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 2 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