Goebbels Diaries

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
marcom
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 2:05 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by marcom »

“he [Himmler] gives a very unvarnished and
frank presentation. He is convinced that we can solve the Jewish question
throughout Europe by the end of this year. He proposes the harshest
and most radical solution: to exterminate the Jews root and branch [Kind
und Kegel]. It is certainly a logical solution, even if it is a brutal one. We
have to take the responsibility of completely solving this issue in our
time. Later generations will certainly not handle this problem with the
courage and the ardor that are ours.”

Goebbels
Oct 7, 1943

Fröhlich, Elke. Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels, K. G. Saur Verlag, Munich 1987-2006 , Part 2, vol. 10, p. 72

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3149
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by Charles Traynor »

Scott wrote:
rollo the ganger wrote:Magda was Goebbel's "birther cow". The perfect compliant woman to represent the National Socialist family image to the German Public while Joe went around screwing anything that spread its legs for him. Even Hitler scolded him for his shennanigans as not representing the National Socialist ideals. A modern day analogy would be Newt Gingrich who espoused the "Family Values" of the Republican Party and then handed divorce papers to his wife who was on her death bed with cancer.
Sounds like any other good Catholic. They both came from good Catholic backgrounds even if Goebbels was not exactly practicing the Faith.
The minimum number of children a couple should be having if the population is to be replaced is four, so Magda really only had two children for the Führer (if we don’t count Harald Quant).

It has been repeatedly established by unimpeachable statistics that even to perpetuate a given family stock, even to maintain a bare equilibrium therein, an average of nearly four children per marriage is necessary. Such was the celebrated pronouncement of Theodore Roosevelt. Dr. Louis I. Dublin, statistician of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, and pre-eminent as an authority on vital statistics, in a personal letter to me, placed the figure at “3.4 or 3.5” children per marriage. The reason that the figure has to be thus high is that some children do not live, some do not marry, and some who marry have no children. To maintain the reproductive level of the family stock, therefore—I say again—those who marry must average nearly four children per completed family.60
Which Way Western Man, William Gayley Simpson, 1978 edition, pp.420-421
Scott wrote:
If the Goebbels family had been able to have gotten their kiddies to safety somehow and could count on decent friends to raise them after the war, I find it hard to believe that the Goebbels would have poisoned them. They might not have believed that Providence would have ever allowed the Red Army tanks to get there until it was too late, but Magda Goebbels wasn't Jim Jones, after all.

:)
I agree Scott, Magda Goebbels was no monster. Whether we like it or not the Goebbels decision to poison their children was a rational one considering the situation in the Führerbunker in those last fateful days of the Reich.

In the evening she [Hanna Reitsch] put the Goebbels children to bed. Eva Braun kept her company. Their mother hardly had the strength to face her children with composure now. Every meeting with them made her feel so terrible that she would burst into tears afterwards.
Hitler’s Last Secretary,Traudl Junge, p.174
There were no differences of class or rank any more, we were all bound together by fate. Frau Goebbels was in greater torment than any of us. She was facing six deaths, while the rest of us had only to face one. ‘I would rather have my children die than live in disgrace, jeered at. Our children have no place in Germany as it will be after the war.’
Hitler’s Last Secretary,Traudl Junge, p.175


Balsamo wrote:Also note that most of prominent Nazis children were mostly untouched after the war, whether it is Hitler's sister, Goering's daughter, etc.
The Goebbels were not to know this at the time. Anyone who has seen the documentaries My Father was a Nazi Kommandant or Hitler’s Children will know that relatives of leading Nazis continue to be used as propaganda tools and live their lives dithering on the edge of insanity. I would rather be dead than be forced to live out my life like Rainer Hoess or the particularly vile Niklas Frank.


theblackrabbitofinlé wrote: Your misreading of posts on this forum never ceases to amaze me Rob.
Rob Luc is a HC troll. The exterminationists are getting nowhere in showing the Goebbels diary is an incriminating piece of holohoax evidence, hence the attempted thread derail.
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9534
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by been-there »

Goebbels' Diaries: excerpts.

Nov 30, 1937 (I.4.429)
"Long discussion on the Jewish Question. My new law is almost finished. But that is not the goal. The Jews must leave Germany, and get completely out (aus…heraus) of Europe. It will still take some time, but it needs to happen. The Führer is determined to do so."

Apr 11, 1938 (I.5.256)
"Long discussion at breakfast, on the Jewish Question (Judenfrage). The Führer wants the Jews completely squeezed out (herausdrängen) of Germany. To Madagascar, or some such place. Right!"

Apr 23, 1938 (I.5.269-270)
"Speaking with Helldorf on the Jewish Question. … We will take from Berlin the character of a Jewish paradise. Jewish shops will be identified. In any case we will now proceed more radically. Negotiations with Poland and Romania. Madagascar would be the most suitable for [the Jews]."

Jan 26, 1939 (I.6.239) *
"The elimination of Jewish influence (Entjudung) in the Reich Chamber of Culture continues. But now considerable financial difficulties are apparent. We shall overcome them."

Four days later, on January 30, Hitler gave his famous Reichstag speech of 1939. This was remarkable on several counts. It was sprinkled with many references to international Jewry (internationale Judentum), the Jewish world-enemy (jüdischen Weltfeind), and the Jewish Question generally.
Hitler said: "Today I will again be a prophet: if the international Jewish financiers in and outside Germany should succeed in plunging the nations once again into a world war, then the result will be not the Bolshevization of the Earth and with it the victory of Jewry, but rather the destruction (Vernichtung) of the Jewish race in Europe."
The ...problem is this: How likely is it that Hitler would declare to the world his intention to murder an entire race? Kershaw (2000: 522) pointedly emphasizes Hitler’s “intense preoccupation with secrecy”; the mass murder scheme was “a secret to be carried to the grave.” But wait—he already announced it to the world in January 1939! Does it even make sense to then keep such a thing secret? Or perhaps there was no secret to keep?

Jun 6, 1940 (I.8.159)
"We will quickly be finished with the Jews after the war."

Jul 26, 1940 (I.8.238)
The big plan for the evacuation (Evakuierung) of the Jews from Berlin was approved. Additionally, all the Jews of Europe are supposed to be deported (deportiert) to Madagascar after the war.

Aug 17, 1940 (I.8.276) *
Later on, we want to ship (verfrachten) the Jews to Madagascar. There they can build their own state.

Sep 2, 1940 (I.8.301)
I fly to Kattowitz [Katowice, Poland, near Auschwitz]. … Bracht reports to me on the various concerns of the Province. The Poles are resigned to their fate, and the Jews have been pushed out (abgeschoben).

Nov 2, 1940 (I.8.406)
"With the Führer. Epp has colonial questions. Koch and Forster, questions about the East. All want to unload their trash onto the General Government: Jews, the sick, the lazy, etc. And [Hans] Frank resists. Not entirely without reason. He would like to make Poland a model nation. But that goes too far. He cannot, and should not. According to the Führer, Poland is a large labour pool for us—a place to hold failed people and use them for lowly work. We have to get them from somewhere. Frank does not like this, but he has to. And the Jews will later be moved out (abschieben) of this area."

We see here a growing vocabulary of terms relating to the status of the Jews. The large majority refer to removing, deporting, or expelling: aus-heraus, herausdrängen, ausscheiden, abschieben, evakuieren, verfrachten, deportieren. Later we find other related terms: beseitigen, herausbringen, aufräumen, herausschaffen, and others—some 18 in total, by my count (not including conjugates). This group is the most numerous, and the most benign. Two of these, evakuieren (evacuate) and abschieben (expel or push out), are especially popular with Goebbels.

A second group of terms include those that I will call ‘ambiguous’, in the sense that they have somewhat more ominous implications: vernichten (verb form of Vernichtung), ausrotten, liquidieren, eliminieren, and auslöschen. I’ve discussed the first of these already, and in the July 6 entry Goebbels first uses a form of ausrotten. This word, literally meaning ‘to root out’, translates to the ambiguous ‘exterminate’ or to ‘eradicate’ (ex-radix, lit. ‘up-root’). Once again, none of these meanings entail death, killing, or murder. A plant that is ausrottet can be replanted and live; a family can be ‘up-rooted’ and reestablished elsewhere. The exterminationist suggestion that either vernichten or ausrotten necessarily imply murder is, quite literally, nonsense.

I should note, by the way, that the German language does indeed have words for ‘killing’: morden, ermorden, töten, totschlagen, totschiessen. Goebbels had no shortage of alternatives if he wished to discuss literally killing the Jews. This is, after all, a personal and private diary.

Consider his situation: should the Germans win, he has nothing to fear. Should they lose, he must have known that his own death awaited, along with the ‘destruction’ of greater Germany — again, nothing to fear. Why hold back? So the reader might be wondering: does Goebbels ever use such explicit terms? In fact he does: once. 14th March 1945, we read that certain soon-to-be-victorious Jews are calling for no mercy on the Germans—to which Goebbels replies, “Anyone in a position to do so should kill (totschlagen) these Jews like rats.”
There we have it—an unambiguous call for murder. Except that it’s three years too late. One wonders, though, why, on the exterminationist thesis, Goebbels didn’t resort to such language much sooner.
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... e_jews.php
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Roberto Luc
Posts: 675
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:40 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by Roberto Luc »

Charles Traynor wrote:Rob Luc is a HC troll.
Do you prove it or is it just another tantrum yours?
Charles Traynor wrote:The exterminationists are getting nowhere in showing the Goebbels diary is an incriminating piece of holohoax evidence, hence the attempted thread derail.
The trouble is you understand which was the original question on the other deleted topic. The topic was about the veracity of the diaries, not about the content of the diaries, I said many "Revis" claim those diaries are fake, I made no question about Goebbels Diaries content. You're trolling again.

User avatar
Depth Check
Site Moderator
Posts: 1078
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:49 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by Depth Check »

Roberto Luc wrote:
Charles Traynor wrote:The exterminationists are getting nowhere in showing the Goebbels diary is an incriminating piece of holohoax evidence, hence the attempted thread derail.
The trouble is you understand which was the original question on the other deleted topic. The topic was about the veracity of the diaries, not about the content of the diaries, I said many "Revis" claim those diaries are fake, I made no question about Goebbels Diaries content. You're trolling again.
What deleted topic? Roberto Luc, your suggestion that threads have been deleted from the holocaust section of the forum is a very serious matter.

Please take your complaint to: http://forum.rodoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=502

User avatar
Roberto Luc
Posts: 675
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:40 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by Roberto Luc »

Depth Check wrote:
Roberto Luc wrote:
Charles Traynor wrote:The exterminationists are getting nowhere in showing the Goebbels diary is an incriminating piece of holohoax evidence, hence the attempted thread derail.
The trouble is you understand which was the original question on the other deleted topic. The topic was about the veracity of the diaries, not about the content of the diaries, I said many "Revis" claim those diaries are fake, I made no question about Goebbels Diaries content. You're trolling again.
What deleted topic? Roberto Luc, your suggestion that threads have been deleted from the holocaust section of the forum is a very serious matter.

Please take your complaint to: http://forum.rodoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=502
DC, once I've opened a topic on the Goebbels diaries, but the topic disappeared in that week before RODOH has gone offline. That's the reason for opening this topic again.

I just cited this fact because CT made a ridiculous statement above.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9534
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by been-there »

http://books.google.se/books?id=m-ICAAA ... 41&f=false

Regarding the controversy over the accuracy of the most recent partial English publications, I notice what appears to me to be some sleight-of-rhetoric at the end of this article.

It is acknowledged that the "Müller typescript" of the redacted 1939-1941 diaries is not authentic but goes on to maintain that the microfilms of the original are. But... Have I missed something? How does that help if the authentic diaries have not been released or published in English and yet the "false" "Müller typescript" has?
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9534
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by been-there »

I’ve gone through the diary with a special interest in the Jewish issue, and particularly the “final solution.” There’s no question that whatever tragedy befell the Jews in Germany during the Third Reich, Dr. Goebbels himself was the prime moving force behind it. He wasn’t just the person who created the atmosphere of hatred, he was also the one who pulled the levers and started the trains in motion. What happened at the other end is still a matter of debate, and this issue is one of the moving causes of revisionism at this moment.

Goebbels didn’t start out anti-Semitic. His very early diary pages, back in 1923, contain no references to the Jews, or any anti-Semitism at all, in fact. We do know that in his home town of Rheydt, a close neighbor with whom his parents maintained very close relations was Dr. Josef Joseph, a Jewish lawyer. There was a long-standing friendship between him and Goebbels’ parents, who often sent their son round to spend the day with Dr. Joseph.

We are not able to pin down just what caused Goebbels to become anti-Semitic around 1922. Certainly by the time he arrived in Berlin, in 1926, as Gauleiter (district party leader), his anti-Semitism was in full flood, and, as we shall see, what he saw there completed the picture for him.

His formative experiences came in the aftermath of World War One, I think. Because of his club foot, the army had refused to accept him as a soldier, which was humiliating. In 1923 he worked in a bank in Cologne, where he was shocked by Jewish banking methods. He saw Jews ruining ordinary Germans, he saw speculation, and he saw inflation wiping out people’s savings. His colleagues at the bank undoubtedly drew his attention to the Jewish role in all of it, as the private banks in Germany were almost entirely in Jewish hands.

Another factor played a role. When he left the university Goebbels was an aspiring writer of poetry, plays and newspaper articles. He wanted to write for the great national newspapers and magazines, which were largely controlled by the Ullstein and Mosse families, both of which were Jewish. His approaches to these two publishing companies, with articles submitted for publication, and subsequently seeking employment, were rudely rebuffed. The Berliner Tageblatt alone returned to him nearly 50 articles he had submitted.

No surprise, if you look at the private papers of Theodor Wolff, chief editor of the Berliner Tageblatt, which was published by the Mosse company. In these papers, which are filed in the German Federal archives, you can see that Wolff was corresponding almost entirely only with Jews.

It’s what today we would call networking; if you’re outside the loop, you can’t break in. One knows this when one is mature, but when you are a young student fresh out of university, full of great idealism and belief in your own superior talents, the first realization that you can’t break into the loop — that the network is there to keep people like you out — makes a great impression, as it probably did on the young Dr. Goebbels. And this undoubtedly had an effect on his anti-Semitism, even though he still wasn’t hostile toward individual Jews.

...His views on Streicher vary widely throughout his diary. Sometimes he’s full of praise for him, rather the way we grudgingly admire a person who is a bit bullheaded and plows ahead regardless of the damage he does. He liked Streicher as a human being, he liked him for his courage. But then again, he strongly deprecated his brand of anti-Semitism, regarding it as needlessly vulgar.

...When Goebbels arrived in Berlin as Gauleiter in 1926, he was confronted by a city with 179,000 Jews, one third of all Jews in Germany, and he made use of this fact. The Berlin population already was seething because of the presence of these Jews. In the coming years, Goebbels repeatedly explained to foreign diplomats that the problem there was the usual one, in which the Jewish population disproportionately controlled all the lucrative professions. This rankled with Berlin’s non-Jewish population, of course, and Goebbels, whether deliberately or by instinct, zeroed in on this as a wound that he could work on to promote the Nazi cause.

He was aided in this endeavor by the fact that his chief opponent there, Berlin’s Deputy Police Chief (who acted as though he was Police Chief; even the real Police Chief referred to him as being the Chief) was Dr. Bernhard Weiss, a Jew.

Image
Dr. Bernhard Weiss, Deputy Police Chief of Berlin in the 1920's.

...The fight between Dr. Bernhard Weiss and Dr. Joseph Goebbels, is, I think, one of the most hilarious, improbable stories to come out of this era. Twenty-eight times Weiss sued Goebbels for calling him a Jew. Twenty-eight times the judges pointed out to Weiss that he was in fact Jewish, and therefore it was no libel.

...As Goebbels orchestrated the rise of the Nazi party in Berlin, part of the problem for the democrats there was that much of what he said was true. The Jewish community not only dominated the legal and medical professions in Berlin, they also dominated the crime scene. In my biography I’ve quoted Interpol figures of the percentage of Jews among those arrested for drug dealing and narcotics. Moreover, three-quarters of the pickpockets in Berlin were Jewish. It was quite easy for Goebbels to draw attention to such facts, and to embellish them in a propaganda campaign. This came to him as second nature. In every new scandal in Berlin, it seemed, Jews were at the base of it – ripping off the banks, ripping off the taxpayers, and ripping off the government. And again and again, they seemed to be getting off scot-free.

At Syracuse University I found the private papers of Heinrich Brüning, who was Hitler’s predecessor as Chancellor (1930–1932). In this collection is a manuscript in which he describes his problems as Chancellor. Brüning recounts that at one time, he ordered an investigation of Jewish banks in Berlin and their methods, and in his manuscript he writes: “The results were so horrifying that I ordered this document to be kept secret, because if it had been allowed to become public knowledge, it would have resulted in anti-Jewish riots.” Of course, even though much of what Goebbels said was true, this just doesn’t justify what he did later on. We must, in all fairness, keep emphasizing this point.

During the 1920s Goebbels wrote a play called Michael, and it’s interesting to compare the various drafts of it, which are available. When he first wrote it back in 1923 or 1924, it was a straightforward kind of morality play. But Goebbels would change things. After Anka Stalherm annoyed him, he changed the leading female character. And as he became more and more annoyed with the Jews, he wrote more anti-Semitism into the play. In the drafts you can see him becoming progressively more anti-Jewish.

After seeing his first Hollywood movie, he wrote in his diary (on Dec. 3, 1928): “Sheer hell. Jewish kitsch. Virtually all you saw were Hebrews.” A few months later, on February 15, 1929, he wrote: “The Jewish question is the questions of all questions.”

There is a curious passage in his private diary that shows how increasingly obsessed he had become. It was after three years in Berlin as Gauleiter, fighting this increasingly desperate battle, almost with one hand tied behind his back, being repeatedly banned on orders of Dr. Weiss, having repeatedly nearly been sent to prison himself. One night he has a dream, which he then records in his diary (December 17, 1929). In this dream he’s back at school, running madly through the corridors with pillars flashing past him, and he’s being chased by Jews screaming at him, “Hate, hate, hate.” He’s always able to keep a few limping strides ahead of his pursuers, occasionally turning round and flinging back at them the same taunt: “Hate, hate, hate!” What an odd thing for a man to write in his own diary. One doesn’t often write down one’s own dreams in a diary. The mere fact that he had dreams like that shows that he was becoming obsessed with these Jews, the enemy.

More and more episodes occurred to give him reasons to dislike Jews. After Horst Wessel, a young Nazi stormtrooper who composed the hymn that subsequently became the second national anthem of Nazi Germany, was murdered in early 1930 by a communist in Berlin, it was a Jew who gave refuge to the murderers when they fled. This kind of thing will have undoubtedly had an effect of Goebbels. He would have chalked it up on his list of grudges.

Even worse, after he began going out with Magda Quandt (whose stepfather, Friedländer, he knew had been Jewish), it happened that for days at a time she didn’t come to see him. After a while, she doesn’t answer the phone or keep dates, and eventually Goebbels finds out he has a rival: a Jew named Victor Arlosoroff, who is also enraged to find out that she’s two-timing him with the Nazi Gauleiter of Berlin. Arlosoroff is so enraged, in fact, that during one meeting he pulls out a revolver, and in a jealous, dramatic scene, fires at her, deliberately missing. The bullet buries itself in the wall near her. She gets him out of her life, although he keeps returning and pleading to be taken back.

Image
Chaim (Victor) Arlosoroff

This man is none other than Chaim Arlosoroff, who subsequently became an important Zionist figure. After Hitler came to power, he was the Zionist representative in the negotiations with the new Nazi government that resulted in the Haavara (“Transfer”) agreement, whereby German Jews could emigrate to Palestine with their property. In June 1933 Arlosoroff was murdered in Tel Aviv, Palestine, by members of the Jabotinsky faction of the Zionist movement. The fact that the love of his life was two-timing him with an ardent Zionist may also have contributed to Goebbels’ growing dislike of Jews.

~~ David Irving

http://ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n1p-2_Irving.html
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Werd
Posts: 10306
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by Werd »

been-there wrote:
Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:41 am
As Goebbels orchestrated the rise of the Nazi party in Berlin, part of the problem for the democrats there was that much of what he said was true. The Jewish community not only dominated the legal and medical professions in Berlin, they also dominated the crime scene. In my biography I’ve quoted Interpol figures of the percentage of Jews among those arrested for drug dealing and narcotics. Moreover, three-quarters of the pickpockets in Berlin were Jewish. It was quite easy for Goebbels to draw attention to such facts, and to embellish them in a propaganda campaign. This came to him as second nature. In every new scandal in Berlin, it seemed, Jews were at the base of it – ripping off the banks, ripping off the taxpayers, and ripping off the government. And again and again, they seemed to be getting off scot-free.

At Syracuse University I found the private papers of Heinrich Brüning, who was Hitler’s predecessor as Chancellor (1930–1932). In this collection is a manuscript in which he describes his problems as Chancellor. Brüning recounts that at one time, he ordered an investigation of Jewish banks in Berlin and their methods, and in his manuscript he writes: “The results were so horrifying that I ordered this document to be kept secret, because if it had been allowed to become public knowledge, it would have resulted in anti-Jewish riots.”
Wow. I wonder what ever happened to those results. Or if anyone else has attempted to document this bit of Jewish Berlin history.

What is the title of Irving's biography and what chapter of his book mentions this?

Werd
Posts: 10306
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Goebbels Diaries

Post by Werd »

http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/BrueningMS.html

Dr Heinrich Brüning's Dislike of the German Jews

One of the last Reich Chancellors of the Weimar Republic before Hitler came to power, Dr Heinrich Brüning was enabled to flee to Britain in 1934 (having been provided with a laissez-passer by Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess). From there he made his way to the USA and took up a teaching position at Harvard University.

In private he retained a vitriolic hatred of the German Jews, whom he blamed (in a private 1937 letter to Winston Churchill) for having financed Hitler's rise to power [see BOTTOM PANEL]

Brüning's papers are now housed at the University of Syracuse, New York state, USA. British writer David Irving made these notes from a Brüning MS while researching his biography of Winston Churchill.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The ribbon copy of Brüning's MS is in: Syracuse University, N.Y.: George Arents Research Library: Dorothy Thompson collection, box #1, file: "Heinrich Brüning."

BRÜNING, Dr Heinrich

English typescript by ---, l3pp., 1943, on Nazi principles and methods.

Mentions that Hans Frank's father was "a leading member of the Jewish community in Munich."

Alfred Rosenberg had Jewish, Tartar, Russian, and Lett ancestry, mother was French. Allegations about Hitler's ancestors.
"After the inflation there was only one big bank not controlled by Jews, and some of them were utterly corrupt."
When the banks came under government control in 1931 findings of dishonesty were kept secret by the [Brüning] government for fear of provoking anti-Semitic riots.

Morally wrong and distasteful as it is for the Nazis to put Jews into concentration camps in Poland, the same action by the Soviet Government after the Russian occupation of the eastern parts of Poland cannot have been morally superior. The tactical abuse of uncontested moral principles, which began during the last war, has destroyed the scale of moral values all over the world, and we are now suffering from it. Therefore it would be good to establish commissions after the war to enquire in all countries what people were in fact responsible, and for what atrocities, without discrimination against any nation. . .
"It would also be necessary to determine the number of atrocities that have been committed. One cannot, of course, as was done a few weeks ago in an advertisement in the New York Times, base an accusation of the murder of hundreds of thousands of people on the facsimile of an envelope that, for anyone who took the trouble to look at it, bore obvious evidence of forgery, as the German 's' had been replaced by the Polish, and certain German words that are not capitalized had been capitalized, and thirdly, as the title chosen for the office supposedly dealing with the poor Jews in Poland would have provoked a contemptuous smile from anyone who understood even a little about administration..."
Brüning demands post war investigation to show how many good Germans protected Jews in November 1938, etc.
"It has been disastrous for the Jews in Germany that at the beginning of the Nazi regime the occasional ill-treatment of Jews was exaggerated by foreign correspondents. In the spring of 1933 foreign correspondents reported that the River Spree was covered with the corpses of murdered Jews. At that time hardly any Jews, except for leaders of the Communist Party and two or three leaders of the Social Democratic Party had been attacked. . . In my Party, on the other hand, more than 300 local members were then in concentration camps. More than a hundred members of the Protestant and Catholic youth movements had already been tortured to death. If the Jews had been treated so badly from the beginning of the regime, it could not be explained that so very few of them left the country before 1938. especially when the following circumstance is considered: The Nazis did not cancel a decree of the spring of 1931 permitting any German citizen to leave the country with his entire property after paying a 25% property tax on the flight of capital. . ."
The immigration of Jews from Poland, Russia; the Gottlosenbewegung, "led by Jews of a type who had no religious conviction left."
"It was a tragedy that non-religious Jews tried to monopolize leading positions in banking and, to a very large extent, in Government departments."
Then: Pan-Germanism.

Demands punishment of Hitler and Co. by trial.


AFTER THE war Winston Churchill wished to quote from a letter written to him by Chancellor Heinrich Brüning, then residing at Oxford, England, on August 28, 1937, about the big industrialists who had supported the Nazis before and after their accession to power.

Brüning was reluctant to provide any ammunition that might be used against his fellow Germans in "the so-called war crimes trials." He felt [he wrote] that Friedrich Flick and the IG Farben company were blameless, having been forced to make their contributions after the Nazis came to power; and added,
"I did not and do not even today, for understandable reasons, wish to reveal that from October 1928 the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi Party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith, and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany."
Brüning [wrote that he] also knew that French sources, including the Schneider-Creusot works and both French intelligence services, had paid one half of Hitler's revenue from 1921 until 1932; that the SA and SS had before 1933 been equipped largely with revolvers and machine guns made in the United States.

(Source: Letter from Heinrich Brüning to Daniel Longwell, February 7,1948; Longwell collection, Butler Library, Columbia University, New York City)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Nessie and 9 guests