Illusion and Leverage

by Dr. William L. Pierce

 

Today I’ll continue with the same general concept we talked about last week: the house-of-cards concept. The Jews maintain their power only by maintaining an illusion, and that illusion is that most people are in agreement with their policies and programs, when in fact a very large number of people are not. The Jews have, of course, a substantial number of willing Gentile collaborators, who collaborate because they depend upon the Jews to help them maintain their own unearned advantages: the feminists, the homosexuals, the welfare rabble, the politicians, and a significant portion of the business and corporate elite. And I’m speaking of White collaborators only. I’m not even concerned about non-Whites. But all of these White collaborators could be swept away were it not for the majority of Whites who are being fooled by the illusion.

 

After last week’s broadcast a listener commented that the people who pretend to be shocked by Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker’s expression of distaste for the denizens of Times Square and the New York subways are the same people who will never give an honest explanation of why they have fled the cities for the suburbs or small towns. The outflow of White families from the cities – the so-called “White flight” – is the direct consequence of the influx of non-Whites into the cities. The Whites are desperate to get away from the non-Whites – but not one in 20 will admit it. They believe that everyone around them will condemn them if they do admit it. They are so terrified of being thought “racists” that many of them won’t even admit the truth to themselves. Instead they invent a Politically Acceptable reason for their flight: the schools are better in the suburbs because of the higher teachers’ salaries, the suburbs provide easier access to the shopping malls, or whatever.

 

How is this illusion maintained? Almost entirely through the Jewish control of the mass media of news and entertainment. Most people – most White Americans, anyway – like to believe that they observe the world around them and then come to objective conclusions about things. They like to believe that they are rational individuals. They like to believe that they are independent thinkers. And of course, a few of them are – but most of them, about 95 per cent of them – aren’t. They are conformists. They conform their opinions, their thinking, their attitudes, to what they believe is expected of them.

 

Consider religion, as an example. People are not Baptists or Lutherans or Roman Catholics or Muslims because they have examined the various religious doctrines, compared them, and then made a rational decision. In 98 per cent of the cases one is a Lutheran or a Catholic or a Muslim or a Buddhist because one’s parents and the other people in one’s community are. A thoughtful person who takes his religion seriously may be prepared to argue about it and to defend cleverly the merits of his particular sect against the claims of a different sect, but the fact remains that his adherence to his own sect is not based on an independent decision. It was based from the beginning on conforming his beliefs to the perceived beliefs of the people around him. All of his arguments are only attempts to rationalize what in the first place was not rational. Think about it, and I’m sure you’ll agree with me.

 

It works a little differently with other types of belief, but the psychology, the human element, remains the same. In America, the government and the mass media don’t take a position favoring one Christian sect over another or even a position favoring Christianity over Buddhism or Islam, say. The pressure to conform in religious matters must come from family and neighbors. But in political ideology the pressure to conform comes very much from the government and even more from the mass media. And when I say pressure comes from the government, I mean all government-controlled institutions, including especially the schools. All of the media and all of the government institutions promote the belief that mass democracy, American style – television style – is the best possible form of government.

 

Beyond this they promote the beliefs that men and women are essentially the same, except for the configuration of their genitalia, and that it is “unfair” to treat them differently in any way; that homosexuals are just like heterosexuals except for a different sexual orientation, and that it is “bigoted” to treat them differently in any way; that Jews are clever and witty people, good at business, but honest and also sensitive and caring, and it is “hateful” to have any other ideas about them; and that Blacks and other non-Whites may look different, but under the skin they are just like us – in particular, they are just as intelligent, just as creative, just as good at solving problems, and just as inclined to accept personal responsibility.

 

Now, whether you personally believe these things or not, I think you’ll agree with me that the government and the mass media do push quite hard for conformity to these beliefs. For example, have you ever seen any television news program showing people using computers – children with computers in a classroom, say – in which a Black wasn’t shown at the keyboard? I mean, it’s like there is a rule that all news program directors must follow: you cannot show a computer unless you show a Black at the keyboard. It’s transparently obvious that they are pushing the idea that computers and Blacks go together, like blackeyed peas and collard greens. That’s what they want the public to believe.

 

The reality, of course, is that computers are a White thing and always have been: the invention, the engineering, the programming, you name it. Blacks just aren’t involved. You can teach a Black to use a computer, of course, just as you can teach a chimpanzee to ride a bicycle. But computers remain in the White domain, just as bicycles remain in the human domain. And that’s certainly not because anyone is holding Blacks back. It’s a matter of aptitude and inclination. Chinamen certainly are capable of understanding the science involved, which is why under the Clinton policy of globalizing the economy much of the computer technology we developed is moving to China, and we’re now forced to buy some computer products from the Chinese. But if you ever see computer products being imported from Ghana or Zambia it will only be because someone who is not a Black has built a factory there to take advantage of the cheap labor. It will not be because a Black computer whiz in Africa has developed something on his own.

 

You know, most people understand this at a certain level. They know that this business of always showing Blacks at computer keyboards is a media trick, but they have a hard time resisting it. They feel a compulsion to believe that the illusion is real.

 

The same trick is used in other ways. If NASA has a public announcement to make about one of its scientific space probes, the chances are pretty good there will be a Black chosen to stand in front of the television cameras, make the announcement, and explain to us the science involved – unless, of course, there has been a screwup and the space probe failed to do what it was supposed to do. Then it’s OK to have a White spokesman. Or if the National Institutes of Health or the Food and Drug Administration has something important to tell us, a Black in a white lab coat will be trotted out for the cameras. The idea is to create the illusion that technology and science and progress and intelligence are associated somehow with Blacks – or at least, that Blacks are just as good at that sort of thing as we are.

 

And as I already mentioned, it’s difficult to resist this sort of illusion. One cannot turn on a television set or pick up a mass-circulation magazine these days without seeing Blacks presented to us in White roles as if it were the most natural thing in the world. Flip through the channels, and you see Black face after Black face, and the smiling Whites all around them always are approving. Black doctors, Black businessmen, Black teachers, Black scientists, Black comedians, Black singers, Black dancers, Black announcers, Black ball players, Black detectives, Black men running off with White girls, and all the Whites around them smiling and approving. It’s almost hypnotic.

 

But you know, it is an illusion. The smiling Whites who are so approving of the Blacks are being paid to smile. The Whites in the television audience aren’t being paid, of course, but it’s difficult for them to resist smiling too. It’s a very primitive but very strong impulse, this need to laugh when those around you are laughing, to smile when everyone else is smiling. The television bosses understand this impulse perfectly, and they use it effectively.

 

And it’s not just in the United States that this illusion is being promoted. The mass media and the democratic politicians in Germany have been collaborating with the Jews for the past 55 years in an effort to foster a similar illusion in the public consciousness of the German people. The Germans always have believed that there was something special about being German, about being born of German parents. Every German inherited through his genes something of the greatness of his nation, its history, its genius.

 

Of course, the French and the Russians and the English and the Irish have similar beliefs about their own nations. It’s an ethnic thing – but very undemocratic: something which the Jews and their collaborators have been trying hard to stamp out. So shortly after the beginning of this year, early on New Year’s Day, German collaborators chose a newborn baby to be the “German of the Millennium.” And of course, they didn’t choose a German baby for this distinction; they chose a Turkish baby, born in a German hospital to two Turkish “guest workers.” And for the past week politicians and the media people have been holding up this Turkish baby to television audiences in Germany as a typical German of the new millennium, and all of the collaborators and paid media people on the screen at the same time have smiled proudly whenever this announcement has been made. And unfortunately, all too many German television viewers have smiled along with them. That’s the way our people are. And so the German public gradually begins falling victim to this carefully engineered illusion that Turks and Gypsies and Pakistanis and Zulus born in Germany are really Germans, just like all other Germans.

 

I’ve spoken of the Jewish power structure shielded by this illusion as a “house of cards.” That’s a reasonable term to use, I believe, but let’s try now to understand it a little better. If tonight Washington and New York City and Hollywood all were devastated by massive earthquakes – if most of the people and the institutions which generate and maintain the illusion in America – suddenly were destroyed, the house of cards would not immediately come tumbling down. In fact, the illusion would not instantly be replaced by a clear view of reality. Illusions have a tendency to persist for a while. People who were deceived by the illusion would continue deceiving themselves for a while; they would continue clinging to the illusion. Many people would need guidance in freeing themselves from the illusion and gaining a firm grasp on reality. Providing that guidance would be a far easier task and require much less work than the work the Jews and their collaborators have put into building the illusion. The truth does have its advantages. But still, uprooting the illusion and pulling down the house of cards would not be something that could be accomplished overnight.

 

There’s another important consideration: the organizational consideration. If a minority wants to maintain its control over a majority – especially if a substantial number of the members of that majority don’t want to be controlled – then the controlling minority needs to have an effective organizational structure through which to exercise its control. The organizational structure provides the necessary leverage which a numerical minority needs in order to control an unwilling majority.

 

Well, that’s pretty simple and obvious, I guess, but it’s still something to think about in coming to an understanding of our situation. The rule is this: the larger the disparity in numbers, the more the organizational leverage that is required; and the greater the leverage needed, the less is the stability. Which is why the Jews are pushing a number of long-range programs to decrease our numbers, both absolutely and in relation to the feminists, homosexuals, non-Whites, and the others in their camp. At the moment their situation is still quite precarious, in that without governmental compulsion they could not maintain their control; illusion alone would not hold their house of cards up.

 

At this time, however, they have both: they have the machinery of illusion in their hands, and they have organizational leverage. And they need both. If someone could put a big enough monkey wrench into the gears of the illusion machinery to shut it down for an extended period, the leverage would become very shaky indeed. The politicians and the bureaucrats and the secret police agencies and the military people don’t do the will of the Jews because they love the Jews. They do it because they are part of an organization, part of the governmental establishment. Their paychecks come from the government, and they are hoping that one day their pensions also will come from the government. But the government itself still is based on the idea of popular support, on the idea of elections and votes. When the illusion machinery is no longer available to control the votes, the politicians will be making new calculations, and so will the head bureaucrats. In every case it will be their own advantage they will be seeking, of course. Patriotism is a thing of the past.

 

On the other hand, if a big enough monkey wrench could be thrown into the government’s gears, then even a fairly small number of determined people could wreck the illusion machinery, and I believe it’s not necessary for me to explain how that could be done. But now the government and the illusion machinery support each other, and I don’t know of anyone who has a big enough monkey wrench to shut down either of them. That’s a shortcoming to which we must address ourselves.

 

Anyway, do you remember the miniature civil war in Russia back in the early part of the Yeltsin era, in September and October 1993? That was just six years ago. Boris Yeltsin, of course, was the candidate of the Jews – sort of the Bill Clinton of Russia. He had been elected only with the all-out support of the mass media – especially the television networks, which then as now were under the tight control of the Jews, most notably Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gussinsky. Progressive Russian patriots, along with conservative elements from the earlier era, tried to take the organizational machinery away from Yeltsin – which is to say, away from the Jews. The Russian legislature – the Duma – voted to depose Yeltsin, but without anyone to take his place immediately the Army and the KGB continued to take their orders from him.

 

Patriots stormed the Russian parliament building in Moscow and also the main television station there. They broke through the troops around the parliament building, the so-called White House, seized the building, and barricaded themselves inside. They did not succeed in taking the main television station, however, because the KGB had its toughest troops – its elite troops – guarding the place. They were far more concerned about protecting the television headquarters – about maintaining their hold on the machinery of illusion – than they were about holding onto the White House and its legislative machinery. When the patriots tried to storm Berezovsky’s television station, the KGB troops simply machine-gunned them, and they died in the streets. Keeping the population entranced with the usual television fare, it was then a simple matter to send tanks against the White House. Yeltsin had the Russian Army shelling the White House with tanks to drive out the patriots. And so Yeltsin and his gang – which is to say, the Jews – were able to hang onto power. How different it might have been if the Russian patriots had succeeded in taking over the machinery of illusion at the same time they were barricaded in the White House! A day or two of control of Russian television by a crew of intelligent patriots could have been enough to bring hundreds of thousands of ordinary Russians into the streets and also to cause the Army and KGB bosses to make new calculations.

 

We might also note that organizational leverage works at the international level pretty much as it works at the national level. During the 1993 crisis in Russia, the Jews and their collaborators over here were sweating the outcome. I don’t know what threats and promises were made behind the scenes, but I can imagine. It’s clear that any small country, without nuclear weapons, that doesn’t take orders will get the same treatment Serbia got. It would have been quite a bit more difficult for the Jews if things had gone better for the patriots in Russia in 1993. And things still may take a turn for the better in Russia. Certainly, even a nuclear war, if it unhinges the leverage or wrecks the machinery of illusion, will be better than a continuation of the present course of events. The best chance for avoiding a nuclear war, however, and also for unhinging the Jews’ international leverage, would be to put a big enough monkey wrench into the organizational machinery here so that the U.S. government cannot exercise the Jews’ will against any other country using cruise missiles, the way it did against Iraq and Serbia.

 

Well, all of my talk today hasn’t provided anything in the way of a concrete plan of action, but perhaps it may help us focus our thinking a little better when we do work out a plan. For now what we must do is continue reaching our people in every way we can. I’ll be happy to have your help in this endeavor.

 

* * *

Does the Bruno Streckenbach Recording ‘Prove the Holocaust’?

 

Source: https://www.renegadetribune.com/does-the-bruno-streckenbach-recording-prove-the-holocaust/

 

by Karl Radl

 

It was recently announced in the mainstream as well as the jewish media that ‘proof that Adolf Hitler had ordered the Holocaust had been discovered’ and hence the public = could consider that the ‘Holocaust’ was now proven beyond any doubt whatsoever.

 

This ‘proof’ came in the form of a recording of SS-Gruppenführer Bruno Streckenbach in the mid-late 1970s where he confirmed that the directive for the Einsatzgruppen’s operations had come from Hitler himself as he had been allegedly told this by his boss Reinhard Heydrich in August 1941.

 

The problem – as anyone relatively conversant with either (or both) the Partisan War in the East and the ‘Holocaust’ in general should be almost immediately aware – is that the ‘Holocaust’ is not the Einsatzgruppen and the Einsatzgruppen are not the ‘Holocaust’. Despite common misconceptions – that have been deliberately fostered in my view – the purpose of the Einsatzgruppen was not to ‘exterminate jews’ but rather to secure the conquered areas of the Soviet Union and the rear of the advancing Wehrmacht forces against partisans and other hostile elements. (1)

 

To quote Carlo Mattogno:

 

‘The various reports drawn up by the Einsatzgruppen show that these units had executive and informational responsibilities.

 

The executive responsibilities were both negative and positive in character. The negative aspect was the capture, identification and elimination of all those who were considered ideological and political enemies or who committed hostile acts against German troops or the populations of the occupied countries, starting with the partisans. However, as stated by the Danish researcher Therkel Strasde, the executive tasks did not initially contemplate mass executions, because (Strasde, p. 27):

 

“When the German police forces moved into Soviet territory in June 1941, they did not have a standard procedure for mass executions like this one, although the mass shooting of civilians and POWs had already been exercised during the Polish campaign in 1939. No detailed orders specifying the organizational and technical details of such massacres were handed out, and it is obvious from actual variations in the ways they were carried out that the methodology of mass killing was to a large extent left up to the commanders of the authorities and units to decide.”’ (2)

 

The problem then is fairly obvious in that Streckenbach’s post-war ‘confession’ is referencing something that isn’t the ‘Holocaust’ but rather mass executions – which we already know happened – by the Germans in the East and is nothing new. Indeed ‘Holocaust’ historians had long referenced an alleged ‘Fuhrer decision’ – not an actual order but rather an alleged informal decision – in December 1941 which they don’t have a copy of, nor can they prove actually existed. (3)

 

Indeed – as Mattogno observes – the problem with this argument is that even ‘Holocaust’ historians admit that the fate of Soviet jewry and that of the wider fate of the jews in Europe was considered quite separate by the Reich government:

 

‘The problem of the two-fold order (or double decision) therefore remains open: why didn’t Hitler issue a single extermination order valid for all Jews without distinction? Why were two orders required? Even orthodox Holocaust historians admit that, at least at the beginning, the fate of the European Jews was quite distinct from that of the Soviet Jews.’ (4)

 

Put another way: there is no actual Fuhrer order to ‘exterminate Soviet jewry’ let alone ‘exterminate the jews’ and without one it is almost impossible to contend this was the purpose of the Einsatzgruppen and thus the so-called ‘Holocaust by Bullets’ was in fact nothing of the kind, but rather an anti-communist/anti-partisan purge that frequently assumed an anti-Semitic character not because the Germans were ‘irrationally anti-Semitic’ but rather because the Germans were being led by local intelligence – (5) indeed the local population often welcomed the arrival of the Germans and informed them who the local supporters of Stalin’s Soviet regime were – and simply executed the main people involved in implementing the Soviet regime’s murderous orders and these were frequently jewish.

 

When we recognize the extremely close association of jews and communism – both in the political understanding of National Socialism and in historical reality – (6) then that such mass executions included so many jews (but were in no way limited to just them) (7) is more because of the close involvement of Soviet jewry with Stalin’s regime and the communist movement in general than because the ‘Germans hated the jews’ (i.e., the famous ‘Commissar Order’ of June 1941 resulted in many dead jews not because they were jews but because they were members of the NKVD and/or Commissars in the Red Army).

 

Now given all this how this ‘proof’ being reported by the mainstream as well as the jewish media?

 

Well, ‘Israel Hayom’s’ article – which was itself heavily syndicated and widely reproduced – gives a good indication when they write how:

 

‘Among the recordings, published on the Hoover Institution website, is one from SS officer Bruno Streckenbach (1902-1977), head of the Administration and Personnel Department of the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), in which he admits that Adolf Hitler gave explicit instructions for implementing the Final Solution and the mass murder of Jews—a significant revelation, as until now there has been limited concrete evidence of this direct order.’ (8)

 

Again, this is misleading because as we’ve already noted ‘Holocaust’ historians have long claimed – based on extrapolations from Streckenbach’s fellow senior SS member and Einsatzgruppen leader Otto Ohlendorf’s testimony at the Nuremberg Trials – that were was an ‘Fuhrer order’ given and this is assumed – to save their blushes – to have been an informal one because otherwise they have no actual evidence that it even existed.

 

Thus, what does this Streckenbach testimony actually tell us?

 

We read that:

 

‘According to Streckenbach’s account, the first time he heard about the plan was when he received a hint from an old friend named Erwin Schulz, a volunteer officer in the Einsatzgruppen who until that point had supervised executions of up to a hundred people in western Ukraine, but apparently felt uncomfortable witnessing the mass murders of Jews.

 

Streckenbach said, “Schulz trembled, trembled like I’m trembling now. He said, ‘What are we doing?’ and I said, ‘We can’t do anything, we can’t leave everything. There was an order.’”

 

Streckenbach went directly to his immediate commander, Reinhard Heydrich, chief of the Reich Security Main Office, including the Gestapo, and one of the main architects of the Holocaust, who chaired the January 1942 Wannsee Conference that formalized plans for the “Final Solution to the Jewish question.”

 

“Heydrich was very quiet, very businesslike. He sat at the edge of his large conference table and said, ‘Be quiet now, Streckenbach. Now listen to me. Shut your mouth, don’t interfere. We can’t do anything about it. This is the order from the Führer. He chose the SS to carry out this order. Neither the Reichsführer [Heinrich Himmler, SS leader] nor I can do anything about it,’” Streckenbach recounted.’ (9)

 

So, what we have here is not – as ‘Israel Hayom’ would have it – ‘a direct order for the Holocaust from Hitler’ but actually a third hand account from Streckenbach that Heydrich told him that Hitler had ‘ordered the mass extermination of the jews’, but the account is very odd to say the least.

 

What clears up a lot of the weirdness is the fact that we already knew about this alleged order from SS-Brigadefuhrer Erwin Schulz – who was the reason for Streckenbach’s alleged conversation with Heydrich in August 1941 – and it isn’t referencing ‘mass extermination’ but rather the mass executions of communists and suspected communists in the East by the Einsatzgruppen.

 

To quote Richard Rhodes writing in 2002:

 

‘After about two weeks’ stay in Berdichev the commando leaders were ordered to report to Zhitomir, where the staff of Dr. Rasch was quartered. Here Dr. Rasch informed us that Obergruppenführer Jeckeln had been there, and had reported that the Reichsführer-SS had ordered us to take strict measures against the Jews. It had been determined without doubt that the Russian side had ordered to have the SS members and Party members shot. As such measures were being taken on the Russian side, they would also have to be taken on our side. All suspected Jews were, therefore, to be shot. Consideration was to be given only when they were indispensable as workers. Women and children were to be shot also in order not to have any avengers remain. We were horrified, and raised objections, but they were met with a remark that an order which was given had to be obeyed.’ (10)

 

So put another way: Schulz was upset with the amount of people he and his troops were killing – because they included women and children (remember child soldiers were common in the Red Army as well among the Soviet partisan movement with the youngest recorded as six years old) – (11) and went to his superior Otto Rasch who told him that his (Rasch’s) superior Friedrich Jeckeln had said it was an order from Hitler as well as Streckenbach (12) who apparently went to his superior Reinhard Heydrich who told him the same thing according to this ‘new evidence’.

 

Now all this actually suggests is that there was a post-war claim that there was an order by Hitler to ‘liquidate jews in the East’ which while possible has its plausibility severely hampered by the fact that senior SS and Wehrmacht officers often threw as much of the blame for their actions as they could on their dead superiors – usually Hitler but sometimes Himmler and/or Heydrich too – (13) after the war and that no such ‘Fuhrer order’ has been found.

 

While this could be an ‘informal order’ this was not Hitler’s style, and it also assumes that Hitler was somehow precognizant and knew he was going to ‘lose the war and thus tried to keep such actions off any official documentation’ (i.e., the rationale for it is magical thinking and in essence trying to shoehorn a claim in without a valid evidentiary reason to do so) despite having put equally if not more contentious ‘Fuhrer orders’ into writing such as the infamous ‘Commando Order’ of October 1942.

 

More likely is that what Schulz and Streckenbach are referring to in their post-war testimony is simply the practical results of the Einsatzgruppen carrying out Hitler’s ‘Commissar Order’ of June 1941 in that they were not used the scale of the executions they were having to carry out as well as who they were having to execute. A useful comparison is provided by Himmler’s visit to Minsk in August 1941 where he witnessed a mass execution conducted by Arthur Nebe’s Einsatzgruppe B (specifically Einsatzkommando 8) and reportedly threw up in disgust.

 

It is important to remember that prior to this Schulz – who remember expressed his reservations to Jeckeln on 10th August 1941 five days before Himmler had a similarly bad reaction to the mass execution in Minsk on 15th August – had not had significant experience of mass executions before he arrived with his unit Einsatzkommando 5 in the Ukraine in early July 1941 and then witnessed the Lviv pogroms of jews by angry Ukrainians and Poles after thousands of dead Ukrainian and Polish prisoners – who had been massacred by the NKVD to prevent them being released by the advancing German forces – were found in three different former Soviet prisons in the city. (14)

 

In addition to this we know that Schulz was unusual in that he disapproved of any ‘anti-Semitic excesses’ as early as 1938 especially the mass execution of jews. (15)

 

Put another way Schulz in his own testimony as well as Streckenbach’s was a shrinking violet with a weak stomach and had only recently – as in circa a month before – begun commanding mass executions only for one of his first experiences to be the notoriously brutal Lviv pogroms of June to July 1941 (we actually have video of angry Ukrainian civilians beating jews to death with a crowbar during these events) in the wake of the discovery of the NKVD’s atrocities in the city.

 

Thus, Schulz’s appeals to Rausch and Streckenbach were not actually to do with his being upset at the mass killings of jews per se, but rather were motivated by his previous opposition to mass executions and ‘anti-Semitic excesses’ in general and Rausch’s response according to Schulz was simply to tell him that he wasn’t going to get his way (as he had previously) (16) because the activities of the Einsatzgruppen (i.e. pacification of the newly conquered areas and executing those implicated in Stalin’s atrocities [or allowing the local inhabitants the latitude to sort it themselves]) had been authorised at the highest levels of the Reich government (i.e., probably referring to Hitler’s ‘Commissar Order’ not an ‘exterminate the jews of the Soviet Union’ order which is claimed by orthodox historians to have come in December 1941 not August 1941! (17)

 

Indeed, Schulz in a fit of pique asked to be relieved of his command and was promptly removed from it on 24th August 1941; precisely two weeks after he lodged his protest with Rausch. (18)

 

The point here is that ‘Israel Hayom’s’ version of Streckenbach’s post-war confession has the timeline completely off because if the informal ‘exterminate the jews of the Soviet Union’ order from Hitler came in December 1941 and the events that Streckenbach and Schulz are referring to happened in August 1941. Then either Heydrich cannot have made the comments that Streckenbach claims he did or Streckenbach and Schulz are not actually talking about an informal ‘exterminate the jews of the Soviet Union’ order from Hitler at all, but rather just the scale of the campaign (as well as Schulz’s own quibbles and lack of stomach for it) required to deal with the sheer number of the supporters of – and local perpetrators allied to – Stalin’s regime (both as a matter of local justice but also to allow the Third Reich to better secure its newly occupied territories from the threat of local subversion and partisan movements).

 

In addition to this we have further reason to suspect Streckenbach wasn’t being entirely honest and trying to transfer blame to others who were long dead – in this instance both Hitler and Heydrich – because his testimony positions Streckenbach as something of a concerned citizen and shrinking violet about mass executions when in fact he is well-known to have been an ideological radical even within the SS and to have been responsible for the mass arrest and the execution of Polish opponents of National Socialism/advocates of a strongly anti-German Polish nationalism in Poland between 1939 to 1940. (19)

 

Thus, we can very quickly see that Streckenbach’s comments are self-serving and downplay his involvement in the Einsatzgruppen as well as his commitment to National Socialism at the time, which Thomas Weber – quoted in the ‘Israel Hayom’ article – also implies. (20)

 

So, what does Streckenbach’s ‘testimony’ actually prove?

 

Well, the honest answer is that it is proves nothing we didn’t already know and had known for decades, and that Streckenbach is not referring in any way, shape or form to the ‘Holocaust’ but rather to the beginning of German anti-partisan operations in the East and the poor choice of Erwin Schulz to lead Einsatzkommando 5 (part of Einsatzgruppe C) who couldn’t handle the reality of punishing those who had supported Stalin and committed atrocities in his name.

 

It does not refer to a ‘Hitler order for the Holocaust’ despite the loud protestations by jews and their apologists that it does.

 

Thanks for reading Semitic Controversies! This post is public so feel free to share it.

---

References

 

(1) On this see Philip Blood, 2006, ‘Hitler’s Bandit Hunters: The SS and the Nazi Occupation of Europe’, 1st Edition, Potomac: Washington D.C., esp. pp. 51-79

 

(2) Carlo Mattogno, 2018, ‘The Einsatzgruppen in the Eastern Territories: Genesis, Missions and Actions’, 1st Edition, Castle Hill: Uckfield, p. 40

 

(3) Ibid., pp. 119-120

 

(4) Ibid., p. 120

 

(5) For example, Ibid., p. 111

 

(6) See for example Yuri Slezine, 2004, ‘The Jewish Century’, 1st Edition, Princeton University Press: Princeton, pp. 195-201; Timothy Synder, 2010, ‘Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin’, 1st Edition, Basic Books: New York, p. 93; Bernard Wasserstein, 2012, ‘On the Eve: The Jews of Europe Before the Second World War’, 1st Edition, Profile: London, pp. 19; 64-65; 80-81

 

(7) For example: ‘Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal’, 1947, Vol. 39, pp. 269–27

 

(8) https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/05/04/fuhrers-order-historic-nazi-recording-confirms-hitler-ordered-holocaust/

 

(9) Ibid.

 

(10) Richard Rhodes, 2002, ‘Masters of Death: The SS-Einsatzgruppen and the Invention of the Holocaust’, 1st Edition, Alfred A. Knopf: New York, pp. 124-125

 

(11) See: https://europeanstudiesreview.com/2023/11/27/the-overlooked-role-of-soviet-child-soldiers-in-defeating-adolf-hitler/

 

(12) Rhodes, Op. Cit., p. 124

 

(13) As Thomas Weber points out in: https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/05/04/fuhrers-order-historic-nazi-recording-confirms-hitler-ordered-holocaust/

 

(14) On this see: Ksenya Kiebuzinski, Alexander Motyl (Eds.), 2017, ‘The Great West Ukrainian Prison Massacre of 1941: A Sourcebook’, 1st Edition, Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam, esp. 56-65

 

(15) George Browder, 1996, ‘Hitler’s Enforcers: The Gestapo and the SS Security Service in the Nazi Revolution’, 1st Edition, Oxford University Press: New York, pp. 46–47

 

(16) Ibid.

 

(17) Mattogno, Op. Cit., pp. 119-120

 

(18) Peter Longerich, 2010, ‘Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews’, 1st Edition, Oxford University Press: New York, p. 225

 

(19) Michael Wildt, 2009, ‘An Uncompromising Generation: The Nazi Leadership of the Reich Security Main Office’, 1st Edition, University of Wisconsin Press: Madison, pp. 240–245

 

(20) https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/05/04/fuhrers-order-historic-nazi-recording-confirms-hitler-ordered-holocaust/

 

via Karl Radl’s Substack 

83 Years Since the German Crusade Against the Bolshevism!

Caricatures from "Der Stürmer" - translated in English and colourized - The Year 1942 – Part 9!

 The Year 1942 – Part 9

The Katyn Massacre

  by Dr. William Pierce

 

Published in Free Speech - May 1998 - Volume IV, Number 5

 

A background noise that seems never to go away is the constant whining and yammering of the Jews about how the world owes them a living because of their losses during the so-called „Holocaust.“ They do it, of course, because they make such a big profit on it. The latest flare-up of this Jewish play for a handout came more than a year ago when they began demanding that the Swiss pay them $7 billion, which „Holocaust“ victims allegedly had stashed in numbered Swiss accounts before being hauled off to gas chambers during the Second World War.

 

With a few „bought“ Gentile politicians fronting for them, the foremost among these being New York’s Senator Alphonse D’Amato, the Jews threatened Switzerland with a boycott by the U.S. government if their demands were not met. Instead of laughing in their faces, telling the Jews to go to hell, and gearing up for countermeasures against Israel and other Jewish interests if the Jews tried to proceed with a boycott, the Swiss politicians tried to placate the Jews by offering to buy them off. The Jews took the Swiss response as a sign of weakness and escalated their demands.

 

The average Swiss citizen seems to have a little more pride than Switzerland’s elected officials, however, and resentment against the Jews’ extortion efforts is building in Switzerland now to the point that some of that country’s richest Jews are wearing bulletproof vests whenever they must go out in public.

 

In general, however, this „Holocaust“-based extortion racket works quite well for the Jews, and they have expanded their demands for World War Two reparations to include a number of other countries besides Switzerland. They are even whining that the Vatican owes them because Pope Pius XII didn’t do enough to save them from the Germans during the war. The Jews’ brazenness in this whole business is quite breathtaking.

 

Their brazenness is justified, because by and large they have been getting away with it. They have been getting away with it because with their media control they have been able to distort the general public’s perception of what happened during the Second World War. They have been able to portray themselves as innocent victims and everyone else as persecutors and aggressors, even the people who were fighting on the Jewish side against the Germans during the war. They have done quite a bit of whining that after the Red Army drove the Germans from Poland, the Poles took the opportunity to lynch hundreds of Jews in 1945 and 1946: Jews whom the Germans somehow had failed to get rid of during their wartime occupation of Poland.

 

Why would the Poles do something like that? Why would they lynch the poor Jews, who had been on their side during the war? If you learned about the war from watching Steven Spielberg propaganda films and other mass-media sources, you probably believe that it was because of religious anti-Semitism on the part of the Catholic Poles. Let me tell you the real reason why so many Poles hated Jews after the war. It’s something the Jew-controlled media in America haven’t said much about. Let me tell you about what happened in the Katyn Forest in 1940.

 

In September 1939 Poland was invaded from the west by Germany and from the east by the Soviet Union. The Germans wanted back the territory in western Poland, including the city of Danzig, which had been taken from them at the end of the First World War. The Soviets wanted eastern Poland. The Germans and the Soviets divided Poland between them, with the boundary running roughly along the River Bug.

 

Britain and France, both under strong Jewish pressure, declared war on Germany in September 1939, ostensibly because of Germany’s invasion of Poland. They did not declare war on the Soviet Union, which also had invaded Poland. In the United States and in western Europe, where the Jews held a deathgrip on the mass media, a great deal of anti-German propaganda was based on the German grab for Polish territory -- much of which, of course, actually was historically German territory -- and nothing was said of the Soviet occupation and annexation of eastern Poland.

 

The reason for this anti-German and pro-Soviet bias by the Jewish media was that the Jews were riding high in the Soviet Union as commissars and communist party bosses under Stalin, while in Germany Hitler had undertaken a program since 1933 of freeing Germany from all Jewish influence. Jews had been weeded out of the media, the law, the schools, and other areas of economic and cultural life in Germany. Before Hitler became chancellor in 1933 the Jews had done in Germany what they do in every country where they gain a foothold: they had monopolized large sections of the mass media and certain professions and were doing their best to distort German culture, German society, and the German economy to suit themselves. Hitler put a stop to that, and two-thirds of the 1933 Jewish population of Germany had emigrated by the invasion of Poland in September 1939. So the Jews hated Germany and were determined to do whatever they could to destroy her.

 

For his part, Hitler hoped to avoid war with Britain and France. He hoped that after his quick victory in western Poland he could make peace with both countries. He was determined, however, to stamp out communism wherever he encountered it. Not only did he hate communism on ideological grounds, but he had sworn to fight communism when the communists in Germany betrayed his country at the end of the First World War. Hitler also saw the Soviet Union as a threat to all of Europe, and he was determined to break the power of that country when he could, even though there was an uneasy non-aggression pact between Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939, at the time of their partition of Poland.

 

In the spring of 1941 massive troop movements and other developments inside the Soviet Union convinced Hitler that Stalin was preparing to invade the west with the Red Army, and so in June 1941 Hitler made a preemptive strike. German forces smashed through the Red Army and made rapid advances, first through Soviet-occupied eastern Poland and then through Ukraine and into Russia.

 

A year and a half later, in February 1943, German forces near Smolensk, in western Russia, investigated reports they heard from Russian civilians to the effect that a large number of prisoners had been murdered by the Soviet secret police in the area nearly three years earlier. The German investigators were led by local Russians to a series of mounds in a wooded area known locally as Katyn Forest, about 10 miles west of Smolensk. The forest is named for a village, Katyn, which it surrounds. The forest had been privately owned prior to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, but after the communist takeover of Russia the area had been confiscated by the government and part of the forest had been turned over to the NKVD, the Soviet equivalent of the American FBI.

 

The Germans began digging in the mounds in the Katyn Forest and made a horrible discovery. They found corpse after corpse, each with its hands bound behind its back and a bullet hole in the base of its skull. They continued their excavations for more than a month, and eventually uncovered more than 4,000 corpses. Other bodies may have remained buried in other mounds, but the Germans had no time to dig up the whole forest. Instead they called in the International Red Cross and representatives of various neutral countries to examine their findings. They also brought in groups of Allied prisoners of war, including Americans, from prison camps in Germany to view the graves in the Katyn Forest. They gave these international inspectors complete freedom to examine the exhumed bodies, permitted doctors among them to conduct autopsies, even allowed them to dig up other bodies from one of the mounds which had not been completely excavated. The Germans asked only that the inspectors report back truthfully to their own governments about their observations. And in fact, most of them did.

 

What they reported was that the bodies were those of Polish military officers, along with a number of civilian cultural leaders, business leaders, and intellectuals -- scientists, writers, and poets -- who had been in the portion of Poland occupied by the Soviet Union in September 1939. Altogether the Soviet secret police had rounded up some 15,000 Polish leaders in 1939 -- including nearly half of the entire Polish officer’s corps, the half that had the misfortune of being in eastern Poland at the time -- and put them in three concentration camps in Russia: at Starobelsk, Kozelsk, and Ostashkov. All of the bodies unearthed in the Katyn Forest were of Polish leaders who had been confined at one of these camps: Starobelsk.

 

Rounding up a country’s leaders and killing them was standard practice for the communists. The theory was that the leaders were bourgeois oppressors of the working class and deserved to die. As egalitarians the communists did not regard the Polish officers and intellectuals as inherently better or more valuable human material than the average Polish criminal or bum; the officers had simply used their class advantage to gain a better life-style for themselves. Of course, no one really believed that theory except the criminals, bums, and other resentful losers and ne’er-do-wells who made up the natural communist constituency. As a practical matter, however, killing all the leaders and potential leaders of a conquered people made them easier to govern. That’s what the Marxists had done in Russia, Ukraine, and the Baltic countries.

 

In the case of the Poles there was a bit of a diplomatic problem, though. The Poles supported the war Britain and France had declared against Germany, purportedly on their behalf, because they viewed that as their one hope for getting back at least the western part of their country. They were not happy about the Russians taking the eastern part of Poland, but the Russians at least were fellow Slavs. The thing to do was get rid of the Germans first and then worry about the Russians. This Polish strategy suited Stalin fine. But it made it desirable for him to avoid alienating the Poles any more than necessary. When Polish exiles asked about their imprisoned leaders in late 1939 and early 1940, the Soviet government promised that they would be released shortly. Meanwhile, the decision had been made to kill all of them. And so in April 1940 the Polish leaders were taken from the three camps where they had been imprisoned, trucked off to various liquidation sites, and murdered. The ones who had been imprisoned at Starobelsk all went to the NKVD area of the Katyn Forest. After the war some of the NKVD executioners were interviewed in Israel and described how they had carried out the killings.

 

The Poles were driven up to the burial pits in long NKVD prison trucks known as „black ravens.“ They were pulled from the trucks one at a time by NKVD guards. Each Polish prisoner had his hands bound behind his back and then was dragged to the edge of a pit. There he was held by two NKVD men while a third fired a pistol bullet into the back of his head. Some of the officers had their coats pulled over their heads to keep them from seeing what was happening before they were shot. Some struggled and were bayoneted by NKVD guards before being shot and thrown into the pit. When all of the officers from Starobelsk had been killed, some 4,400 of them, the Katyn Forest burial pits were covered with dirt and pine trees were planted on them. The locations of the mass graves of the prisoners from the camps at Kozelsk and Ostashkov remain unknown, but none of the 15,000 Polish officers and intellectuals rounded up by the NKVD in September 1939 was seen alive after April 1940.

 

The Red Cross representatives and the Allied prisoners the Germans brought in to examine the mass graves in the Katyn Forest understood after their examination not only who had been killed; they also understood who had killed them. This was apparent not only from the medical estimates of the length of time the bodies had been buried, but also from documentary evidence on the bodies. Diaries, news clippings, letters, and other personal papers removed from the clothing of the victims all told the same story: the latest dates on any of these papers were from mid-April 1940. The Polish leaders had been killed in April 1940, when they were prisoners of the Soviet Union and when the Katyn region was under Soviet control. And this is what they reported back to their governments.

 

So what do you think happened? Were the British and American governments horrified to discover that their „gallant Soviet ally,“ as the Soviet Union was referred to by the mass media, was a mass murderer? Did the British government, which had gone to war against Germany under the pretext of defending Poland, decide that it had made a mistake? Did anyone condemn the Soviet Union for this act of genocide against the Poles?

 

Of course not! The Allied governments ordered their people who had inspected the Katyn site to keep their mouths shut, and the Jewish media immediately began announcing that the Germans had done it. A mass murder of Polish officers and intellectuals by the Nazis had been discovered in the Katyn Forest, the New York Times and the rest of the Jewish media shrieked. Poor Poles! Wicked Germans! The war must go on to free the poor Poles and punish the wicked Germans. And the war did go on, killing millions of more Germans, Britons, Americans, and other Europeans. And the Germans were indeed punished. The Poles, of course, were not freed. Instead they were turned over to the Reds, who had butchered their leaders in the Katyn Forest, and made to suffer under communist rule for half a century.

 

The war went on after the German discovery of the mass graves in the Katyn Forest, because its purpose from the beginning was not to free Poland but to destroy Germany, which had dared to free itself from the Jews. Roosevelt understood this. Churchill understood this. But the American and British people didn’t understand it, of course, because they were lied to by the Jewish media and by their own governments, who in 1943, as in 1998, did whatever was politically expedient. And what is politically expedient has been what the Jewish media bosses have decided.

 

The lies about Katyn were maintained by the media for some years after the end of the war, because these lies meshed nicely with the „Holocaust“ story which was making so much money for the Jews. Nowadays, of course, the truth about the Katyn murders is generally accepted by historians everywhere. You can go into almost any large library and read about it and even see the gruesome photographs that the Germans took of the Polish bodies they dug up. One of several authoritative books on the subject is J.K. Zawodny’s Death in the Forest: the Story of the Katyn Forest Massacre, published in 1962 by the University of Notre Dame Press. None of this is publicized a la Steven Spielberg for the illumination of American television audiences, of course. It still might undermine the Jews’ „Holocaust“ racket.

 

In 1945 and 1946, although the deceived citizens of the Western world didn’t know the truth about Katyn, Polish patriots did. The word had gotten back to the Polish prisoners in German camps from the Poles the Germans had taken to examine the graves. After the war, when these Polish prisoners were freed, the word spread to other Poles. They knew that it was the communists, not the Nazis, who had murdered their leaders, who had beheaded their nation. And they knew who was behind communism -- from the Jew, Karl Marx, who started the whole business, to the Jewish commissars in Soviet-occupied Poland. They knew who had welcomed their Soviet conquerors and then collaborated with those conquerors. And so it is hardly surprising that in 1945 and 1946 a few Polish patriots organized lynchings of Jews in Poland, before the Reds had a chance to clamp down and suppress any further expressions of anti-communist or anti-Jewish feeling.

 

The Polish dislike of Jews isn’t surprising. What is surprising is that so few patriots in America and Britain have expressed their outrage against the Jews, not only for what they did to the Poles during and after the war, but for what they have done to us: lying to us and using us to wage their wars for them. If patriots study the Katyn story and take its lesson to heart, they will understand why they cannot trust either the mass media or any government which dances to the tune played by the media. Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were as much liars and traitors as Bill Clinton and Tony Blair.

 

You might remember Katyn the next time you hear the Jews or some of their bought politicians whining about how much gold was stolen from them by the Swiss or how badly the Poles and the Germans treated them during the Second World War.