1

ADELAIDE INSTITUTE PO Box 3300 Norwood SA 5067 Online

Australia ISSN 1440-9828

Mob: 61+401692057

Email: info@adelaideinstitute.org

Web: http://www.adelaideinstitute.org

August 2019 No 1062

_____________________________________________________________________

2

3

4

5

6

-------------------------------------------------------------

Britain's secret torture centre

The interrogation camp that turned

prisoners into living skeletons

German spa became a forbidden village where

Gestapo-like techniques were used

Ian Cobain, The Guardian

Saturday 17 December 2005

Despite the six years of bitter fighting which lay behind

him, James Morgan-Jones, a major in the Royal Artillery,

could not have been more specific about the spectacle in

front of him. "It was," he reported, "one of the most

disgusting sights of my life."

Curled up on a bed in a hospital in Rotenburg, near

Bremen, was a cadaverous shadow of a human being. "The man literally had no flesh on him, his state of emaciation was incredible," wrote Morgan-Jones. This man had weighed a little over six stones (38kg) on admission five weeks earlier, and "was still a figure which may well have been one of the Belsen inmates". At the base of his spine "was a huge festering sore", and he was

clearly terrified of returning to the prison where he had been brought so close to death. "If ever a man showed

fear - he did," Morgan-Jones declared.

Adolf Galla, 36, a dental technician, was not alone. A few beds away lay Robert Buttlar, 27, a journalist, who had been admitted after swallowing a spoon handle in a

suicide attempt at the same prison. He too was emaciated and four of his toes had been lost to frostbite.

The previous month, January 1947, two other inmates, Walter Bergmann, 20, and Franz Osterreicher, 38, had

died of malnutrition within hours of arriving at the hospital. Over the previous 13 months, Major Morgan-Jones learned, 45 inmates of this prison, including several women, had been dumped at Rotenburg. Each was severely starved, frostbitten, and caked in dirt.

Some had been beaten or whipped.

The same week that Major Morgan-Jones was submitting his report, a British doctor called Jordan was raising similar concerns at an internment camp 130 miles away. Dr Jordan complained to his superiors that eight men who had been transferred from the same prison "were all suffering gross malnutrition ... one in my opinion dying".

They included Gerhard Menzel, 23, a 6ft German former soldier who weighed seven stones, and was described as

a living skeleton. Another, admitted as Morice Marcellini, a 27-year-old Frenchman, later transpired to be Alexander Kalkowski, a captain in the Soviet secret police, the NKVD. He weighed a little over eight stones,

and complained that he had been severely beaten and forced to spend eight hours a day in a cold bath.

Prisoners complained thumbscrews and "shin screws" were employed at the prison and Dr Jordan's report highlighted the small, round scars that he had seen on the legs of two men, "which were said to be the result of the use of some instrument to facilitate questioning".

One of these men was Hans Habermann, a 43-year-old disabled German Jew who had survived three years in Buchenwald concentration camp.

All of these men had been held at Bad Nenndorf, a small,

once-elegant spa resort near Hanover. Here, an organisation called the Combined Services Detailed Interrogation Centre (CSDIC) ran a secret prison

following the British occupation of north-west Germany in 1945.

CSDIC, a division of the War Office, operated interrogation centres around the world, including one known as the London Cage, located in one of London's most exclusive neighbourhoods. Official documents

discovered last month at the National Archives at Kew, south-west London, show that the London Cage was a secret torture centre where German prisoners who had been concealed from the Red Cross were beaten, deprived of sleep, and threatened with execution or with

unnecessary surgery.

As horrific as conditions were at the London Cage, Bad

Nenndorf was far worse. Last week, Foreign Office files which have remained closed for almost 60 years were opened after a request by the Guardian under the Freedom of Information Act. These papers, and others declassified earlier, lay bare the appalling suffering of many of the 372 men and 44 women who passed through the centre during the 22 months it operated

before its closure in July 1947.

They detail the investigation carried out by a Scotland Yard detective, Inspector Tom Hayward, following the complaints of Major Morgan-Jones and Dr Jordan. Despite the precise and formal prose of the detective's

report to the military government, anger and revulsion

leap from every page as he turns his spotlight on a place where prisoners were systematically beaten and exposed to extreme cold, where some were starved to death and,

7

allegedly, tortured with instruments that his fellow countrymen had recovered from a Gestapo prison in

Hamburg. Even today, the Foreign Office is refusing to release photographs taken of some of the "living

skeletons" on their release.

Initially, most of the detainees were Nazi party members or former members of the SS, rounded up in an attempt to thwart any Nazi insurgency. A significant number, however, were industrialists, tobacco importers, oil

company bosses or forestry owners who had flourished under Hitler.

By late 1946, the papers show, an increasing number were suspected Soviet agents. Some were NKVD officers - Russians, Czechs and Hungarians - but many were simply German leftists. Others were Germans living in the Russian zone who had crossed the line, offered to

spy on the Russians, and were tortured to establish whether they were genuine defectors.

One of the men who was starved to death, Walter Bergmann, had offered to spy for the British, and fell under suspicion because he spoke Russian. Hayward reported: "There seems little doubt that Bergmann,

against whom no charge of any crime has ever been made, but on the contrary, who appears to be a man who has given every assistance, and that of considerable value, has lost his life through malnutrition and lack of medical care".

The other man who starved to death, Franz Osterreicher, had been arrested with forged papers while attempting to

enter the British zone in search of his gay lover. Hayward said that "in his struggle for existence or to get extra scraps of food he stood a very poor chance" at Bad Nenndorf.

Many of Bad Nenndorf's inmates were there for no reason at all. One, a former diplomat, remained locked up because he had "learned too much about our

interrogation methods". Another arrived after a clerical error, and was incarcerated for eight months. As Inspector Hayward reported: "There are a number against whom no offence has been alleged, and the only authority for their detention would appear to be that they are citizens of a country still nominally at war with us."

Today, the older people of Bad Nenndorf talk about August 1 1945, the day the British arrived, with undisguised bitterness. A convoy of trucks pulled into the village, and the Tommies took over from an easygoing US infantry division. Within hours, the British had

ordered everybody in the centre of the village to pack their belongings and leave. Bad Nenndorf was heaving

with refugees from the bomb-ravaged ruins of Hanover, 18 miles to the east: hundreds of people were given 90 minutes to pack some food and valuables, and get out.

"We thought everyone would be allowed back in a few days," recalls Walter Münstermann, now a retired newspaperman, but then a 14-year-old. "Then the soldiers started putting barbed wire fences around the

centre of the village, and slowly we began to realise that this was going to be no ordinary camp."

Walter and his neighbours realised that the centre of their village was being transformed into a prison camp when they heard that the British were converting a large,

40-year-old bath-house, ripping out the baths and

installing heavy steel doors to turn each cubicle into a cell. They saw the first batch of prisoners arrive in the

back of a truck. Later groups arrived at the village railway station in cattle trucks.

Ingrid Groth, then a seven-year-old, said locals claimed that if you crept up to the barbed wire at night, you

could hear the prisoners' screams. Mr Münstermann, who passed the main gate on his way to school each day, insists that the opposite was true: that it was a sinister place precisely because "you never, ever saw anyone, and you never heard a sound". Among the people of

Lower Saxony, Bad Nenndorf became known as das verbotene dorf - the forbidden village.

The commanding officer was Robin "Tin Eye" Stephens, 45, a monocled colonel of the Peshawar Division of the Indian Army who had been seconded to MI5 in 1939, and who had commanded Camp 020, a detention centre in Surrey where German spies had been interrogated during

the war.

An authoritarian and a xenophobe with a legendary

temper, Stephens boasted that interrogators who could "break" a man were born, and not made. Of the 20 interrogators ordered to break the inmates of Bad Nenndorf, 12 were British, a combination of officers from

the three services and civilian linguists. The remaining eight included a Pole and a Dutchman, but were mostly German Jewish refugees who had enlisted on the outbreak of war, and who, Inspector Hayward suggested, "might not be expected to be wholly impartial".

Most of the warders were soldiers barely out of their teens. Some had endured more than a year of combat,

at the end of which they had liberated Belsen. Some represented the more unruly elements of the British Army of the Rhine, sent to Bad Nenndorf after receiving suspended sentences for assault or desertion. Often,

Hayward said, they were the sort of individuals "likely to resort to violence on helpless men".

The inmates were starved, woken during the night, and

forced to walk up and down their cells from early morning until late at night. When moving about the prison they were expected to run, while soldiers kicked them. One warder, a soldier of the Welsh Regiment, told Hayward: "If a British soldier feels inclined to treat a prisoner decently he has every opportunity to do so; and

he also has the opportunity to ill-treat a prisoner if he so desires".

The Foreign Office briefed Clement Attlee, the prime minister, that "the guards had apparently been instructed to carry out physical assaults on certain prisoners with

the object of reducing them to a state of physical collapse and of making them more amenable to

interrogation".

Former prisoners told Hayward that they had been whipped as well as beaten. This, the detective said, seemed unbelievable, until "our inquiries of warders and guards produced most unexpected corroboration". Threats to execute prisoners, or to arrest, torture and murder their wives and children were considered

"perfectly proper", on the grounds that such threats were never carried out.

Moreover, any prisoner thought to be uncooperative during interrogation was taken to a punishment cell where they would be stripped and repeatedly doused in

water. This punishment could continue for weeks, even in

sub-zero temperatures.

Naked prisoners were handcuffed back-to-back and forced to stand before open windows in midwinter.

8

Frostbite became common. One victim of the cold cell punishment was Buttlar, who swallowed the spoon

handle to escape. An anti-Nazi, he had spent two years as a prisoner of the Gestapo. "I never in all those two

years had undergone such treatments," he said.

Kalkowski, the NKVD officer, claimed that toenails were ripped out and that he had been hung from his wrists during interrogation, with weights tied to his legs. British NCOs, he alleged, would beat him with rubber

truncheons "while the interrogating officers went for lunch". Hayward concluded, however, that "there was not a shred of evidence to support these allegations".

Whatever was happening during the interrogations must have been widely known among many of the camp's officers and men. In common with every CSDIC prison, each cell was bugged, so that the prisoners' private

utterances could be matched against their "confessions".

Inspector Hayward's investigation led to the courts

martial of Stephens, Captain John Smith, Bad Nenndorf's medical officer, and an interrogator, Lieutenant Richard Langham. The hearings were largely held behind closed doors. A number of sergeants - men who had carried out

the beatings - were told they would be pardoned if they gave evidence against their officers.

Langham, who had been born in Munich and fled to England with his parents in 1934, at the age of 13, denied that he had mistreated prisoners and was acquitted. Charges of manslaughter against Smith were dropped but, after a court martial held entirely in secret,

he was found guilty of the neglect of inmates and sentenced, at the age of 49, to be dismissed the service.

It is unclear whether any of Stephens's superiors knew, or condoned, what had happened at Bad Nenndorf,

although his lawyers said they were prepared to spread the blame among senior army officers and Foreign Office officials. Before his court martial began there was

nervous debate among ministers and government officials about how to avoid the repercussions which would follow, should the truth become known.

Ministers were anxious that nobody should learn that CSDIC was running a number of similar prisons in Germany. There was also what the chancellor of the

Duchy of Lancaster, Frank Pakenham, later to become Lord Longford, described as "the fact that we are alleged to have treated internees in a manner reminiscent of the German concentration camps". The army, meanwhile, said it was determined the Soviets should not discover

"how we apprehended and treated their agents", not least because some would-be defectors might have

second thoughts.

Finally, there was the inevitable fall-out for Attlee's Labour government. As Hector McNeill, foreign minister, pointed out in a memo to Ernest Bevin, the foreign secretary: "I doubt if I can put too strongly the parliamentary consequences of publicity. Whenever we have any allegations to make about the political police

methods in Eastern European states it will be enough to call out in the House 'Bad Nenndorf', and no reply is left to us."

Stephens was eventually court martialled behind closed doors. Amid complaints of a half-hearted prosecution, he

was acquitted of two charges, two others were withdrawn, and he was free to apply to rejoin MI5.

In Bad Nenndorf, the remaining prisoners were shipped out, the wire ripped down, and the prison shut down. The baths were reinstalled in the cubicles and, gradually, the spa returned to its traditional business of catering for the health needs of elderly German tourists.

The closure of Bad Nenndorf was not the end of the story, however. The archives reveal that three months later a custom-built interrogation centre, with cells for 30 men and 10 women, was opened near to the British military base at Gütersloh. The inmates were to be suspected Soviet spies, and would be medically examined before interrogation.

When Frank Pakenham complained that most of the interrogators had been at Bad Nenndorf, and demanded

that "drastic methods" should not be employed, Major-General Sir Brian Robertson, the military governor, put his foot down.

Why, he exclaimed, if the military authorities were

required to justify the arrest of each inmate, and then handle them according to the standards "enforced by the prison commissioners in our own enlightened country", there was little point in having an interrogation centre at all.

Death subterfuge

One of the most bizarre episodes at Bad Nenndorf

followed the death of a former SS officer called Abeling. He had been so severely beaten during his arrest in January 1947 that he was unconscious on arrival at the

prison, and died shortly afterwards.

The camp's officers instructed a local gravedigger to prepare a grave for a British officer who had died of an infectious disease. Abeling's corpse was sewn into a

blanket, lowered in, and covered with quicklime. A firing party was on hand to ensure that the dead man was buried with full British military honours, and a white wooden cross with a false name was erected over the grave.

The reasons for such subterfuge are made clear in

declassified Foreign Office papers at the National Archives. Abeling, formerly a member of an "annihilation squad" in Warsaw, had been working as an agent for the Americans at the time of his death, spying on his old Nazi

comrades under the codename Slim.

The report notes that the Americans "insisted that 'Slim's' death must be kept a very closely guarded

secret, because of the fact that the US authorities had been employing him in the full knowledge that he was wanted by the Polish government as a major war criminal".

Today the wooden cross over Abeling's grave has been replaced with a gravestone. It still bears the name of the man that local people believe to be buried there: John X

White, born 1.8.1911, died 17.1.1947.

*https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/dec/17/secondworldwar.topstories3

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9

10

11

12

13

The Real Case for Auschwitz: Robert Van Pelt's

Evidence from the Irving Trial Critically Reviewed

Carlo Mattogno

Castle Hill Publishers, 2015 –

Holocaust denial literature - 750 pages

In 1993 Jewish theologian Deborah Lipstadt called British historian David Irving a "Holocaust denier." Irving sued her for libel in return. Subsequently a court case unfolded in England which attracted the attention of the world's mass media in 2000. The sharpest weapon in Lipstadt's defense arsenal was Jewish

art historian Robert van Pelt, who presented an expert report claiming to refute revisionist assertions about Auschwitz. Because Irving had neither the support by any expert witnesses nor was he himself an expert on the Holocaust, he inevitable lost the case. Robert van Pelt was therefore praised as the defeater of revisionism. When he published his revised expert report in his book The Case for Auschwitz in 2002, he even advanced to the foremost expert on Auschwitz in the public's eyes. Mattogno's The Real Case for Auschwitz is the revisionist response to Robert van Pelt. On 750 pages, Mattogno thoroughly scrutinizes van Pelt's assertions by juxtaposing them

to material and documentary facts. The author's first revelation is that van Pelt has committed plagiarism: he plundered and basically regurgitated the research results published in 1989 and 1993 by French researcher Jean-Claude Pressac - yet without naming his source even once. Mattogno's analysis is devastating for both Pressac and van Pelt, as it reveals that their studies of Auschwitz ignore crucial counter-arguments, fail to approach pivotal technical issues with technical means, are highly inconsistent, use deceptive methods, present conflicting sources without due source criticism, deform all sources to serve the author's perspective, and reveal a shockingly threadbare knowledge of the history of the Auschwitz camps. Mattogno therefore concludes "The Case for Auschwitz is neither a scholarly nor a historical work; it is only a biased journalistic assemblage of poorly understood and poorly interpreted historical sources." This is a book of prime political and scholarly importance, as it delivers the exterminationists' case the most devastating blow ever *https://books.google.com.au/books/about/The_Real_Case_for_Auschwitz.html?id=KfdXrgEACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

___________________________________________________

23

The Destruction of Dresden With the passing of time, the “Holocaust” narrative

will become one of the greatest jokes in the history of humanity. By Jonas E. Alexis, August 3, 2019

When David Irving wrote his classic work The Destruction of Dresden in 1963, many so-called experts doubted its accuracy. Richard J. Evans, the Cambridge professor who represented Deborah

Lipstadt during the Irving trial, wrote:

“Not one of [Irving’s]

books, speeches

or articles, not one

paragraph, not one sentence in

any of them, can be taken

on trust as an accurate representation of its historical

subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about.”

I corresponded with Evans back in 2012. I wrote:

I am currently reading some of your work. What is your

take on David Irving’s Hitler’s War precisely? He has been praised by a number of historians for digging into the archives and looking into primary sources. I realized that much of what has been written about the Third

Reich has been based on secondary sources. I also discovered that you seem to present two contradictory views on Irving. At one point, you declared that Irving

“knows an enormous amount about Hitler and his entourage and his immediate circle in the second world war and their conduct of military affairs, and over the years he’s dug up through contacts and through sheer energy and diligence enormous amounts of new documentation of varying interest and importance, but some of it is undeniably important.”

Yet after the trial, you wrote that Irving’s writing as “completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about if we mean

by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a

representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian.” Can you clarify those statements? Thank you so much.

Evans, astonishingly, responded by saying that “there is really no contradiction. He did dig up a lot of valuable material but what he did with it was worthless.” This is the kind of thinking that pervades the Holocaust

establishment! I wrote back and declared:

If he actually “did dig up a lot of valuable material,” then everything he ever wrote could not possibly be “worthless.” That would be an obvious contradiction, and I’m sure you would agree with me here. Some of his stuff

could be demonstrably false—and I think he should be willing to concede that point. However, one should be

able to disprove his claims by what he seems or claims to know best: the archives, documented accounts, etc. I

have carefully read Lying About Hitler and you seem to rely heavily on what other historians have said about Irving, which again is an appeal to authority.

Moreover, if that is not ad hominem, it is close enough.

Should serious historians be willing to take this route? I really enjoy reading your work In Defense of History, in which you argue quite rightly that there was a community of historians in the 1920s in Germany who agreed on similar issues but we today would consider those issues to be quite wrong. If that is the case, it is not historically sound to summon the opinions of the

experts in order to dismiss Irving. Is it possible to challenge Irving on his own ground? He has been saying for decades that he is more than willing to change his

mind if someone would prove him wrong from the archives.

If not, he will then continue to marshal his claims that “conformist historians” have no interest in real history,

most particularly when it comes to making extraordinary claims with regard to Nazi Germany and providing little archival evidence for those claims. He certainly would be right in line with rational and historical thought if he backs his claims with documents straight from the archives as opposed to relying on the opinions of like-

minded historians. Would you not agree?

It was very clear to me throughout our dialogue that Evans does not even believe the stuff that he writes in books such as In Defense of History. These people are

out there propounding one theory and laughing all the way to the bank. I was told by Irving that Evans got paid a huge amount of money for representing Lipstadt.

In any event, it seems that the

British Telegraph was paying attention to Irving’s Destruction of Dresden in 2015. Listen to the Telegraph here:

“Today marks the 70th anniversary of ‘Operation

Thunderclap,’ one of the twentieth century’s most controversial military actions. From 13 to 15 February 1945, British (and some American) heavy bombers dropped 2,400 tons of high explosives and 1,500 tons of

incendiary bombs onto the ancient cathedral city of Dresden. In just a few hours, around 25,000 to 35,000 civilians were blown up or incinerated…

“It was not the first time a German city had been firebombed. “Operation Gomorrah” had seen Hamburg torched on 25 July the previous year. Nine thousand tons of explosives and incendiaries had flattened eight square

miles of the city centre, and the resulting inferno had created an oxygen vacuum that whipped up a 150-mile-an-hour wind burning at 800 Celsius. The death toll was 37,000 people. (By comparison, the atom bomb in

Nagasaki killed 40,000 on day one.)

“Chief of the Air Staff Charles Portal had calculated that

bombing civilians could kill 900,000 in 18 months,

24

seriously injure a million more, destroy six million homes, and ‘de-house’ 25 million, creating a

humanitarian crisis that, he believed, would speed up the war.”[1]

Didn’t Irving write about similar things? If the Telegraph is right, then Evans’ assessment of Irving is categorically wrong. If he is categorically wrong, then it is safe to say that the virulent attack on Irving by the Holocaust establishment is questionable. I would hasten to say that

Irving will be vindicated precisely because his research on World War II is largely based on archival documents, not upon an ideological foundation.

In that sense, the Holocaust establishment will one day collapse completely. It’s already been challenged. In fact, military historian R. H. S. Stolfi’s provocative study Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny, published by

Prometheus Books, has already sent shockwaves across the historical spectrum.

Stolfi, a professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, cogently argued that Hitler was rational in making many of his decisions and that the Holocaust establishment has irresponsibly demonized him for ideological purposes.

Stolfi declares that he has “weighted the great biographies [of Hitler] on the scales of historical reality and found them wanting…”[2] According to Stolfi, the

great biographies do not ask deep questions and fail to address the metaphysical issues surrounding the evolution of Hitler and Nazi Germany. He writes,

“Virtually every literary piece written about Adolf Hitler in the more than half century since 1945 has been based on antipathy. In a seemingly boundless corpus of writing, every work from the mighty to the insignificant is

fundamentally similar in its common revulsion for the man and his national movement.

“In the most recent great biography, Professor Ian Kershaw begins and ends with detestation. His work is

skilled and often brilliant, but he fails to inform the reader of certain characteristics indispensable for true

comprehension of the man, and he underestimates the importance of the postwar conditions inflicted by the Allies on Germany, which contributed to Hitler’s rise.

“Bullock, Fest, and Kershaw ascribe criminal features to Hitler’s foreign policy from 1933 through 1939, but they

fail to correlate it realistically with the Allied imposition of the Versailles Treaty—the ultimate manifestation of German defeat and Allied victory following World War I.

“In the present situation, the reading public has been served only half a portrait of the great tyrant of the twentieth century….half a portrait of Hitler tells us little about the man as a human being and presents a

distorted and incredible interpretation of his actions as creator of National Socialism and leader of Germany.

“The great biographies take excessive liberties in denigrating his person, and, in doing so, they make it difficult to comprehend him…Every single one falls short of producing an adequate understanding of Hitler as an

historical person. To this point in time, the biographers have lost the biographical war.”[3]

Well, Irving has been saying almost the same thing for decades. With the passing of time, the “Holocaust” narrative will become one of the greatest jokes in the history of humanity. [1] Dominic Selwood, “Dresden was a civilian town with no military significance. Why did we burn its people?,” Telegraph, February 13, 2015.

[2] Stolfi, Hitler, 11.

[3] Ibid., 11, 12, 17.

*https://www.veteranstoday.com/2019/08/03/the-

destruction-of-dresden-2/

___________________________________________________ NY TIMES HEADLINE: OCTOBER 6, 1940:

'NEW WORLD ORDER PLEDGED TO JEWS'

From opening paragraph: "....Arthur Greenwood member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a New World Order..." In his famous Iowa speech of September 11, 1941, famed aviator Charles Lindbergh of the much-maligned "America First" movement caused a controversy which Establishment Fake Historians and the Judenpress continue, to this day, to denounce as "anti-Semitic" ™ and false. The offending excerpts from the Lindbergh speech: "The three most important groups who have been

pressing this country toward war are the British, the

Jewish and the Roosevelt administration.....

First, the British: It is obvious and perfectly

understandable that Great Britain wants the United

States in the war on her side. England is now in a

desperate position. Her population is not large enough

and her armies are not strong enough to invade the

continent of Europe and win the war she declared against

Germany.

The second major group I mentioned is the Jewish.

Their greatest danger to this country lies in their (the

Jews) large ownership and influence in our motion

pictures, our press, our radio and our government.

I am not attacking either the Jewish or the British people.

Both races, I admire. But I am saying that the leaders of

both the British and the Jewish

races, for reasons which are as

understandable from their

viewpoint as they are inadvisable

from ours, for reasons which are

not American, wish to involve us

in the war.

But was Lindbergh really out of line

for fingering the British and the Jews

as the main agitators behind FDR's

not-so-secret effort to embroil the USA into World War II?

Original source evidence, from the "horse's own mouth," appear

to support the Lindbergh allegations.

Let's

investigate.

Charles

Lindbergh

(shown

receiving a

medal from German Air Force

Marshal Herman Goering in 1938)

and the "America First" movement

which he supported have long been denounced for

claiming that American Jews were manipulating the USA

into another World War. But an old Slimes article

supports the claim.

25

THE SETTING:

1940: Germany is in total control of the European war situation.

The French have signed an armistice with Germany and are out

of the war. The British army has been forced to evacuate the

continent at Dunkirk (Hitler had graciously allowed them to

escape). The Soviets and Americans are not in the war, and

Hitler has a very generous peace offer on the table for Britain.

As they had during their losing days of World War I, British

politicians reach out to international Jewry for help in inducing

America into the war. During that war, Britain's "Balfour

Declaration" promised to open Palestine to the Jews (after the

defeat and busting-up of the Ottoman Turkish Empire) as a

payoff for bringing about U.S. entry. And after Woodrow

Wilson's 1916 re-election, the Zionists delivered on their end of

the deal.

Now, in 1940, 14 months before the deliberate provocation

which led to Japan's justifiable attack on Pearl Harbor, comes

what we might call "The Greenwood Declaration" --

issued by British War Cabinet member Lord Arthur

Greenwood through a British-Jewish intermediary, and then on

to Jewish World Congress Director Dr. Stephen S Wise of New

York, and duly hyped by Sulzberger's Jew York Slimes -- is

offering (((them))) THE WORLD! Note one of Greenwood's

amazingly prophetic statements contained in the article which

we post and link down below, "When we have achieved

victory, and we assuredly shall..."

But there is absolutely no chance of British victory unless the

U.S. can be dragged into the conflict. Therefore, Greenwood

must already know that the U.S. will enter the war at a later

date. This official promise of a "New World Order" is clearly

intended to further encourage American Jewish support and

pressure for dragging "isolationist" ™ America into the war.

Greenwood promises:

"In the rebuilding of civilized society after the war, there

should and will be a real opportunity for Jews everywhere

to make a distinctive and constructive contribution."

Translation: "Get America in and we'll really empower the Jew

bankers and their henchmen after the war!"

Greenwood's imperialist "dance with the Devil" will prove fatal.

After the war, Britain would end up broke and lose control of her

own Empire to the Marxist Jews as well.

From the viewpoint of forensic history, what's really interesting

about the Greenwood's declaration is how it perfectly mirrors

the September, 1941 accusation made by Lindbergh. Yes, Lucky

Lindy" was right after all --- and the Greenwood statement,

summed up in the original Slimes article posted below (and also

linked as a pdf), proves it.

War Cabinet member Lord Arthur Greenwood (left),

delivered his promise of a "New World Order" to British

Zionist Maurice Perlzweig (center) of the World Jewish

Congress; who in turn handed it to Stephen S Wise of the

American branch of the World Jewish Congress (right)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

* http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=61302

________________________________

Siegmar Faust in seiner Gegendarstellung an die Berliner

Zeitung: „Das habe ich so nie gesagt“

Epoch Times2. Juni 2018 Als Reaktion auf angebliche "AfD-nahe und den Holocaust relativierende Äußerungen" in einem Interview, soll Siegmar

Faust nicht mehr für Führungen in der Stasiopfer Gedenkstätte Hohenschönhausen eingesetzt werden. In einer Gegendarstellung erklärt Faust: „Was mir da in dem Bericht in den Mund gelegt wurde, habe ich so nie gesagt“.

Ein Wachturm in dem ehemaligen Stasi-Gefängnis Hohenschönhausen, das jetzt als Stasiopfer-Gedenkstätte fungiert. Foto: AXEL SCHMIDT/AFP/Getty Images Am Freitag berichteten wir über den früheren DDR-Dissidenten Siegmar Faust. Hubertus Knabe, Direktor der Stasiopfer Gedenkstätte Höhenschönhausen, erfuhr von angeblichen Aussagen, die Faust in einem Interview einem Reporter der Berliner Zeitung gegenüber geäußert haben soll.

Daraufhin entschied Knabe, den Gedenkstättenführer und Zeitzeugen der DDR-Diktatur nicht mehr für Führungen wegen „AfD-nahen und den Holocaust relativierenden Aussagen“ einsetzen zu wollen. Faust erklärte allerdings am Samstag der „Jungen Freiheit“ gegenüber: „Was mir da in dem Bericht in den Mund gelegt wurde, habe ich so nie gesagt“. Interview fand in einem ehemaligen Vernehmungszimmer statt

Hintergrund ist ein Bericht der Berliner Zeitung, laut dem der ehemalige politische DDR-Gefangene zum Autor des Textes, Markus Decker, während einer Führung AfD-Positionen vertreten und den Holocaust relativiert haben soll. Faust zeigte sich verwundert darüber, dass zahlreiche Medien die Darstellung der Berliner Zeitung verbreiteten, ohne seine Version der Geschichte zu hören, berichtet die Junge Freiheit. „Herr Decker [Reporter der Berliner Zeitung] und ich haben uns am Rande einer Führung am 22. Mai in der Gedenkstätte Hohenschönhausen in einem ehemaligen Vernehmungszimmer unterhalten. Er nahm das Gespräch mit dem Handy auf“,

26

schilderte Faust gegenüber der JF das Treffen. Inhaltlich, so erklärt Faust, sei es um Wolf Biermann gegangen und die Frage, warum Faust die AfD gewählt habe. Im Gespräch ging es dann um Horst

Mahler

Dann ging es im Gespräch um Horst Mahler (verurteilter Holocaustleugner). „Ich finde es empörend, wenn jemand für ein Meinungsdelikt zwölf Jahre hinter Gitter muss. So etwas beunruhigt mich in einem Rechtsstaat. Aber das heißt doch nicht, dass ich die abstrusen Ansichten von Mahler teile“, betonte Faust gegenüber der JF. „Es geht mir hierbei nicht um Mahler, sondern allein darum, dass jemand, und zwar egal wer auch immer, für ein Meinungsdelikt so lange ins Gefängnis muss, während ein Mörder wie Erich Mielke nach sechs Jahren wieder freigelassen wird und sogar noch Haftentschädigung bekommt“, so Faust weiter. Für Faust ist dies eine Schieflage, unabhängig von der Person Mahlers. „So etwas muss man doch wenigstens ansprechen und diskutieren dürfen. Wir leben doch nicht mehr in der DDR“, äußert Faust gegenüber der JF. Faust wendet sich mit einer Gegendarstellung an die Berliner

Zeitung

Die JF berichtet außerdem, dass sich Faust wegen der ihm unterstellten Zitate am Freitag mit einer Gegendarstellung an die Berliner Zeitung gewandt hat. Die Aussage über die heutige Wirkung der Naziverbrechen habe er „keinesfalls gesagt“. Sie verstoße „völlig gegen meine eigenen Grundsätze“, erläuterte Faust.

An die Bemerkung zur Zahl der sechs Millionen ermordeten Juden könne er sich nicht erinnern. Wenn, dann sei diese möglicherweise auf dem Weg zum Ausgang gefallen und nun „in einen absichtlich falschen Kontext gestellt“, so Faust in der JF. Das Schreiben von Faust an die Berliner Zeitung mit der Gegendarstellung läge der JF vor. Darin findet sich ein weiterer Vorwurf von Faust an die Zeitung. Mit ihr habe er mündlich vereinbart, die Zitate vor Veröffentlichung gegenlesen zu dürfen, um diese abzusegnen. Dem habe der Autor zugestimmt, dann aber nichts mehr von sich hören lassen, so die JF.

Mitglied des Stiftungsbeirats: Faust sei kein Einzelfall

Unterdessen kritisierte ein Mitglied des Stiftungsbeirats, dass es sich bei Faust nicht um einen Einzelfall handele. „Ich betrachte mit Sorge die wachsende Nähe der Gedenkstätte Hohenschönhausen zur AfD und ihrem Rechtspopulismus“, warnte der Historiker Jens Gieseke. Es mehrten sich Stimmen, „die ein Problem mit Pluralismus und liberaler Demokratie haben“, berichtet die JF. Gieseke weiter: Der Glaubwürdigkeit der Einrichtung würde es nachhaltig schaden, „wenn man sich mit Geschichtsrevisionisten einlässt“. Der Förderverein der Gedenkstätte sei ein „Einfallstor“. Als Beispiel nannte Gieseke den Vorsitzenden Jörg Kürschner, der auch für die JF tätig ist. „Das ist mit dem Auftrag einer so zentralen Aufarbeitungsstätte nicht zu vereinbaren“, behauptete Gieseke zu der JF. (er) *https://www.epochtimes.de/politik/deutschland/siegmar-faust-in-seiner-gegendarstellung-an-die-berliner-zeitung-das-habe-ich-so-nie-gesagt-a2454141.html

__________________________________________________ [Setting the stage when there is a change in evaluation –

that Adolf Hitler was a good man - then Jews will claim

his legacy as their won JEWISH LEGACY!]

******************

Hitler's grandfather was JEWISH, claims historian

By Sophie Law For Mailonline, 6 August 2019

A historian has claimed Hitler's grandfather was Jewish after

Nazi sympathisers scrubbed his real ancestry from public

records. Dr. Leonard Sax presented evidence that Hitler's

grandmother, who refused to reveal her lover's identity,

conceived her only child with a Jew living in Graz, Austria.

Hitler's Jewish ancestry was first put forward by Hans Frank,

Hitler's personal attorney, who uncovered evidence in 1930 that

the Nazi leader's grandfather lived in the household where his

grandmother worked.

Dr. Leonard Sax has presented evidence that Hitler's

grandmother, who refused to reveal her lover's identity,

conceived her only child Alois (pictured) with a Jew living in

Graz, Austria

Published seven years after his execution at International

Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, many have since dismissed

Frank's findings.

Nikolaus von Preradovich, a famous German author, even found

evidence to suggest there were no Jews living in Graz in 1836,

when Hitler's father Alois Schicklgruber was conceived.

But Dr. Sax has drawn from Austrian archives from the 1800s

and uncovered documents to prove there was in fact a settled

community of Jews living in Graz before 1850.

And he also presents overwhelming evidence that Preradovich

was a Nazi sympathizer who was offended by the suggestion

that Hitler was one-quarter Jewish.

Hitler's grandmother Maria Anna Schicklgruber, who gave birth

to his father Alois, was a poor peasant child who lived in a rural

area, in the northwest part of Austria

Dr Sax told MailOnline: 'I have been thinking about the fact that

neo-Nazis are offended by the suggestion that Hitler had a

Jewish grandfather, because they hate Jews.

'Jews are often offended by the suggestion that Hitler had a

Jewish grandfather, because they hate Hitler. But now, as nearly

a lifetime has passed since the end of the Third Reich, maybe

we are free at last to ask - not what is offensive, or what is not

offensive - but what is true? And what does it mean for our

understanding of Adolf Hitler, and the Holocaust?'

In 1931, Hitler ordered his political party Schutzstaffel (SS) to

investigated the alleged rumours who found no evidence he had

Jewish links

Hitler's grandmother Maria Anna Schicklgruber, who gave birth

to his father Alois, was a poor peasant who lived in a rural area,

in the northwest part of Austria.

Not much is known about her life until she reached the age of

42, when she gave birth to Hitler's father while still unmarried.

Historians note that she refused to reveal the identity of the

father and so 'illegitimate' was entered into the baptismal

register. She went on to marry Johann Georg Hiedler, who later

went on to be officially accepted as Alois' father by the Third

Reich.

Hitler's ancestry came into question when opponents spread

rumours that his grandfather was Jewish - since for the Nazis a

'pure' bloodline was all-important. In 1931, Hitler ordered his

political party Schutzstaffel (SS) to investigated the alleged

rumours who found no evidence he had Jewish links.

Hitler then ordered genealogist Rudolf Koppensteiner to publish

a detailed family tree of his ancestry in 1937 which showed that

his ancestors were all Austrian Germans.

As Johann Georg Hiedler was legitimised as his biological father

with the priest changing the 'illegitimate' on the birth certificate

to his name in 1876, this was considered certified proof of

Hitler's ancestry.

Dr. Sax's findings, Revisiting the question of Adolf Hitler’s

paternal grandfather, is published in the Journal of European

Studies.

*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article7323857/Hitlers-grandfather-JEWISH-claims-historian-says-Nazi-sympathisers.html

***

__________________________________________________________________________

27

German philosopher Martin Heidegger’s concise maxim that points to a cultural/ideal origin of Judaism: The Jews, with their marked gift for calculating, live, already for the longest time, according to the principle of race,

which is why they are resisting its consistent application with utmost violence.

_______________________________________________________________________________

28

White Girl Bleed a Lot:

The Return of Racial Violence to America and

How the Media Ignore It The only book to document the recent epidemic of black mob violence, including the Knockout Game: Hundreds of examples in more than 100 cities. In the last three years. Front Page magazine: ““While Girl Bleed a Lot” is an important entry into the debate over whether black racial violence exists and whether it should be reported on. While the debate continues, the book breaks through the barriers of

censorship and transcends the anecdotal for a raw snapshot of cities under siege and a nation in denial.”

Racial violence is back.

Along with racial lawlessness and even riots. You didn’t hear about it? The Midwest state fair with a “Beat Whitey Night?” Or the Black Beach Week that turns a town into “living hell?” Or the school principal who blamed Asian students for being racist after suffering years of abuse? The eleven episodes of racial violence on the Fourth of July 2012? Some involving more than 1000 black people? These criminal episodes go by different names: Flash mobs, flash robs, black on white crime, or as one social worker put it: Kids just “blowing off steam.” Anything except what they are: Racial violence. Now for the first time, a new book breaks the code of silence on the explosion of racial violence in more than 100 cities since 2010. All “impeccably documented,” says the Houston Examiner. Thomas Sowell: ”Reading Colin Flaherty’s book made painfully clear to me that the magnitude of this problem is greater than I had discovered from my own research. He documents both the race riots and the media and political evasions in dozens of cities.” – National Review. Sean Hannity: White Girl Bleed a Lot “has gone viral.” Los Angeles Times: “a favorite of conservative voices.” Daily Caller: “As the brutal “knockout” game sweeps across the U.S., one author isn’t surprised by the attacks or the media reaction. Colin Flaherty, author of the book “White Girl Bleed A

Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How The Media Ignore It,” began chronicling the new wave of violence nearly a year ago — revealing disturbing racial motivations behind the attacks and a pattern of media denial.” Alex Jones: “Brilliant. Could not put it down.” Neal Boortz: “Colin Flaherty has become Public Enemy No.1 to the leftist media because of his research on black culture of violence.” From the Bill Cunningham show. It is official: “Colin Flaherty is a great American.A wonderful book.” Breitbart.com: “Prescient. Ahead of the News. Garnering attention and sparking important discussions.”

Allen West: “At least author Colin Flaherty is tackling this issue (or racial violence) in his new book, White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore it.“ David Horowitz: “A determined reporter, Colin Flaherty, broke ranks to document these rampages in a book titled, White Girl Bleed A Lot” WND.com: “Colin Flaherty has done more reporting than any other journalist on what appears to be a nationwide trend of skyrocketing black-on-white crime, violence and abuse.” Jack Cashill: “In White Girl Bleed A Lot, Colin Flaherty bravely goes where the major media dare not follow. In short, he tells the truth about America’s otherwise unspoken epidemic of black on non-black crime.” “What makes this otherwise grim saga so readable is Flaherty’s magical sense of humor. Among contemporary authors only Flaherty’s fellow alchemist Mark Steyn has a comparable ability to transform dread into gold.” NPR: “In conservative media, Colin Flaherty has catalogued the Knockout Game.” Slate: “Colin Flaherty is at the epicenter of the Knockout Game.” Milt Rosenberg, WGN: “My compliments to Colin Flaherty for White Girl Bleed a Lot. A very interesting book that points out an important problem that needs to be confronted.” Selling the Second Amendment: “Colin Flaherty’s White Girl Bleed A lot is a real masterpiece.” Anthony Cumia:: “Love the book. It’s so encouraging to see others come forward and address this seemingly unaddressable issue. Good luck!”

* http://whitegirlbleedalot.com/

_____________________________________________________________ Woman Killed in First Friday Shooting Was Advocate for Domestic Violence Survivors

Luke Nozicka, Kansas City Star, August 5, 2019

The victim The Shooter

* https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article233499707.html

___________________________________________________________________________

E. Michael Jones on Jewish Privilege

Our Interesting Times

EPISODE DESCRIPTION

Dr. E. Michael Jones returns to Our Interesting Times to discuss his article "Jewish Privilege." Dr. Jones is the

editor of Culture Wars and the author of many books including The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History, Barren Metal: The History of Capitalism As The Conflict Between Labor and Usury, and The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing. *Please consider supporting this program by donating here. *https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/tkelly6785757/

episodes/2019-08-06T05_06_05-07_00

_____________________________________________________________

--------------------------------------------------------------- So, what’s new in the universal battle-of-the-will?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Der Spiegel report accuses Jewish organizations of using "dubious methods" to influence Berlin's

29

policies on Middle East to better reflect those of PM Netanyahu. Report claims German parliament's

decision to define BDS as anti-Semitic result of "systemic influence and pressure."

A recent article in German weekly Der Spiegel makes anti-Semitic accusations against Jewish

organizations in the country that work to promote the struggle against the hatred of Jews and the recognition of

Israel's positions.

The report accuses two organizations, Promoting Values and the Middle East Peace Forum, of using "dubious methods" to wage a "focused campaign" aimed at

changing Germany's Middle Easy policies to better conform to those of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government. A number of journalists behind the article have in the past written reports that were found to have been fabricated.

According to the report in Der Spiegel, the aforementioned organizations have ties to the Strategic Affairs Ministry's international campaign against the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, and acted "aggressively" to promote the decision by the Bundestag to define BDS as anti-Semitic and call to withhold

government funding from organizations with ties to the anti-Israel movement. In its report, Der Spiegel quotes members of Germany's

parliament as claiming the decision was unnecessary and only made as a result of "systemic influence and pressure" from Promoting Values founder and German Jewish activist Dario Adler.

Founded just a few years back in response to increasing anti-Semitism in Germany, Promoting Values aims to raise public and political awareness of the positions of Germany's Jewish community. Until recently, Adler also served on the Middle East Peace Forum's board of directors, which the report asserts represents the positions of Netanyahu.

"It is not unusual for experienced associations to try to bring parliamentarians closer to their interests and political positions," according to the report. "It should be noted just how much of an influence both these relatively

small and unknown organizations have on the wider public."

Der Spiegel claimed that these groups organize debates, disseminate position papers, and organize trips to Israel

funded by anonymous sponsors, and "organize donations to politicians." "All this shows the strategic way in which the [organizations exert their] influence over German politics," the report said.

"In the end, the question remains: Just how independent can politicians be when they make money off their contacts?" It should be noted that the report specifically relates to a personal and modest €1500 ($1693) donation made by two members of the Middle East Peace Forum to members of the Green Party.

The report also quotes Minister of State at the German Federal Foreign Office and Social Democratic Party member Niels Annen, known for his Israel criticism, as

saying, "Any attempt to influence the balanced position of Germany or Europe in one of the sides' directions is problematic."

Annen, it should be noted, has not come out against the work of Arab and Iranian lobbyists, who are very active in Berlin. Nor did Der Spiegel find it necessary to investigate the work of these organizations. A senior official from one of the defamed organizations told Israel Hayom, "It's an anti-Semitic article, aimed at creating the impression that Jews buy off German

politicians. The article bolsters anti-Semitic stereotypes among its audience …. which is unable to understand just how anti-Semitic this article is. This is a focused campaign against the pro-Israel activities of Jewish organizations in Germany, a defamatory report full of

false or incomplete information." In a statement, the Middle East Peace Forum told Israel

Hayom: "The claims that we represent the positions of PM Netanyahu are without basis. In fact, we have invited people who do not belong to the Netanyahu camp like [Yesh Atid party leader] Yair Lapid, [former Zionist Union and Hatnuah party leader] Tzipi Livni and [former Labor and Independence party lawmaker] Einat Wilf to events

in Germany. The trips to Israel are funded in part by the lawmakers themselves, and as an organization, we have never donated funds to any politicians whatsoever." Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter *https://www.israelhayom.com/2019/07/14/german-weekly-jewish-lobbyists-have-dubious-influence/

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Austria court ends legal battle over Hitler's birth house Austria's top court has had its final say in a row over the house where Adolf Hitler was born. AFP news@thelocal.at @thelocalaustria, 5 August 2019

The house where Adolf Hitler was born in Braunau Am Inn. Photo: Joe Klamar/AFP

Gerlinde Pommer's

family owned the yellow

corner house in the

northern town of

Braunau on the border

with Germany for nearly a century.

The government took control of the dilapidated building

in December 2016 after years of legal wrangling with

Pommer. Austrian authorities have been keen to prevent

the premises, where Hitler was born on April 20th, 1889,

from becoming a neo-Nazi shrine. Although he only spent

a short time at the property, it continues to draw Nazi

sympathizers from around the world.

In January, a regional court ruled that the state should

pay Pommer offered. But another tribunal overturned

this verdict in €1.5 million ($1.7 million) in

compensation, much more than the €310,000 she had

been originally April, finding that the current market

price – set by a court-appointed expert at €810,000

30

excluding any rental income – would constitute an

appropriate amount of compensation.

Austria's highest court has now upheld the April ruling,

meaning Pommer will receive less compensation than she

sought but still more than she had been originally

offered.

"After the court's decision on compensation, a use for

Hitler's birth house can now be found within the

framework of the law to prevent any sort of Nazi-related

activity," Interior Minister Wolfgang Peschorn said in a

statement. Authorities will invite submissions from

architects about the future of the site, the statement said

without giving further details.

Pommer had been renting the 800-square-metre

property – which also has several garages and parking

spaces located behind the main building – to the interior

ministry since the 1970s. The government paid her

around €4,800 a month and used it as a centre for

people with disabilities.

But this arrangement fell apart in 2011 when Pommer

refused to carry out essential renovation work and also

declined to sell it. Since then, the building has lain

empty. At one point, the interior ministry was pushing to

have it torn down but the plans ran into angry resistance

from politicians and historians.

Every year on Hitler's birthday, anti-fascist protesters

organize a rally outside the building.

* https://www.thelocal.at/20190805/austria-court-

ends-legal-battle-over-hitlers-birth-house

______________________________________________________________

Appeasing the far right with Dutch burqa ban could have repercussions Adopting the policies of hardline parties normalises them

Faisal Al Yafai, Aug 6, 2019

Visitors to the Second Chamber attend burqa debate in

The Hague. AFP

In the 13 years since the People's Party for Freedom was first created, the issue of the burqa ban has moved from a discussion on the far-right fringes in

the Netherlands to a political reality, mirroring

the rise of both the party and its founder.

Now that the ban has come into force across the country – its official name is the Partial Ban on Face-Covering Clothing Act – anyone wearing a full-face motorcycle helmet, balaclava, ski mask or niqab in a public building

or on public transport can be fined the equivalent of $167. Although on paper, the ban doesn't target any particular religious group, Party for Freedom founder Geert Wilders has made it his mission in life to weed out what he calls “the Islamisation of the Netherlands”. He has compared the Quran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and tried

to block the building of new mosques.

It seems to matter little that there are as few as 100 women in the whole of the Netherlands wearing the burqa or niqab, out of a population of about 17 million.

The ban isn't about solving a particular problem. Instead, it is about signalling a particular attitude. Dutch centrist politicians have been spooked by the rise of far-right

sentiment across Europe and the way in which Wilders has polarised popular opinion in the Netherlands. They have alighted on the burqa ban as a way of demonstrating a tough stance on immigration and playing to growing anti-Muslim sentiment. When the law was first mooted in 2016, it was purported to be for safety reasons. In reality, it was a reflection of the fact

Wilders’ party was by then the third largest in parliament and the main ally of the minority coalition government. A ban on religious clothing was a way of stealing the clothes of the far-right and ostensibly wearing them to appeal to its supporters.

That has been the pattern for other burqa bans across Europe, with politicians seeking to punish a minority

group as a very visible means of appeasing the rising far

right. In May, Austria approved a ban on headscarves in primary schools. Typically, the language was studiously impartial, referring to “religiously influenced clothing

which is associated with the covering of the head”. Yet the government clarified it would not apply to the Sikh patka nor the Jewish kippah. And despite the generic description of banned items, politicians lined up to say the law was a “signal against political Islam” and a bid to stop “parallel societies”.

Other countries that have banned the face veil include

Denmark, Belgium, France and Bulgaria. In the Netherlands, police and public officials have vowed not to

enforce it, saying they have far more important work to do. Rotterdam mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb complained: “There are so many laws and not enough police officers. Rotterdam has bigger problems – murder, drugs, the

undermining of society.” But in a way, arguing that the burqa ban won't solve anything or will only apply to a tiny minority is beside the point. The law is not intended to send a strong message to the few women who cover their faces; it is instead meant to deliver a political signal to millions more of the electorate.

A ban on religious clothing is a way of stealing the

clothes of the far-right and ostensibly wearing them to appeal to its supporters

Wilders, the architect of the proposal, who has a criminal conviction for inciting discrimination, was absolutely

explicit about his intentions, tweeting last week when the ban came into force: “Now we can start working on the next step: a headscarf ban in the Netherlands.”

In doing so, he made a mockery of the security justification for the ban, because headscarves leave the face uncovered. His triumph in getting the burqa banned is really the failure of centrist politics. Anti-immigration sentiment is rising across Europe and centrist parties are scrambling to stop voters flocking to right-wing parties. In many European countries, the response has been to

adopt language or policies previously associated with the hard right.

That is what happened last month in Greece, where the centrist-right New Democracy party gained power by

taking a hardline stance on immigration and thereby sidelined the far-right Golden Dawn. And that is the real

political context behind the burqa ban - not security concerns or community cohesion but raw political

31

calculation. Even though it was a far-right party that first proposed the Dutch burqa ban, it was the centre-right

People's Party for Freedom and Democracy that pushed it through.

By adopting the previously fringe policies of the hard right, centrist parties hope to be able to appease anti-immigrant sentiment without actually having to make substantial changes. That could lead to voters being swayed by such signals seeing centrist parties as

defenders of some amorphous sense of patriotism or culture.

There are several dangers to this approach, not least that it undermines the values of tolerance that many in the Netherlands are justly proud of. It also gives excessive power to conservative views within the Muslim community and undermines a wider sense of community

cohesion by pitting one group against another.

There are also political dangers, chiefly that normalising

far-right sentiment might actually empower those views, not diminish them.

Having centrist parties adopt extreme positions on immigration or the burqa could, in theory, draw the sting

from those issues and reduce their effectiveness as political platforms. In other words, by adopting the

language and some of the policies of the far right, those right-wing parties could be neutralised and sidelined.

But it is equally possible that adopting such policies normalises them and European voters begin to believe in the logic of the hard right and in its ideology of nativism

and nationalism. Centrist parties might then be forced to keep drifting further to the right to stay relevant. With the burqa ban, the Dutch government is giving the public a taste of far-right policies. They might find that the public's appetite for far-right ideas simply grows as a result. *https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/appeasi

ng-the-far-right-with-dutch-burqa-ban-could-have-

repercussions-1.895212

*https://www.amren.com/news/2019/08/woman-killed-in-first-friday-shooting-was-advocate-for-domestic-

violence-survivors/ ______________________________________________________________________________

32

7 reasons why so many church leaders

are having breakdowns or deconstructing their faith By Billy Kennedy, 2nd August 2019

Earlier this week, the US-based Christian author and former pastor Joshua Harris announced he was no longer a Christian. In a statement Harris said: "The popular phrase for this is ‘deconstruction,’ the biblical phrase is ‘falling away’". Billy Kennedy, who leads the Pioneer network of churches, says he's observed an increase in the number of UK Christian leaders going through similar experiences

So, here's a serious question. Why are so many pastors, leaders and ministers having breakdowns, going off with

stress, deconstructing their faith? Something is not right. What are we (collectively) doing wrong?

On Tuesday I posted the above question on my Facebook page. Within hours I’d received over 150 comments from friends far and wide offering advice.

I know a number of people involved in church leadership

who have recently been signed off work with stress.

Every week, it seems, I hear of another leader or pastor (some well-known, others not) who has either had a breakdown, been signed off work or has decided to call it a day entirely on their Christian faith.

I’m not saying church leaders have a more stressful job than other professions. In fact, in surveys on job

satisfaction church ministers often come out quite well. But given how many pastors are running into similar difficulties, it seems something is going wrong.

For some the answer is simple – exercise regularly, eat well, go to bed on time, operate out of place of ‘rest’, etc. For others it’s more complex – the system needs an overhaul, unrealistic expectations of congregational

members, unhealed inner ‘drivers’. And for others it’s part of the cycle of maturity and we should accept this is the way life is and what appears as a negative can actually aid our personal growth.

The comments are still pouring in, but here are 7 possible reasons which have been given so far, for why so many church leaders are struggling:

1. The system needs fixing

Our models of church are unsustainable. Leaders might genuinely answer a call to the gospel of grace, but they can all too easily slide into merit-based measures of success and become slaves to numerical and financial growth.

There’s also the constant demand to please and contain

those you have, while also expanding to those you do not have yet.

The hierarchical nature of organised Christianity is intensely demanding. If you were a company director or CEO you wouldn't live under the scrutiny of the workers to such a crucial degree. A CEO would be free to hire and

fire their people. Whereas in church, a congregation to some degree hires and fires its leaders.

You are not well recompensed - can't afford the rest and holidays that others can – and there’s pressure on your kids to be 'perfect'. Marriages can come under pressure due to sheer time commitments. Then there’s the danger of overwork and working Sundays and bank holidays.

2. Isolation

It’s no secret that pastoral ministry can be one of the

most lonely professions. And you’re often working with some of the most rejected people. Building friendships as a leader is a real issue. And it’s not as easy as it sounds.

3. Unrealistic expectations

People don’t always understand the frailty and

vulnerability of leaders. There’s often little

encouragement and much criticism. There can be judgementalism and blame from others in the congregation about your gifts, spirituality, control-freakery/not enough vision/not enough Holy Spirit/too much Holy Spirit/not deep enough teaching/too dense teaching/not making disciples/building your own thing - when they don't see or recognise your heart or your hard

work.

You might be expected to have all the best answers to tough theological questions, and to always know what to do in any and every pastoral situation - when clearly that's impossible.

Our expectations of our leaders (both inside and outside

of church) is very high and leaders feel the need to

maintain the “I’ve got it all together” mantra. More vulnerability and honesty about how we’re doing, and a willingness to ask for help will change perceptions and expectations.

4. Disappointment

There’s a strange tension we often live in between vision

and expectation and the inevitable disappointment we face with the messy, mundane lives we deal with, including our own. That's an emotionally difficult wire to walk. When you're bombarded with models of 'success' and faced with the reality that gospel growth and transformation is not something within your 'control' then

you can end up if you're not careful, in despair. 5. We forget we’re only human

We are human beings, not human doings. But somewhere along the way with all the developments in society we are striving more than ever to look out and take care of others and not ourselves.

It’s the same problem that managers in non-faith organisations are facing - we are all having to cope with a heck of a lot more than we ever used to.

With the stigma of mental health very slowly lessening, people are opening up and church leaders are on the front lines of this. We are collectively asking a lot more of people without considering their well-being and church

leaders are stepping in the gap without full comprehending the impact on their own wellbeing.

6. We don’t know ourselves

Make sure you're doing what you were born for. Something you love. Fulfilling your purpose (you can put up with an awful lot if you are).

A very limited definition of 'church' means many leaders end up not able to do what they signed up for. I once asked a room full of youth leaders "how many of you are doing what you feel called to or is it just the closest you can get and get paid?" Three people burst into tears and there was a huge amount of frustration expressed. I suspect it’s the same with many church leaders.

A huge problem is the fact we make Sunday attendance the defining measurement for the health of the church. Making disciples, community impact, training and sending and many others don't seem to feature. The

most whole leaders seem to be those who know who they are, how they are wired, find space and lead out of that.

33

7. And finally, my favourite piece of advice so far…

It’s hard for us to hear about leaders going through a

crisis of faith and burnout. They are two different things, but not necessarily mutually exclusive.

We react emotionally first of all. We may feel shocked, sad, disappointed, let down, angry, disillusioned. To feel these things is normal; it’s how we’re built. Here is someone we looked up to, or at least, deferred to. Letting them go is hard.

As we begin to process our feelings and thoughts, we come up with plenty of reasons (see above). The truth is that being a leader does not make you impervious to doubt, fear or breakdowns, it likely makes you more vulnerable to it because you are in the spotlight, under the microscope. This alone can be too much. Nor can you

pretend or strive to be immune to the pressure, to your own weaknesses and dilemmas – the lid will eventually come off. A good leader must learn to hold and inhabit places of tension: personal tensions, relational tensions,

conflicting beliefs, personality differences: the tensions of journey, metamorphosis, deconstruction and reconstruction. This is our creation story.

The Bible is full of leaders who ‘got it wrong’. The business world is full of leaders who ‘get it wrong’. They find a way through. They don’t give into shame, fear or anger. Making mistakes is part of the process. Reflecting and learning is a part of the process. Change is part of the process. It’s just that for most of us we do it from the comfort of our dinner table, our loyal friends or with

a therapist. Leaders do it more publicly (some for whatever reason decide to announce it to the press – a bid for authenticity? A cry of pain? A desire to reconnect somehow with the wider world from a place of

loneliness?).

Why can deconstruction be so devastating? Because it causes us to question, ultimately, the very heart of who

we are as a person and as a community: our identity, our values, our beliefs and our purpose. How can you

survive the many face-down-in-the-arena moments with nothing to guide you? But in the pursuit of authenticity and commitment to the truth, some of us just have to go there. I would just say this: deconstruction (and breakdown for that matter) isn’t the end of the road. It’s

just a point on the journey. To be stripped bare does, at least, strip away a load of the chaff at the same time. Can’t go over it, can’t go under it, got to go through it. I think the next bit can be exciting. Let’s not give up. Billy Kennedy is Senior Leader at New Community Church, Southampton, and International Leader of the Pioneer network. He spends his time supporting and coaching church leaders in the UK and across the globe.

* https://www.premierchristianity.com/Blog/7-reasons-

why-so-many-church-leaders-are-having-breakdowns-or-deconstructing-their-faith

***

[Indeed – there is a basic feeling of Untergang- decline,

where materialism, hedonism and nihilism, among other -

isms, are spinning individuals into an abyss, as illustrated

in the following clip:

*https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-03/signs-

go-london-telling-people-not-sht-streets; and Richard

Wagner’s world view, as presented in his Der Ring des

Nibelungen operas, addresses this very challenge through

music.

And for those who delight in more timeless idealism in

music, here is a contemporary clip about love:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Vv-BfVoq4g –

FT].

______________________________________________________________________________

It’s time for a war on white supremacists Whatever you wish to call it –

bigotry, antisemitism, Jew-hatred – it is vile.

By Mike Evans, August 6, 2019 21:45

Two home-grown terrorists created scenes of murder and

mayhem in two US cities this past weekend. First, Patrick

Crusius of Allen, Texas, drove from that city outside of Dallas to

El Paso, where he murdered 22 people and wounded scores of

others. Less than 24 hours later, and while the country still

reeled from the horror of the El Paso massacre, Connor Betts

opened fire near a crowded bar in Dayton, Ohio. Nine people

were killed, including Betts’s sister, and 27 were wounded.

In March 2018, I was in the UAE meeting with Crown Prince

Sheikh Mohammad Bin Zayed Al Nahyan when the news arrived

that a white supremacist had targeted several black families in

Austin, Texas. Stephen House and Draylen Mason were killed.

Esperanza Herrera was wounded after having received a

package bomb apparently meant for another black individual.

In October of last year, his country’s national anthem played as

an Israeli judo champion was crowned the winner of a

tournament in the United Arab Emirates. It was the first time

that an Israeli delegation was allowed to participate under its

own national flag. It was also the first time an Israeli culture and

sport minister attended an event in the Gulf. Miri Regev said, “It

is a dream come true. For two years we had talks in order to

reach this moment. I want to thank the authorities in Abu Dhabi

and our hosts here who received us in an exemplary manner.”

She could not stop the tears, and could not have been happier.

In October 2018, on a Shabbat morning, Jewish people in a

quiet neighborhood in Pittsburgh mourned yet another massive

assault by an antisemite. The perpetrator this time was

allegedly Robert Bowers, a loner with few friends. According to

police reports, Bowers armed himself with an AR-15 rifle and

three handguns, walked into the Tree of Life Synagogue and

opened fire on the unsuspecting congregants. Included among

the 11 dead were a 97-year old woman, a husband and wife,

and two brothers. Among the wounded were four police officers

who had responded to the call of “shots fired” in the

neighborhood that housed the synagogue. Bowers had

apparently told police interviewers that he just wanted “to kill

Jews.”

Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein of Poway, California, communicated to

me that the synagogue there needed 24-hour security. I raised

funds to assist with that, but the truth is these evil-doers need

to be profiled and stopped.

The sad and inexplicable truth is: Antisemitism is alive and well

on planet Earth. Nothing has assuaged that which erupted the

moment God declared His covenant with Abraham and his

offspring. As a Jewish man, I am no stranger to antisemitism.

My mother, as a Jewish woman in our Massachusetts

neighborhood, was often targeted with slurs, eggs and

tomatoes. Antisemitic insults such as “Jew witch” were painted

on our home.

EVEN WORSE, my own father, a white supremacist, would beat

my mother, calling her a Jewish whore. I heard him say

34

repeatedly that Jews were running the country and Blacks were

ruining it. He had a shooting range and a bar in our basement.

He and his buddies would get drunk and shoot rifles. Yet every

Sunday he was in church, praising the Lord.

But perhaps my most terrifying experience came when as an

adult living near Dallas, I received a call from the Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms telling me that a white

supremacist was allegedly headed to my home to kill me. His

name was Richard Wayne Snell. By the time I heard of his

intentions, he had murdered at least two individuals. On

November 3, 1983, Snell gunned down William Stumpp, the

owner of a small pawn shop in Texarkana, Arkansas. Snell

apparently thought his victim was a Jew. He wasn’t, but that

didn’t negate the blatant antisemitism that compelled the

murderer to act.

The case confounded the authorities for over eight months, until

Snell’s rage drove his downfall. On June 30, 1984, Snell was

stopped on a lonely western Arkansas highway by State Trooper

Louis Bryant. As Bryant approached the vehicle, Snell opened

fire and fatally wounded the trooper.

A truck driver who saw the shooting followed Snell across the

Oklahoma border and contacted the Broken Bow Police. Snell

ran headlong into a roadblock set up by the authorities. He was

captured in the ensuing gun battle, but not before being

wounded by the officers.

When the ATF agents searched Snell’s vehicle, they found a

single piece of paper on the front seat. Written on the paper

were my name, address and unlisted telephone number. I had

just written a book titled Israeli America’s Key to Survival and

had produced a major television special by the same name. At

that time I was also working closely with prime minister

Menachem Begin. Snell hated Jews and must have decided to

deliver a birthday gift just for me.

Snell was known to be a disciple of the white supremacist group

The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord (better

known as the CSA.) The CSA was not simply one of the more

quirky religious cults, its stated purpose was to start a war that

would ultimately lead to the second coming of Christ. The

members of the group believed they were literally God’s chosen

people, and as such could dominate all others.

As the founder of the Jerusalem Prayer Team, I receive

thousands of antisemitic posts weekly through our 62-million

strong social media presence on Facebook. Our technicians are

working now to create an algorithm that will spot terrorists so

authorities can be notified quickly.

Whatever you wish to call it – bigotry, antisemitism, Jew-hatred

– it is vile. It fueled and fed the pogroms in Russia, the

Holocaust in Europe, and currently al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah

and anti-Jewish movements in Iran, among other Arab states.

Make no mistake, racism must be taken seriously. The

Holocaust did not begin in the concentration camps, it began in

the churches.

The writer is a #1 New York Times bestselling author

with 89 published books. He is the founder of Friends of

Zion Museum in Jerusalem and serves on the Trump

Evangelical Faith Initiative.

* https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Its-time-for-a-war-

on-white-supremacists-597881

He posed as a righteous Jewish convert for 19 years.

Then he wrote a 2,000-page anti-Semitic screed. Henry Abramson, August 6, 2019

NEW YORK (JTA) — “Eisenmenger belonged to the class of

insects which sucks poison even out of flowers,” the 19th-

century Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz wrote.

Graetz was referring to Johann Andreas Eisenmenger, a young

17th-century scholar from Mannheim, Germany, who dedicated

some 19 years of his life to mastering the Talmud and

presenting himself to the Jewish community as a prospective

“ger tzedek,” or righteous convert. He learned Hebrew, Aramaic

and even Arabic during his intellectual journey, and read the

whole Talmud roughly three times.

And then, in 1700, Eisenmenger published “Judaism Unmasked,”

one of the most noxious and highly influential anti-Semitic

works ever written.

During the Nine Days leading up to Tisha b’Av, during which

Jews commemorate the saddest moments in Jewish history from

the destruction of the Temples in Jerusalem to the deportation

of the Jews of Warsaw, we again have witnessed Eisenmenger’s

contemporary descendants: gunmen who publish paranoid,

hateful “manifestos” before embarking on horrific acts of

random violence. Those specifically targeting Jews, such as the

shooters in Poway and Pittsburgh, often rely, consciously or

otherwise, on the work of Johann Andreas Eisenmenger.

Spanning 2,000 pages over two brick-like volumes, “Entdecktes

Judenthums” is an exhaustive survey of every possible passage

from the Talmud that could be distorted to reflect badly on Jews

and Judaism.

His verbose subtitle thoroughly described his intent, which was

to prove how “the stubborn Jews frightfully blaspheme and

dishonor the Holy Trinity … and despise and curse to the

uttermost extreme the whole of Christianity.” He also promised

“ridiculous and amusing stories” to boot, “written for the honest

information of all Christians.”

Eisenmenger’s purpose and even methodology were hardly new.

Jew-haters have been mining the Talmud for talking points since

the 13th century, when the apostate Nicholas Donin first

denounced it before Pope Innocent III. Few, however, were able

to penetrate the depths of this massive, ancient text written in a

mixture of highly coded Aramaic and Hebrew.

But Eisenmenger was different. A man of considerable academic

skills (he ultimately taught at the University of Heidelberg),

Eisenmenger realized that the only way to seriously understand

the Talmud was to become immersed in the world of the

yeshiva, a world closed to non-Jews by custom and even Jewish

law. To achieve his dark purpose, Eisenmenger had to present

himself as a genuine spiritual seeker, perhaps modeling himself

as a righteous convert like Onkelos, whose translation of the

Torah into Aramaic enjoys primacy over even Rashi, or Bodo-

35

Elazar, who ignored the anti-Semitic environment of medieval

Europe to adopt the ancient faith.

Eisenmenger began his lifelong deception in 1680 at the age of

24. By the time he was ready to bring his malicious book to

print, Eisenmenger could count many rabbis among his

teachers, including the prolific David ben Aryeh Lieb of Lida,

Lithuania — then chief Ashkenazi rabbi of Amsterdam.

News of Eisenmenger’s colossal betrayal leaked out before

“Judaism Unmasked” was released. The Jewish community

rapidly mobilized to prevent its distribution, persuading Emperor

Leopold I that its publication might ignite the popular violence

that had plagued the region in 1699. Eisenmenger protested and

a lengthy court battle ensued. The Jewish community offered

12,000 florins (roughly $5,000) to cover his costs if he would

withdraw publication. Surprisingly, Eisenmenger seemed

agreeable, but demanded 30,000. Negotiations were cut

short by Eisenmenger’s sudden death in 1704, at age 50,

of a stroke. [Emph added – ed AI]

King Friedrich Wilhelm I of nearby Prussia circumvented the

emperor by printing a second edition of 3,000 copies in 1711 in

Berlin (although the title page listed “Koenigsburg” as the place

of publication to reinforce that it was published outside the

jurisdiction of Leopold I). For the past three centuries, from

Stehelin’s English translation to the ugliest parts of the web,

anti-Semites have relied on Eisenmenger’s distorted research to

promote hatred.

Despite his incredibly profound impact on 300 years of anti-

Semitic ideology, a shroud of scholarly silence descended over

the man. With the exception of the great professor Jacob Katz’s

exhaustive analysis of Eisenmenger’s methodology

(Eisenmenger strove for accuracy in citation and translation, but

criminally distorted the meaning of the passages in context with

unacceptably tendentious commentary to promote awful lies like

the infamous blood libel), the most extensive biography

available is an impressive but brief

study posted to Wikipedia by a 12th-

grader in Braunschweig, Germany.

As a historian of the Jewish people,

writing during the Nine Days, I find

myself awed by Eisenmenger’s

pathological achievement for two

reasons. First, whatever we think

about this sick individual, he devoted himself to an

overwhelming tour de force of twisted scholarship: nearly 20

years of solitary toil, exhaustively infiltrating an alien community

in order to produce such a massive publication.

Second, like Graetz, it is hard not to reflect on how Eisenmenger

was “able to suck poison even out of flowers,” twisting and

distorting the Talmud in such a hateful manner. Such, I

suppose, is the power of Amalek, the ancient, eternal enemy of

the Jewish people.

Henry Abramson is a specialist in Jewish history and

thought who currently serves as a Dean of Touro College

in Brooklyn, New York. The views and opinions expressed

in this article are those of the author and do not

necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent

company, 70 Faces Media.

*https://www.jta.org/2019/08/06/opinion/he-posed-as-a-righteous-jewish-convert-for-19-years-then-he-wrote-a-2000-page-anti-semitic-screed

__________________________________________________ Judea Declares War on Germany 1933

A journey back in time, hosted by Dr Fredrick Toben This intriguing documentary shows a little-known fact of WWII in

which Jews at one time declared war on Germany.

In response to this, many Jews were incarcerated in concentration camps, similar to what America did to the

Japanese.

Some Germans even claim that

prior to the war's end when

supply lines were cut and

starvation and disease was

rampant, Jews were treated

more humanely than the

Japanese in American

internment camps.

See what such talk is based on.

Many rare photographs, and

some surprising footage showing

the concentration camps as they

are today.

*https://archive.org/details/JudeaDeclaresWarOnGermanyComplete_201806

________________________________________________________________________________________

36

__________________________________________________