Holocaust remorse rings hollow in Germany

 

On 30 January, Uwe Becker – the so-called commissioner for Jewish life and the fight against anti-Semitism in the German state of Hesse – demanded that the organization Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East (Jewish Voice, for short) should be banned. Pointing out that it is already classed as “a certified extremist organization by the Verfassungsschutz” (Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, equivalent to the FBI), he called it “not a voice of peace, but a voice of hatred” because it “vilifies [Israel] as a terrorist state.”

The timing of Becker’s rant is piquant in view of the near-simultaneous paperback publication of Germany’s Jewish Problem by Wieland Hoban, Anglo-German chair of Jewish Voice, a book in which these (mostly non-Jewish) commissioners feature prominently and unflatteringly.

Hoban is a prolific translator of texts by, among others, Theodor Adorno, Peter Sloterdijk and Jürgen Habermas – ironically enough, German philosophers not known for progressive views on Palestine.

He is also a composer, in which capacity he witnessed Germany’s cancel culture firsthand in 2018 when his proposal for an Israel-critical composition provoked Björn Gottstein, the then director of the Donaueschingen Music Festival, to explain that “although [he] gave composers a free hand in their use of political content, he would not tolerate any criticism of Israel.” As a fellow composer and activist, I wrote about this in The Electronic Intifada at the time.  (more...)

Holocaust remorse rings hollow in Germany

Tehran warns EU against ‘Nazi mindsets,’ slams German backing of Israeli-US aggression

 

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei has warned European countries against sliding toward “historical #NAZI mindsets” by supporting the Israeli-US aggression against Iran.

In a post published Wednesday on X, Baghaei denounced Germany’s stance and warned European states against complicity in war crimes.

“The EU/E3 once played a pivotal role in int'l diplomacy, helping to forge the 2015 JCPOA—a landmark achievement of European foreign policy that was torpedoed by this U.S. administration,” Baghaei wrote, referring to the 2015 nuclear deal formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

The agreement, reached between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, aimed to limit Tehran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. The US unilaterally pulled out of the deal in 2018.

Turning to current developments, Baghaei said: “Today, under pressure from the #German Chancellor, some EU members risk being placed on the wrong side of history by appearing complicit in U.S./Israel acts of aggression & war crimes against the Iranian nation, one of the world’s oldest and the most enduring civilizational Nation-States.”  (more...)

Tehran warns EU against ‘Nazi mindsets,’ slams German backing of Israeli-US aggression

How Germany became Israel’s enabler-in-chief

 

Friedrich Merz says Iran deserves being the target of war because it hasn’t bent the knee to sanctions

Say what you will about Germany’s current ‘elites’, but they are consistent: Once they don’t give a damn about international law, elementary fairness, rudimentary human decency, and, last but not least, basic logic, they really won’t quit before their country’s reputation is ruined as it has not been since 1945. Hyperbole, you think? Can it really be that bad, you wonder?

Leave it to Chancellor Friedrich Merz and company to achieve what seems almost impossible. For almost two-and-a-half years, not one but two German governments have been, in effect, complicit in Israel’s continuing Gaza genocide. Under former Chancellor Olaf Scholz from the centrist Social-Democrats – otherwise remembered for gutless evasion when US ex-president Joe Biden announced, in essence, that he was going to blow up Nord Stream – as well as under the unusually dishonest Merz from the centrist Christian-Democrats, Berlin has supplied Israel with arms (and probably misled the International Court of Justice about it), diplomatic cover, legal support, media propaganda, and the often brutal suppression of protests against Israel’s crimes.

Indeed, recently a UN special rapporteur has identified the “use of anti-terrorism laws to restrict advocacy for Palestinian rights” as “a primary concern” in a report warning that the “space for freedom of expression is shrinking” in Germany.

Against this awful and shameful background, the fresh war of aggression launched by Israel and its American auxiliaries – that’s the technically correct term for troops serving a foreign nation – could, conceivably, have been a very late wake-up call. Perhaps, an eternal optimist may have thought, the sheer brazenness of the attack will make even Berlin hesitate. Nope. Instead, Friedrich Merz and official Germany in general have radicalized their virtually nihilistic denial of law, ordinary ethics, and common sense.  (more...)

How Germany became Israel’s enabler-in-chief

More than a crime, a blunder

 

Sneak attack in the middle of negotiations. Irony overload, as it happened Netanyahu sought protection in Germany. Ayatollah Khamenei didn't run away. Biggest single US atrocity since Vietnam.

Revisiting 1944: Sedition, Suspicious Deaths, and a Rising Evangelist

 

John and Charles examine the 1944 Great Sedition Trial and explore its possible connections to figures surrounding William Branham’s early ministry. They discuss Roy Davis, extremist political networks, the mysterious collapse of the trial, and how wartime investigations intersected with Pentecostal and fundamentalist movements in the United States.

The conversation traces historical timelines from the 1930s through the early 1950s, analyzing how political ideology, religious revivalism, and postwar reinvention may have overlapped. Drawing from archival research, they consider how these events shaped the trajectory of Branham’s public ministry and the broader religious landscape.

• Introduction
• The Great Sedition Trial of 1944
• Suspicious Deaths and Mistrial
• Post-Trial Fallout and Extremist Networks
• Los Angeles Connections and Religious Circles
• Roy Davis and Early Ministry Overlap
• Reconnection in the Late 1940s and 1950s

Deploying Nukes in Europe Is Insane

 

Alexander Rahr, the President of the Eurasia Society in Berlin, who has a long history of experience in working to improve relations between Germany and Russia, expressed deep concern over the report of a possible British-French initiative to provide nuclear weapons to Ukraine.  He decried such talk as dangerous, but not surprising, given the role the British have played in organizing Europe to keep the war against Russia going.  Given the Russophobia of the northern Europeans -- by which he specified nations of Scandinavia and the Baltics, Britain and France -- he said he believes the only hope of ending the war rests with the U.S. President.  Donald Trump will prevail, he said, but he faces opposition in the U.S. from the Democrats and the "Deep State", in addition to that from Europe.  As for the Republicans, he said those who want Trump to succeed in achieving peace in Europe want him to split the alliance between Russia and China, and get Russia to join with the U.S. to face the challenge of China.

He also had interesting comments about what he described as the "weakness" of the Russian army and strategic errors in the war against Ukraine.

 He said he watched the "European problem" dominate the last several years of the Munich Security Conference (MSC).  He singled out the failure of Europe's leaders to recognize the emerging "multipolar world" as their problem.  The MSC focus was narrowly on Europe, with no attention given to the BRICS, which is a new element.  He expressed disappointment in the youth in Germany, who act as though nuclear weapons are an issue for older people who live in the past.

In addition to chairing the Eurasia Society in Berlin, Rahr serves as a board member of the Petersburg Dialogue, is a member of the Valdai Club and a former senior adviser to Gazprom.

The Hidden Political Ties Behind Branham’s Early Ministry

 

John and Charles explore the historical figure Gerald Burton Winrod, a controversial British Israelite preacher who became central to the 1944 Great Sedition Trial during World War II. They examine Winrod’s role in pro-Nazi agitation, the American Bund network, and the emerging Christian Identity theology that blended racial ideology with religious language.

The discussion places these developments alongside William Branham’s early ministry timeline, including Branham’s later claims about his 1933 prophecies and Mussolini. By revisiting primary sources and documented historical events, the conversation connects mid-century Pentecostalism, wartime extremism, and the broader religious climate that shaped postwar revival movements.

• Introduction
• Who Was Gerald Burton Winrod?
• Branham’s Mussolini Prophecy Claim
• The Great Sedition Trial Of 1944
• Christian Identity And British Israelism
• The American Bund And World War II

Back to SAVAK days: Pahlavi monarchist violence surges against diaspora opponents

 

Across major Western cities – from the quieter neighborhoods of Europe to the crowded boulevards of Los Angeles – reports have surfaced of the campaigns of violence and intimidation linked to pro-Pahlavi monarchist groups targeting critics within the diaspora.

The most recent cases involve the killing of an Iranian national in Canada and the fatal stabbing of an Afghan businessman in Germany – incidents directly linked to Pahlavi monarchist supporters.

These cases have reignited debate online about the conduct of hardline monarchist circles, who advocate “regime change” in the Islamic Republic of Iran and have grown increasingly intolerant of dissent, responding aggressively to voices critical of their rhetoric or political activities.

For decades, the Iranian diaspora in North America and Europe has been a space marked by virulent political debate and ideological division following the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

In recent years, however, some activists and community members say that political rivalry has, at times, escalated into harassment and physical violence.

Reports from several Western countries describe incidents involving supporters of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s deposed monarch, engaging in aggressive and very often violent tactics against those perceived as critics or dissenters.

Documented cases include physical altercations at protests, confrontations outside community events, and coordinated online harassment campaigns. Some business owners and students have also reported threats or pressure linked to their political positions.

Observers who spoke to the Press TV website noted that the pattern suggests more than spontaneous clashes between rival demonstrators.

They contend that certain groups with the so-called Iranian “opposition” operate in an organized manner, seeking to suppress and isolate those who show signs of disillusionment with their movement, which has increasingly turned violent and unpopular over the years.

Some frame these incidents as part of broader tensions surrounding West Asian politics, particularly in the wake of the Gaza genocide, which has sharply polarized communities worldwide.

Following the outbreak of the Gaza war, monarchist groups became increasingly visible at pro-Israel rallies in several Western capitals, which suggests the involvement of Israeli spy agencies in the violent activities of pro-Pahlavi groups in the West.  (more...)

Back to SAVAK days: Pahlavi monarchist violence surges against diaspora opponents

“May you die!” — the slogan of some pro-Pahlavi monarchists, who chose to harass and verbally attack @amanpour simply for asking a few softball questions of Reza Pahlavi.

These are, of course, the same people who insist they’re here to deliver ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ to Iran. pic.twitter.com/QJDWFgNNlE

— Frontline (@frontlineiran) February 18, 2026

How White Supremacist Theology Entered Pentecostalism

 

John and Charles examine the historical origins of serpent seed theology, tracing how British Israelism evolved into Christian Identity and how those ideas later surfaced in Latter Rain teaching. They walk through the documented development of these beliefs, identifying where extra-biblical interpretations entered Pentecostal circles and why they carried racial implications.

The discussion follows key figures and institutions that shaped this theology, explaining how ideas about mystery Babylon, genealogy, and identity were reframed and reused. By grounding the conversation in historical sources, John and his co-host show how teachings often presented as spiritual revelations were inherited from earlier ideological movements.

• Introduction
• British Israelism and the Birth of Christian Identity
• Philip Monson and Serpent Seed Theology
• How These Ideas Entered Latter Rain Teaching

Canada Should Release Nazi War Criminal Report

 

It is long past time for the Canadian government to release the final report of the Commission of Inquiry On War Criminals In Canada.

The commission, whose mandate was to deal with the explosive issue of suspected Nazi war criminals admitted into Canada, was chaired by Jules Deschenes, a retired Quebec Superior Court judge.

He released the first part of the report in 1986, but classified the second section, which contains a list of suspected war criminals allowed into Canada after World War II.

The classified segment is stored in the vaults of Library and Archives Canada (LAC), which last year refused to release it on the grounds that it could damage Canada’s relationship with foreign countries, further tarnish the names of individuals whose alleged crimes were never proven in court, and furnish Russia with material to vilify the Ukrainian-Canadian community.

LAC’s reasoning is supported by the Access to Information Act, which states that Canadian institutions can refuse to release data that could undermine Canada’s national interests.

Recently, the office of the Information Commissioner informed The Globe and Mail newspaper that it accepted LAC’s rationale for keeping the second half of the report under lock and key.

LAC’s argument rests on thin ice because a University of California historian named Jared McBride, an expert on war crimes, has already examined an annotated and redacted version of the secret list. The Information Commissioner acknowledges that McBride’s request was granted several years ago.

Among the names on the list were Helmut Oberlander, a member of an Einsatzgruppen killing squad during Nazi Germany’ military campaign in the Soviet Union, and Volodymyr Kubiovych, a Ukrainian instrumental in the formation of the SS Galicia division in the German army. Kubiovych died in the mid-1980s. Oberlander passed away in 2021.

Particularly in light of McBride’s success in gaining access to the classified report, the Canadian government should declassify and release it, says Richard Evans, an authority on Nazi Germany.  (more...)

Canada Should Release Nazi War Criminal Report

British Israelism and the Road to Religious Extremism

 

John and Charles examine the historical evolution of British Israelism, explaining how a movement that once claimed solidarity with Jewish restoration gradually transformed into a racialized theology. The discussion walks through the 19th and early 20th centuries, showing how ideas about the “lost tribes” merged with post-Civil War white supremacist thought in the United States.

The conversation then follows the decisive break that led to Christian Identity theology, where earlier pro-Jewish positions were reversed and replaced with claims of racial supremacy. Along the way, John examines how these ideas influenced early Pentecostalism, healing revival figures, and later movements, helping listeners understand why these doctrines remain relevant — and dangerous — today.

Chapters

• Introduction
• What British Israelism Originally Taught
• Early Support for Jewish Restoration
• The Turning Point Toward Christian Identity
• Post-Civil War America and Racial Ideology
• John Alexander Dowie and Zion, Illinois
• Healing Revival Figures and British Israelism
• How Theology Enabled Abuse and Control
• British Israelism’s Legacy in Later Movements

They tortured, murdered, committed ethnic cleansing. Meet Ukraine’s ‘national heroes’

Radical nationalists collaborated with Nazi Germany and left a bloody legacy that is still celebrated today

In early February 1929, 97 years ago, a group of Ukrainian political émigrés gathered in Vienna to formalize what they believed was a movement of national liberation. What emerged from that congress, however, was not merely a campaign for statehood, but a radical organization that rejected democratic norms and embraced political violence.

Members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) took part in Nazi Germany’s aggression against Poland and the USSR, carried out mass killings on ethnic and political grounds, and conducted sabotage operations first for the Third Reich and later for Western powers. Those members of the OUN who survived and could not flee to the West faced criminal charges in the USSR; however, many were granted amnesty by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in an effort to promote internal reconciliation in Ukraine.

In this article, we examine how the OUN developed into a militant movement whose actions during and after World War II left a lasting and controversial historical legacy.

The history of Ukrainian nationalism is rather brief. The term ‘Ukrainians’ was not used as an ethnonym until the late 19th century. According to historians, the idea that Ukrainians are a separate nation from Russians was quickly seized upon by the Austro-Hungarian authorities, who recognized its ‘anti-Russia’ potential. In contrast, Galician Russophiles who advocated for unity between the Carpathian region’s population and Russians faced severe repression from the Austro-Hungarians. During World War I, Austrians actively promoted Ukrainian nationalism to recruit volunteers for their army.  (more...)

They tortured, murdered, committed ethnic cleansing. Meet Ukraine’s ‘national heroes’

American fascism is both homegrown and imported

 

Trump's fascism is neither uniquely American nor merely imported, but a convergence of the US’s own racial-terror history and a long-standing admiration for Nazi ideology and aesthetics.

As Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) continue to wreak border violence upon US cities, an amateur Historikerstreit is playing out on social media over the origins of white supremacist authoritarianism under President Donald Trump.

Hobby historians and academics turned content-creators are at odds over whether America in 2026 is more comparable to Nazi Germany or to the many instances in the US’s own history of racial terrorism.

“ICE is the American Gestapo,” wrote bestselling author Stephen King tersely on X, a reference to Nazi Germany’s notorious secret police.

Savala Nolan, a racial and social justice scholar at UC Berkley Law, disagrees.

“ICE is not the gestapo; ICE is ours. It’s a manifestation of the same systems and beliefs that animated slave patrols, military conquest against the indigenous, vigilante night riders, and German Shepherds on Black ppl,” she posted on Instagram.

True, these homegrown, historical continuities are hard to miss when one looks at ICE’s and CBP’s campaign of terror against American communities of colour.

But calls to integrate the autochthonous origins of Trump’s anti-immigrant persecution in analyses of the current moment should not obscure the historical influence Nazism has had on American fascism, even if it is true that Nazism itself “was inspired by America’s institutionalized racism and indigenous holocausts,” as Haydar Ali, a Toronto-based rapper, poet and writer, reminds us.  (more...)

American fascism is both homegrown and imported

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by HAYDAR | حيدر (@haydarverse)

William Branham's Final Overseas Tour: What the Records Actually Show

 

John and Charles examine William Branham’s final overseas trip to Germany and Switzerland, placing it in the context of his late-1950s shift toward apocalyptic preaching and anti-communist rhetoric. They compare Branham’s repeated claims of traveling “seven times around the world” with documented itineraries that show only four overseas tours.

The discussion also explores why the fourth tour marked the end of his international campaigns, raises questions about the business logic behind overseas offices and distribution, and highlights discrepancies between Branham’s public statements and the historical record.

Chapters

• Introduction
• Four overseas tours vs. “seven times around the world”
• Germany and Switzerland as the final campaign
• Questioning the purpose of the tours
• Offices, printing, and distribution logistics

John and Charles examine William Branham’s European campaign by tracing the figures around him in Germany, including translator Ewald Frank and security connections that shaped the movement’s growth. Drawing on declassified records and historical research, they outline how these relationships formed and why they matter for understanding later developments.

The discussion separates speculation from documented evidence, connects European events to Colonia Dignidad and Cold War operations, and explains how power structures and accountability failures influenced the movement’s trajectory across continents.

Chapters

• Introduction
• Ewald Frank as Translator and Early Influence
• Frank’s Reach and Global Following
• Postwar Germany and Emigration Context
• Links to Colonia Dignidad
• Declassified Investigations and Records
• Paul Schäfer and Security Roles
• Evaluating Evidence Versus Claims
• Operation Condor and Cold War Context
• Operation Paperclip and Broader Implications

John and Charles examine the evidence surrounding William Branham’s German tour and the troubling figures connected to his inner circle. Drawing on court records, historical documentation, and contemporary Pentecostal scholarship, they explore allegations linking Branham’s movement to Paul Schäfer, Ewald Frank, and the atrocities of Colonia Dignidad.

The discussion also reviews failed healing claims in Switzerland, the testimony of respected historians, and how Branham’s theology produced later sects with deeply harmful racial and authoritarian teachings. The episode traces how revival language masked darker power structures and why these historical links still matter today.

Germany, the Cold War, and the Rise of American Pentecostal Influence

 

John and Charles discuss the lesser-known political and social forces that surrounded the rise of a major postwar revival movement. Drawing from documented speeches, historical relationships, and first-hand connections, they explore how global instability, refugee resettlement, and Cold War messaging intersected with religious leadership.

The conversation examines how language about “the battle of the mind” migrated from national security rhetoric into revival preaching, and why understanding these historical pressures matters for evaluating movements that still shape religious culture today.

William Branham, Colonia Dignidad, and the 1955 Turning Point

 

John and Charles examine newly surfaced historical evidence connecting William Branham to Colonia Dignidad and other overseas networks during the peak and collapse of his ministry. Drawing from documented reports, European press coverage, and ministry records, they trace how Branham’s 1955 tour marked a decisive shift toward Latter Rain influence and growing instability.

The discussion explores Roy Davis’s threatening letter, the breakdown with Voice of Healing, financial backers behind the European campaigns, and why figures tied to later atrocities repeatedly surface around Branham’s inner circle. The episode focuses on verifiable timelines rather than speculation, showing how cracks in Branham’s public narrative began widening long before his eventual downfall.

CHAPTERS

• Introduction
• Early reports linking Branham to Colonia Dignidad
• Message believers and European confirmations
• Branham’s 1955 Germany and Switzerland tour
• Ministry breakdown and new inner circle
• Roy Davis letter and collapse of Branham’s life story
• Shift from Voice of Healing to Herald of Faith
• Latter Rain influence and financial backers

Nawrocki Strongly Alluded To The Significant Non-Military Threat That Germany Poses To Poland

 

Instead of another invasion, the current German threat to Poland is the hybrid warfare that’s actively waged against it through the German-led EU, the goal of which is to deracinate Poles and erode their country’s sovereignty in order to facilitate their subordination as post-modern German vassals.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk wrote that “President Nawrocki has once again pointed to the West as the main threat to Poland. This is the essence of the dispute between the anti-European bloc (Nawrocki, Braun, Mentzen, PiS) and our Coalition. A deadly serious dispute, a dispute over our values, security, sovereignty. East or West.” This was in response to President Karol Nawrocki’s speech in Poznan in late December commemorating the Greater Poland Uprising that secured Poland’s interwar western borders.

Notes From Poland drew attention to how Nawrocki declared that “Poland is a ‘national community open to the west, but also a national community ready to defend the western border of the republic, as the Greater Poland insurgents knew.’…He also recalled how ‘aggressive’ efforts were made to ‘take away our culture and national heritage’. Just as Poles back then took action to defend their national identity, so today ‘we must do everything we can to ensure that Poland remains Poland.’”

In response to Tusk’s post, Nawrocki wondered whether he has grievances against those historical Polish figures who fought Germany in the past in an allusion to Tusk’s long-suspected German loyalties. He also suggested that he’s either “unable to listen with understanding, or deliberately seeks conflict because his budget, healthcare, etc., aren’t adding up.” Nawrocki ended by reminding Tusk of his close ties with Putin during the golden era of Russian-EU relations, which remain controversial inside Poland to this day.

Analyzing this exchange, Nawrocki’s innuendo that the German-led EU poses a similar threat to Polish identity as the Imperial-era “Kulturkampf” upset Tusk, who then twisted his words and the context within which they were said to provoke a faux scandal for deflecting from his domestic political failures. Nawrocki wasn’t implying that Germany still poses the same threat to Poland’s territorial integrity as its predecessor states did, but he was nevertheless reaffirming that it’s still indeed a threat of some sort.

It was recently explained that “Germany Poses A Significant Non-Military Threat To Polish Sovereignty”, namely through its de facto control of the EU and associated attempts to erode Polish sovereignty, which also aim to weaken its national identity and thus amount to a modern-day “Kulturkampf”.  (more...)

Nawrocki Strongly Alluded To The Significant Non-Military Threat That Germany Poses To Poland

Germany never stopped arming Israel’s genocide

 

A new bilateral cybersecurity deal and the continued flow of weapons leave little ambiguity about Germany's stance: not accountability, but normalization.

“Israel has the right — and indeed the duty — to defend its citizens and its existence against those who repeatedly deny the democratic Jewish state’s right to exist.” With these words, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz opened a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem in December.

The language was familiar, part of a well-established lexicon of German-Israeli diplomacy. Against the backdrop of Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, such phrasing now reads as a blunt reaffirmation of the countries’ “special relationship”: an assertion of Germany’s responsibility for Israel’s security and endorsement of a growing military partnership.

That symbolism has since been followed by more concrete steps. A little over a week ago, Israel and Germany signed a cybersecurity agreement to expand their existing cooperation. “I attach enormous importance to the overall cooperation between Israel and Germany,” Netanyahu said during the signing. “Israel’s enemies should know: Our eyes are on them at all times and everywhere,” read a statement on the agreement from his office.

German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, who traveled to Israel to sign the deal, said he wanted to take Israel as a “model.” “We are relying on systematic exchange rather than ad-hoc cooperation,” Dobrindt told German media. “Israel is Germany’s most important partner outside of NATO and the EU,” his ministry stated.

According to the German newspaper Bild, the agreement includes cooperation between Germany’s elite police unit GSG 9 and the Israeli police’s counterterrorism unit, known colloquially as Yamam. This unit has carried out extrajudicial assassinations of Palestinians in the West Bank, and was also involved in Israel’s hostage rescue operation in Nuseirat refugee camp in northern Gaza in June 2024, during which four Israelis were freed and over 270 Palestinians were killed. Bild also reported plans for a joint German-Israeli AI and cybersecurity research center.

The agreement further includes Germany’s participation in the U.S.-led Office of the Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority (OSC) in Jerusalem, within which Dobrindt reportedly said Germany would “take on a leadership role.” The office provides training to Palestinian police officers and “security forces” in the West Bank, with plans to extend this to Gaza. Germany is already involved in the EU Mission for the Support of Palestinian Police and Rule of Law, which is expected to expand its mandate to train police officers from Gaza as well (overall, 3,000 police units are expected to be trained by European forces).  (more...)

Germany never stopped arming Israel’s genocide

Appeasement: the SHOCKING truth about the 1938 Munich Agreement - The “three block” imperial agenda

 

Neville Chamberlain's perfidious game in 1938 deliberately created a monster in the heart of Europe, setting stage for the continent's greatest tragedy in history.

Following the destruction of Czechoslovakia, Hitler turned his attention to Poland. At first, it was just diplomacy: the talks with Poland kicked off on 21 October 1938. As expected, German representatives asked the Polish government for the city of Danzig and a kilometer-wide strip across the Polish Corridor to accommodate a highway and four-track railroad under German sovereignty. These were deemed moderate requests and they were made to the Polish ally in a relatively cordial atmosphere.

The territories in question were parts of Germany that she’d lost by Versailles treaty after the World War I, so German demands didn’t seem outrageous. At that time Hitler did not intend to overrun Poland, but rather to engage her in the forthcoming invasion of Russia. If his demands were granted, Germany was prepared to reciprocate with certain concessions to Poland. However, the Polish government did not yield to German demands.

A few months later, on 21 March 1939, Hitler reiterated his demands, this time more forcefully. When the news of this reached London, UK’s Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain suddenly and unilaterally issued a strangely worded security guarantee for Poland. It read as follows:

“Certain consultations are now proceeding with other governments. In order to make perfectly clear the position of His Majesty’s Government in the meantime, before those consultations are concluded, I now have to inform the House [of Commons] that during that period, in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence and which the Polish Government accordingly considered it vital to resist with their national forces, His Majesty’s Government would feel themselves bound at once to lend the Polish Government all support in their power.”

This was the first time Britain made such a commitment to another nation since 1918. Not only did the British government commit to guaranteeing a foreign nation, it also gave that nation the privilege to decide when the guarantee would take effect, while asking for nothing in return. Importantly, the British only guaranteed Poland’s independence, not its territorial integrity. In that, they left the door wide open for Germany to continue pressuring Poland for territorial concessions.  (more...)

Appeasement: the SHOCKING truth about the 1938 Munich Agreement - The “three block” imperial agenda

Appeasement: the SHOCKING truth about the 1938 Munich Agreement

 

Neville Chamberlain's perfidious game in 1938 deliberately created a monster in the heart of Europe, setting stage for the continent's greatest tragedy in history.

As the crisis between Germany and Czechoslovakia escalated through the summer of 1938, France and Britain ordered the Czech government not to mobilize its troops for fear of provoking Germany. Instead, they pressured Prague to accept the Anglo-French solution to the crisis. But their proposal would only further weaken Czechoslovakia’s security in exchange for vague promises of international guarantees.

The government of President Edvard Beneš protested vigorously and rejected the solution. In their turn, London and Paris rejected the Czech refusal and mounted further pressure on the government in Prague. Neville Chamberlain explained the imperative to force Czechoslovakia’s government to yield:

“The idea of territorial cession would be likely to have a more favorable reception from the British public if it could be represented as the choice of the Czechoslovak Government themselves and it could be made clear that they had been offered the choice of a plebiscite or of territorial cession and had preferred the latter. This would dispose of any idea that we were ourselves carving up Czechoslovak territory.”

To turn up the pressure, France threatened to revoke their alliance and abandon the Czechs to Germany. Finally, on 21 September 1938 the Czech government relented and accepted the Anglo-French dictate.

The very next day, Chamberlain paid Hitler a visit at Godesberg on the Rhine in order to personally deliver the good news. At that meeting, Hitler and Chamberlain formulated the extreme Godesberg Ultimatum – a set of even more exacting demands against the Czechoslovak government and had the British military attaché rush them to Prague.  (more...)

Appeasement: the SHOCKING truth about the 1938 Munich Agreement