From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:42 EDT 2008
Article: 1937054 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: gas chamber story is just war propaganda. Where were the air shelters at Birkenau?
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References:  <271ba47b-74ee-405b-bee1-43a31643ffce@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>   <8s56b4h549uhpn67ndn1ov4sismcper0a3@4ax.com>   <2JFuk.71761$C65.61143@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com> <5i2ob4loiakpke9fnr9n3kf3fj9r0daej7@4ax.com> 
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 117
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:13:08 -0400
Bytes: 6714
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937054

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 20:09:54 +1000, "B.H. Cramer"
 wrote:

>
>"Johannes von Ebersdorf"  wrote in message 
>news:5i2ob4loiakpke9fnr9n3kf3fj9r0daej7@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:22:13 -0400, Gord McFee 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In 8/29/2008 12:46 AM, B.H. Cramer wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Gord McFee"  wrote in message
>>>> news:BKHtk.60018$C65.33029@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>> On 8/25/2008 4:35 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:09:44 +1000, "B.H. Cramer"
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Truth Will Out"  wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:wHqsk.31137$IK1.29490@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>>>>> "Philip Mathews"  wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:271ba47b-74ee-405b-bee1-43a31643ffce@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>>>  On Aug 22, 11:26 am, ZULU  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> RJ11 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article , ZULU 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> RJ11 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The one that lists no less than 900 stokers working in the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kremas.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why does one camp require such a number of stokers?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can imagine that some SS guards and officers were in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge of those people It was also an hospital with SS
>>>>>>>>>>>>> medics near the Kremas as well as Zentral Sauna where
>>>>>>>>>>>>> many SS were in charge of the control.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And you're asserting -- without a shred of evidence --
>>>>>>>>>>>> that the SS used the Krema cellars as "air-aid shelters"
>>>>>>>>>>>> for them. No testimony, no document, no logical thought
>>>>>>>>>>>> process to support this insanity. But you don't care, do
>>>>>>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>>>>>>> LOL. NO document showed by Pressac, a slight nuance...
>>>>>>>>>> No document, period.
>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't we have any document concerning the proved
>>>>>>>>>>> material transformation of the morgue of Krema I in an air
>>>>>>>>>>> shelter?
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.mazal.org/Pressac/Pressac0156.htm
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.mazal.org/Pressac/Pressac0157.htm
>>>>>>>>>>> How can you assume that nothing could be find among 80,000 
>>>>>>>>>>> documents
>>>>>>>>>>> of construction available?
>>>>>>>>>> So your "proof" is that the document *may* exist?
>>>>>>>>>>>> And it gets even better -- just yesterday, you said that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> entrance to the cellar was "too small" for it to
>>>>>>>>>>>> serve as a gas chamber. But now you're saying it was
>>>>>>>>>>>> large enough for people who have to enter an air-raid
>>>>>>>>>>>> shelter in the maximum possible speed.
>>>>>>>>>>> The SS weren't 2000 on that zone, moron.
>>>>>>>>>> You're saying there were so many SS around that they required
>>>>>>>>>>  two huge "air-raid shelters", and then you're saying that
>>>>>>>>>> the doors of the "air-raid shelters" were too small for
>>>>>>>>>> people to enter in a hurry. It's quite amusing to see you
>>>>>>>>>> somersault back and forth, little one. RJ.
>>>>>>>>> It is amusing to observe your desperate tentative to make that
>>>>>>>>> little door more practical to "gas 2000 people" than to serve
>>>>>>>>> as entrance to a second stage of SS protection.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Remember that the main entrance to underground was a fair large
>>>>>>>>> stairway to the morgue 2 that you insist in calling "undressing
>>>>>>>>> room". The entry to the second room would be without rush. And
>>>>>>>>> the moron Zulu would have us believe this large stairway to a 
>>>>>>>>> "morgue"
>>>>>>>>> would be needed to carry the corpses to the morgue? Makes sensel,
>>>>>>>>> right?
>>>>>>>> Another dyslexic Holohuxter raises his head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What is it with you people and your lack of education and
>>>>>>>> ability? Is whining, lying and hurling invective all you've got?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I doubt I'll bother with you from here on in, Mathews. You're too
>>>>>>>> stupid to bother with.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TTFN.
>>>>>>> I see you've met Philthy Mathews. Gobshite extraordinaire, him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of us have the little wanker killfiled.
>>>>>> I figure that I will follow suit and dump Phil in the garbage bin.
>>>>> Gads, he must be kicking your collective asses for you to flee so 
>>>>> quickly.
>>>>
>>>> Christ, gord. Philthy only possesses a half dozen or so standard, 
>>>> proforma
>>>> responses. One becomes quite bored with him very quickly.
>>>
>>>Translation: He decimates you with facts.
>>
>> Phil has yet to present his first "fact".
>> All he slings is the standard industry dreck that we have all seen a
>> thousand times previously.
>
>Which is exactly why most of us ignore the silly little twat.
>
>Keep your eye out for his dobbelganger, Roger, who as coincidentally 
>returned to posting after Philthy's identical absence from this group.
>
>
>>Be assured that the bullshit does not get
>> transformed into truth by frequent repetition.
>
>Be careful, Johannes. You're about to be labelled ;-)

Name-calling is their speciality. It is all they have.

>
>
>
>
>
>> 


From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:42 EDT 2008
Article: 1937055 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: gas chamber story is just war propaganda. Where were the air shelters at Birkenau?
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References: <271ba47b-74ee-405b-bee1-43a31643ffce@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>   <8s56b4h549uhpn67ndn1ov4sismcper0a3@4ax.com>  <8l0gb4h8gg7v6mm36ue8vtg81nlol8bgvc@4ax.com>   
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 98
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:15:44 -0400
Bytes: 6268
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937055

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:27:57 -0400, Gord McFee 
wrote:

>On 9/1/2008 11:41 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:22:41 -0400, Gord McFee 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/29/2008 10:09 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:51:21 -0400, Gord McFee 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/25/2008 4:35 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:09:44 +1000, "B.H. Cramer" 
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Truth Will Out"  wrote in message 
>>>>>>> news:wHqsk.31137$IK1.29490@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>>>>> "Philip Mathews"  wrote in message 
>>>>>>>> news:271ba47b-74ee-405b-bee1-43a31643ffce@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>>>  On Aug 22, 11:26 am, ZULU  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> RJ11 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article , ZULU 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> RJ11 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The one that lists no less than 900 stokers working in 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the Kremas. Why does one camp require such a number of 
>>>>>>>>>>>> stokers?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can imagine that some SS guards and officers were in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge of those people It was also an hospital with SS
>>>>>>>>>>>>> medics near the Kremas as well as Zentral Sauna where
>>>>>>>>>>>>> many SS were in charge of the control.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And you're asserting -- without a shred of evidence --
>>>>>>>>>>>> that the SS used the Krema cellars as "air-aid shelters"
>>>>>>>>>>>> for them. No testimony, no document, no logical thought
>>>>>>>>>>>> process to support this insanity. But you don't care, do
>>>>>>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>>>>>>> LOL. NO document showed by Pressac, a slight nuance...
>>>>>>>>>> No document, period.
>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't we have any document concerning the proved
>>>>>>>>>>> material transformation of the morgue of Krema I in an air
>>>>>>>>>>> shelter?
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.mazal.org/Pressac/Pressac0156.htm 
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.mazal.org/Pressac/Pressac0157.htm
>>>>>>>>>>> How can you assume that nothing could be find among 80,000 
>>>>>>>>>>> documents of construction available?
>>>>>>>>>> So your "proof" is that the document *may* exist?
>>>>>>>>>>>> And it gets even better -- just yesterday, you said that 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the entrance to the cellar was "too small" for it to
>>>>>>>>>>>> serve as a gas chamber. But now you're saying it was
>>>>>>>>>>>> large enough for people who have to enter an air-raid
>>>>>>>>>>>> shelter in the maximum possible speed.
>>>>>>>>>>> The SS weren't 2000 on that zone, moron.
>>>>>>>>>> You're saying there were so many SS around that they required
>>>>>>>>>>  two huge "air-raid shelters", and then you're saying that
>>>>>>>>>> the doors of the "air-raid shelters" were too small for
>>>>>>>>>> people to enter in a hurry. It's quite amusing to see you
>>>>>>>>>> somersault back and forth, little one. RJ.
>>>>>>>>> It is amusing to observe your desperate tentative to make that
>>>>>>>>> little door more practical to "gas 2000 people" than to serve
>>>>>>>>> as entrance to a second stage of SS protection.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Remember that the main entrance to underground was a fair large
>>>>>>>>> stairway to the morgue 2 that you insist in calling "undressing
>>>>>>>>> room". The entry to the second room would be without rush. And
>>>>>>>>> the moron Zulu would have us believe this large stairway to a 
>>>>>>>>> "morgue" would be needed to carry the corpses to the morgue? 
>>>>>>>>> Makes sensel, right?
>>>>>>>> Another dyslexic Holohuxter raises his head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What is it with you people and your lack of education and
>>>>>>>> ability? Is whining, lying and hurling invective all you've got?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I doubt I'll bother with you from here on in, Mathews. You're too
>>>>>>>> stupid to bother with.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TTFN.
>>>>>>> I see you've met Philthy Mathews. Gobshite extraordinaire, him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of us have the little wanker killfiled.
>>>>>> I figure that I will follow suit and dump Phil in the garbage bin.
>>>>> Gads, he must be kicking your collective asses for you to flee so quickly.
>>>> You make no sense, Gord.
>>> Only to idiots like you.
>> 
>> The only idiot around these parts is you, Gordie.
>
>Your admission of defeat is noted.  Back to troll school for you.

You're such a jackass, Gordie. You haven't said anything worth saying
in the last hundred or so messages, so I suspect that you're operating
on empty.

I'm fairly patient, so I'm going to wait just a little longer before
putting you on a filter. My time is too valuable to waste on your
barrage on silly one-liners.


From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:43 EDT 2008
Article: 1937056 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Educational material at the Nizkor site
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References:    <40zsk.215535$gc5.214860@pd7urf2no>     <681ob4hiafd4n86l97j8loc2p2fttoccef@4ax.com> 
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 40
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:19:04 -0400
Bytes: 2934
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937056

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:33:48 -0400, Gord McFee 
wrote:

>On 9/1/2008 11:08 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:37:21 -0400, Gord McFee 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/29/2008 10:18 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:07:40 -0400, Gord McFee 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/25/2008 4:42 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:06:56 GMT, "Kurt Knoll"  
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting McFee can one see the aging of your book to analyze its
>>>>>>>  age.
>>>>>> It seems that McFee's understanding of a German text is pretty 
>>>>>> primitive.
>>>>> It's a lot better than yours.
>>>> LOL, Gord, your bluster and bullshit won't get you out of this one.
>>> I have no need of either.  I merely posted a quote that you said didn't 
>>> exist.
>> 
>> I didn't say that it didn't exist, merely that it probably didn't say
>> what you claimed it said. I was correct. That is why the passage
>> didn't jump out at me when I read the book. Your interpretations are
>> putting words into the author's mouth that he didn't say and that he
>> probably didn't intend.
>
>What interpretation?  I merely quoted it.

No Gordie, you quoted an irrelevant passage as "proof" of the intent
to institute mass gassings of Jews. The passage doesn't say or even
indirectly imply that. You are the same as some stupid fundie with
their ridiculous interpretations of scripture.



From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:43 EDT 2008
Article: 1937057 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Educational material at the Nizkor site
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: <9t0rb4palkgff0upca2ptt6ej93qq3f3k7@4ax.com>
References:      <40zsk.215535$gc5.214860@pd7urf2no>   <7RGuk.57253$3I2.17444@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com> <6i1ob4daap5ggtd4o1or27f3m27g6o1s3i@4ax.com> 
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 65
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:20:45 -0400
Bytes: 4087
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937057

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:35:24 -0400, Gord McFee 
wrote:

>On 9/1/2008 11:16 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:39:05 -0400, Gord McFee 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/29/2008 10:26 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:04:13 -0400, Gord McFee 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/25/2008 10:06 AM, Kurt Knoll wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gord McFee"  wrote in message 
>>>>>> news:phlsk.50253$6p1.32754@en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>>> On 8/24/2008 5:58 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:57:27 GMT, "Kurt Knoll"
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "RJ11"  wrote in message 
>>>>>>>>> news:g8m37l$loo$1@pcls6.std.com...
>>>>>>>>>> In article , Kurt Knoll 
>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is it you are trying to proof here. It was the Jews
>>>>>>>>>>> who did declare a finical war against Germany.
>>>>>>>>>> Already in 1925,  Adolf Hitler,  in "Mein Kampf",  expressed
>>>>>>>>>> his will to murder Jews with poison gas.  So,  when he became
>>>>>>>>>> the ruler of Germany in 1933,  some Jews called to boycott
>>>>>>>>>> German goods.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Are you sure this is true.
>>>>>>>> I doubt that it is true.
>>>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I own an original German printing of the book.
>>>>>>> So do I.  However, I have read my copy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I would like to know is where to find this item in the book.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hätte man zu Kriegsbeginn und während des Krieges einmal zwölf-
>>>>>>> oder fünfzehntausend dieser hebräischen Volksverderber so unter
>>>>>>> Giftgas gehalten, wie Hunderttausende unserer allerbesten deutschen
>>>>>>> Arbeiter aus allen Schichten und Berufen es im Felde erdulden
>>>>>>> mußten, dann wäre das Millionenopfer der Front nicht vergeblich
>>>>>>> gewesen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Mein Kampf", Vol II, page 772
>>>> There isn't more than one volume,
>>> Yes there are.  Zwei Bände.
>> 
>> The book I have is a single volume, although it does actually seem
>> that in 1925 and 1927 there had been two volumes for a short time.
>> Those are clearly not the copies you have, so you're merely trying to
>> obfuscate the issue, as is your usual tactic.
>
>Ah, so you were wrong again.  Thanks for the confirmation.

Give it up Gordie. If I make a mistake, I will generally admit it,
unlike you, Gordie, and your endless conveyor belt of horse-shit.

I do make mistakes from time to time, but not very many.


From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:43 EDT 2008
Article: 1937058 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Educational material at the Nizkor site
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References:          
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 81
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:24:23 -0400
Bytes: 4618
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937058

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:38:17 -0400, Gord McFee 
wrote:

>On 9/1/2008 11:20 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:43:36 -0400, Gord McFee
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/29/2008 10:33 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:08:39 -0400, Gord McFee
>>>>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 8/25/2008 4:39 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:29:18 -0400, Gord McFee
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 8/24/2008 5:58 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:57:27 GMT, "Kurt Knoll"
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> "RJ11"  wrote in message 
>>>>>>>>> news:g8m37l$loo$1@pcls6.std.com...
>>>>>>>>>> In article , Kurt
>>>>>>>>>> Knoll  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> What is it you are trying to proof here. It was the
>>>>>>>>>>> Jews who did declare a finical war against Germany.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Already in 1925,  Adolf Hitler,  in "Mein Kampf",
>>>>>>>>>> expressed his will to murder Jews with poison gas.
>>>>>>>>>> So,  when he became the ruler of Germany in 1933,
>>>>>>>>>> some Jews called to boycott German goods.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Are you sure this is true.
>>>>>>>> I doubt that it is true.
>>>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I own an original German printing of the book.
>>>>>>> So do I.  However, I have read my copy.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> What I would like to know is where to find this item in
>>>>>>>> the book.
>>>>>>> Hätte man zu Kriegsbeginn und während des Krieges einmal
>>>>>>> zwölf- oder fünfzehntausend dieser hebräischen
>>>>>>> Volksverderber so unter Giftgas gehalten, wie
>>>>>>> Hunderttausende unserer allerbesten deutschen Arbeiter aus 
>>>>>>> allen Schichten und Berufen es im Felde erdulden mußten,
>>>>>>> dann wäre das Millionenopfer der Front nicht vergeblich
>>>>>>> gewesen.
>>>>>> You are a moron, McFee. Hitler is describing his own
>>>>>> experiences and those of his fellow soldiers in an allied
>>>>>> poison gas attack. The passage is light-years away from
>>>>>> suggesting an extermination policy against Jews. This type of
>>>>>> distortion seems to be typical of the holocaust™ industry.
>>>>> Get someone to translate it for you, dipstick.
>>>> 
>>>> I don't need some English-speaking fart like you to interpret
>>>> German texts for me, arsehole.
>>> Eww... struck a nerve did I?
>> 
>> It just became really clear that I'm dealing with a clueless
>> arsehole, that's all.
>
>Then stop talking to yourself.
>
>> You keep meddling in conversations I'm having
>> with others here. Kindly fuck off and mind your own business.
>
>I'll post where I choose, moron.
>> 
>> If I want your input, I'll ask for it, otherwise stick to trading 
>> holocaust™ fables with McFay and the rest of your crew.
>
>Well, well.  Didn't take long to chase you away.  It seems that all you
>clowns are expert cowards.

That is another of your endless trail of non-sequiturs. I'm starting
to get the feeling that you're suffering from senile dementia.


From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:44 EDT 2008
Article: 1937059 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: gas chamber story is just war propaganda. Sonderkommandos are ALL  LIARS!!!!
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References:   	   <84879fd2-74ef-4e8d-a64d-6adb8305e606@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>   <6CFuk.71758$C65.43716@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com>  <1_Zuk.69813$4p1.51839@en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 46
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:26:55 -0400
Bytes: 3023
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937059

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:25:38 -0400, Gord McFee 
wrote:

>On 9/1/2008 11:52 AM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:14:48 -0400, Gord McFee 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/30/2008 5:58 PM, Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 17:17:01 +0200, ZULU  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Philip Mathews wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 29, 4:32 pm, ZULU  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RJ11 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article , ZULU   wrote:
>>>>>>>>> What I observe is that you put assertions without any consistant fact
>>>>>>>>> or document to support it.
>>>>>>>>   Really,  lulu?
>>>>>>>>   Where is that document about the alleged "conversion" of cellar 1
>>>>>>>> to an "air-raid shelter"?
>>>>>>> Material evidences
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1- requirement of 1 gas tight door (1 m x 1,90 m)
>>>>>> Compatible with a homicidal gas chamber, not a room labeled as a
>>>>>> "morgue".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None of the known air-raid shelters at Auschwitz had gas tight doors.
>>>>> Proofs?
>>>> An air-raid shelter with doors that are not gas tight would be utterly
>>>> useless, since the vast majority of people who died in air attacks
>>>> died from noxious gases produced by the fire, rather than from the
>>>> fire itself or from blast effects.
>>> ROTFL!
>>>
>>> Absolute rubbish.
>> 
>> That's what fills your head, Gordie. Ask any firefighter to alleviate
>> your abysmal ignorance on the subject of fire deaths.
>
>Troll someone else.

You really are a demented clown.


From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:44 EDT 2008
Article: 1937060 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Topaz and His TOP TEN NEO-NAZI RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References:       <5ca61b5d-a6df-4ac1-82bc-36fd26c4a28a@s1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>      <6eb4c145-0897-4142-914f-84723d6e0492@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 1040
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:30:16 -0400
Bytes: 61333
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937060

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 19:50:58 -0700 (PDT), Michael Price
 wrote:

>On Sep 1, 11:16 pm, Topaz  wrote:
>> By Mark Weber
>>
>> Much has already been written about Roosevelt's campaign of deception
>> and outright lies in getting the United States to intervene in the
>> Second World War prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in
>> December 1941. Roosevelt's aid to Britain and the Soviet Union in
>> violation of American neutrality and international law, his acts of
>> war against Germany in the Atlantic in an effort to provoke a German
>> declaration of war against the United States, his authorization of a
>> vast "dirty tricks" campaign against U.S. citizens by British
>> intelligence agents in violation of the Constitution, and his
>> provocations and ultimatums against Japan which brought on the attack
>> against Pearl Harbor-all this is extensively documented and reasonably
>> well known.[1]
>>
>> Not so well known is the story of Roosevelt's enormous responsibility
>> for the outbreak of the Second World War itself. This essay focuses on
>> Roosevelt's secret campaign to provoke war in Europe prior to the
>> outbreak of hostilities in September 1939. It deals particularly with
>> his efforts to pressure Britain, France and Poland into war against
>> Germany in 1938 and 1939.
>>
>> Franklin Roosevelt not only criminally involved America in a war which
>> had already engulfed Europe. He bears a grave responsibility before
>> history for the outbreak of the most destructive war of all time.
>>
>> This paper relies heavily on a little-known collection of secret
>> Polish documents which fell into German hands when Warsaw was captured
>> in September 1939.
>>
>> http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html
>> These documents clearly establish Roosevelt's crucial role in bringing
>> on the Second World War.
>
>
>  And was the role more "crucial" than that of Hitler, who broke every
>agreement he
>ever signed 

You're confusing him with Bush and other American presidents.

>and invaded countries left and right,

Germany hasn't attacked nearly as many countries as the USA has over
its short and violent history.

>including countries
>that had already
>given up territory to placate the Germans?

Name a couple if you can.

>  No, in fact nothing could
>have caused a
>war in Europe without Hitler specifically seeking complete domination
>of it.

The war in Europe was caused by Britain trying vainly to make
Versailles stick and by American world-domination plans for which
Germany presented an obstacle.

>>
>> Poland had refused to even negotiate over self-determination for the
>> German city of Danzig and the ethnic German minority in the so-called
>> Polish Corridor. Hitler felt compelled to resort to arms when he did
>> in response to a growing Polish campaign of terror and dispossession
>> against the one and a half million ethnic Germans under Polish rule.
>> In my view, if ever a military action was justified, it was the German
>> campaign against Poland in 1939.
>>
>> Poland's headstrong refusal to negotiate was made possible because of
>> a fateful blank check guarantee of military backing from Britain-a
>> pledge that ultimately proved completely worthless to the hapless
>> Poles. Considering the lightning swiftness of the victorious German
>> campaign, it is difficult to realize today that the Polish government
>> did not at all fear war with Germany. Poland's leaders foolishly
>> believed that German might was only an illusion. They were convinced
>> that their troops would occupy Berlin itself within a few weeks and
>> add further German territories to an enlarged Polish state. It is also
>> important to keep in mind that the purely localized conflict between
>> Germany and Poland was only transformed into a Europe-wide
>> conflagration by the British and French declarations of war against
>> Germany.
>>
>> On 9 February 1938, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, Count Jerzy
>> Potocki, reported to the Foreign Minister in Warsaw on the Jewish role
>> in making American foreign policy:
>>
>> The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State
>> Department is becoming ever more powerful ...
>>
>> ... The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis
>> which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general
>> catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent.
>> in their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created
>> real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and
>> communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred
>> against Nazism.
>>
>> This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by
>> every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans
>> are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which
>> wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean
>> of blood.
>>
>> In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly
>> come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is
>> inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of
>> propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation
>> and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is
>> growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans
>> and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be
>> subdued by the 'democratic world.'
>>
>> Ambassador Potocki's report from Washington of 9 January 1939 dealt in
>> large part with President Roosevelt's annual address to Congress:
>> President Roosevelt acts on the assumption that the dictatorial
>> governments, above all Germany and Japan, only understand a policy of
>> force. Therefore he has decided to react to any future blows by
>> matching them. This has been demonstrated by the most recent measures
>> of the United States.
>>
>> The American public is subject to an ever more alarming propaganda
>> which is under Jewish influence and continuously conjures up the
>> specter of the danger of war. Because of this the Americans have
>> strongly altered their views on foreign policy problems, in comparison
>> with last year.
>>
>> Of all the documents in this collection, the most revealing is
>> probably the secret report by Ambassador Potocki of 12 January 1939
>> which dealt with the domestic situation in the United States. This
>> report is given here in full:
>>
>> The feeling now prevailing in the United States is marked by a growing
>> hatred of Fascism and, above all, of Chancellor Hitler and everything
>> connected with Nazism. Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews
>> who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical
>> press. Although this propaganda is extremely coarse and presents
>> Germany as black as possible-above all religious persecution and
>> concentration camps are exploited-this propaganda is nevertheless
>> extremely effective since the public here is completely ignorant and
>> knows nothing of the situation in Europe...
>>
>> It is interesting to note that in this extremely well-planned campaign
>> which is conducted above all against National Socialism, Soviet Russia
>> is almost completely excluded. If mentioned at all, it is only in a
>> friendly manner and things are presented in such a way as if Soviet
>> Russia were working with the bloc of democratic states. Thanks to the
>> clever propaganda the sympathy of the American public is completely on
>> the side of Red Spain.
>>
>> Besides this propaganda, a war psychosis is being artificially
>> created. The American people are told that peace in Europe is hanging
>> only by a thread and that war is unavoidable. At the same time the
>> American people are unequivocally told that in case of a world war,
>> America must also take an active part in order to defend the slogans
>> of freedom and democracy in the world.
>>
>> These groups of people who occupy the highest positions in the
>> American government and want to pose as representatives of 'true
>> Americanism' and 'defenders of democracy' are, in the last analysis,
>> connected by unbreakable ties with international Jewry.
>>
>> For this Jewish international, which above all is concerned with the
>> interests of its race, to portray the President of the United States
>> as the 'idealist' champion on human rights was a very clever move. In
>> this manner they have created a dangerous hotbed for hatred and
>> hostility in this hemisphere and divided the world into two hostile
>> camps. The entire issue is worked out in a masterly manner. Roosevelt
>> has been given the foundation for activating American foreign policy,
>> and simultaneously has been procuring enormous military stocks for the
>> coming war, for which the Jews are striving very consciously. With
>> regard to domestic policy, it is very convenient to divert public
>> attention from anti-Semitism, which is constantly growing in the
>> United States, by talking about the necessity of defending religion
>> and individual liberty against the onslaught of Fascism.
>>
>> On 16 January 1939, Polish Ambassador Potocki reported to the Warsaw
>> Foreign Ministry on another lengthy conversation he had with
>> Roosevelt's personal envoy, William Bullitt
>>
>> 1. The vitalizing of foreign policy under the leadership of President
>> Roosevelt, who severely and unambiguously condemns totalitarian
>> countries.
>>
>> 2. United States preparations for war on sea, land and air will be
>> carried out at an accelerated pace and will consume the colossal sum
>> of 1.25 billion dollars.
>>
>> 3. It is the decided opinion of the President that France and Britain
>> must put an end to any sort of compromise with the totalitarian
>> countries. They must not get into any discussions aiming at any kind
>> of territorial changes.
>>
>> 4. They have the moral assurance that the United States will abandon
>> the policy of isolation and be prepared to intervene actively on the
>> side of Britain and France in case of war. America is ready to place
>> its whole wealth of money and raw materials at their disposal.
>>
>> The Polish Ambassador to Paris, Juliusz (Jules) Lukasiewicz, sent a
>> top secret report to the Foreign Ministry in Warsaw at the beginning
>> of February 1939 which outlined U.S. policy towards Europe as
>> explained to him by William Bullitt:
>>
>> A week ago, the Ambassador of the United States, William Bullitt
>> returned to Paris after a three months' leave in America. Meanwhile, I
>> have had two conversations with him which enable me to inform you of
>> his views regarding the European situation and to give a survey of
>> Washington's policy.
>>
>> The international situation is regarded by official circles as
>> extremely serious and in constant danger of armed conflict. Those in
>> authority are of the opinion that if war should break out between
>> Britain and France on the one hand, and Germany and Italy on the
>> other, and should Britain and France be defeated, the Germans would
>> endanger the real interests of the United States on the American
>> continent. For this reason, one can foresee right from the beginning
>> the participation of the United States in the war on the side of
>> France and Britain, naturally some time after the outbreak of the war.
>> As Ambassador Bullitt expressed it: 'Should war break out we shall
>> certainly not take part in it at the beginning, but we shall finish
>> it.'
>>
>> On 7 March 1939, Ambassador Potocki sent a remarkably lucid and
>> perceptive report on Roosevelt's foreign policy to his government in
>> Warsaw. This document was first made public when leading German
>> newspapers published it in German translation, along with a facsimile
>> reproduction of the first page of the Polish original, in their
>> editions of 28 October 1940. The main National Socialist party
>> newspaper, the Voelkischer Beobachter, published the Ambassador's
>> report with this observation:
>>
>> The document itself needs no commentary. We do not know, and it does
>> not concern us, whether the internal American situation as reported by
>> the Polish diplomat is correct in every detail. That must be decided
>> by the American people alone. But in the interest of historical truth
>> it is important for us to show that the warmongering activities of
>> American diplomacy, especially in Europe, are once again revealed and
>> proven by this document. It still remains a secret just who, and for
>> what motives, have driven American diplomacy to this course. In any
>> case, the results have been disastrous for both Europe and America.
>> Europe was plunged into war and America has brought upon itself the
>> hostility of great nations which normally have no differences with the
>> American people and, indeed, have not been in conflict but have lived
>> for generations as friends and want to remain so...
>>
>> While the Polish documents alone are conclusive proof of Roosevelt's
>> treacherous campaign to bring about world war, it is fortunate for
>> posterity that a substantial body of irrefutable complementary
>> evidence exists which confirms the conspiracy recorded in the
>> dispatches to Warsaw...
>>
>> On 19 September 1938 -- that is, a year before the outbreak of war in
>> Europe-Roosevelt called Lindsay to a very secret meeting at the White
>> House. At the beginning of their long conversation, according to
>> Lindsay's confidential dispatch to London, Roosevelt "emphasized the
>> necessity of absolute secrecy. Nobody must know I had seen him and he
>> himself would tell nobody of the interview. I gathered not even the
>> State Department." The two discussed some secondary matters before
>> Roosevelt got to the main point of the conference. "This is the very
>> secret part of his communication and it must not be known to anyone
>> that he has even breathed a suggestion." The President told the
>> Ambassador that if news of the conversation was ever made public, it
>> could mean his impeachment. And no wonder. What Roosevelt proposed was
>> a cynically brazen but harebrained scheme to violate the U.S.
>> Constitution and dupe the American people.
>>
>> The President said that if Britain and France "would find themselves
>> forced to war" against Germany, the United States would ultimately
>> also join. But this would require some clever maneuvering. Britain and
>> France should impose a total blockade against Germany without actually
>> declaring war and force other states (including neutrals) to abide by
>> it. This would certainly provoke some kind of German military
>> response, but it would also free Britain and France from having to
>> actually declare war. For propaganda purposes, the "blockade must be
>> based on loftiest humanitarian grounds and on the desire to wage
>> hostilities with minimum of suffering and the least possible loss of
>> life and property, and yet bring the enemy to his knees." Roosevelt
>> conceded that this would involve aerial bombardment, but "bombing from
>> the air was not the method of hostilities which caused really great
>> loss of life."
>>
>> The important point was to "call it defensive measures or anything
>> plausible but avoid actual declaration of war." That way, Roosevelt
>> believed he could talk the American people into supporting war against
>> Germany, including shipments of weapons to Britain and France, by
>> insisting that the United States was still technically neutral in a
>> non-declared conflict. "This method of conducting war by blockade
>> would in his [Roosevelt's] opinion meet with approval of the United
>> States if its humanitarian purpose were strongly emphasized," Lindsay
>> reported.[19]
>>
>> The American Ambassador to Italy, William Phillips, admitted in his
>> postwar memoirs that the Roosevelt administration was already
>> committed to going to war on the side of Britain and France in late
>> 1938. "On this and many other occasions," Phillips wrote, "I would
>> like to have told him [Count Ciano, the Italian Foreign Minister]
>> frankly that in the event of a European war, the United States would
>> undoubtedly be involved on the side of the Allies. But in view of my
>> official position, I could not properly make such a statement without
>> instructions from Washington, and these I never received."[20]
>>
>> The fateful British pledge to Poland of 31 March 1939 to go to war
>> against Germany in case of a Polish-German conflict would not have
>> been made without strong pressure from the White House
>>
>> In their nationally syndicated column of 14 April 1939, the usually
>> very well informed Washington journalists Drew Pearson and Robert S.
>> Allen reported that on 16 March 1939 Roosevelt had "sent a virtual
>> ultimatum to Chamberlain" demanding that henceforth the British
>> government strongly oppose Germany. According to Pearson and Allen,
>> who completely supported Roosevelt's move, "the President warned that
>> Britain could expect no more support, moral or material through the
>> sale of airplanes, if the Munich policy continued."[22] Chamberlain
>> gave in and the next day, 17 March, ended Britain's policy of
>> cooperation with Germany in a speech at Birmingham bitterly denouncing
>> Hitler. Two weeks later the British government formally pledged itself
>> to war in case of German-Polish hostilities.
>>
>> In a confidential telegram to Washington dated 9 April 1939, Bullitt
>> reported from Paris on another conversation with Ambassador
>> Lukasiewicz. He had told the Polish envoy that although U.S. law
>> prohibited direct financial aid to Poland, it might be possible to
>> circumvent its provisions. The Roosevelt administration might be able
>> to supply war planes to Poland indirectly through Britain. "The Polish
>> Ambassador asked me if it might not be possible for Poland to obtain
>> financial help and aeroplanes from the United States. I replied that I
>> believed the Johnson Act would forbid any loans from the United States
>> to Poland but added that it might be possible for England to purchase
>> planes for cash in the United States and turn them over to
>> Poland."[24]
>>
>> On 25 April 1939, four months before the outbreak of war, Bullitt
>> called American newspaper columnist Karl von Wiegand, chief European
>> correspondent of the International News Service, to the U.S. embassy
>> in Paris and told him: "War in Europe has been decided upon. Poland
>> has the assurance of the support of Britain and France, and will yield
>> to no demands from Germany. America will be in the war soon after
>> Britain and France enter it."[25]
>>
>> In a lengthy secret conversation at Hyde Park on 28 May 1939,
>> Roosevelt assured the former President of Czechoslovakia, Dr. Edvard
>> Benes, that America would actively intervene on the side of Britain
>> and France in the anticipated European war.[26]
>>
>> In June 1939, Roosevelt secretly proposed to the British that the
>> United States should establish "a patrol over the waters of the
>> Western Atlantic with a view to denying them to the German Navy in the
>> event of war." The British Foreign Office record of this offer noted
>> that "although the proposal was vague and woolly and open to certain
>> objections, we assented informally as the patrol was to be operated in
>> our interests."[27]
>>
>> Many years after the war, Georges Bonnet, the French Foreign Minister
>> in 1939, confirmed Bullitt's role as Roosevelt's deputy in pushing his
>> country into war. In a letter to Hamilton Fish dated 26 March 1971,Bonnet wrote: "One thing is certain is that Bullitt in 1939 did
>>
>> everything he could to make France enter the war."[28] An important
>> confirmation of the crucial role of Roosevelt and the Jews in pushing
>> Britain into war comes from the diary of James V. Forrestal, the first
>> U.S. Secretary of Defense. In his entry for 27 December 1945, he
>> wrote:
>>
>> Played golf today with [former Ambassador] Joe Kennedy. I asked him
>> about his conversations with Roosevelt and [British Prime Minister]
>> Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on. He said Chamberlain's position in
>> 1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she
>> could not risk going to war with Hitler. Kennedy's view: That Hitler
>> would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it
>> had not been for [William] Bullitt's urging on Roosevelt in the summer
>> of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the
>> French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had
>> not been for the constant needling from Washington. Bullitt, he said,
>> kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn't fight; Kennedy that
>> they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says,
>> stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the
>> war. In his telephone conversations with Roosevelt in the summer of
>> 1939, the President kept telling him to put some iron up Chamberlain's
>> backside.[29]
>>
>> "In the West," the Ambassador told Szembek, "there are all kinds of
>> elements openly pushing for war: the Jews, the super-capitalists, the
>> arms dealers. Today they are all ready for a great business, because
>> they have found a place which can be set on fire: Danzig; and a nation
>> that is ready to fight: Poland. They want to do business on our backs.
>> They are indifferent to the destruction of our country. Indeed, since
>> everything will have to be rebuilt later on, they can profit from that
>> as well."[30]
>>
>> On 24 August 1939, just a week before the outbreak of hostilities,
>> Chamberlain's closest advisor, Sir Horace Wilson, went to Ambassador
>> Kennedy with an urgent appeal from the British Prime Minister for
>> President Roosevelt. Regretting that Britain had unequivocally
>> obligated itself in March to Poland in case of war, Chamberlain now
>> turned in despair to Roosevelt as a last hope for peace. He wanted the
>> American President to "put pressure on the Poles" to change course at
>> this late hour and open negotiations with Germany. By telephone
>> Kennedy told the State Department that the British "felt that they
>> could not, given their obligations, do anything of this sort but that
>> we could." Presented with this extraordinary opportunity to possibly
>> save the peace of Europe, Roosevelt rejected Chamberlain's desperate
>> plea out of hand. At that, Kennedy reported, the Prime Minister lost
>> all hope. "The futility of it all," Chamberlain had told Kennedy, "is
>> the thing that is frightful. After all, we cannot save the Poles. We
>> can merely carry on a war of revenge that will mean the destruction of
>> all Europe."[31]
>>
>> But Roosevelt rejected out of hand this chance to save the peace of
>> Europe. To a close political crony, he called Kennedy's plea "the
>> silliest message to me that I have ever received." He complained to
>> Henry Morgenthau that his London Ambassador was nothing but a pain in
>> the neck: "Joe has been an appeaser and will always be an appeaser ...
>> If Germany and Italy made a good peace offer tomorrow, Joe would start
>> working on the King and his friend the Queen and from there on down to
>> get everybody to accept it."[33]
>>
>> Infuriated at Kennedy's stubborn efforts to restore peace in Europe or
>> at least limit the conflict that had broken out, Roosevelt instructed
>> his Ambassador with a "personal" and "strictly confidential" telegram
>> on 11 September 1939 that any American peace effort was totally out of
>> the question. The Roosevelt government, it declared, "sees no
>> opportunity nor occasion for any peace move to be initiated by the
>> President of the United States. The people [sic] of the United States
>> would not support any move for peace initiated by this Government that
>> would consolidate or make possible a survival of a regime of force and
>> aggression."[34]
>>
>> In the months before armed conflict broke out in Europe, perhaps the
>> most vigorous and prophetic American voice of warning against
>> President Roosevelt's campaign to incite war was that of Hamilton
>> Fish, a leading Republican congressman from New York. In a series of
>> hard-hitting radio speeches, Fish rallied considerable public opinion
>> against Roosevelt's deceptive war policy. Here are only a few excerpts
>> from some of those addresses.[35]
>>
>> On 6 January 1939, Fish told a nationwide radio audience:
>> The inflammatory and provocative message of the President to Congress
>> and the world [given two days before] has unnecessarily alarmed the
>> American people and created, together with a barrage of propaganda
>> emanating from high New Deal officials, a war hysteria, dangerous to
>> the peace of America and the world. The only logical conclusion to
>> such speeches is another war fought overseas by American soldiers.
>>
>> All the totalitarian nations referred to by President Roosevelt ...
>> haven't the faintest thought of making war on us or invading Latin
>> America.
>> I do not propose to mince words on such an issue, affecting the life,
>> liberty and happiness of our people. The time has come to call a halt
>> to the warmongers of the New Deal, backed by war profiteers,
>> Communists, and hysterical internationalists, who want us to
>> quarantine the world with American blood and money.
>> He [Roosevelt] evidently desires to whip up a frenzy of hate and war
>> psychosis as a red herring to take the minds of our people off their
>> own unsolved domestic problems. He visualizes hobgoblins and creates
>> in the public mind a fear of foreign invasions that exists only in his
>> own imagination.
>>
>> On 5 March, Fish spoke to the country over the Columbia radio network:
>> The people of France and Great Britain want peace but our warmongers
>> are constantly inciting them to disregard the Munich Pact and resort
>> to the arbitrament of arms. If only we would stop meddling in foreign
>> lands the old nations of Europe would compose their own quarrels by
>> arbitration and the processes of peace, but apparently we won't let
>> them.
>>
>> Fish addressed the listeners of the National Broadcasting Company
>> network on 5 April with these words:
>> The youth of America are again being prepared for another blood bath
>> in Europe in order to make the world safe for democracy.
>> If Hitler and the Nazi government regain Memel or Danzig, taken away
>> from Germany by the Versailles Treaty, and where the population is 90
>> percent German, why is it necessary to issue threats and denunciations
>> and incite our people to war? I would not sacrifice the life of one
>> American soldier for a half dozen Memels or Danzigs. We repudiated the
>> Versailles Treaty because it was based on greed and hatred, and as
>> long as its inequalities and injustices exist there are bound to be
>> wars of liberation.
>>
>> The sooner certain provisions of the Versailles Treaty are scrapped
>> the better for the peace of the world.
>>
>> I believe that if the areas that are distinctly German in population
>> are restored to Germany, except Alsace-Lorraine and the Tyrol, there
>> will be no war in western Europe. There may be a war between the Nazis
>> and the Communists, but if there is that is not our war or that of
>> Great Britain or France or any of the democracies.
>>
>> New Deal spokesmen have stirred up war hysteria into a veritable
>> frenzy. The New Deal propaganda machine is working overtime to prepare
>> the minds of our people for war, who are already suffering from a bad
>> case of war jitters.
>>
>> President Roosevelt is the number one warmonger in America, and is
>> largely responsible for the fear that pervades the Nation which has
>> given the stock market and the American people a bad case of the
>> jitters.
>>
>> I accuse the administration of instigating war propaganda and hysteria
>> to cover up the failure and collapse of the New Deal policies, with 12
>> million unemployed and business confidence destroyed.
>>
>> I believe we have far more to fear from our enemies from within than
>> we have from without. All the Communists are united in urging us to go
>> to war against Germany and Japan for the benefit of Soviet Russia.
>>
>> Great Britain still expects every American to do her duty, by
>> preserving the British Empire and her colonies. The war profiteers,
>> munitions makers and international bankers are all set up for our
>> participation in a new world war.
>>
>> On 21 April, Fish again spoke to the country over nationwide radio:
>>
>> It is the duty of all those Americans who desire to keep out of
>> foreign entanglements and the rotten mess and war madness of Europe
>> and Asia to openly expose the war hysteria and propaganda that is
>> impelling us to armed conflict.
>>
>> What we need in America is a stop war crusade, before we are forced
>> into a foreign war by internationalists and interventionists at
>> Washington, who seem to be more interested in solving world problems
>> rather than our own.
>>
>> In his radio address of 26 May, Fish stated:
>> He [Roosevelt] should remember that the Congress has the sole power to
>> declare war and formulate the foreign policies of the United States.
>> The President has no such constitutional power. He is merely the
>> official organ to carry out the policies determined by the Congress.
>>
>> Without knowing even who the combatants will be, we are informed
>> almost daily by the internationalists and interventionists in America
>> that we must participate in the next world war.
>>
>> On 8 July 1939, Fish declared over the National Broadcasting Company
>> radio network:
>> If we must go to war, let it be in defense of America, but not in
>> defense of the munitions makers, war profiteers, Communists, to cover
>> up the failures of the New Deal, or to provide an alibi for a third
>> term.
>> It is well for all nations to know that we do not propose to go to war
>> over Danzig, power politics, foreign colonies, or the imperialistic
>> wars of Europe or anywhere in the world.
>>
>> President Roosevelt could have done little to incite war in Europe
>> without help from powerful allies. Behind him stood the self-serving
>> international financial and Jewish interests bent on the destruction
>> of Germany. The principal organization which drummed up public support
>> for U.S. involvement in the European war prior to the Pearl Harbor
>> attack was the cleverly named "Committee to Defend America by Aiding
>> the Allies." President Roosevelt himself initiated its founding, and
>> top administration officials consulted frequently with Committee
>> leaders.[36]
>>
>> Although headed for a time by an elderly small-town Kansas newspaper
>> publisher, William Allen White, the Committee was actually organized
>> by powerful financial interests which stood to profit tremendously
>> from loans to embattled Britain and from shrewd investments in giant
>> war industries in the United States.
>> At the end of 1940, West Virginia Senator Rush D. Holt issued a
>> detailed examination of the Committee which exposed the base interests
>> behind the idealistic-sounding slogans:
>>
>> The Committee has powerful connections with banks, insurance
>> companies, financial investing firms, and industrial concerns. These
>> in turn exert influence on college presidents and professors, as well
>> as on newspapers, radio and other means of communication. One of the
>> powerful influences used by the group is the '400' and social set. The
>> story is a sordid picture of betrayal of public interest.
>> The powerful J.P. Morgan interest with its holdings in the British
>> Empire helped plan the organization and donated its first expense
>> money.
>>
>> Some of the important figures active in the Committee were revealed by
>> Holt: Frederic R. Coudert, a paid war propagandist for the British
>> government in the U.S. during the First World War; Robert S. Allen of
>> the Pearson and Allen syndicated column; Henry R. Luce, the
>> influential publisher of Time, Life, and Fortune magazines; Fiorella
>> LaGuardia, the fiery half-Jewish Mayor of Now York City; Herbert
>> Lehman, the Jewish Governor of New York with important financial
>> holdings in war industries; and Frank Altschul, an officer in the
>> Jewish investment firm of Lazard Freres with extensive holdings in
>> munitions and military supply companies.
>>
>> If the Committee succeeded in getting the U.S. into war, Holt warned,
>> "American boys will spill their blood for profiteers, politicians and
>> 'paytriots.' If war comes, on the hands of the sponsors of the White
>> Committee will be blood-the blood of Americans killed in a needless
>> war."[37]
>>
>> In March 1941 a list of most of the Committee's financial backers was
>> made public. It revealed the nature of the forces eager to bring
>> America into the European war. Powerful international banking
>> interests were well represented. J.P. Morgan, John W. Morgan, Thomas
>> W. Lamont and others of the great Morgan banking house were listed.
>> Other important names from the New York financial world included Mr.
>> and Mrs. Paul Mellon, Felix M. and James F. Warburg, and J. Malcolm
>> Forbes. Chicago department store owner and publisher Marshall Field
>> was a contributor, as was William Averill Harriman, the railroad and
>> investment millionaire who later served as Roosevelt's ambassador in
>> Moscow.
>>
>> Of course, Jewish names made up a substantial portion of the long
>> list. Hollywood film czar Samuel Goldwyn of Goldwyn Studios was there,
>> along with David Dubinsky, the head of the International Ladies
>> Garment Workers Union. The William S. Paley Foundation, which had been
>> set up by the head of the giant Columbia Broadcasting System,
>> contributed to the Committee. The name of Mrs. Herbert H. Lehman, wife
>> of the New York Governor, was also on the list.[38]
>>
>> Without an understanding of his intimate ties to organized Jewry,
>> Roosevelt's policies make little sense. As Jewish historian Lucy
>> Dawidowicz noted: "Roosevelt himself brought into his immediate circle
>> more Jews than any other President before or after him. Felix
>> Frankfurter, Bernard M. Baruch and Henry Morgenthau were his close
>> advisers. Benjamin V. Cohen, Samuel Rosenman and David K. Niles were
>> his friends and trusted aides."[39] This is perhaps not so remarkable
>> in light of Roosevelt's reportedly one-eighth Jewish ancestry.[40]
>>
>> In his diary entry of 1 May 1941, Charles A. Lindbergh, the American
>> aviator hero and peace leader, nailed the coalition that was pushing
>> the United States into war:
>>
>> The pressure for war is high and mounting. The people are opposed to
>> it, but the Administration seems to have 'the bit in its teeth' and
>> [is] hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in the
>> country are behind war, and they control a huge part of our press and
>> radio and most of our motion pictures. There are also the
>> 'intellectuals,' and the 'Anglophiles,' and the British agents who are
>> allowed free rein, the international financial interests, and many
>> others.[41]
>>
>> Joseph Kennedy shared Lindbergh's apprehensions about Jewish power.
>> Before the outbreak of war he privately expressed concerns about "the
>> Jews who dominate our press" and world Jewry in general, which he
>> considered a threat to peace and prosperity. Shortly after the
>> beginning of hostilities, Kennedy lamented "the growing Jewish
>> influence in the press and in Washington demanding continuance of the
>> war "[42]
>>
>> Roosevelt's efforts to get Poland, Britain and France into war against
>> Germany succeeded all too well. The result was untold death and misery
>> and destruction. When the fighting began, as Roosevelt had intended
>> and planned, the Polish and French leaders expected the American
>> president to at least make good on his assurances of backing in case
>> of war. But Roosevelt had not reckoned on the depth of peace sentiment
>> of the vast majority of Americans. So, in addition to deceiving his
>> own people, Roosevelt also let down those in Europe to whom he had
>> promised support.
>>
>> Seldom in American history were the people as united in their views as
>> they were in late 1939 about staying out of war in Europe. When
>> hostilities began in September 1939, the Gallup poll showed 94 percent
>> of the American people against involvement in war. That figure rose to
>> 96.5 percent in December before it began to decline slowly to about 80
>> percent in the Fall of 1941. (Today, there is hardly an issue that
>> even 60 or 70 percent of the people agree upon.)[43]
>>
>> Roosevelt was, of course, quite aware of the intensity of popular
>> feeling on this issue. That is why he lied repeatedly to the American
>> people about his love of peace and his determination to keep the U.S.
>> out of war, while simultaneously doing everything in his power to
>> plunge Europe and America into war.
>>
>> In a major 1940 re-election campaign speech, Roosevelt responded to
>> the growing fears of millions of Americans who suspected that their
>> President had secretly pledged United States support to Britain in its
>> war against Germany. These well-founded suspicions were based in part
>> on the publication in March of the captured Polish documents. The
>> speech of 23 October 1940 was broadcast from Philadelphia to the
>> nation on network radio. In the most emphatic language possible,
>> Roosevelt categorically denied that he had
>> pledged in some way the participation of the United States in some
>> foreign war. I give to you and to the people of this country this most
>> solemn assurance: There is no secret Treaty, no secret understanding
>> in any shape or form, direct or indirect, with any Government or any
>> other nation in any part of the world, to involve this nation in any
>> war or for any other purpose.[44]
>>
>> We now know, of course, that this pious declaration was just another
>> one of Roosevelt's many brazen, bald-faced lies to the American
>> people.
>>
>> Roosevelt's policies were more than just dishonest-they were criminal.
>> The Constitution of the United States grants authority only to the
>> Congress to make war and peace. And Congress had passed several major
>> laws to specifically insure U.S. neutrality in case of war in Europe.
>> Roosevelt continually violated his oath as President to uphold the
>> Constitution. If his secret policies had been known, the public demand
>> for his impeachment would very probably have been unstoppable.
>>
>> The Watergate episode has made many Americans deeply conscious of the
>> fact that their presidents can act criminally. That affair forced
>> Richard Nixon to resign his presidency, and he is still widely
>> regarded as a criminal. No schools are named after him and his name
>> will never receive the respect that normally goes to every American
>> president. But Nixon's crimes pale into insignificance when compared
>> to those of Franklin Roosevelt. What were Nixon's lies compared to
>> those of Roosevelt? What is a burglary cover-up compared to an illegal
>> and secret campaign to bring about a major war?
>>
>> Those who defend Roosevelt's record argue that he lied to the American
>> people for their own good-that he broke the law for lofty principles.
>> His deceit is considered permissible because the cause was noble,
>> while similar deception by presidents Johnson and Nixon, to name two,
>> is not. This is, of course, a hypocritical double standard. And the
>> argument doesn't speak very well for the democratic system. It implies
>> that the people are too dumb to understand their own best interests.
>> It further suggests that the best form of government is a kind of
>> benevolent liberal-democratic dictatorship.
>>
>> Roosevelt's hatred for Hitler was deep, vehement, passionate-almost
>> personal. This was due in no small part to an abiding envy and
>> jealousy rooted in the great contrast between the two men, not only in
>> their personal characters but also in their records as national
>> leaders.
>>
>> Superficially, the public fives of Roosevelt and Hitler were
>> astonishingly similar. Both assumed the leadership of their respective
>> countries at the beginning of 1933. They both faced the enormous
>> challenge of mass unemployment during a catastrophic worldwide
>> economic depression. Each became a powerful leader in a vast military
>> alliance during the most destructive war in history. Both men died
>> while still in office within a few weeks of each other in April 1945,
>> just before the end of the Second World War in Europe. But the
>> enormous contrasts in the lives of these two men are even more
>> remarkable.
>>
>> Roosevelt was born into one of the wealthiest families in America. His
>> was a life utterly free of material worry. He took part in the First
>> World War from an office in Washington as UnderSecretary of the Navy.
>> Hitler, on the other hand, was born into a modest provinicial family.
>> As a young man he worked as an impoverished manual laborer. He served
>> in the First World War as a front line soldier in the hell of the
>> Western battleground. He was wounded many times and decorated for
>> bravery.
>>
>> In spite of his charming manner and soothing rhetoric, Roosevelt
>> proved unable to master the great challenges facing America. Even
>> after four years of his presidency, millions remained unemployed,
>> undernourished and poorly housed in a vast land richly endowed with
>> all the resources for incomparable prosperity. The New Deal was
>> plagued with bitter strikes and bloody clashes between labor and
>> capital. Roosevelt did nothing to solve the country's deep, festering
>> racial problems which erupted repeatedly in riots and armed conflict.
>> The story was very different in Germany. Hitler rallied his people
>> behind a radical program that transformed Germany within a few years
>> from an economically ruined land on the edge of civil war into
>> Europe's powerhouse. Germany underwent a social, cultural and economic
>> rebirth without parallel in history. The contrast between the
>> personalities of Roosevelt and Hitler was simultaneously a contrast
>> between two diametrically different social-political systems and
>> ideologies.
>>
>> And yet, it would be incorrect to characterize Roosevelt as merely a
>> cynical politician and front man for powerful alien interests.
>> Certainly he did not regard himself as an evil man. He sincerely
>> believed that he was doing the right and noble thing in pressuring
>> Britain and France into war against Germany. Like Wilson before him,
>> and others since, Roosevelt felt himself uniquely qualified and called
>> upon by destiny to reshape the world according to his vision of an
>> egalitarian, universalist democracy. He was convinced, as so many
>> American leaders have been, that the world could be saved from itself
>> by remodeling it after the United States.
>>
>> Presidents like Wilson and Roosevelt view the world not as a complex
>> of different nations, races and cultures which must mutually respect
>> each others' separate collective identities in order to live together
>> in peace, but rather according to a selfrighteous missionary
>> perspective that divides the globe into morally good and evil
>> countries. In that scheme of things, America is the providentially
>> permanent leader of the forces of righteousness. Luckily, this view
>> just happens to correspond to the economic and political interests of
>> those who wield power in the United States.
>>
>> President Roosevelt's War
>> In April 1941, Senator Gerald Nye of North Dakota prophetically
>> predicted that one day the Second World War would be remembered as
>> Roosevelt's war. "If we are ever involved in this war, it will be
>> called by future historians by only one title, 'the President's War,'
>> because every step of his since his Chicago quarantine speech [of 5
>> October 1937] has been toward war.[45]
>>
>> The great American historian, Harry Elmer Barnes, believed that war
>> could probably have been prevented in 1939 if it had not been for
>> Roosevelt's meddling. "Indeed, there is fairly conclusive evidence
>> that, but for Mr. Roosevelt's pressure on Britain, France and Poland,
>> and his commitments to them before September 1939, especially to
>> Britain, and the irresponsible antics of his agent provocateur,
>> William C. Bullitt, there would probably have been no world war in
>> 1939, or, perhaps, for many years thereafter."[46] In Revisionism: A
>> Key to Peace, Barnes wrote:
>>
>> President Roosevelt had a major responsibility, both direct and
>> indirect, for the outbreak of war in Europe. He began to exert
>> pressure on France to stand up to Hitler as early as the German
>> reoccupation of the Rhineland in March 1936, months before he was
>> making his strongly isolationist speeches in the campaign of 1936.
>> This pressure on France, and also England, continued right down to the
>> coming of the war in September 1939. It gained volume and momentum
>> after the quarantine speech of October 1937. As the crisis approached
>> between Munich and the outbreak of war, Roosevelt pressed the Poles to
>> stand firm against any demands by Germany, and urged the English and
>> French to back up the Poles unflinchingly.
>> There is grave doubt that England would have gone to war in September
>> 1939 had it not been for Roosevelt's encouragement and his assurances
>> that, in the event of war, the United States would enter on the side
>> of Britain just as soon as he could swing American public opinion
>> around to support intervention.
>>
>> Roosevelt had abandoned all semblance of neutrality, even before war
>> broke out in 1939, and moved as speedily as was safe and feasible in
>> the face of anti-interventionist American public opinion to involve
>> this country in the European conflict.[47]
>>
>> One of the most perceptive verdicts on Franklin Roosevelt's place in
>> history came from the pen of the great Swedish explorer and author,
>> Sven Hedin. During the war he wrote:
>>
>> The question of the way it came to a new world war is not only to be
>> explained because of the foundation laid by the peace treaties of
>> 1919, or in the suppression of Germany and her allies after the First
>> World War, or in the continuation of the ancient policies of Great
>> Britain and France. The decisive push came from the other side of the
>> Atlantic Ocean.
>>
>> Roosevelt speaks of democracy and destroys it incessantly. He slanders
>> as undemocratic and un-American those who admonish him in the name of
>> peace and the preservation of the American way of life. He has made
>> democracy into a caricature rather than a model. He talks about
>> freedom of speech and silences those who don't hold his opinion.
>> He talks about freedom of religion and makes an alliance with
>> Bolshevism.
>>
>> He talks about freedom from want, but cannot provide ten million of
>> his own people with work, bread or shelter. He talks about freedom
>> from the fear of war while working for war, not only for his own
>> people but for the world, by inciting his country against the Axis
>> powers when it might have united with them, and he thereby drove
>> millions to their deaths.
>> This war will go down in history as the war of President
>> Roosevelt.[48]
>>
>> Officially orchestrated praise for Roosevelt as a great man of peace
>> cannot conceal forever his crucial role in pushing Europe into war in
>> 1939.
>>
>> It is now more than forty years since the events described here took
>> place. For many they are an irrelevant part of a best-forgotten past.
>> But the story of how Franklin Roosevelt engineered war in Europe is
>> very pertinent-particularly for Americans today. The lessons of the
>> past have never been more important than in this nuclear age. For
>> unless at least an aware minority understands how and why wars are
>> made, we will remain powerless to restrain the warmongers of our own
>> era.
>>
>> Notes
>> 1.      See, for example: Charles A. Beard, President Roosevelt and
>> the Coming of the War 1941 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948);
>> William Henry Chamberlin, America's Second Crusade (Chicago: Regnery,
>> 1952, 1962); Benjamin Colby, 'Twas a Famous Victory (New Rochelle,
>> N.Y.: Arlington House, 1979); Frederic R. Sanborn, Design for War (New
>> York: Devin-Adair, 1951); William Stevenson, A Man Called Intrepid
>> (New York: Ballantine Books, 1980); Charles C. Tansill, Back Door to
>> War (Chicago: Regnery, 1952); John Toland, Infamy: Pearl Harbor and
>> Its Aftermath (New York: Doubleday, 1982).
>> 2.      Saul Friedlander, Prelude to Downfall: Hitler and the United
>> States 1939-1941 (New York: Knopf, 1967), pp. 73-77; U.S., Congress,
>> House, Special Committee on Investigation of Un-American Activities in
>> the United States, 1940, Appendix, Part II, pp. 1054-1059.
>> 3.      Friedlander, pp. 75-76.
>> 4.      New York Times, 30 March 1940, p. 1.
>> 5.      Ibid., p. 4, and 31 March 1940, p. 1.
>> 6.      New York Times, 30 March 1940, p. 1. Baltimore Sun, 30 March
>> 1940, p. 1.
>> 7.      A French-language edition was published in 1944 under the
>> title Comment Roosevelt est Entre en Guerre.
>> 8.      Tansill, "The United States and the Road to War in Europe," in
>> Harry Elmer Barnes (ed.), Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace (Caldwell,
>> Idaho: Caxton, 1953; reprint eds., New York: Greenwood, 1969 and
>> Torrance, Calif.: Institute for Historical Review [supplemented],
>> 1982), p. 184 (note 292). Tansill also quoted from several of the
>> documents in his Back Door to War, pp. 450-51.
>> 9.      Harry Elmer Barnes, The Court Historians Versus Revisionism
>> (N.p.: privately printed, 1952), p. 10. This booklet is reprinted in
>> Barnes, Selected Revisionist Pamphlets (New York: Arno Press & The New
>> York Times, 1972), and in Barnes, The Barnes Trilogy (Torrance,
>> Calif.: Institute for Historical Review, 1979).
>> 10.     Chamberlin, p. 60.
>> 11.     Edward Raczynski, In Allied London (London: Weidenfeld and
>> Nicolson, 1963), p. 51.
>> 12.     Orville H. Bullitt (ad.), For the President: Personal and
>> Secret (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972), p. x1v [biographical
>> foreword]. See also Time, 26 October 1936, p. 24.
>> 13.     Current Biography 1940, ed. Maxine Block (New York: H.W.
>> Wilson, 1940), p. 122 ff.
>> 14.     Gisleher Wirsing, Der masslose Kontinent: Roosevelts Kampf um
>> die Weltherrschaft (Jena: E. Diederichs, 1942), p. 224.
>> 15.     Bullitt obituary in New York Times, 16 February 1967, p. 44.
>> 16.     Jack Alexander, "He Rose From the Rich," Saturday Evening
>> Post, 11 March 1939, p. 6. (Also see continuation in issue of 18 March
>> 1939.) Bullitt's public views on the European scene and what should be
>> America's attitude toward it can be found in his Report to the
>> American People (Boston: Houghton Mifflin [Cambridge: Riverside
>> Press], 1940), the text of a speech he delivered, with the President's
>> blessing, under the auspices of the American Philosophical Society in
>> Independence Hall in Philadelphia shortly after the fall of France.
>> For sheer, hyperventilated stridency and emotionalist hysterics, this
>> anti-German polemic could hardly be topped, even given the similar
>> propensities of many other interventionists in government and the
>> press in those days.
>> 17.     Michael R. Beschloss, Kennedy and Roosevelt (New York: Norton,
>> 1980), pp. 203-04.
>> 18.     Robert Dallek, Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign
>> Policy 1932-1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), p. 31. See
>> also pp. 164-65.
>> 19.     Dispatch No. 349 of 20 September 1938 by Sir. R. Lindsay,
>> Documents on British Foreign Policy (ed. Ernest L. Woodward), Third
>> series, Vol. VII (London, 1954), pp. 627-29. See also: Joseph P. Lash,
>> Roosevelt and Churchill 1939-1941 (New York: Norton, 1976), pp. 25-27;
>> Dallek, pp. 164-65; Arnold A. Offner, America and the Ori-, gins of
>> World War II (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1971), p. 61.
>> 20.     William Phillips, Ventures in Diplomacy (North Beverly, Mass.:
>> privately published, 1952), pp. 220-21.
>> 21.     Carl Burckhardt, Meine Danziger Mission 1937-1939 (Munich:
>> Callwey, 1960), p. 225.
>> 22.     Drew Pearson and Robert S. Allen, "Washington Daily
>> Merry-Go-Round," Washington Times-Herald, 14 April 1939, p. 16. A
>> facsimile reprint of this column appears in Conrad Grieb (ed.),
>> American Manifest Destiny and The Holocausts (New York: Examiner
>> Books, 1979), pp. 132-33. See also: Wirsing, pp. 238-41.
>> 23.     Jay P. Moffat, The Moffat Papers 1919-1943 (Cambridge: Harvard
>> University Press, 1956), p. 232.
>> 24.     U.S., Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United
>> States (Diplomatic Papers), 1939, General, Vol. I (Washington: 1956),
>> p. 122.
>> 25.     "Von Wiegand Says-," Chicago Herald-American, 8 October 1944,
>> p. 2.
>> 26.     Edvard Benes, Memoirs of Dr. Eduard Benes (London: George
>> Allen & Unwin, 1954), pp. 79-80.
>> 27.     Lash, p. 64.
>> 28.     Hamilton Fish, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin (Now York:
>> Vantage, 1976; Torrance, Calif.: Institute for Historical Review,
>> 1980), p. 62.
>> 29.     James V. Forrestal (ads. Walter Millis and E.S. Duffield), The
>> Forrestal Diaries (New York: Viking, 1951), pp. 121-22. I have been
>> privately informed by a colleague who has examined the original
>> manuscript of the Forrestal diaries that many very critical references
>> to the Jews were deleted from the published version.
>> 30.     Jan Szembek, Journal 1933-1939 (Paris: Plan, 1952), pp.
>> 475-76.
>> 31.     David E. Koskoff, Joseph P. Kennedy: A Life and Times
>> (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974), p. 207; Moffat, p. 253;
>> A.J.P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War (London: Hamish
>> Hamilton, 1961; 2nd ed. Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett Premier [paperback],
>> 1965), p. 262; U.S., Department of State, Foreign Relations of the
>> United States, 1939, General, Vol. I (Washington: 1956), p. 355.
>> 32.     Dallek, p. 164.
>> 33.     Beschloss, pp. 190-91; Lash, p. 75; Koskoff, pp. 212-13.
>> 34.     Hull to Kennedy (No. 905), U.S., Department of State, Foreign
>> Relations of the United States, 1939, General, Vol. I (Washington:
>> 1956), p. 424.
>> 35.     The radio addresses of Hamilton Fish quoted here were
>> published in the Congressional Record Appendix (Washington) as
>> follows: (6 January 1939) Vol. 84, Part 11, pp. 52-53; (5 March 1939)
>> same, pp. 846-47; (5 April 1939) Vol. 84, Part 12, pp. 1342-43; (21
>> April 1939) same, pp. 1642-43; (26 May 1939) Vol. 84, Part 13, pp.
>> 2288-89; (8 July 1939) same, pp. 3127-28.
>> 36.     Wayne S. Cole, Charles A. Lindbergh and the Battle Against
>> American Intervention in World War II (New York: Harcourt Brace
>> Jovanovich, 1974), pp. 128, 136-39.
>> 37.     Congressional Record Appendix (Washington: 1941), (30 December
>> 1940) Vol. 86, Part 18, pp. 7019-25. See also: Appendix, Vol. 86, Part
>> 17, pp. 5808-14.
>> 38.     New York Times, 11 March 1941, p. 10.
>> 39.     Lucy Dawidowicz, "American Jews and the Holocaust," The New
>> York Times Magazine, 18 April 1982, p. 102.
>> 40.     "FDR 'had a Jewish great-grandmother'" Jewish Chronicle
>> (London), 5 February 1982, p. 3.
>> 41.     Charles A. Lindbergh, The Wartime Journals of Charles A.
>> Lindbergh (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970), p. 481.
>> 42.     Koskoff, pp. 282, 212. The role of the American press in
>> fomenting hatred against Germany between 1933 and 1939 is a subject
>> that deserves much more detailed treatment. Charles Tansill provides
>> some useful information on this in Back Door to War. The essay by
>> Professor Hans A. Muenster, "Die Kriegsschuld der Presse der USA" in
>> Kriegsschuld und Presse, published in 1944 by the German
>> Reichsdozentenfuehrung, is worth consulting.
>> 43.     An excellent essay relating and contrasting American public
>> opinion measurements to Roosevelt's foreign policy moves in 1939-41 is
>> Harry Elmer Barnes, Was Roosevelt Pushed Into War By Popular Demand in
>> 1941? (N.p.: privately printed, 1951). It is reprinted in Barnes,
>> Selected Revisionist Pamphlets.
>> 44.     Lash, p. 240.
>> 45.     New York Times, 27 April 1941, p. 19.
>> 46.     Harry Elmer Barnes, The Struggle Against the Historical
>> Blackout, 2nd ed. (N.p.: privately published, ca. 1948), p. 12. See
>> also the 9th, final revised and enlarged edition (N.p.: privately
>> published, ca. 1954), p. 34; this booklet is reprinted in Barnes,
>> Selected Revisionist Pamphlets.
>> 47.     Harry Elmer Barnes, "Revisionism: A Key to Peace," Rampart
>> Journal of Individualist Thought Vol. II, No. 1 (Spring 1966), pp.
>> 29-30. This article was republished in Barnes, Revisionism: A Key to
>> Peace and Other Essays (San Francisco: Cato Institute [Cato Paper No.
>> 12], 1980).
>> 48.     Sven Hedin, Amerika im Kampf der Kontinente (Leipzig: F.A.
>> Brockhaus, 1943), p. 54.
>>
>> Bibliography
>> Listed here are the published editions of the Polish documents, the
>> most important sources touching on the questions of their authenticity
>> and content, and essential recent sources on what President Roosevelt
>> was really-as opposed to publicly-doing and thinking during the
>> prelude to war. Full citations for all references in the article will
>> be found in the notes.
>> Beschloss, Michael R. Kennedy and Roosevelt. New York: Norton, 1980.
>> Bullitt, Orville H. (ed.). For the President: Personal and Secret.
>> [Correspondence between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt.]
>> Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
>> Germany. Foreign Office Archive Commission. Roosevelts Weg in den
>> Krieg: Geheimdokumente zur Kriegspolitik des Praesidenten der
>> Vereinigten Staaten. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag, 1943.
>> Germany. Foreign Office. The German White Paper. [White Book No. 3.]
>> New York: Howell, Soskin and Co., 1940.
>> Germany. Foreign Office. Polnische Dokumente zur Vorgeschichte des
>> Kriegs. [White Book No. 3.] Berlin: F. Eher, 1940.
>> Koskoff, David E. Joseph P. Kennedy: A Life and Times. Englewood
>> Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974.
>> Lukasiewicz, Juliusz (Waclaw Jedrzejewicz, ed.). Diplomat in Paris
>> 1936-1939. New York: Columbia University Press, 1970.
>> Wirsing, Giselher. Der masslose Kontinent: Roosevelts Kampf um die
>> Weltherrschaft. Jena: E. Diederichs, 1942.
>>
>> http://www.ihr.org/     http://www.natvan.com
>>
>> http://www.thebirdman.org   http://www.nsm88.org
>>
>> http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html   


From ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca Wed Sep  3 18:25:48 EDT 2008
Article: 1937061 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Topaz and His TOP TEN NEO-NAZI RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
Reply-To: ebersdorf2@sympatico.ca
Message-ID: 
References:   <5ca61b5d-a6df-4ac1-82bc-36fd26c4a28a@s1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>      <6eb4c145-0897-4142-914f-84723d6e0492@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com>   <188e4dce-11b3-4bdd-9ce5-12ee4a0c32de@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 1878
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc.  http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:34:36 -0400
Bytes: 109377
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1937061

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 04:55:04 -0700 (PDT), Michael Price
 wrote:

>On Sep 2, 8:31 pm, "B.H. Cramer"  wrote:
>> "Michael Price"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:6eb4c145-0897-4142-914f-84723d6e0492@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 1, 11:16 pm, Topaz  wrote:
>>
>> > By Mark Weber
>>
>> > Much has already been written about Roosevelt's campaign of deception
>> > and outright lies in getting the United States to intervene in the
>> > Second World War prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in
>> > December 1941. Roosevelt's aid to Britain and the Soviet Union in
>> > violation of American neutrality and international law, his acts of
>> > war against Germany in the Atlantic in an effort to provoke a German
>> > declaration of war against the United States, his authorization of a
>> > vast "dirty tricks" campaign against U.S. citizens by British
>> > intelligence agents in violation of the Constitution, and his
>> > provocations and ultimatums against Japan which brought on the attack
>> > against Pearl Harbor-all this is extensively documented and reasonably
>> > well known.[1]
>>
>> > Not so well known is the story of Roosevelt's enormous responsibility
>> > for the outbreak of the Second World War itself. This essay focuses on
>> > Roosevelt's secret campaign to provoke war in Europe prior to the
>> > outbreak of hostilities in September 1939. It deals particularly with
>> > his efforts to pressure Britain, France and Poland into war against
>> > Germany in 1938 and 1939.
>>
>> > Franklin Roosevelt not only criminally involved America in a war which
>> > had already engulfed Europe. He bears a grave responsibility before
>> > history for the outbreak of the most destructive war of all time.
>>
>> > This paper relies heavily on a little-known collection of secret
>> > Polish documents which fell into German hands when Warsaw was captured
>> > in September 1939.
>>
>> >http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html
>> > These documents clearly establish Roosevelt's crucial role in bringing
>> > on the Second World War.
>>
>>   And was the role more "crucial" than that of Hitler, who broke every
>> agreement he ever signed and invaded countries left and right, including countries
>> that had already given up territory to placate the Germans?  No, in fact nothing
>> could have caused a war in Europe without Hitler specifically seeking complete
>> domination of it.
>>
>> Well - No.
>>
>  Well, yes.
>
>> WWII was totally avoidable.
>>
>> Read please, and weep.
>>
>  None of this disproves that Hitler did exactly what I said.  He lied
>and aggressed
>against all his neighbours including those he made treaties.

Are you naively saying that the allies were honest? Dream on. What
treaties did Hitler allegedly break?

>Agreeing
>to a treaty
>would only mean that Germany had more places to attack from like in
>Czechoslavakia.

Czechoslovakia was an artificial Versailles-state based on the
oppression and exploitation of both the Slovak and German minorities.
Czechoslovakia was doomed as a state on the day of its creation. Where
is Czechoslovakia today? It no longer exists because it had no basis
on which to exist.

>
>
>> GERMAN WHITE BOOK
>> DOCUMENTS
>>
>> Concerning the Last Phase
>> of the
>> German-Polish Crisis
>>
>> GERMAN LIBRARY OF INFORMATION
>> NEW YORK
>>
>> The original German white Book, "Documents Concerning the Last Phase of the
>> German-Polish Crisis", is not available to students of international affairs
>> in the United States in adequate quantities, owing to illicit British
>> interferences with the mails.
>>
>> The German Library of Information, therefore, issues a reprint of the
>> original for the benefit of such students, with a prefatory note disposing
>> of certain widely-circulated allegations made in the British Blue Book.
>>
>> Further copies may be obtained from the German Library of Information, 17
>> battery Place, New York.
>> ______________________________________________
>> INDEX
>> Note on the German white Book
>>  I.  The Last Phase of the German-Polish Crisis
>> II.  Documents
>>  1.  First Note from the Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of Poland
>> in the Free City of Danzig to the President of the Senate of the Free City
>> of Danzig, August 4, 1939.  12
>>  2.  Second Note from the diplomatic Representative of the Republic of
>> Poland to the President of the Senate of the Free City of Danzig, August 4,
>> 1939
>>  3.  Reply of the President of the Senate of the Free City of Danzig to the
>> Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of Poland, August 7, 1939
>>  4.  Communication from the Secretary of State in the German Foreign Office
>> to the Polish Charge d'Affairs in Berlin, August 9, 1939
>>  5.  Communication from the Under-Secretary of State in the Polish Foreign
>> Office to the German Charge d'Affairs in Warsaw, August 10, 1939
>>  6.  Letter from the British Prime Minister to the Fuhrer, Aug. 22, 1939
>>  7.  Fuhrer's Reply to the British Prime Minister, August 23, 1939
>>  8. Declaration made by the Fuhrer to the British Ambassador on  August 25,
>> 1939, at 1:30 p. m.
>>  9.  Letter of the French Premier to the Fuhrer, August 26, 1939
>> 10. The Fuhrer's letter of reply to the French premier, August 27, 1939
>> 11. Memorandum from British Government handed to Reich Minister for Foreign
>> Affairs by the British Ambassador on August 28, 1939, at 10:30 p.m
>> 12. The Fuhrer's reply to the British Government handed to the British
>> Ambassador august 29, 1939 at 6:45 p.m
>> 13. Telephone Message from the German charge d'Affairs in Warsaw to the
>> German Foreign Office on August 30, 1939 at 5:30 p. m.
>> 14.  Memorandum from the British Government handed to the Reich Minister for
>> Foreign Affairs by the British Ambassador on August 30, 1939, at midnight.
>> 15.  Official German Statement published on August 31, 1939, at 9 p.m.
>> containing the Proposal for a settlement of the Danzig and the Polish
>> Corridor Problem, as well as of the question concerning the German and
>> Polish Minorities.
>> 16.  Announcement made by the Polish Broadcasting Station at Warsaw on
>> August 31, 1939, at 11 p.m.
>> 17.  Speech delivered by the Fuhrer before the Reichstag on September 1,
>> 1939
>> 18.  Note handed to the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs by the British
>> Ambassador on September 1, 1939, at 9:30 p. m.
>> 19.  Note handed to the Reich Minister for foreign Affairs by the French
>> Ambassador on September 1, 1939, at 10 p. m.
>> 20. Communication handed to the German Foreign Office by the Italian
>> Ambassador on the morning of September 2, 1939.
>> 21.  Information from the Havas news Agency on September 2, 1939
>> 22.  Extract from a Declaration made by the British Secretary of State for
>> Foreign affairs in the House of Lords on the afternoon of September 2, 1939
>> 23.  Note handed to the German Foreign Office by the British Ambassador on
>> September 3, 1939, at 9 a.m.
>> 24. Note from the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs handed to
>> the German Charge d'Affairs in London on September 3, 1939, at 11:a5 a.m.
>> 25.  Memorandum from the German Government handed to the British Ambassador
>> by the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs, September 3, 1939, at 11:30 a.m.
>> 26. Note handed to the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs by the French
>> Ambassador on September 3, 1939, at 12.20 p.m.
>> _______________________________________________________
>>  Note on the German White Book
>>
>>      The German White Book, presented herewith, is a collection of official
>> documents and speeches, not a collection of uncontrollable conversations. It
>> does not pretend to cover the entire field of German-Polish relations but,
>> as the title implies, concerns itself solely with the last phase of the
>> German-Polish crisis, from August 4th to September 3rd, 1939.
>>
>>      the Polish-german controversy concerning the Corridor, Upper Silesia
>> and Danzig, began in 1919; it has never, since the signing of the Versailles
>> Treaty, ceased to agitate europe. For many years intelligent commentators
>> and statesmen of all nations, including Great Britain, agreed that the
>> separation of East Prussia from the Reich and, indeed, the whole Polish
>> settlement, was unjust and fraught with danger.
>>
>>      Germany, again and again, made attempts to solve the differences
>> between the two countries in a friendly spirit. It was only when all
>> negotiations proved vain and Poland joined the encirclement front against
>> Germany, that chancellor Hitler cut the Gordian knot with the sword. It was
>> England that forced the sword into his hand.
>>
>>      Great Britain asserts in her Blue Book and elsewhere that she was
>> compelled to "guaranty" Poland against "aggression" for reason of
>> international morality. Unfortunately the British Government subsequently
>> admitted (Under-Secretary of State Butler, House of Commons, October 19,
>> 1939) that the "guaranty" was aimed solely against Germany.
>>
>>      It was not valid in case of conflicts with other powers. In other
>> words, the British "guaranty" was merely a link in the British encirclement
>> chain. The Polish crisis was deliberately manufactured by Great Britain with
>> the connivance of Poland: it was the fuse designed to set off the explosion!
>>
>>      Great Britain naturally attempts to becloud this fact. Official British
>> statements on the outbreak of the war place great emphasis on the allegation
>> that England did not give a formal "guaranty" to Poland until March 31, 193,
>> whereas the German demand on Poland, which Poland rejected, was made on
>> march 21st. Britain contends that the British "guaranty" was merely the
>> consequence of the German demand of March 21st.
>>
>>      Britain denies that her "guaranty" stiffened Polish resistance. She
>> insists that Germany took advantage of a moment of highly strained
>> international tension by springing upon Poland her demand for an
>> extra-territorial road through the Corridor between the Reich and East
>> Prussia.
>>
>>      The British ignore a vital fact in this connection. The existence of
>> the "guaranty", not its formal announcement, was the decisive factor. The
>> future may reveal when the British promise was first dangled before Poland.
>> In any event, Poland was assured of British aid before March 21st.
>>
>>      Chamberlain's speech of march 17, 1939, and the statement by Lord
>> Halifax of March 20th, (both reprinted in the British Blue Book) leave no
>> doubt on that question. The British "guaranty" was in the nature of a blank
>> check. Poland did not know when she marched to her doom, that the check
>> would not be honored.
>>
>>      The allegations that the Poles were surprised or overwhelmed by the
>> German proposals, does not hold water. Poland was fully informed of the
>> German demands. When as Herr von Ribbentrop points out in his Danzig speech
>> (October 24, 1939) chancellor Hitler in 1934 concluded a Friendship and
>> Non-Aggression Pact with Marshal Pilsudski, it was clearly understood that
>> the problem of Danzig and the Corridor must be solved sooner or later.
>> Chancellor Hitler hoped that it would be solved within the framework of that
>> instrument.
>>
>>      Poland callously disregarded her obligations under the German-Polish
>> Pact, after the death of Marshal Pilsudski. The persecution of German
>> minorities in Poland, Poland's measures to strangle Danzig economically, the
>> insolent manner the Polish Government chose to adopt with the British blank
>> check in its pocket and the Polish mobilization frustrated chancellor
>> Hitler's desire to settle Polish-German differences by peaceful negotiation,
>> as he had solved every other problem arising from the bankruptcy of
>> statesmanship at Versailles.
>>
>>      No one can affirm that the National Socialist Government did not
>> attempt with extraordinary patience to impress upon Poland the desirability
>> of a prompt and peaceful solution. The Polish Government was familiar with
>> the specific solution proposed by Chancellor Hitler since October 24, 1938.
>> The nature of the German proposals was discussed at least four times between
>> the two governments before March 21, 1939.
>>
>>      On October 24, 1938, von Ribbentrop, the German foreign Minister,
>> proposed to the Polish Ambassador, Lipski, four steps to rectify the
>> injustice of Versailles and to eliminate all sources of friction between the
>> two countries.
>>
>> 1).  The return of the Free City of Danzig to the Reich, without severance
>> of its economic ties to the Polish State. (The arrangement vouchsafed to
>> Poland free port privileges and extra-territorial access to the harbor.)
>>
>> 2.)  An exterritorial [sic] route of communication through the Corridor by
>> rail and motor to reunite Germany and East Prussia.
>>
>> 3.)  Mutual recognition by the two States of their frontiers as final and,
>> if necessary, a mutual guaranty of their territories.
>>
>> 4.)  The extension of the German-Polish Pact of 1934 from ten to twenty-five
>> years.
>>
>>      On January 5, 1939, Poland's Foreign Minister, Josef Beck, conferred
>> with the German chancellor on the problems involved.  At this time
>> Chancellor Hitler offered Beck a clear and definite guaranty covering the
>> Corridor, on the basis of the four points outlined by von Ribbentrop.  The
>> following day, January 6th, at Munich, the German Foreign Minister once more
>> confirmed Germany's willingness to guaranty, not only the Corridor, but all
>> Polish territory.
>>
>>      The generous offer for a settlement along these line, liquidating all
>> friction between the two countries, was reiterated when Foreign Minister von
>> Ribbentrop paid a state visit to Warsaw (January 23rd to 17th, 1939). On
>> that occasion von Ribbentrop again offered a guaranty of the Polish-German
>> boundaries and a final all-inclusive settlement of German-Polish relations.
>>
>>      Under the circumstances it is absurd to allege that Poland was
>> "surprised" by the German proposal of March 21st, and subsequent
>> developments.  It is possible that Poland may have concealed Germany's
>> friendly and conciliatory offers from Paris and London.  With or without
>> British promptings, Poland prepared the stage for a melodramatic scene, in
>> which the German villain brutally threatened her sovereignty and her
>> independence.
>>
>>      In spite of Polish intransigence, culminating in threats of war,
>> Chancellor Hitler made one more desperate attempt to prevent the conflict.
>> He called for a Polish plenipotentiary to discuss the solution presented in
>> Document 15 of the German White book. This solution envisaged the return of
>> Danzig to the Reich, the protection of Polish and German minorities, a
>> plebiscite in the Corridor under neutral auspices, safeguarding,
>> irrespective of the result, Poland's unimpeded exterritorial access to the
>> sea.
>>
>>      The British are please to describe this reasonable document as an
>> "ultimatum". This is a complete distortion of the facts.  The German
>> government, it is true, had set a time-limit (August 30th) for the
>> acceptance of its proposal, but it waited twenty-four hours after its
>> expiration before concluding that the possibilities of diplomatic
>> negotiations had been exhausted. There was ample opportunity for England and
>> Poland to act within those twenty-four hours.
>>
>>      The British take the position that Germany's demands were not known
>> either in Warsaw or London.  That pretense is demolished by the British Blue
>> Book itself, for we find here a dispatch from Sir Nevile Henderson, the
>> British Ambassador to Berlin, which leaves no doubt that he relayed the
>> German proposal to London after his midnight conference with von Ribbentrop
>> on August 30th, and that he understood the essential points of the German
>> proposal. Henderson even transmitted to the British Government Chancellor
>> Hitler's assurance that the Polish negotiator would be received as a matter
>> of course on terms of complete equality with the courtesy and consideration
>> due to the emissary of a sovereign state.
>>
>>      Henderson sent his night message not only to Downing Street, but also
>> to the British Embassy in Warsaw. There is evidence, which has recently come
>> into the possession of the German Foreign Office that, in spite of all its
>> protestations of ignorance and helplessness, the British Cabinet
>> communicated the substance of Henderson's midnight conversation with the
>> German Foreign Minister directly to the Polish Government. The London Daily
>> Telegraph, in a late edition of August 31st, printed the following
>> statement:
>> "At the Cabinet Meeting yesterday, at which the terms of the British Note
>> were approved, it was decided to send a massage to Warsaw, indicating the
>> extent of the latest demands from Berlin for the annexation of territory".
>>
>>      This item appeared only in a few issues. It was suppressed in later
>> editions.
>>
>>      Germany's demands were so reasonable that no sane Polish Government
>> would have dared to reject them. They certainly would have been accepted if
>> England had advised moderation. There was one more chance to preserve peace
>> on September 2nd. It was offered by a message from Premier Mussolini
>> (Document 20). The Italian suggestion was acceptable to Germany and France
>> (Document 21). but was rejected by Great Britain (Document 22).
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> I
>> THE LAST PHASE
>> of the German-Polish Crisis
>> (pp.7-12)
>>      Appended to this are printed the documents which were exchanged during
>> the last days before the beginning of the German defensive action against
>> Poland and the intervention of the western Powers, or which in any other
>> respect refer to these events. These documents, when shortly recapitulated,
>> give the following general survey:
>> 1).   At the beginning of August the Reich Government was informed of an
>> exchange of notes between the representative of Poland in Danzig and the
>> Senate of the Free City (Danzig), according to which the Polish Government
>> in the form of a short-term ultimatum and under threat of retaliatory
>> measures had demanded the withdrawal of an alleged order of the Senate -- an
>> order which, in fact, had never been issued -- concerning the activities of
>> Polish customs inspectors (Documents 1 to 3).
>>      This caused the Reich Government to inform the Polish Government, on
>> August 9th, that a repetition of such demands in the form of an ultimatum
>> would lead to an aggravation of the relations between Germany and Poland,
>> for the consequences of which the Polish government would alone be
>> responsible.
>>      At the same time, the attention of the Polish Government was drawn to
>> the fact that the maintenance of the economic measures adopted by Poland
>> against Danzig would force the Free City to seek other export and import
>> possibilities (Document 4).
>>      The Polish government answered this communication from the Reich
>> Government with an aide-Memoire of August 10th, handed to the German Embassy
>> in Warsaw, which culminated in the statement that Poland would interpret
>> every intervention of the Reich Government in Danzig matters, which might
>> endanger Polish rights and interests there, as an aggressive action
>> (Document 5).
>>
>> 2).   On August 22nd, the British Prime Minister, Mr. Neville Chamberlain,
>> acting under the impression of announcements of the impending conclusion of
>> a Non-Aggression Pact between Germany and the U.S.S.R., sent a personal
>> letter to the Fuhrer. Here he expressed on the one hand the firm
>> determination of the British Government to fulfill its pledged obligations
>> to Poland, on the other hand, the view that it was most advisable in the
>> first instance to restore an atmosphere of confidence and then to solve the
>> German-Polish problems through negotiations terminating in a settlement
>> which should be internationally guaranteed (Document 6).
>>      The Fuhrer, in his reply of August 23rd, set forth the real causes of
>> the German-Polish crisis.
>>      He referred in particular to the generous proposal made by him in March
>> of this year and stated that the false reports spread by England at that
>> time regarding a German mobilization against Poland, the equally incorrect
>> assertions about Germany's aggressive intentions towards Hungary and
>> Roumania and, finally, the guarantee given by England and France to the
>> Polish Government had encouraged the Polish Government not only to decline
>> the German offer but to let loose a wave of terror against the Germans
>> domiciled in Poland and to strangle Danzig economically. At the same time,
>> the Fuhrer declared that Germany would not let herself be kept back from
>> protecting her vital rights by any methods of intimidation whatsoever
>> (Document 7).
>>
>> 3).   Although the above-mentioned letter from the British Prime Minister of
>> August 22nd, as well as speeches made on the subsequent day by British
>> statesmen, showed a complete lack of understanding for the German
>> standpoint, the Fuhrer nevertheless resolved to make a fresh attempt to
>> arrive at an understanding with England.
>>      On August 25th, he received the British Ambassador, once more with
>> complete frankness explained to him his conception of the situation, and
>> communicated to him the main principles of comprehensive and far-sighted
>> agreement between Germany and England which he would offer to the British
>> Government once the problem of Danzig and the Polish Corridor was settled
>> (Document 8).
>>
>> 4).   while the British government were discussing the preceding declaration
>> from the Fuhrer, and exchange of letters took place between the French
>> President, M. Daladier, and the Fuhrer. In his answer the Fuhrer again
>> submitted his reasons for Germany's standpoint in the German Polish question
>> and once more repeated his firm decision to regard the present Franco-German
>> frontier as final (Documents 9 and 10).
>>
>> 5).   In their answer to the step taken by the Fuhrer on August 25th, which
>> was handed over on the evening of August 28th, the British Government
>> declared themselves prepared to consider the proposal for a revision of
>> Anglo-German relationships. They further stated that a they had received a
>> definite assurance from the Polish Government that they were prepared to
>> enter into direct discussions with the reich Government on German-Polish
>> questions.
>>      At the same time they repeated that in their opinions a German-Polish
>> settlement must be safeguarded by international guarantees (Document 11).
>>      Despite grave misgivings arising from the whole of Poland's previous
>> attitude and despite justifiable doubts in a sincere willingness on the part
>> of the Polish Government for a direct settlement, the Fuhrer, in his answer
>> handed to the British Ambassador on the afternoon of August 29th, accepted
>> the British proposal and declared that the Reich Government awaited the
>> arrival of a Polish representative invested with plenipotentiary powers on
>> August 30th. At the same time the Fuhrer announced that the Reich Government
>> would immediately draft proposals for a solution acceptable to them and
>> would, if possible, have these ready for the British Government before the
>> Polish negotiator arrived (Document 12).
>>
>> 6).   In the course of August 30th, neither a Polish negotiator with
>> plenipotentiary powers nor any communication from the British Government
>> about steps undertaken by them reached Berlin. On the contrary, it was on
>> this day that the Reich Government were informed of the ordering of a
>> general Polish mobilization (document 13).
>>      Only at midnight did the British Ambassador hand over a new memorandum
>> which, however, failed to disclose any practical progress in the treatment
>> of Polish-German questions and confined itself to a statement that the
>> Fuhrer's answer of the preceding day was to be communicated to the Polish
>> Government and that the British Government considered it impracticable to
>> establish a German-Polish contact so early as on August 30th (Document 14).
>>
>> 7).   Although the non-appearance of the Polish negotiator had done away
>> with the conditions under which the British government were to be informed
>> of the Reich government's conception of the basis on which negotiations
>> might be possible, the proposals since formulated by the Reich were none the
>> less communicated and explained in detail to the British Ambassador when he
>> handed over the above-mentioned memorandum.
>>      The Reich Government expected that now at any rate, subsequently to
>> this, a Polish plenipotentiary would be appointed. Instead, the Polish
>> Ambassador in Berlin made a verbal declaration to the Reich Minister for
>> Foreign Affairs on the afternoon of August 31st, to the effect that the
>> Polish Government had been informed in the preceding night by the British
>> government that there was a possibility of direct negotiations between the
>> Reich Government and the Polish Government, and that the Polish Government
>> were favorably considering the British proposal.
>>      When expressly asked by the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs whether
>> he had the authority to negotiate on the German proposals, the Ambassador
>> stated that he was not entitled to do so, but had merely been instructed to
>> make the foregoing verbal declaration. A further question from the Reich
>> Minister for Foreign Affairs whether he could enter into an objective
>> discussion on the matter was expressly denied by the Ambassador.
>>
>> 8).   The Reich Government thus were confronted with the fact that they had
>> spent two days waiting in vain for a Polish plenipotentiary. On the evening
>> of August 31st, they published the German proposals with a short account of
>> the events leading up to them (Document 15).
>>      These proposals were described as unacceptable by Polish broadcast
>> (Document 16).
>>
>> 9).   Now that every possibility for a peaceful settlement of the
>> Polish-German crisis was thus exhausted, the Fuhrer saw himself compelled to
>> resist by force the force which the Poles had long employed against Danzig,
>> against the Germans in Poland, and finally, by innumerable violations of the
>> frontier, against Germany.
>>
>> 10).   On the evening of September 1st, the Ambassadors of Great Britain and
>> France handed to the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs two notes couched in
>> the same terms in which they demanded that Germany should withdraw her
>> troops from Polish territory, and declared that if this demand were not
>> conceded, their respective Governments would fulfill their obligations to
>> Poland without further delay (Documents 18 and 19).
>>
>> 11).   In order to banish the menace of war, which had come dangerously
>> close in consequence of these two notes, the Duce made a proposal for an
>> armistice and a subsequent conference for the settlement of the
>> German-Polish conflict (Document 20).
>>      The Germans and the French Government replied in the affirmative to
>> this proposal whilst the British Government refused to accept it (Documents
>> 21 and 11).
>>      That this was so was already apparent in the speeches made by the
>> British Prime Minister and the British Secretary of State for Foreign
>> Affairs on the afternoon of September 2nd in the British Houses of
>> Parliament, and a communication to that effect was made to the Reich
>> Minister for Foreign Affairs by the Italian Ambassador on the evening of
>> September 2nd. Thus also in the opinion of the Italian Government the
>> initiative of the Duce had been wrecked by England.
>>
>> 12).   On September 3rd, at 9 a.m., the British Ambassador arrived at the
>> German Foreign Office and handed over a note in which the British
>> Government, fixing a time limit of two hours, repeated their demand for a
>> withdrawal of the German troops and, in the event of a refusal, declared
>> themselves to be at war with Germany after this time limit had expired
>> (Document 23).
>>
>>      The British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on September 3rd,
>> 1939, at 11:15 a. m. delivered a note to the German Charge d'Affairs in
>> London in which he informed him that a state of war existed between the two
>> countries as from 11 a. m. on September 3rd (Document 24).
>>
>>      On the same day, at 11:30 a. m. the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs
>> handed to the British Ambassador in Berlin a memorandum from the Reich
>> Government in which the Reich rejected the demands expressed by the British
>> Government in the form of an ultimatum and in which it was proved that the
>> responsibility for the outbreak of war rested solely with the British
>> Government (Document 25).
>>
>>      On the afternoon of September 3rd, the French Ambassador in Berlin
>> called on the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs and inquired whether the
>> Reich government were in a position to give a satisfactory answer to the
>> question directed to them by the French government in their note of
>> September 1st. The Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs told the Ambassador
>> that after the English and French Notes of September had been handed to him,
>> the Head of the Italian Government had made a new intermediary proposal, to
>> which the Duce had added, the French Government had agreed.
>>
>>      The Reich Government had informed the Duce on the preceding day that
>> they were also prepared to accept the proposal.
>>
>>      The Duce however had informed them later on in the day that his
>> proposal had been wrecked by the intransigent attitude of the British
>> Government.
>>
>>      The British Government several hours previously had presented German
>> with an ultimatum which had been rejected on the German side by a memorandum
>> which he, the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs, would hand over to the
>> French Ambassador for his information.
>>
>>      Should the attitude of France towards Germany be determined by the same
>> considerations as that of the British Government, the Reich Minister for
>> Foreign Affairs could only regret this fact.  Germany had always sought
>> understanding with France. Should the French Government, despite this fact
>> adopt a hostile attitude towards Germany on account of their obligations
>> towards Poland, the German people would regard this as a totally
>> unjustifiable aggressive war on the part of France against the Reich.
>>
>>      The French Ambassador replied that he understood from the remarks of
>> the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs that the Reich Government were not in
>> a position to give a satisfactory answer to the French Note of September
>> 1st. Under these circumstances he had the unpleasant task of informing the
>> Reich Government that the French Government were forced to fulfill the
>> obligations which they had entered into towards Poland, from September 3rd
>> at 5 p.m. onwards.
>>
>>      The French Ambassador at the same time handed over a corresponding
>> written communication (CF, Document 26).
>>
>>      The Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs thereupon declared in conclusion
>> the the French Government would bear the full responsibility for the
>> suffering which the nations would have to bear if France attacked Germany.
>>
>> GERMAN WHITE BOOK
>> Concerning The Last Phase of the German-Polish Crisis
>> II
>>
>> Documents
>> Documents 1 through 8 (of 26)
>>
>> 1.   First Note from the Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of Poland
>> in the Free City of Danzig to the President of the Senate of the Free City
>> of Danzig, august 4, 1939
>> (Translation)
>>
>>      I learn that the local Danzig customs officials posted on the frontier
>> between the Free City of Danzig and East Prussia have declared in an
>> unprecedented statement to the Polish customs officials, that the Danzig
>> executives intend from 7 o'clock a. m. on august 6th onwards to oppose a
>> certain number of Polish inspectors in the exercise of their normal duties,
>> which functions are a part of the prerogatives of the Polish government on
>> the customs frontier. I am convinced that this act on the part of the local
>> authorities depends either on a misunderstanding or on an erroneous
>> interpretation of the instructions of the Senate of the Free city of Danzig.
>>
>>      I am fully convinced that you, Mr. President of the Senate, can have no
>> doubt that this infringement of the fundamental rights of Poland will on no
>> pretext whatever be tolerated by the Polish Government.
>>
>>      I await, by august 5th at 6 p. m. at the latest, your answer with the
>> assurance that you have given instructions cancelling the action of your
>> subordinates.
>>      In view of the fact that the above-mentioned action is one of a series
>> which have taken place on the frontier, I am forced to warn you, mr.
>> president of the Senate, that all Polish customs inspectors have received
>> the order to appear for duty in uniform and bearing arms, on August 6th of
>> the current year and on subsequent days, at every point on the frontier
>> which they consider necessary for examination of the customs.
>>
>>      Every attempt made to hinder them in the exercise of their duties,
>> every attack or intervention on the part of the police will be regarded by
>> the Polish Government as an act of violence against the officials of the
>> Polish State in the pursuance of their duties.
>>
>>      If the above-mentioned illegal actions should take place, the Polish
>> Government will take retaliatory measures (retorsions) without delay against
>> the Free City, as the responsibility for them will rest entirely on the
>> Senate of the Free City.
>>
>>      I hope to receive a satisfactory explanation before the above-mentioned
>> date.
>>
>> (signed): CHODACKI,
>>
>> Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of Poland.
>> ________________________________________
>> 2.   Second Note from the Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of
>> Poland to the President of the Senate of the Free City of Danzig, August 4,
>> 1939
>> (Translation)
>>
>> Danzig, August 4, 1939.
>>
>>      Mr. President of the Senate:
>>      The Polish Government beg to express its astonishment at the fact that
>> the Senate should find technical difficulties in replying to so simple a
>> matter. In the interest of avoiding threatening consequences, I note for the
>> time being that no act of violence will be undertaken against our customs
>> inspectors and that they will be able to proceed in a normal way with their
>> duties. I must repeat nevertheless that the admonitions contained in my note
>> of August 4th, 11:40 p. m. remain in force.
>>
>>      I beg to remain. . .
>>
>> (signed): CHODACKI
>>
>> To
>> His Excellency, Herr Arthur Greiser,
>> President of the Senate of the Free City of Danzig
>> _____________________________________________
>> 3.   Reply of the President of the Senate of the Free City of Danzig to the
>> Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of Poland, August 7, 1939.
>> (Translation)
>> Danzig, August 7, 1939
>>
>> His Excellency
>> The Diplomatic Representative of the Republic of Poland.
>> M. Chodacki, Minister with plenipotentiary powers,
>> Danzig.
>>
>> Sir:
>>      In reply to your two notes dated the 4th of this month, the second of
>> which I received on August 5th, I must express my astonishment to you that
>> you should make a completely unverified rumor a pretext for sending the
>> Danzig Government a short-term ultimatum from the Polish Government, and
>> thus in this time of political unrest conjure up unfounded danger which may
>> result in inconceivable disaster.
>>
>>      The sudden decree of the Polish Government that all Polish customs
>> officials on duty are to appear in uniform and bearing arms, is a breach of
>> the arrangement agreed upon and can be understood only as an intentional
>> provocation to bring about incidents and acts of violence of the most
>> dangerous nature.
>>      According to facts which I have since ascertained and concerning which
>> I immediately telephoned to you on Saturday morning, the 5th inst., no order
>> announcing that the Danzig executives from August 6th at 7 a. m. onwards are
>> to oppose a certain number of Polish inspectors in the exercise of their
>> normal duties has been issued from an office, certainly not from any
>> administrative quarter of the Customs Office of the Free City of Danzig.
>>
>>      I refer you further to my note of June 3rd of this year, in which I
>> already carefully defined the relationship of the Danzig customs officials
>> and the Polish customs inspectors on the frontier.
>>
>>      The Danzig Government protest with great energy against the threatened
>> retorsions of the Polish Government which they regard as an absolutely
>> inadmissible threat and the consequences of which will devolve on the Polish
>> Government alone.
>>
>>      I beg to remain. . .
>>
>> (signed): GREISER
>> __________________________________________________
>> 4.   Communication from the Secretary of State in the German Foreign Office
>> to the Polish Charge d'Affairs in Berlin, August 9, 1939.
>> (Translation)
>> Berlin, August 9, 1939.
>>
>>      The Reich Government have received with great astonishment information
>> of the note of the Polish Government to the Senate of the Free City of
>> danzig, in which a demand was made in the form of an ultimatum to revoke an
>> alleged decree intended to hinder the Polish customs inspectors in the
>> exercise of their normal duties (which decree, however, was based on
>> unfounded rumors, and in reality had never been issued by the Senate of the
>> Free City of Danzig). In case of a refusal, the Free City of Danzig was
>> threatened with retaliatory measures.
>>
>>      The Reich Government see themselves obliged to point out to the Polish
>> Government that the repetition of such a demand, in the form of an
>> ultimatum, to the Free City of Danzig and the threat of retaliatory measures
>> would lead to greater tension in the relationship between Germany and
>> Poland, and that the responsibility of such consequences would devolve
>> exclusively on the Polish Government, the German Government already now
>> declining all responsibility for them.
>>
>>      The German Government further draw the attention of the Polish
>> Government to the fact that the measures taken by the Polish Government to
>> prevent the import of certain goods from the Free City of Danzig to Poland
>> are likely to bring about serious economic loss to the population of Danzig.
>>
>>      Should the Polish Government insist on further lending their support to
>> such measures, there would, in the opinion of the Reich Government, be no
>> choice left to the Free City of Danzig, as matters lie, but to seek other
>> export and consequently import possibilities.
>> _____________________________________________________
>> 5.   Communication from the Under-Secretary of State in the Polish Foreign
>> Office to the German Charge d'Affairs in Warsaw, August 10, 1939.
>> (Translation)
>>
>>      With the greatest surprise