At the end of the First World War, Germany was essentially tricked [see Paul Johnson A
History of the Modern World
(1983) p24 and H Nicholson Peacemaking 1919 (1933) pp13-16]
into paying massive reparations to France and other economic competitors and former
belligerent countries in terms of the so-called Treaty of Versailles, thanks to the liberal
American President
Woodrow Wilson. Germany was declared to be solely responsible for the
war, in spite of the fact that ‘Germany did not plot a European war, did not want one, and made
genuine efforts, though too belated, to avert one.’ (Professor
Sydney B. Fay The Origins of
the World War
(vol. 2 p 552)).

As a result of these massive enforced financial reparations, by 1923 the situation in Germany
became desperate and inflation on an astronomical scale became the only way out for the
government. Printing presses were engaged to print money around the clock. In 1921 the
exchange rate was 75 marks to the dollar. By 1924 this had become about 5 trillion marks to
the dollar. This virtually destroyed the German middle class (
Koestler, The God that Failed, p
28), reducing any bank savings to a virtual zero.

According to
Sir Arthur Bryant the British historian (Unfinished Victory, (1940 pp. 136-144):

    ‘It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who
    were best able to seize such opportunities.. They did so with such effect that, even in
    November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still
    owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real
    property in the Reich. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation.. But to those
    who had lost their all this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice.

    After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They
    saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices
    and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions..

    The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned
    professions (in spite of constituting) less than one percent of the population..

    The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically
    controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large
    part of the press – all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized
    country is formed..

    The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was
    a Jewish monopoly.. Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep
    a foothold in any privileged occupation..

    At this time it was not the ‘Aryans’ who exercised racial discrimination. It was a
    discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a
    majority. There was no persecution, only elimination..

    It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed – and lavishly displayed – by aliens of
    cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-
    Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are
    seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle.’

Tough stuff,
Sir Arthur! What made you get out of the wrong side of the bed?

Strangely enough, in a book unexpectedly published by Princeton University Press in 1984,
Sarah Gordon (Hitler, Germans and the "Jewish Question") essentially confirms what Bryant
says. According to her, ‘Jews were never a large percentage of the total German population; at
no time did they exceed 1% of the population during the years 1871-1933.’ But she adds ‘Jews
were overrepresented in business, commerce, and public and private service..

They were especially visible in private banking in Berlin, which in 1923 had 150 private Jewish
banks, as opposed to only 11 private non-Jewish banks.. They owned 41% of iron and scrap
iron firms and 57% of other metal businesses..

Jews were very active in the stock market, particularly in Berlin, where in 1928 they comprised
80% of the leading members of the stock exchange. By 1933, when the Nazis began
eliminating Jews from prominent positions, 85% of the brokers on the Berlin Stock exchange
were dismissed because of their "race"..

At least a quarter of full professors and instructors (at German universities) had Jewish origins..
In 1905-6 Jewish students comprised 25% of the law and medical students.. In 1931, 50% of
the 234 theatre directors in Germany were Jewish, and in Berlin the number was 80%.. In 1929
it was estimated that the per capita income of Jews in Berlin was twice that of other Berlin
residents..’ etc etc.

Arthur Koestler confirms the Jewish over-involvement in German publishing. ‘Ullstein’s was a
kind of super-trust; the largest organization of its kind in Europe, and probably In the world.
They published four daily papers in Berlin alone, among these the venerable
Vossische
Zeitung
, founded in the eighteenth century, and the B.Z. am Mittag, an evening paper..

Apart from these, Ullstein’s published more than a dozen weekly and monthly periodicals, ran
their own news service, their own travel agency, etc., and were one of the leading book
publishers. The firm was owned by the brothers Ullstein - they were five, like the original
Rothschild brothers, and like them also, they were Jews.’ (
The God that Failed (1950) ed. RHS
Crossman, p 31).

Edgar Mowrer, Berlin correspondent for the Chicago Daily News, wrote an anti-German tract
called
Germany Puts the Clock Back (published as a Penguin Special and reprinted five times
between December 1937 and April 1938). He nevertheless notes ‘In the all-important
administration of Prussia, any number of strategic positions came into the hands of Hebrews..

A telephone conversation between three Jews in Ministerial offices could result in the
suspension of any periodical or newspaper in the state.. The Jews came in Germany to play in
politics and administration that same considerable part that they had previously won by open
competition in business, trade, banking, the Press, the arts, the sciences and the intellectual
and cultural life of the country. And thereby the impression was strengthened that Germany, a
country with a mission of its own, had fallen into the hands of foreigners.’

Mowrer says ‘No one who lived through the period from 1919 to 1926 is likely to forget the
sexual promiscuity that prevailed.. Throughout a town like Berlin, hotels and pensions made
vast fortunes by letting rooms by the hour or day to baggageless, unregistered guests.
Hundreds of cabarets, pleasure resorts and the like served for purposes of getting acquainted
and acquiring the proper mood..’ (pp. 153-4).
Bryant describes throngs of child prostitutes
outside the doors of the great Berlin hotels and restaurants. He adds ‘Most of them (the night
clubs and vice-resorts) were owned and managed by Jews. And it was the Jews.. among the
promoters of this trade who were remembered in after years.’ (pp. 144-5).

Douglas Reed, Chief Central European correspondent before WWII for the London Times,
was profoundly anti-German and anti-Hitler. But nevertheless he reported: ‘I watched the
Brown Shirts going from shop to shop with paint pots and daubing on the window panes the
word "Jew", in dripping red letters. The Kurfürstendamm was to me a revelation. I knew that
Jews were prominent in business life, but I did not know that they almost monopolized
important branches of it. Germany had one Jew to one hundred gentiles, said the statistics; but
the fashionable Kurfürstendamm, according to the dripping red legends, had about one gentile
shop to ninety-nine Jewish ones.’ (
Reed, Insanity Fair, (1938) p. 152-3).

In
Reed’s book Disgrace Abounding of the following year he notes ‘In the Berlin (of pre-Hitler
years) most of the theatres were Jewish-owned or Jewish-leased, most of the leading film and
stage actors were Jews, the plays performed were often by German, Austrian or Hungarian
Jews and were staged by Jewish film producers, applauded by Jewish dramatic critics in
Jewish newspapers..

The Jews are not cleverer than the Gentiles, if by clever you mean good at their jobs. They
ruthlessly exploit the common feeling of Jews, first to get a foothold in a particular trade or
calling, then to squeeze the non-Jews out of it.. It is not true that Jews are better journalists
than Gentiles. They held all the posts on those Berlin papers because the proprietors and
editors were Jewish’ (pp238-9).

The Jewish writer
Edwin Black notes ‘For example, in Berlin alone, about 75% of the
attorneys and nearly as many of the doctors were Jewish.’ (
Black, The Transfer Agreement,
(1984) p58.

To cap it all, Jews were perceived as dangerous enemies of Germany after
Samuel
Untermeyer
, the leader of the World Jewish Economic Federation, declared war on Germany
on August 6 1933. (
Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: the Untold Story of the Secret
Pact between the Third Reich and Palestine,
(1984) pp272-277)

According to
Black, ‘The one man who most embodied the potential death blow to Germany
was
Samuel Untermeyer.’ (p 369). This was the culmination of a worldwide boycott of
German goods led by international Jewish organizations.
The London Daily Express on March
24, 1933 carried the headline "Judea Declares War on Germany." The boycott was particularly
motivated by the German imposition of the Nuremberg Laws, which ironically were similar in
intent and content to the Jewish cultural exclusivism practiced so visibly in present-day Israel
(
Hannah Arendt Eichmann in Jerusalem, p 7).

The origins of World War 2: the views of four diplomats close to events

  • Joseph P. Kennedy, U.S. Ambassador to Britain during the years immediately preceding
    WW2 was the father of the famous American Kennedy dynasty. James Forrestal the first
    US Secretary of Defense (1947-1949) quotes him as saying "Chamberlain (the British
    Prime Minister) stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war".
    (The Forrestal Diaries, ed. Millis, Cassell 1952 p129).

  • Count Jerzy Potocki, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, in a report to the Polish
    Foreign Office in January 1939, is quoted approvingly by the highly respected British
    military historian Major-General JFC Fuller. Concerning public opinion in America he
    says "Above all, propaganda here is entirely in Jewish hands…when bearing public
    ignorance in mind, their propaganda is so effective that people have no real knowledge of
    the true state of affairs in Europe…

    It is interesting to observe that in this carefully thought-out campaign… no reference at all
    is made to Soviet Russia. If that country is mentioned, it is referred to in a friendly manner
    and people are given the impression that Soviet Russia is part of the democratic group of
    countries…

    Jewry was able not only to establish a dangerous centre in the New World for the
    dissemination of hatred and enmity, but it also succeeded in dividing the world into two
    warlike camps…

    President Roosevelt has been given the power.. to create huge reserves in armaments for
    a future war which the Jews are deliberately heading for." (J.F.C. Fuller, The Decisive
    Battles of the Western World, vol 3 pp 372-374.)

  • Hugh Wilson, the American Ambassador in Berlin until 1938, the year before the war
    broke out, found anti-Semitism in Germany ‘understandable’. This was because before
    the advent of the Nazis, "the stage, the press, medicine and law [were] crowded with
    Jews…among the few with money to splurge, a high proportion [were] Jews…the leaders
    of the Bolshevist movement in Russia, a movement desperately feared in Germany, were
    Jews. One could feel the spreading resentment and hatred." (Hugh Wilson: Diplomat
    between the Wars, Longmans 1941, quoted in Leonard Mosley, Lindbergh, Hodder
    1976).

  • Sir Nevile Henderson, British Ambassador in Berlin ‘said further that the hostile attitude
    in Great Britain was the work of Jews and enemies of the Nazis, which was what Hitler
    thought himself’ (A.J.P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War, Penguin 1965,
    1987 etc p 324).

Hitler wanted to destroy Communism, a fact that earned him the immense hatred and animosity
of the Jewish organisations and the media and politicians of the west which they could
influence. After all, according to the Jewish writer
Chaim Bermant, although Jews formed less
than five percent of Russia's population, they formed more than fifty percent of its
revolutionaries.

‘It must be added that most of the leading revolutionaries who convulsed Europe in the final
decades of the last century and the first decades of this one, stemmed from prosperous Jewish
families.. They were perhaps typified by the father of revolution,
Karl Marx.. Thus when, after
the chaos of World War I, revolutions broke out all over Europe, Jews were everywhere at the
helm; Trotsky, Sverdlov, Kamenev and Zinoviev in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Kurt Eisner in
Bavaria, and, most improbable of all, Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin.

‘To many outside observers, the Russian revolution looked like a Jewish conspiracy, especially
when it was followed by Jewish-led revolutionary outbreaks in much of central Europe. The
leadership of the Bolshevik Party had a preponderance of Jews.. Of the seven members of the
Politburo, the inner cabinet of the country, four, Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinoviev (Radomsky),
Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Sverdlov, were Jews.’ (
Bermant, The Jews, (1977), chapter 8.)

Hitler came to power with two main aims, the rectification of the unjust provisions of the
Versailles Treaty, and the destruction of the Soviet/ Communist threat to Germany. He had no
plans or desire for a larger war of conquest, as Professor
A.J.P. Taylor showed in his book,
The Origins of the Second World War
to the disappointment of the professional western
political establishment.

What occurred in Europe in 1939-41 was the result of unforeseen weaknesses and a tipping of
the balance of power, and Hitler was an opportunist ‘who took advantages whenever they
offered themselves’ (
Taylor). Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way
around. Hitler wanted peace with Britain, as the German generals admitted (
Basil Liddell
Hart
, The Other Side of the Hill 1948, Pan Books 1983).

With regard to the so-called Halt Order at Dunkirk, where Hitler had the opportunity to capture
the entire British Army, but chose not to.
Liddell Hart, one of Britain’s most respected military
historians, quotes the German General
von Blumentritt with regard to this Halt Order:

"He (Hitler) then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the
necessity for its existence, and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world. He
remarked, with a shrug of the shoulders, that the creation of its Empire had been achieved by
means that were often harsh, but ‘where there is planing, there are shavings flying’. He
compared the British Empire with the catholic Church – saying they were both essential
elements of stability in the world.

He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position
on the Continent. The return of Germany’s colonies would be desirable but not essential, and
he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in difficulties
anywhere.." (p 200).

According to
Liddell Hart, "At the time we believed that the repulse of the Luftwaffe in the
‘Battle over Britain’ had saved her. That is only part of the explanation, the last part of it. The
original cause, which goes much deeper, is that Hitler did not want to conquer England. He
took little interest in the invasion preparations, and for weeks did nothing to spur them on; then,
after a brief impulse to invade, he veered around again and suspended the preparations. He
was preparing, instead, to invade Russia" (p140).

David Irving in the foreword to his book The Warpath (1978) refers to "the discovery.. that at
no time did this man (Hitler) pose or intend a real threat to Britain or the Empire."

This gives a completely different complexion, not only to the war, but to the successful
suppression of this information during the war and afterwards. Historians today know only too
well where the boundaries lie within which they can paint their pictures of the war and its
aftermath, and the consequences of venturing beyond those boundaries, irrespective of the
evidence. Unfortunately, only too few of them have been prepared to have the courage to
break out of this dreadful straitjacket of official and unofficial censorship.
The Economic Reasons for Calling World
War
II A Jewish Creation
Author Unknown
Background: In October of 1938 Walter Funk, Economic Minister of the Reich, had made a trip
to the Balkans during which he concluded massive trade agreements with Yugoslavia, Turkey,
and Bulgaria. Rumania was not willing to make such an agreement at that time because of the
opposition of King Carol, whose girlfriend, Magda Elena Lupescu, was Jewish.

On November 15, 1938 King Carol of Rumania arrived in London. The lover of the Jewess
Lupescu was acclaimed by Anti-Hitlerites in Hyde Park. But no one imagined the monarch had
come all the way to London just for the pleasure of lending his presence to a philo-Semitic
demonstration.

Carol represented the resistance to German economic expansion in Southeast Europe. Carol
had come to London to meet with the bankers of the City of London to combat this expansion.

The purpose of his voyage was indirectly revealed by R. S. Hudson, member of the Crown
Council and undersecretary of Foreign Trade, in a speech given in the House of Commons
November 30. It was a speech of capital importance, which constituted a virtual declaration of
economic war against Germany. Economic war, which in our times always precedes total,
political war.

It was a speech that indicated that an important fraction of the English City had now evolved in
the direction of Churchill's postulates. Here is a revealing fragment of Hudson’s speech:

Quote:

    Germany engages in no treatment unfavorable to England’s markets in Germany; that we
    must recognize. But what we are complaining about is that with its methods Germany will
    ruin trade in the entire world.

    Our principle problem today is to know how it will be possible for us to confront the new
    form of German competition in the world. We are able to say that the reason for the
    economic influence of Germany resides in the fact that she pays the producer countries of
    Central and Southeast Europe much higher prices than those paid in the world market.

    We have examined all the procedures it would be possible for us to apply. The only
    means consists in organizing our industries in such a way that they would be in a position
    to oppose German industry and saying to Hitler and his people:

    "If you are not disposed to put an end to your present manner of proceeding and come to
    an agreement with us according to which you promise to sell your merchandise at a price
    that will ensure you a reasonable profit, we will combat you and vanquish you with your
    own methods."

    From a strictly financial point of view our country is infinitely stronger than any other
    country in the world; in any case stronger than Germany, and for that reason we enjoy
    great advantages that will result in our winning the battle.

After this speech of Hudson’s, England revoked Germany's "most favored nation," status
which, in its foreign trade treaties, it had maintained with Germany since 1927. The United
States did the same, with a curious coincidence of dates.

A brief comment: England and the United States, the champions of liberalism, politically as well
as economically "the two are indissolubly linked" became indignant because Germany, by
selling its products more cheaply, snatched from them markets that were traditionally theirs.
This is outrageous. Where is the famous freedom of commerce?

Hudson spoke of unfair commercial competition. Why unfair? Germany was able to sell its
products more cheaply for one reason. One reason only. Because they did not depend on the
gold standard, their products were not burdened at every stage of production with the heavy
interest charges of the financiers and bankers. Here is the real motive for the 180-degree turn
that was taking place in England. Organic Natural Economy, put into practice by National
Socialist Germany defeated, for simple arithmetical reasons, the Classic Economy which
reigned in England.

But here is the other fact that brought to a pinnacle the irritation of the pleiade of bankers,
dealers, ship-owners insurers, and captains of industry who swarmed around the Strand, the
City, and Whitehall. On December 10, 1938, the government of Mexico signed an agreement
with the Reich, in virtue of which, it would hand over to the latter, in the course of 1939,
petroleum to the value of 17 million dollars. This petroleum came from oil wells that a
nationalist government of Mexico City had expropriated from the Judeo-Yankees of Standard
Oil of Manhattan. This was the straw that broke the camel's back. It was a barter agreement.
The Reich would pay in irrigation apparatus, farm machines, office materials, typewriters and
photographic equipment. Moreover, the agreement was concluded on the basis of an oil price
much lower than the worldwide rates.

The consequences of all this: Germany would obtain oil without having to put up with Royal
Dutch, of the Judeo-British Samuel Deterding, nor with Standard Oil, of the Judeo-American
Rockefeller. The transaction would take place without the City touching one miserable shilling
through credit operations, financing, guarantees, warrants, freight charges, or insurance
premiums. It would be a simple barter, guaranteed by the German government itself, and the
transports would be effected in German boats. For the big shots of the City this was plain
dismaying. Never mind that Hitler used such procedures in the Balkans or in Turkey; never
mind that Central Europe would acclimate to them, but to extend them to Central America
condemned London to a certain and inevitable decline.

What’s more, it became manifest that Minister Funk was preparing a trip to Buenos Aires,
Montevideo, and Santiago de Chile. All this was, for the City, the beginning of the end. As a
consequence of this, new and important segments of the English plutocracy, racially Anglo-
Saxon, joined Churchill’s camp.

Funk’s trip to Southeast Europe; the taking of Canton and Hankeu [by Japan]; the German-
Mexican accord; the announcement of Funk's trip to South America; the progressive weakening
of the position of King Carol of Rumania; loss of the Chinese market [by Japan's occupation of
Hong Kong, Canton, and Hankeu]; the occupation of Albania by Italy; each one of these events
provoked the desertion of another part of the pacifist forces on which Chamberlain had based
his politics of conciliation in September [the Munich Agreement]. When these forces acted
openly to the benefit of Beck [Polish Foreign Minister], Stalin could relax. The progress toward
the East, the Drang nach Osten, that progress which, at the same time it gave land to German
plows would eliminate Communism as a potential danger for Europe and the World, would
have to stop.

In truth, there still remained, at the beginning of December, 1938, some English businessmen
who formed the City’s last stronghold that still opposed the war. But their resistance would
soon be swept away by an offensive of New York Zionism, embodied in the “Brain Trust” of
President Roosevelt.
The Economic Roots of WWII
Joaquin Bochaca