Tag Archives: Poland

Poland Rising: Brilliant Polish women hand Germans their own @zz

The Germans are neurotic. Anyone who supports what Germany has done via this manufactured “refugee crisis” must be verbally shut down, exactly as this fantastic — nay brilliant — Polish woman has done here.

The refugee crisis is a German problem. Not a European problem. Not an international problem. A German problem. Germany is on her own.

Hungary and Poland are rising as Germany withers under the weight of her own insanity; like an old, neurotic hag.

GettyImages-496693690

janusz korwin-mikke Polish political commentator and Member of the European Parliament Iamge from his open facebook page - for Nikki
janusz korwin-mikke Polish political commentator and Member of the European Parliament
Iamge from his open facebook page – for Nikki

German chauvinist blames Britain & Poland for WW2

All original grammatical and spelling errors have been left intact. This is the Hitler Worship Cult’s idea of “good research”:

I think there was one big mistake. I have read Stefan Scheil’s book about Ribbentrop. He says that Ribbentrop believed in peace when he flew back from The Soviet Union, but he did not assure Hitler that the Brits won’t fight. I think everybody knew after the treaty between Pland and Britain that the wari will be inevitable. Scheil says that all the statements about Ribbentrop wanting the war and believing that Britain would not fight are the lies from the Brits and the traitors in the Auswärtiges Amt (Germany’s Foreign Ministery) who were Weizsäcker, the brothers of Kordt and others.

From Hesse’s mission they finally knew that next day the declaration of war would be coming. Hitler did not cry to Ribbentrop. He just asked, what now should be done.

Ribbentrop did not want the war. He did not encourage Hitler to the War. He did not say the Brits would not fight. All these are just lies.The traitors themselevs did encourage Hitler to the war and wanted much more from Poland. They would not have made a deal with Poland in 1934 or later. Unlike the nationalsocialists did. The “nazis” wanted friendship with Poland.

Hitler said he would be an idiot, if he would have let himself to the World War because of Poland, if he would have another possibility. He had no choices because he knew that Britain wanted the war. In the Autumn he would have lost the war because of the weather. The Poles said they would attack Danzig and they would have. And without this the Brits would have started bombings or some provocations or falseflags. They knew it.

Ribbentrop had for years warned that England was planning the war and it would attack in any case. There were much talk for years in the floors and the cabinets of power. Churchill and the FOCUS were preaching for the war publicly from 1936. The propaganda machine had rolled and the people brainwashed.

At the same time there was the appeasement. Ribbentrop said that the appeasement was a fraud. The leaders of England needed an alibi for the war. It was Chamberlain who started the process of the annexation of the Sudetenland into the Reich. He promised it to the Germans. Scheil says that Chamberlain maybe did not want the war but he could not avoid it. Hitler and Ribbentrop believed he was just a pawn of the leading plutocrats so he could not do otherwies. I think too he eventually had to do what the USA and the plutocrats wanted. He has said himself that the World Jewry and the USA forced England to the war and he felt he had written a doom for the whole civilization with the declaration of the war.

So the revisions of the Versailles were good for the coming war and the Brits provided them, although they afterwards said they were humiliations and they must be stopped and cancelled.

When England and Poland refused to negotiate, Hitler knew the War was unavoidable. And Ribbentrop too. They had not another choice. The legends about Ribbentrop are dangerous because they create a picture of many choices. So if the book is about the guilty of Britain, it accuses Hitler too, if the author really believes these lies about Ribbentrop and Hitler.

Jan Peczkis Reviews “The Butcher of Poland: Hitler Lawyer Hans Frank”

Nazism in Context: The Personal and Professional Life of the Butcher of Poland. Atypical Insights on Stauffenberg

By Jan Peczkis | May 7, 2014

One major shortcoming of this book, for which reason I give it three stars, is the information and quotations that are not linked to any of the sources in the bibliography. This makes it difficult for the reader to conduct further research, and s/he must resort to other books on Hans Frank.

Author O’Connor puts emphasis the role of the Bavarian Catholic Church in supporting Hitler. However, he sees this as a church that had allowed itself to be shaped by the popular culture, as he comments, “`The Church which is married to the Spirit of the Age will be a widow in the next’. Dean Inge’s judgment is often quoted today in support of Catholic traditional values. In many disastrous ways the Catholic Church in the late 1920’s and the 1930’s was married to the `Spirit of the Age’.” (p. 103).

In time, the Nazis showed their true anti-Christian colors. Already in 1934, the song of the Hitler Youth included stanzas that were anti-Christ, anti-papist, and openly stated that the singer is not a Christian and not a Catholic. (p. 97). Hitler repeatedly made snide remarks about Christianity. (pp. 98-on). The Nazis abolished mandatory prayer in schools in 1935, and eliminated religious education for 14-15 year olds in 1940. (p. 95, 105).

The author touches on the sexuality of the Nazis. They modeled their homosexuality on that of the male bonding of the Spartans. (p. 57). He considers it inconclusive as to whether Hans Frank was a homosexual or bisexual. He also puts the later Nazi persecution of gays in perspective, “Later the Nazis prosecuted homosexuals and sent them to concentration camps, though this did not happen with the thoroughness of the destruction of Jews, Catholics, intellectuals, opponents of the regime, and the disabled.” (p. 95).

What about the possible Jewish ancestry of some of the Nazi leaders, including Hitler? The author notes that this question is not answerable because the Nazis had destroyed the relevant records. (p. 87).

Unfortunately, this book repeats the old canard about Polish cavalry charging German tanks during the 1939 German-Soviet conquest of Poland. (p. 124). On the other hand, author Gary O’Connor has a good grasp of the Nazi German crimes in occupied Poland, especially for a non-Polish author. These crimes were hardly limited to Jews as victims. The author features the destruction of Poland’s intelligentsia, and mass shootings of Poles, the systematic confiscation and destruction of Polish cultural treasures, the mass deaths (by starvation and cold) of Poles expelled from the Reich-annexed territories, the thorough German destruction of Warsaw after the fall of the Soviet-betrayed Warsaw Uprising, etc. One minor point: the genocidal “Zamosc experiment” against Poles is misspelled as Zamosz. (p. 171).

But, according to white nationalists, Hitler was “Mr. White Solidarity”, “White Power”, “White Nationalism.” Why, then, did he do this to the white Poles?

The author demythologizes Claus von Stauffenberg, notably as portrayed in the movie VALKYRIE. The would-be assassin of Hitler supported the German conquest, exploitation, and colonization of Poland. Even in 1944, Stauffenberg wanted a peace with the Soviet Union that would return Poland to the partitioned state of 1914. (p. 130). This reminds us once again that being anti-Hitler does not make one an anti-Nazi, and that being an anti-Nazi does not prevent one from being a German imperialist.

At the Nuremberg trials, the Nazi defendants commonly attempted to exculpate their conduct by blaming it on the “injustices” of Versailles, and by adopting an “Allies were just as bad” line of rationalization. Some tried to equate the authoritarianism of the Nazis with that of the Catholic Church. Psychologist Douglas Kelley, accused of being the one who smuggled the cyanide capsule to Goering, later (December 1957) himself committed suicide by taking the same poison–an alleged souvenir from the Nuremberg trials. (p. 238).

Hans Frank warned that Hitler was but the first stage of a “new man”–one that is amoral. The author then juxtaposed it with the warnings of Pope John Paul II about the emergence of a “culture of death”, albeit one that manifests itself in many different forms, and not only totalitarian ones. (p. 220).

URL: http://www.amazon.com/review/R26RFH2RFAA484/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0752498134