|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
29 April 1983. Thought for the Week: "The cause of unrest in Palestine, and the only cause, arises from the Zionist movement, and from our promises and pledges in regard to it."
Winston Churchill, June l4th.1921
'HITLER DIARIES' AND HISTORY
By Eric D. Butler
Following the First World War, Winston Churchill wrote on the subject of Political Zionism and the influence of certain Jews in the Bolshevik Revolution. But he later found it politically expedient not to mention the subject. In fact his lawyers wrote to the publishers of Mrs. Nesta Webster's books threatening action if quotes from Churchill's articles were used to advertise these books. Churchill's own history of the Second World War, in which the British Prime Minister played a major role, was presented, quite naturally, to justify his own record.
The first thing to be said about the "Hitler Diaries" is that they could be yet another fabrication. Fabrications concerning the Second World War have been big business, and have also been used extensively by the Communists. The notorious "Potsdam fake factory" has over the years turned out an enormous amount of material concerning Hitler for the purpose of earning foreign currency for East Germany. The Soviet has been responsible for "leaking" books and articles to the West for the purpose of spreading what has come to be known as disinformation. Kim Philby participated in one such "leak".
Well-known British historian, David Irving, who has offered $2,000 for documentary evidence to support the Zionist claim that Hitler ordered an extermination programme for Jews, is one of those who at present remain skeptical about the "Hitler Diaries", pointing out that during his years of research he has been offered 34 volumes of material by a West German dealer but had declined the offer after discovering what appeared to be several obvious forgeries. In spite of the obvious fact that the "Anne Frank Diary" was a fabrication, and has been demonstrated as such, it still continues as one of the hoaxes of our times. However, assuming that the "Hitler Diaries" are genuine, there is always the possibility that they could be "edited".
Back in 1977 the British Government announced that it was withholding Cabinet papers dating back to 1946 and relating to Palestine and the British mandate before the creation of the Zionist State of Israel. The papers were due to be released under a 30 year rule, but were regarded, according to one statement, as "too sensitive to be made public". It was also stated that if made public they could be harmful to individuals involved in the creation of the Zionist State of Israel.
How true is written history when certain documents are suppressed? Much of the real history of the creation of the Zionist State of Israel has been provided by writers like the American Jewish authority on the Middle East, Dr. Alfred Lilienthal, but his major work, "The Zionist Connection", remains relatively unknown because an insidious type of censorship. I venture to predict that the "Hitler Diaries" will add little of substance to what is already known, but which has not been publicised by the media.
Commentators have said that the history of Dunkirk, for example, will have to be rewritten if the "Hitler Diaries" are genuine. Hitler is quoted as ordering that the isolated British army at Dunkirk not be destroyed as Hitler did not want to humiliate the British, believing that he could then negotiate a separate peace with a new British Government, Churchill having been deposed. Years ago the famous British military writer Liddel Hart, along with others, referred to Hitler's view that he could negotiate a separate with the British Empire as a preliminary to attacking the Soviet Union. Hitler's endorsement of the Hess mission to Britain was in keeping with this view.
It is no surprise to learn that Hitler was astonished when the British declared war in 1939. This has been revealed before. Thanks to the peace demonstrators of the period, Hitler was completely misled by the British situation. The mythmakers have persistently misrepresented Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain as a weak, gullible man completely "taken in" by Hitler. The "Hitler Diaries" provide a picture of Chamberlain more akin to that of the real Chamberlain, a man who knew at the time of Munich that, thanks to a treacherous disarmament programme, Britain was in no position to fight in 1938. Britain needed time and Neville Chamberlain strove to gain that time. His first loyalty was to Britain.
Quotes from "The Hitler Diaries" apparently provide no evidence to support the Zionist inspired view that Hitler ordered the mass extermination of Jews. But already one journalist, perhaps because of force of habit, has Hitler writing his diary in secret late at night, "plotting" the "Final Solution" for the Jews. Hitler certainly had no love for the Jews, who suffered and died along with others in the German wartime camps. But the "Final Solution" was clearly a programme to ultimately force all Jews to leave German occupied territory.
As a number of objective writers, including Jews, have demonstrated, the story of six million Jews being gassed on Hitler's orders has served in the main to justify the international power politics of Political Zionism. The fact that large numbers, of "experts" have accepted this nonsense makes them suspect on other past events. As a student of hoaxes and propaganda over many years, I well recall the sensationalism, which surrounded the publication of the "diaries" of Benito Mussolini. The London "Sunday Times" started to publish the "diaries", assuring their readers that they were authentic. But when it was demonstrated that the "diaries" were written years after Mussolini was hanged by Italian partisans, the "Sunday Times" was placed in the embarrassing position of having to cease publication.
Apart from the political implications, there is big money in the fabrication of what purport to be diaries of prominent people, or of official documents. It may prove that "The Hitler Diaries" are the most brilliant fabrication and forgery to date. In "The Controversy of Zion", the well known British journalist and writer, the late Douglas Reed, the man who knew Hitler's Germany intimately and who had met Hitler personally, examines some of the little known shadowy past of the man who was born as Schickelgruber. But the basic point to observe in assessing any politician's role in real history is what were his philosophy and policies.
Commenting editorially on "The Hitler Diaries", "The Australian" in its weekend edition of April 23-24th, says that the diaries may explain why "an Austrian immigrant of little education, of mediocre talents in every field of human endeavour other than the capturing and holding of political power, was able to lead the nation of Kant, Goethe and Beethoven into committing the most monstrous evils in recorded human history."
The Germany of Kant, Goethe and other great artists was one of the decentralised German States. Hitler took over the highly centralised German State created by Bismark and furthered the centralisation. As Lord Action said, all power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hitler possessed power, which no human being should have. But Hitler himself was the creature of centralised financial power and, as documented by Dr. Antony Sutton in "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler", only came to power with the support of the big international banking houses. Linked with those organisations were international industrial organisations, which played a vital role in ensuring that Hitler's war machine could operate.
"Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler" has been described as a work, which makes every other book on the Second World War obsolete. It has been given the "silent treatment" by the media. Like all those using centralised power, Hitler was, of course, mad in the sense that he was divorced from reality. His National Socialist regime was responsible for many evils. But when Mr. Rupert Murdock's "Australian" asserts that it was responsible for "The most monstrous evils in recorded history", it is not only falsifying history, but is ignoring a Socialist power already far surpassing in atrocities and human suffering anything Hitler's Germany achieved. I refer to the Soviet Union and its satellites.
The major lesson to be learned from Hitler's role in history is that centralised power is always evil, irrespective of whether it is called Fascism, Nazism, Bolshevism or "democratic socialism". Australians might consider, while they have time, that the programme Mr. Robert Hawke proposes for Australia is strikingly similar to that of Hitler's. Hitler was a Republican, reduced the German States to creatures of the Federal German Government, and created a National Economic Planning Organisation to direct a "mixed economy". Mr. Hawke took his major legislative step to impose his central planning when he called Parliament together last week for one day only to rush through the World Heritage Properties Conservation Bill, 1983, not only in an endeavour to stop the Franklin River dam, but to bring other regions of Australia under Canberra control.
Admittedly Mr. Hawke has a Federal constitutional hurdle to overcome before he creates his "democratic Republican socialist" State. Hitler also had a constitutional problem. He solved it by tearing up the German Constitution. Mr. Hawke and Senator Evans cannot do that so readily to the Australian Constitution. But unless stopped, they can achieve the same end by indirect methods. Senator Evans has promised that Australia is to have a new Constitution by 1988.
Hitler's seizure and extension of centralised power was only possible during a period of tremendous crisis. The development of crisis conditions in Australia, primarily stemming from an economic crisis, which must get worse under present financial rules, will be used in an attempt to stampede the Australian people. Now as never before it is time for Australians to appreciate the value of a constitution, which, if maintained, is the major barrier to the establishment of an Australian version of National Socialism.
Crude Level of Debate
The following letter was published in
The Australian (March 30th): The correspondent was
Professor Joan Rydon, Professor of Politics, LaTrobe University,
The High Price of Saving the Franklin
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|