Ian Stuart Donaldson Skrewdriver

Posts Tagged ‘England’

Sex Gangs Report ‘Will Play Down Threat of Pakistani Men Targeting White Girls’

Saturday, November 17th, 2012

A major report into child abuse will trigger controversy next week when it plays down the significance of Pakistani men targeting white girls.

It is claimed England’s deputy children’s commissioner Sue Berelowitz will avoid saying there is a specific problem, fearing it might appear politically incorrect.

The move will add to claims that the authorities have turned a blind eye to the problem.

Council officials and police were accused of failing to tackle the problem of Pakistani gangs sexually abusing young girls in Rochdale in Lancashire and Rotherham in South Yorkshire.

A Whitehall source said: ‘It’s important we don’t take a politically-correct approach and pretend there is not a real problem here.

‘Obviously abuse has been carried out by men from all sorts of ethnic background,’ the source told The Sun.

‘But that doesn’t mean we cannot say there is an issue about groups of Pakistani men systematically targeting young white girls.’

Earlier this year Ms Berelowitz was at pains to insist inquiries into abuse should not focus solely on young Pakistani men.

She told MPs that children in all communities and ethnic groups were at risk, highlighting cases in Derby, Rotherham, Birmingham and Dewsbury.

‘What I am uncovering is that sexual exploitation of children is happening all over the country,’ she told the home affairs select committee.

‘As one police officer who was the lead in a very big investigation in a very lovely, leafy, rural part of the country said to me: “There isn’t a town, village or hamlet in which children are not being sexually exploited.” The evidence that has come to the fore during the course of my inquiry is that that, unfortunately, appears to be the case.

‘We should start from the assumption that children are being sexually exploited right the way across the country.’

However there is growing unease in Whitehall that Ms Berelowitz’s approach will fail to place sufficient emphasis on the problem of Pakistani men targeting young white girls.

A spokesman for the deputy children’s commissioner said: ‘The report recognises that there are many different patterns of abuse and that is clearly identified in the report.

‘As the deputy commissioner has already reported, there is evidence coming in of many different kinds of perpetrators.

‘What has been in recent reports is one pattern of abuse. Our evidence shows it’s not the only pattern of abuse.’

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Five-year ban for Manchester City yob who launched racist abuse at Anton Ferdinand and protested ‘John Terry did it’

Friday, November 16th, 2012

A yob who bleated ‘John Terry said it’ when confronted about his vile racist abuse of footballer Anton Ferdinand has been barred from Manchester City matches for five years.

Blues fan Stephen Best singled out the black QPR player when City played them at the Etihad Stadium in September.

When he was confronted by a woman who repeatedly urged him to tone down his language, he protested: ‘John Terry said it’.

Best, 31, of Edge Lane, Droylsden, denied he was a racist at Manchester magistrates’ court.

His lawyer said it was a case of ‘sticks and stones’.

But the court heard that after calling Anton Ferdinand a ‘black b******’ he directed another racist slur at Korean QPR skipper Ji-Sung Park.

A witness told police that he had never seen such behaviour in more than 1,000 matches, and that it had made him feel ‘embarrassed’ to be a City fan.

The woman who challenged Best described him as ‘very intimidating’ and said he had spoilt her enjoyment of games.

Unemployed Best, who admitted a racially-aggravated public order offence, has now how been slapped with a football banning order which bars him from the Etihad Stadium, a four-mile area around it, and the city centre for lengthy periods on match-days.

He is also barred from travelling to towns where City are playing away, and England games.

Best must also do 250 hours’ unpaid work as part of a 12-month community order, and pay £85 costs.

Phil Reed, defending, said Best was ‘not a racist person’, claiming that his stepfather was black and that black pals did not consider him racist in ‘any way shape, or form’. He said Best had been suffering personal problems at the time, and had sunk eight pints before the match.

Sentencing, chairman of the bench Debbie Matthew said it was a case of ‘quite serious racial abuse’.

In September Chelsea player John Terry was banned for four matches and fined £220,000 for ‘using insulting words which included a reference to Anton Ferdinand’s colour or race’ following an incident at a game last year.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Hitler’s Speech at the Berlin Sports Palace (January 30, 1941)

Monday, August 27th, 2012

My German countrymen, men and women, (long pause) Changes of Government have occurred frequently in history, and in the history of our people. It is certain, however, that never was a change of Government attended with such far-reaching results as that eight years ago. At that time the situation of the Reich was desperate. We were called upon to take over the leadership of the nation at a moment when it did not seem to develop towards a great rise. We were given power in circumstances of the greatest conceivable pressure, the pressure of the knowledge that, by itself, everything was lost, and that, in the eyes of the noblest minds, this represented a last attempt, while in the eyes of evil-wishers it should condemn the National-Socialist Movement to final failure. Unless the German nation could be saved, by a miracle, the situation was bound to end in disaster. For during a period of 15 years, events had moved downwards without respite. On the other hand, this situation was only the result of the World War: of the outcome of the World War, of our own internal, political, moral, and military collapse. For these reasons it is particularly important on a day like this to think back to the course of that entire national misfortune.

What was the cause of the World War? I do not want to explain it from the personal aspect, about which so many treatises have been written. Ordered by the present President Roosevelt, American scholars have investigated the cause of the World War and made sure that there could be no German guilt. In moments of so great importance in contemporary history, individuals can play a significant part only if they enter the scene as really outstanding personalities. This was not then the case. Neither on the German nor on the other side were there personalities cast in an unusual mould. The cause, therefore, could not be due to the failure or to the will of individuals. The reasons went deeper. The German form of government, certainly, could not have been the cause of that war, for Germany was a democracy already-and what a democracy! Strictly copied from the western countries, it was compromise between monarchy and parliamentary leadership. On account of its form of government then, this State could certainly not be the cause of the war waged by the democracies against the Reich as it was then. Germany, considered as a political factor in the world, was much more of a cause, for after centuries of disruption and ensuing weakness, the German tribes and states had at last combined into a new State which naturally introduced a new element into the so-called Balance of Power, an element which was regarded as an alien body by others. Even more potent, perhaps was dislike of the Reich as an economic factor. After Germany had tried for centuries to remedy her economic distress by letting people gradually starve or forcing them to emigrate, the increasing consolidation of the, political power of the Reich gave rise to a development of economic power. Germany began to export commodities rather than men, thereby securing the necessary markets in the world, a process, natural and just from our point of view, but others regarded it as encroachment into their most sacred domains.

Here we come to the State which regarded this encroachment as intolerable-England.

Three hundred years earlier England had gradually built her Empire, not perhaps through the free will or the unanimous demonstrations of those affected, but for 300 years this World Empire was welded together solely by force. War followed war. One nation after another was robbed of its freedom-one state after another was shattered so that the structure which calls itself the British Empire might arise. Democracy was nothing but a mask covering subjugation and the oppression of nations and individuals. This State cannot allow its members to vote if today, after they have been worked upon for centuries, they should freely choose to be members of this Commonwealth. On the contrary, Egyptian Nationalists, Indian Nationalists in their thousands are filling the prisons. Concentration camps were not invented in Germany; it is the English who were the ingenious inventors of this idea. By these means they contrived to break the backbone of other nations, to remove their resistance, to wear them down, and make them prepared at last to submit to this British yoke of democracy.

In this process, a formidable weapon was that of lying, that is, of propaganda. A proverb says that if the Englishman speaks of God he means cotton. And so it is today. Considering how pious and religious are the outward gestures of men who deliberately, and with a cold heart, drive nation after nation into a struggle serving only their material interests, one is compelled to state that rarely has human hypocrisy reached such a pitch as that of the English today. At any rate, at the end of the blood-stained path of British history over three centuries stands the fact that 46,000,000 Englishmen in the mother country are ruling about a quarter of the globe.

This means that there are 46,000,000 men for about 40,000,000 square kilometres. It is important, my countrymen, to shout this to the world again and again, for they are brazen democratic liars who assert that the so-called Authoritarian States are out to conquer the world, while in fact, the conquerors of the world are our old enemies. The British World Empire has left behind an icy stream of blood and tears in the path of its creation. It rules today, undoubtedly, a tremendous section of the globe. But this world government is affected not by the power of an idea, but essentially by force, and where force does not suffice, by the power of capitalist or economic interests.

Bearing in mind the history of the British Empire, we can understand the process itself only as a result of the complete absence of the European Continent as an entity in face of this development, particularly by the absence of the German Reich. For 300 years, Germany was practically non-existent. While the British talked of God without losing sight of their economic interests, the German nation, overstrained to the limit, raised religious problems to such importance that bloody wars, lasting for centuries, ensued. This was one of the conditions which made the formation of the British Empire possible, for in the same measure with which the German nation spent its strength internally, it was eliminated as a power internationally, and in the same measure England could, undisturbed, build her Empire through robbery.

Not only was Germany practically eliminated from competition on this globe during those three centuries; the same holds for Italy, where there were similar phenomena as in Germany, but of a political and dynastic rather than a religious nature. For other reasons again, another great nation in East Asia was eliminated, which also for nearly four centuries had gradually withdrawn from the rest of the world, and ceasing to regard its own living space as vital plunged into voluntary solitude.

In this way a system arose, particularly in Europe, which England called the Balance of Power, which means, in fact, disorganization of the European Continent in favour of the British Isles. For this reason it was for centuries the aim of British policy to maintain this disorganization, not under the name of “disorganization” of course, but with a better sounding name. Just as they do not speak of cotton, but say “God,” they do not speak of the disorganization of Europe but of the “Balance of Power.” And this so-called Balance of Power, that is the real internal importance of Europe, enabled England again and again to play one State against another, so keeping the forces of Europe involved in internal struggle. Thus England could thrust forward undisturbed into other areas offering comparatively little resistance.

And yet to speak today of England’s World Power or of England as the master of the world, is nothing but an illusion. To begin with her internal situation: England, in spite of her world conquests is perhaps socially the most backward State in Europe. Socially backward-that is, a State orientated entirely in the interests of a comparatively small and thin upper stratum and the Jewish clique with which it is allied. The interests of the broad masses are of no weight in determining the orientation of this State. Here again propaganda phrases must serve. One speaks about freedom, one speaks about democracy, one speaks about the achievements of a Liberal system meaning nothing but the stabilization of the regime of a section of society, which, thanks to its capital, is able to get hold of the Press, to organize and direct it, and to create public opinion. Thus, in a State commanding the riches of the world, having gigantic living space at its disposal, in a State with altogether hardly one inhabitant per square kilometre, in a State so blessed by nature, millions are excluded from these benefits, and live in greater poverty than the population of any of the over-populated central European States. The country which is a paradise for a few, is nothing but continuous misery for many, that is, for the masses. Misery in nourishment, misery in clothing, misery particularly in housing; misery in security of income, and in the entire social legislation. And if all of a sudden a British Labour Secretary, who, incidentally, as a member of the Opposition, is paid by the State, appears and says: “After this war, after victory, England will have to tackle social problems; we will have to care for the wide masses,” I can only reply, “We have done this long ago.”

It is only interesting to us as a confirmation of our thesis that England in reality is socially the most backward country in the world. Thus, considered internally, this gigantic external wealth is really barren as far as the masses as distinct from the few are concerned. But even externally this world domination is only a figment. New centres have been given to the world. Gigantic States have arisen which can be neither attacked nor even threatened by Great Britain. The whole British idea of world domination was based on getting others to proceed against the Continent. But outside this European Continent or far beyond it great States have come into existence which are completely unassailable by England. British diplomacy may only attempt to maintain its position there by clever manipulations and by trying to bring other forces into play, which means that it must now attempt to raise the so-called Balance of Power in Europe to a Balance of Power in the world. In other words, it has to play Great Powers against each other in order to maintain at least a semblance of a World Power.

In Europe, itself, however, the awakening of the nations has already done away with the theory of the so-called Balance of Power, that is, disorganization of the Continent.

The national development of Germany and the creation of the new German Empire pierced into this disorganized European Continent and to the south of us, Italy did the same. To this must be added new elements which make the Balance of Power appear an illusion. It exists no longer. Therein we really see the real reason for the World War. Since 1871, when German tribes began to organize themselves and, under the leadership of a statesman of genius, formed an Empire once more, and the national rebirth of the German nation found expression in a united state, Great Britain has been persecuting this new apparition. In 1871, even in 1870, immediately after the battle of Sedan, British newspapers began to point out that this new structure was more dangerous to Great Britain than France had been. It had been hoped even then that Prussia might succeed, perhaps, by a long war, in throwing back France, but there was no wish that from Prussia’s rise there should emerge a national German re-birth or, even more, a new German Empire.

Thus began the period from 1871 to 1914, in which Great Britain continually plotted for a war against Germany, in which she was hostile and aggressive to Germany at every opportunity, until finally the World War broke out, the work of quite a small group of international, unscrupulous rogues. And Great Britain received foreign help for this World War, which, again, she was only able to wage with foreign help.

It is interesting to visualize the development of the British policy of world domination during the last 400 years. First, there was Spain, with Dutch help; then the fight against the Dutch, with the help of other European States, France amongst them; then, finally, was against France, with the help of Europe and that part of the world at Great Britain’s disposal.

The World War which shook Europe from 1914 to 1918 was exclusively the longed-for result of British statesmanship. Although the whole world had at that time been mobilized against Germany, Germany was actually not defeated. We may safely state this today.

I should not like to be a critic of the past if I had not improved upon it. But today, as one of the historic men who have improved matters, I may critically examine and judge the past, and all I can say is that the result of the year 1918 is merely the consequence of a rare accumulation of personal inefficiency in the leadership of our nation, a unique accumulation which had never existed before in history, nor-let me tell these gentlemen-will it ever be repeated. In spite of all this, this country and the German soldier for four years withstood the attack of a hostile world, and the German nation still believed in the honor of the remaining democratic world and its statesmen.

This credulity of the German nation, which was at the time regretted by many, received a terrible reward. If today Englishmen come along and believe that it is only necessary to put on the gramophone the old propaganda records of the years 1917-18 in order to achieve a new result, I can only say they have not forgotten anything, but unfortunately for them, they have not learned by experience. In this respect they differ from the German people. The German nation has learned since then; nor has it forgotten anything.

We do not wish to be mean. Many times there have been broken pledges in the past. But what happened in the years following 1918 was not one broken pledge; broken pledges were mass-produced. Not a single pledge has been fulfilled. Never before has a great nation been deceived as the German nation was then deceived. It had received so many assurances, this credulous nation had been promised so much, and what did they do to our nation? It was plundered, it was exploited. A foreign statesman, an American, was employed to make the German people even more credulous. Perhaps this was really the reason why the German people were duped by this manoeuvre. But in this respect, too, they are immune against any similar attempts. The German people had opportunities, year after year, to ponder the sincerity of democratic promises and assurances and the honesty of democratic statesmen, to make comparison and to test them against their own experiences. It was in this period that the National Socialist movement originated.

If they now say: “But why did they pounce on a new ideology?” my answer is “Because the old one failed miserably.” Not only in the interior-Heavens! democracy was a pitiful thing with us! When 40 or 50 odd parties compete with their gigantic philosophical interests, ranging from that of property down to the level of cyclists’ clubs, estate owners and so on, that in itself is a very bad sight; but quite apart from that; if we only had been rewarded externally for this miserable internal democratic distortion of our lives, we could at least say: “Well that stuff has certainly failed at home, but at least you received decent treatment outside.” At home the whole thing was, of course, nothing but a joke, but foreign countries took you seriously-or at least they pretended that they wanted to take you seriously. If they had kept some of their promises because you were willing to be good democrats on the pattern of others. Oh, if at least this had been the case! But who was it they blackmailed? Who was it they sweated? Was it the National Socialist State? It was the German democracy!

When I came home in 1918 and lived through the winter of 1918 and 1919, I realized, like many other people, that we could not expect regeneration from the existing political world in Germany, and so I began to search-as did so many others-and this was how that conception originated which later conquered the German nation as National-Socialism. I started from the one insight: the German nation fell because it indulged in the luxury of spending its strength at home. This use of strength in the interior took away external strength according to an external law.

The German nation had hoped to gain, in turn, the goodwill of others but it met only the naked egotism of the cruelest and meanest vested interests, which began to loot everything there was to loot. One should not have expected anything else. But now the die was cast. One thing seemed obvious to me: any rise could not originate from outside. First, the German nation had to learn to understand its own political struggle, which enabled it to rally Germany’s entire strength above all its idealistic strength. And this idealistic strength was at the time only to be found in two camps; in the Socialist and in the Nationalist camps. But these were the camps between which there was the most mortal feud and strife. These two camps had to be fused into a new unit.

Today, my countrymen, when millions and millions are marching under the symbol of this unity, this appears to be obvious. But in the years 1918 and 19l9, this seemed to be the product of a diseased imagination. At best, people pitied me. Perhaps, my countrymen, it was lucky that it was so. If people had taken me seriously at that time, they would probably have destroyed me, and the movement at that time was much too small to be able to survive such a destruction. But it was perhaps destiny willed by nature or by God, that they laughed at us, mocked us, and that a certain type of propaganda only ridiculed us and regarded us as a joke. Thus we succeeded, gradually, in forming the first germ, and the first nucleus of a new national community-an almost incredible historical phenomenon started by unknown people and willing followers among the masses of the people itself.

There is only one other State in which this process may be regarded as having come to a successful conclusion: Italy; nowhere else in Europe. In many States we see, perhaps, a beginning and in all the democracies they fully realise the importance of such a process, and believe that they can achieve similar results by swindle. They forget one thing: such a rebirth of a nation is really a miraculous event, an event which pre-supposes faith rather than so-called abstract and super-clever knowledge.

The fact that in the years 1918 to 1921 the simple belief of the broad masses slowly came to us, was the beginning of our Movement. That made the little man from the factories and the mines, from the farms, from the offices, believe in his future, in the future of this idea and this Movement, and in the victory which was yet to come. At that time our point of view was that if the German nation were not to repair its prestige in the world, that is to say, did not again become a powerful factor, Germany would shortly have 20,000,000 people less. This was a matter of simple deduction.

Year after year unemployment increased and caused the confusion of national conceptions and of economic plans. The constant change of Governments prevented any wider vision. Projects could not even be made for two or three months ahead, because one could be sure that in three months the government would have changed. One would say-“Why should I clear up the mistakes made by others?” Another would say, “Why should I make improvements only for someone else to benefit?” There was no longer any reason to attempt any efficacious and real solution. But this state of affairs naturally increased national weakness, and the economic decline, and caused more unemployment. The burden became greater, the capacity to carry it less, and the end had to be a collapse, the result of which could not be foreseen.

It was well to be believed that the kind and humane prophecy of the great democrat Clemenceau that we had 20,000,000 people too many would become the truth. Thus the programme of unification of the German forces, of blind obedience to a goal was created to assure our right to live forever and ever.

By so doing we chose a path between two extremes. The one of these extremes was holding our people: It was the liberal-individualist extreme which made the individual not only the centre of interest but also the centre of all action. On the other hand, our people were tempted by the theory of universal humanity which alone was to guide the individual. Our ideals were between the two: we saw the people as a community of body and soul, formed and willed by Providence. We are put into this community and within it alone can we form our existence. We have consciously subordinated all considerations to this goal, have shaped all interests according to it, and all our actions. Thus the National-Socialist world of thought arose which has overcome individualism, but not by cutting down individual capacities or individual initiative, only by asserting that the common interest is superior to individual liberty and the initiative of the individual. This common interest regulates and orders, if necessary, curtails, but also commands.

Thus we started a struggle against everyone in those days, against the individualist as well as against the humanitarians. And in this struggle we slowly conquered the German nation during 14 years. The 1000 members which this Movement counted at the end of its first year of life, a number which was to increase steadily-these followers were but Germans who had come from other movements. Hundreds of thousands of my SA and SS had been fighters in other organizations, whom we had all convinced and conquered by winning their inner allegiance. That was perhaps the greatest battle of souls in our history. I could not force anybody to go with me, to enter my organization-they all had to be inwardly convinced and this conviction caused them to make great sacrifices. This struggle was to be really fought out in the spirit by word, form and writing. Only when an ill-willed opponent said: “I cannot defeat you in the spirit, but I am stronger than you,” only then did I, the former soldier, rightly answer violence with violence. Before I (apparently one or two words left out by Hitler) . . . the fighting movement which fought by the spirit as long as the opponent kept to spiritual weapons…. But I did not hesitate to appeal to violence when the other thought he would help the spirit by violence.

Our opponents at that time were those who have always fought us inside as well as outside the country: a conglomeration of people who feel, think and act according to international ideas. We know the coalitions of that time. In this battle of the spirit we have defeated them everywhere. For when at last I was called to power, I came in the legal way, under the Presidency of Reichs General Field Marshal von Hindenburg because I was backed by the strongest movement.

This means that the so-called National Socialist Revolution has defeated democracy, within democracy, by democracy. We acquired power legally and today, too, I am facing you here on a mandate given to me by the German nation, a mandate more comprehensive than that which any one of the so-called democratic statesmen possess today.

When we came to power in 1933 our road was clearly mapped out. It had been defined in a struggle of 15 years, which in a thousand demonstrations had put us under an obligation to the German people. And I would be dishonourable and deserve to be stoned if I had deviated but one step from this programme, or if I were to do so now. The social part of this programme meant unifying the German people, overcoming all class and race prejudices, educating the German for the community, and if necessary, breaking any opposition to this unity. Economically, it meant building a National German economy which appreciated the importance of private initiative, but subordinated the entire economic life to the common interest. Believe me, here, too, no other aim is thinkable. In times in which the sons are arrayed for defence in battle, and where no difference can be made between those who represent much, and those who represent little, economic advantages or privileged positions to the disadvantage of the total community cannot be maintained. As everywhere, I proceeded here by teaching, educating and slow adaptation, for it was my pride to carry out this revolution without one single window-pane being broken in Germany. A revolution which led to the greatest changes ever achieved on earth, but which destroyed nothing, only slowly reorganized everything, until at last the entire great community had found its new road,-that was my goal.

It was the same in foreign politics. My programme was to do away with Versailles. People all over the world should not pretend to be simpletons and act as if I had only discovered this programme in 1933, or 1935 or 1937. These gentlemen should only have read what I wrote about myself a thousand times instead of listening to stupid emigre trash. No human being can have stated and written down as often as I what he wanted, and I wrote it again and again: “Away with Versailles!”

And this was not a whim of ours, but the reason was that Versailles was the greatest injustice and the most abject ill-treatment of a great people ever known in history. Without the abolition of this instrument of force-meant to destroy the German people-it would have been impossible to keep this people alive. I came forward as a soldier with this programme, and spoke about it for the first time in 1919. And I have kept to this programme as to a solemn obligation during all the years of the struggle for power, and when I came to power I did not say like democratic politicians (follows a quotation from Schiller’s Fiesco meaning roughly: “The monster has carried out his work, now he can be dismissed.”) But at that moment I said to myself: “Thank God, for having brought me to a point where I can put my programme into action.”

But again I did not want to do this with violence. I talked as much as any human being can. My speeches in the Reichstag, which cannot be falsified by democratic statesmen, are evidence for history. What offers did I make them! How I begged them to be reasonable! I begged them to see reason and not to interfere with the existence of a great nation. I proved to them that they themselves would derive no benefit from it. I told them it was senseless, and that they would only do themselves harm. What have I not done in all these years to pave the way to an understanding? It would never have been possible to begin this armament race unless others had wanted it. I made proposals to them. However, every proposal, coming as it did from me, was sufficient to cause excitement among a certain Jewish-international-capitalist clique, just as it used to happen formerly in Germany when every reasonable proposal was rejected only because it was made by National Socialists.

My Reichstag speech on 17th May 1933, or for that matter, my later speeches, my innumerable announcements at public meetings, all the memoranda which I wrote in these days-they were all governed by the one idea: whatever happened it must be possible to find a method for a peaceful revision of this Versailles Treaty. That this Treaty was an infamous document, all its authors finally admitted. In fact, the possibility of a revision was to be left open. Only they made the League of Nations the agent for this purpose, and this institution was quite unsuited for its task. The League of Nations was established on the one hand to prevent a revision of the Treaty, and, on the other hand, was to have jurisdiction for such a revision.

At first we were not members of the League, and later German participation amounted in the last analysis to nothing but the payments of yearly installments. That was the only positive thing as far as Germany could see. Of course, Germany was then a Democracy and the Democrats of Berlin begged, on their knees. They went to Geneva before the International Tribunal. They begged: “Give us a revision.” Everything was in vain.

I, as a National Socialist, recognized after a few months that this Tribunal would not help us. Accordingly, I did what I could, but I say our adversaries always confused us with the people with whom they had dealt since November 1918. The German nation had nothing in common with those men. That was not Germany. They were miserable individuals kept by England and France, who had doped them. That was not the German nation, and to connect the nation with such people we regard as a defamation.

If the others believed they could apply the same methods to us they applied to the November men, they were greatly mistaken. In that event both sides were at cross purposes. They could not expect us to go to Geneva and continue begging, to receive kicks, and to beg again. If they expected that, they mistook the former German soldier for the traitor of 1918. Of course, those November men could not do anything but give in, for they were in fetters; they were caught in the fetters of that other world. We, however, have no reason to give in to that other world, or do the English perhaps believe that we have an inferiority complex when we compare ourselves with them. (Several words drowned in applause.)

Then they forced us down by a lie; a trick, but the British soldiers did not defeat us. Neither did it seem during the Western campaign that any change has taken place.

I, myself, and in fact, all of us, made up our minds that voluntary negotiation at Geneva would not yield any result. The only thing to do, therefore, was to leave Geneva.

Never in my life have I pushed myself. Those who do not want to talk to me need not do so. Now here are 85,000,000 Germans looking into the future with pride and confidence. They are heirs of a great history. We had a world empire when England was nothing but a small island, and for a longer time than for 300 years. Indeed, they forced us to take the road which we took. The League of Nations only ridiculed and derided us. We left it. At the Disarmament Conference, the same happened, and we left it. We started on the road which we were forced to choose, but all the time we strove for understanding and conciliation. In this connection I may point out that our striving in one case, in that of France, almost succeeded. When the Saar Plebescite took place and the Saar territory was returned to the Reich, I made up my mind, with difficulty, and declared on behalf of the German nation that I would waive any further revision in the West. The French accepted this as a matter of course, but I told the French Ambassador of the day: Look here, this is by no means a matter of course as you seem to imagine. What we are doing is making a sacrifice in the interest of peace. We make this sacrifice, but we, at least, want to have peace in exchange for it.

But the ruthlessness of the capitalist plutocrats in these countries always broke through in a short time, fostered by emigrants who presented a picture of the German situation which was naturally quite mad, but was believed because it seemed agreeable and then, of course, it was propagated by Jewish hatred. This collection of capitalist interests on the one hand, Jewish instincts of hatred and the emigrants’ lust for revenge, succeeded in increasingly beclouding the world, enveloping it in phrases, and in inciting it against the present German Reich, just as against the Reich which preceded us. At that time they opposed the Germany of the Kaiser, this time they opposed National-Socialist Germany. In fact, they opposed any Germany which might be in existence. But my decision was firm: in no circumstances to abandon one’s rights, for in doing so it would not be theories which were given up, but the lives of millions of the future. I do not sacrifice some point or other in a party programme, for in such a case one sacrifices the future, a race, and nobody is entitled to do that unless he stands before the people and says: “I can no longer represent your interests; someone else must take over.”

But we did not come to power having on our programme: “We are ready to abandon the interests of the German nation.” I came with the oath: “I abandon no interests.” For, my country, it was not as if the abandoning of interests would bring quiet for all time. We saw that from the old German Reich, which began with abandoning the Western Provinces of the Reich, and went on and on, and every decade demanded further sacrifices, until finally Germany was broken in pieces-then the century-long powerlessness came over the people. As against that, I am determined not to give way one step. Therefore when I saw that the old warmongers of the Great War were resuming their criminal activities in England, when Messrs. Churchill, Eden, Duff Cooper and Hore-Belisha and so on, and Vansittart, our great old friend, and then Chamberlain and Halifax-when these old men again began their warmongering then it was clear to me that these people were not concerned with reaching a just understanding with Germany, but that they believed they could again break Germany down, cheaply, and the quicker the easier.

You know what happened then, my countrymen. In those years, beginning in 1934, I armed. When in the Reichstag in September 1939, I outlined the extent of German armament, the rest of the world did not believe; for those who live by bluff think that others are only bluffing. But we have already experienced that internally. Here, too, my opponents never believed me. When it is said that the prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, I should like to extend it, and say that his prophecies are not esteemed. So it always was with me. And now it goes beyond our own country: we are having exactly the same experience as my National Socialist co-fighters had at home. Every one of our prophecies was laughed at, every statement was represented as ridiculous, every picture of the future described as a fantastic chimera. We were greeted only with mockery and laughter. Now I can only say to this world: “But I have armed and very much so.” The German people know it today. But it does not know nearly all.

But it is not at all necessary that everything should be told. What is decisive is that everything has been done.

We have demanded nothing from the others. When France entered this war, she had absolutely no reason. It was merely the desire to fight against Germany again. They said, “We want the Rhineland; naturally we now want to split up Germany; we want to tear away the Ostmark, we want to disintegrate Germany.” They actually wallowed in fantasies of the destruction of our Reich, which were completely unreal in the 20th Century, the century of the conception of nationality. It was simply childish.

And England? I held out my hand, again and again. It was actually my programme to reach an understanding with the English people. We had really no point of difference, absolutely none. There was a solitary point, the return of the German colonies, and on that I said, “We will negotiate that some time,-I do not fix any time.” For England those colonies are useless. They cover 40,000,000 square metres. What do they do with them? Absolutely nothing. That is only the avarice of old usurers, who possess something and will not give it up; perverted beings who see their neighbour has nothing to eat, while they themselves cannot use what they possess. The mere thought of giving away something makes them ill. Moreover, I have demanded nothing which belonged to the English, I have demanded only what they robbed and stole in the years 1918 and 19l9. In fact, robbed and stole against the solemn assurance of the American President. We have not asked them for anything, not demanded anything, again and again I offered my hand for negotiations.

Evermore clearly it became apparent that it is German unification itself, this very State, which they hate-irrespective of its aspect, no matter whether Imperial or National Socialist, whether Democratic or Authoritarian. Most of all they hate the social progress of the Reich, and here, clearly, external hatred has combined with the meanest internal egotism. For they say: “Never shall we be reconciled with this world-it is the world of awakening social conscience . . . (end of sentence drowned in applause). As far as this goes, I can only tell the gentlemen on both shores of the Atlantic: “In the present war that side will achieve victory in the end where the social conscience . . . (several inaudible words). They can wage wars for their capitalist interests, but in the end these wars will open the way for social risings within the nations; for in the long run it is impossible that hundreds of millions of human beings should be aligned according to the interests of a few individuals. In the long run the greater interest of mankind is bound to prevail over the interests of these little plutocratic profiteers.

Proof that in other countries, too, a crisis is already beginning to develop in this sphere, is that English Labour Leaders now suddenly come out with new social conceptions, so worn out and antiquated that I can only say: “Put them back into the chest. We have already divested ourselves of this sort of material, it is out of date. If you want to know how these things are being done, then you must not take up programmes which in our country would have been modern in the 80’s or 90’s. You must come to us and study here, then you will learn something, gentlemen.” But the mere fact that anything like that is suddenly put forward as an aim-for what then are these gentlemen actually waging war? First, they said it was to fight against National Socialism that the nations of the world had to be bled white, and now, suddenly they detect in their bottom drawers, points that were in the programmes of our predecessors. Why all this? They could have had all this cheaper. But this fact furnishes proof that there, too, the nations are showing signs of action, or if for instance a storm breaks out in England, because somebody-a colonel or a general, I believe-declares that in the England of such an advanced social standard, they cannot use officers taken from the lower section of the population, but only officers from the upper classes-the others are unfit-then I can only say, do you get exasperated because he has said this? You should not get exasperated because this is not the case, but not for the reason that somebody has at long last expressed it. It is interesting that no one gets exasperated over the fact that the reality is like this, that is to say, that in point of fact only representatives of the upper classes can attain a position there. This is what should exasperate you, and not the fact that by mere chance someone was, while this war is on, unwise enough to make that statement. In our country if you are interested to hear it, this was remedied long ago. Only a short time ago you pointed out to us that our officers and generals were incapable, because they are all too young and infested with National Socialist ideas. Meanwhile developments have shown which side has the better generals. If the war continues this will prove a great misfortune for England, and you will have ample opportunity to gain further experience. The English will make up their minds to send a commission which is to take over our soldiers. It is this social Germany which is hated most by this clique, a conglomeration of Jews, their financiers and profiteers. Our foreign policy, our policy in the interior and our economic policy have been clearly defined. We have set ourselves only one aim: the people. All paths upon which we set our feet will lead to this purpose. Furthermore, we recognize that unless one wants to destroy everything, one must start and proceed on this path with many compromises and many leniencies. But the movement is not the temporary appearance of one man. Many years ago, in Mein Kampf I said that National Socialism will put its stamp on the next thousand years of Germany history. You cannot conceive it without National Socialism. It will only then disappear when its programme has become a matter of course. But not before that time.

But even in war, the possibility of an understanding still existed. At once, after the war with Poland, I held out my hand. I did not ask anything from either France or England. It was in vain. After the collapse in the west, I again held out my hand to England. I was received with derision. They practically spat at me. They were indignant. All right. Everything is in vain. The financial interests of this Democracy are victorious over the true National interests. Once more, the nations’ blood must be at the service of the money of this small group of interested people. Thus the war started and thus it will go on. But, looking back, I may point out one thing: the year behind us and the last part of the previous year have practically decided this war. The opponent which they first mobilized against us in the East was overthrown in a few weeks. The attempt to cut us off from Norway and the iron ore bases, and to gain a base for attack against Northeast Germany was dealt with in the same way, within a few weeks. The attempt to reach the border of the Ruhr and the Ruhr zones via Holland and Belgium collapsed after a few days. France went the same way. England was chased from the Continent.

I sometimes read now of a British intention to begin a great offensive somewhere. I have only one wish: that they should inform me of it in advance; then I would have this European territory cleared beforehand. I should like to save them the difficulties of landing and we should then introduce ourselves and discuss matters once more. And in the language which is the only one they understand they now have hopes. For they must have hopes. What are they expecting now?

We are now standing on this Continent and from where we stand nobody will be able to remove us again. We have created certain bases, and when the time comes we shall deal the decisive blows, and that we have made good use of our time will be historically impressed on the gentlemen during this year.

What are they waiting for? For the help of others? I can only say one thing: we have from the beginning allowed for any eventuality. That the German nation has no quarrel with the Americans is evident to everybody who does not consciously wish to falsify truth. At no time has Germany had interests on the American Continent except perhaps that she helped that Continent in its struggle for liberty. If States on this continent now attempt to interfere in the European conflict, then the aim will only be changed more quickly. Europe will then defend herself. And do not let people deceive themselves. Those who believe they can help England must take note of one thing: every ship, whether with or without convoy which appears before our torpedo tubes is going to be torpedoed.

We are involved in a war which we did not want. Otherwise one could not stretch out one’s hand to the other side. However, if those financial hyenas want war, if they want to exterminate Germany, they will get the surprise of their lives. This time they are not up against a weakened Germany, as they were during the World War. This time, they have joined battle with a Germany which is mobilized to the limit of her power, able and resolved to fight. However, should the other side entertain hopes to the contrary, then I can only say, “I cannot understand you.”

They speak of Italy’s coming defection. Let those gentlemen not invent revolution in Milan, let them rather see that unrest does not break out in their own countries.

Those countries view the relationship between Germany and Italy as they do their own. If in democracies one gives aid to the other, he asks a quid pro quo-bases or something of the sort. These he then owns. When, therefore, the Italians sent aircraft formations to the Atlantic coast the English newspapers wrote that the Italians were putting their oar in the conduct of the war, and that they would in future demand an Atlantic base by way of compensation. On the other hand, now that German aircraft formations are in Sicily, they say that presumably Germany will confiscate that island. These gentlemen can be quite certain that no German or Italian is moved by such fine stories. Such tales show only the pathetic lack of spirit of those people who in England retail such anecdotes.

We can deduce from those writings that the people over there have not yet understood the meaning of the present war, but we have understood it very well. Wherever we can meet England we will meet her. However, if they regard the present setbacks of our partner as evidence of their victory, then I really cannot understand Englishmen. Whenever they have setbacks of their own they regard them as big victories. The gentlemen over there may be convinced our calculation is quite accurate, and the reckoning will be made after the war, foot by foot, square kilometre by square kilometre. Another thing these people must understand, the Duce and myself are not Jews nor out for bargains. If we shake hands, that is the handshake of men of honour. I hope that in the course of the year the gentlemen will acquire a more accurate understanding of this.

Perhaps they pin their hopes on the Balkans. If I were they, I would not give much for that. One thing is certain. Whenever England puts in an appearance we shall attack her, and we are sufficiently strong to do so.

Perhaps they pin their hopes on other countries which they can involve in this war. I don’t know. But my Party comrades, men and women, you have known me for so many years as a careful man with foresight; I can assure you that every possible contingency has been weighed and calculated. We shall win final victory.

Perhaps, though probably not to the same extent, they expect famine. We have organized our lives. We know at the beginning that there would not be too much of anything in war time. However, the German nation will never starve, never, rather will the English nation, those gentlemen can be sure of that.

Raw material shortage! That too, we have foreseen, and have for that reason made our Four Year’s Plan. Maybe this has already dawned on some Englishmen.

There might be one other point. Perhaps they really believe that once again they will be able to dope the German nation with their lies, their propaganda and their empty words. To this I can only say that they should not have slept for so long. It would be better for them to look into the development of the German nation somewhat more carefully. In the same way, they were idiotic enough to try to estrange the Italian nation and the Duce. One British lord rises and appeals to the Italian nation no longer to follow the Duce, but his lordship. That is too idiotic. Such an ass (next words drowned). Then another lord rises and admonishes the German nation to follow his lordship, and to turn away from me. I can only tell these people: “Others in Germany have tried that game.” Those people have no conception of the German nation, of the National-Socialist State, of our community, the army of our marching masses, of our people. Those people have no conception of our propaganda. Perhaps, because they themselves were not quite convinced of the effectiveness of their ideas, which they borrowed from some people in Germany. However, these people are those who so miserably failed here, the emigrants who had to leave. Such are their advisors, and we can see it by the pamphlets. We know for certain that this one was written by this fellow, that one by that fellow. Just as idiotic as (following drowned) in the time of the “system.” Only at that time this stuff was labelled Vossische Zeitung and is now labelled Times or something, and those people imagine that these old, old stories, which were a failure in the Vossische Zeitung will now be successful because they are published by The Times or the Daily Telegraph.

A real softening of the brain has broken out in these Democracies. They can rest assured, the German people will do everything necessary for its interest. It will follow its leadership. It knows that its leadership has no other goal. It knows that today the man at the head of the Reich is not one with a packet of shares in his pocket and with ulterior motives. This German people, I know it and I am proud of it, is pledged to me and will go with me through thick and thin. An ancient spirit has come to life again in this people-a spirit which was with us once before, a fanatic readiness to accept any burden. We will repay every blow with compound interest. The blow will only harden us, and whatever they mobilize against us, and if the world were full of devils, we will succeed all the same (quote from Luther’s hymn, “A mighty fortress is our God”). But when they end up by saying: “But think of all the mistakes they made!” God, who doesn’t make mistakes! This morning I read that an Englishman, I don’t know how, has calculated that I made seven mistakes last year. The man is mistaken. I have checked it. I did not make seven mistakes but 724. But I continued to calculate and found that my opponents had made 4,385,000. That is right. I have checked it carefully. We will manage to get on in spite of our mistakes. We will make as many mistakes this year as last year, and if I make as many mistakes as in 1940, then I must thank God on my knees at the end of the year for letting me make only seven mistakes. And if the enemies do as many clever things as last year, I shall be satisfied.

We go into the new year with a fighting force armed as never before in our German history. The number of our divisions on land has been enormously increased. Pay has been increased, the gigantic unique experience of war among the leaders and the file has been put to use. The equipment has been improved-our enemies will see how it has been improved (applause and commotion). In the spring our U-boat war will begin at sea, and they will notice that we have not been sleeping (shouts and cheers). And the Air Force will play its part and the entire armed forces will force the decision by hook or by crook. Our production has increased enormously in all spheres. What others are planning we have achieved. The German people follows its leadership with determination, confident in its armed forces and ready to bear what fate demands. The year 1941 will be, I am convinced, the historical year of a great European New Order. The programme could not be anything else than the opening up of the world for all, the breaking down of individual privileges, the breaking of the tyranny of certain peoples, and better still, of their financial autocrats.

Finally this year will help to assure the basis for understanding between the peoples, and thereby, for their reconciliation. I do not want to miss pointing out what I pointed out on 3rd of September [1940] in the German Reichstag, that if Jewry were to plunge the world into war, the role of Jewry would be finished in Europe. They may laugh about it today, as they laughed before about my prophecies. The coming months and years will prove that I prophesied rightly in this case too. But we can see already how our racial peoples which are today still hostile to us will one day recognise the greater inner enemy, and that they too will then enter with us into a great common front. The front of Aryan mankind against Jewish-International exploitation and destruction of nations.

The year which lies behind us has been a year of great successes, but also, it is true, one of many sacrifices. Even if the total number of dead and wounded is small in comparison with former wars the sacrifices for each individual family concerned weigh heavy. Our whole sympathy, our love and care belongs to those who had to make these sacrifices. They have suffered what generations before us also had to suffer. Each individual German had to make other sacrifices. The nation worked in all spheres. German women worked to replace men. It is a wonderful idea of community which dominates our people. That this ideal, that our whole strength should be preserved in the coming year-this should be our wish today. That we will work for this community-let that be our vow. That we conquer in devotion to this community-that is our faith, one in which we are confident, and that the Lord should not abandon us in this struggle of the coming year-let that be our prayer. Deutschland! Sieg Heil!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Mohammed Retakes Top Spot in English Baby Names

Thursday, August 16th, 2012

Mohammed reclaimed its place as the most popular name for baby boys born in England and Wales in 2011—convincingly ahead of Harry, in second place, according to data released by the government this week.

The government declared that Harry was the most popular boy’s name, but if you add up the five most popular different spellings of Mohammed, that name comes top.

Mohammed is also the most popular boy’s name of the past five years for England and Wales, ahead of Oliver and Jack. It came first or second every year since 2007, the only name to do so.

The popularity of the name comes as Britain’s Muslim population is expected to double in the next 20 years.

The country, which was about 2% Muslim in 1990, grew to 4.6% Muslim in 2010, with nearly 2.9 million followers of the faith, according to analysis by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

By 2030, the United Kingdom will be just over 8% Muslim, with more than 5.5 million adherents, the Washington-based think tank projected in a 2011 report, “The Future of the Global Muslim Population.”

Mohammed first became the most popular boy’s name in England in 2009, then was knocked back into second place the next year as Oliver enjoyed a huge surge in popularity.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Police warn over racist Ukrainian thugs at Euro 2012 championships

Friday, May 11th, 2012

Racist chants by
Ukrainian football thugs could be a flashpoint for violence at the Euro 2012
championships, police warned today.

A senior UK police officer said there was no intelligence that English fans were planning trouble at the event which begins next month.

Asst Ch Const Andy Holt said his concern was that Ukrainain fans would bombard fans and players with racist abuse.

He said “If there is a substantial amount of racist abuse that could prompt retaliation. It may be a flashpoint for some sort of disorder if fans feel they are being unfairly treated.”

Around 30 UK police officers will travel to the Euros and help police the England games in full uniform.

Mr Holt said there was also concern that Ukrainian authorities assumed UK fans would be trouble.

The Ukrainians started by anticipating a large amount of disorder caused by England fans.

“We hope that English supporters will be policed in an appropriate manner.”

He added :”I think football hooliganism is more of a problem in the Ukraine than perhaps it is at home.”

“I don’t think they are as advanced in dealing with racism.”

He said officers had been reassuring Ukrainian police about travelling fans.

He said he was concerned that England players would face racist abuse.

Around 2050 England  fans have been issued with banning orders to stop them travelling to the Euros.

But police do not expect huge numbers of fans to attend the event. Only around 3,000 tickets have been sold to England fans.

All ports and airports will be on alert for football thugs trying to avoid the ban on travelling.

In the UK extra police will be on patrol in city centres to tackle drink related disorder at big screen events.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

‘Angelcynn Awake’

Wednesday, May 9th, 2012

Folk Heathenry is a modern religion based on the ancient faith of our ancestors. All that is practiced today is based on the ancient tribal religions of the pre-Christian Anglo-Saxon tribes that moved into what is now England during the period between the 4th and 5th century.

All that we currently practice has been based upon historical research and often thanks to clues within archeological finds. Modern followers are sometimes called  free thinkers, mainly because they have broken away from the Christian oppression to re-discover the true and ancient faith of the English.

The ancestors have left many clues with much knowledge passed down through folk lore and traditions. The Icelandic Eddas, the works of saint Bede and Tacticus have also been helpful in our reconstruction. It is fact that many of  the historical clues have recently come to light through archeological digs with many more exciting finds to be uncovered. So one can only assume that Heathenry has been re-born.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Spring 1942: Massive attacks on German morale

Saturday, May 5th, 2012

Churchill’s situation grew even tighter in spring 1942. England and the USA had had no doubts about the success of the major Soviet winter offensive, but the German military’s tough defense and its superhuman accomplishments ruined their hopes. The millions of German soldiers that the enemy happily claimed were freezing to death in the Russian winter suddenly displayed their full offensive power and seized the initiative. Their unexpected successes increasingly forced Churchill to do something about all the boastful statements and threats he had made over the course of the winter. The Kremlin pressed for the promised military assistance, and the Soviet demand for a “second front” could no longer be ignored.

Even the biggest optimists in England had realized, after nearly three years of war and an unbroken series of major German victories, that the German military could not be defeated with weapons. The hope that one could bring Germany to its knees by a hunger blockade vanished as German territory increased step by step to include the most fertile and productive areas of Europe. They vanished completely after the food reserves of the Ukraine were in German hands. One could no longer hope for a “sitting war,” the victorious end of which one could patiently wait for. The “irresistible Soviet war machine,” Churchill’s last trump after the failure of a half dozen other allies, did not flood into Germany, but rather was driven deep into the heart of Soviet territory in bloody battles with the German military, and was in itself in need of help. Churchill and his clique realized by the spring of this year — long before Dieppe — that a “second front” on the European mainland was impossible. After years of experience with their risky policies, we were nonetheless sure they would make an attempt. “Even the attempt is punishable,” Dr. Goebbels had written several weeks before the failed landing attempt at Dieppe. That they made the attempt despite its hopelessness speaks to the situation Great Britain found itself in. The rising number of ships sunk made the material and economic support of the USA an illusion. Rommel was winning in Africa, the Japanese in East Asia.

England had no other hope than that the air force could decide the war. As even England granted, the German armaments industry was distributed throughout Europe, and was well defended. The only remaining target was the morale of the German population.

Thus in the spring of 1942, the British resumed their senseless terror attacks on the German population in the north and west of the Reich, at first with weak forces, then in mass attacks. Many of the Reich’s cities fell prey to British air terror.

During the night of 30-31 May, the British air force made its “great attack” on the residential districts of Cologne.

How the population of Cologne bore and overcame the largest British air attack so far is portrayed in what follows as an example of all the areas threatened from the air.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Cause for Caution

Monday, April 30th, 2012

Any speculation about the function of runes in Anglo-Saxon society is hampered by substantial gaps in the archaeological and historical records. The most convincing studies are cautious ones that take into account the fragmentary nature of the evidence. These studies, detailed in their analysis and restrained in their interpretation, suggest a diversity of interactions between the runic and Roman alphabets in Anglo-Saxon Britain.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Murderers, paedophiles and rapists on the loose

Saturday, April 28th, 2012

More than 160 violent criminals and sex offenders are at large in the community despite breaching the terms of their release or committing another offence, figures showed today.

Some 18 killers — 16 of them murderers — 10 rapists and at least four paedophiles are among more than 960 criminals in England and Wales who have been recalled to prison but have not yet been put back behind bars.

The Ministry of Justice figures for October to December last year showed 92 of the 4,017 offenders recalled to jail in that time had not been returned.

They remained free with a further 870 offenders who have still not been returned despite being recalled before October.

Of the 962 offenders who remained free, 361 have been on the run for more than five years, the figures showed.

A further 280 have been on the run for between two and five years.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Ukraine’s Nazi militia training ‘football hooligans’ to interrupt England’s Euro games

Saturday, April 28th, 2012

Neo-Nazi paramilitaries are clandestinely training football hooligans to inflict mayhem during Ukraine’s Euro 2012 match against England.

An investigation by The Sun has filmed members of extreme right-wing militia ‘The Patriot of Ukraine’, as it drilled thugs in unarmed combat, knife fighting and use of rifles and pistols at a secret camp.

One of those football hooligans boasted about how they planned to riot and hurl racist abuse at black England stars such as Rio Ferdinand and Ashley Cole.Of course we will boo your black players. There will be fighting too. Why should we apologise for it?” he said.

The group’s leaders said the hooligans were seen as “foot soldiers” that would proclaim their contemptible message of racial hatred to the world during Euro 2012.

All three of England’s group matches are in the Ukraine, which is jointly hosting the tournament with Poland. ThePatriots, whose 3,500 members run illegal military training camps, teach the thugs fighting skills and offer “education” in their ideology.

In return the hooligans agree to chant white supremacist slogans from the stands and swell the Patriots’ ranks at anti-immigration rallies on the streets.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

“Like Hunting Rats…”

Saturday, March 31st, 2012

“It was like hunting rats,” said one of them later after returning to England. He was speaking about the treacherous murder of unarmed German merchant seamen!

“Like hunting rats…”

None of the British officers has the ability or authority to shop his men. No one even tries. In fact, those in officers’ uniforms on the Cossack apparently take great pleasure in the shooting abilities of their men. Target practice on defenseless, unarmed people…

One of the murdered German seamen was later found to have fist-sized exit wounds, a sure sign that dumdum bullets had been used. That means that the shooter had slit the tip of the bullet before firing to ensure it caused the worst possible wound — or he might have been supplied with dumdum bullets in the first place.

The purpose of such bullets is not only to incapacitate the opponent, but also to cause particular pain. Using such bullets is the worst that a person is capable of. Not even animals are killed in this infamous way.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

The World Watches

Saturday, March 31st, 2012

At first, the world is astonished by the fact that British warships attempted to board a German steamer in Norwegian territorial waters. Peoples around the world remember, of course, that England disregards the rights of smaller states when it serves British interests (particularly during the World War). They also know of many cases in the current war when England has violated principles of neutrality and international law. Still, thanks to England’s proclaimed moral policies and propaganda, they believed in so-called British fairness. However, world public opinion recognizes the seriousness and significance of this incident: the English attempt a capture in Norwegian territorial waters, and in the presence of Norwegian torpedo boats. People are still willing to believe that this is only the action of the commander of a British warship, doubtless outraged and disappointed that his prey escaped from the Atlantic.

But then comes a new bombshell. A second radio message from the Altmark’s captain reports that English destroyers have returned. One of them, the Cossack, has boarded the Altmark in the Jössing Fjord, shot down German sailors, taken the English sailors, and sailed off. The incredible has happened. British pirates murder defenseless German sailors in Norwegian territorial waters.

Immediately after the report of the first attack on the Altmark, the German ambassador in Norway protested sharply to the Norwegian government and demanded that the German steamer receive immediate protection. The Norwegian admiralty assured the German naval attaché that everything necessary would be done to protect the German steamer.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Churchill’s Stubborn Silence by Hans Fritzsche

Thursday, March 29th, 2012

What is the British fleet up to, anyway? You are asking that question, I am asking that question, the world is constantly raising it.

We were all absolutely astonished when the British Admiralty simply admitted on Saturday that the battleship Royal Oak had been sunk by a German submarine. With good reason, one asked why an agency that previously was known only for the stubbornness of its tactics of secrecy suddenly adopted a news policy of quick and honest reporting.

We first thought that the reason for the rapid admission was that American news agencies and radio stations had already reported the sinking of the Royal Oak. But that was probably not Mr. Winston Churchill’s reason, since the Americans probably depended on sources in the British Admiralty; only their apparatus for spreading the news functioned better than the English, for whom some hands faltered at the typewriter or the telegraph keyboard and some mouths had trouble speaking over the telephone.

It became clear today why Mr. Winston Churchill was in such a hurry to give out the news of the sinking of theRoyal Oak, which shook England and gained the world’s attention.

Mr. Winston Churchill knew already on Saturday that the fleet His British Majesty had entrusted to him had suffered not only this serious loss, but that at the same time another, perhaps more serious, blow had fallen.

The same German U-boat that sank the Royal Oak had also torpedoed the Repulse, one of the most powerful battleships in the British navy. [The U-boat captain believed that he had torpedoed the Repulse, but he was wrong. The Repulse was actually at sea.]

Mr. Winston Churchill apparently has a precise feel for what a nation’s nerves can take, of how to use agitation to drive a people to war. Mr. Churchill knows all too well the feelings that the man on the street in England has for theRepulse, since this battleship has been in all the newspapers in the country nearly every day since last spring. When the English king wanted to visit Canada last spring, the English government put at his disposal its most impressive ship that the Home Fleet of Old England has. The government and the king agreed that a state visit to Canada required the Repulse, on which staterooms were already prepared.

But that did raise deep public concern. Several English naval experts said that the Repulse was the only ship then at England’s disposal that was superior in power and armaments to German ships, and that the Repulse was the only vessel capable of guaranteeing England’s control of the North Sea. Since England was already playing with the thought last spring of waging war against Germany and since it was waiting only for the completion of its encirclement plans before letting war loose on Germany, there suddenly were conversations in the House of Commons, in the newspapers, on the subways and over garden fences: That is impossible! If the King travels to Canada on the Repulse, the Germans will attack us when this powerful ship is far way, and England is done for. Since one always believes the other side is planning what one plans to do oneself, the English believed that we Germans were only waiting for the Repulse to set sail before beginning our own preventive war, which we could win quickly and completely.

The responsible men in England, for reasons that have since become clear, had reasons not to make clear to the man in the street that the fear of a German attack was absurd, and so they bowed to the unintended effects of their artificially caused war mood and told the king with a shrug that he could not sail to Canada on the Repulse, but they would give him a fine passenger steamer instead. It bore the lovely and genuine English name Empress of Australia, but it had been christened the Tirpitz during its construction in Germany. It was one of the ships that the English took from us after Versailles. A truly royal means of transportation!

The loss of the Repulse, which had caused the hearts of millions of Englishmen to tremble nervously a few months ago, which to keep in England the British king had been given a stolen German ship, the Repulse on which English pride depended as on no other ship in the entire British navy — the loss of the Repulse could not be admitted under any circumstances.

It therefore seemed easier for Mr. Winston Churchill to quickly admit the sinking of the Royal Oak in order to conceal the torpedoing of that ship.

That is the answer to the riddle of the so sudden apparent love of truth on the part of the First Lord of the British Admiralty.

The English people had become all too deeply persuaded that the guarantee of England’s dominance of its home waters depended on the Repulse, and only on the Repulse.

The British Admiralty carried out this concealment maneuver with truly astonishing determination. Too bad that when the support for such a lie collapses, not only the lie and the liar are in trouble, but the whole framework one has erected. So it was here. Listen:

It was naturally hard for British radio to carry on its musical and political programming Saturday evening and Sunday. After such an event funeral marches are hardly encouraging, and one did not of course want to provide too many details to an already depressed English public. Mr. McMillan’s helpers found a way out from material apparently provided by Mr. Churchill, a way that at first glance did not seem at all dumb. They told their listening public, which was gradually regaining its courage, that the sinking of the Royal Oak was known only through sources in the British Admiralty. The Germans had released no reports, and probably would not be able to do so in the future since the German U-boat that had dared to attack a proud British battleship had been destroyed along with its whole crew. That was at least a small consolation for English listeners. Further balm was provided by rapidly-following announcements that other German U-boats had been sunk. British radio even dared to report that 13 October was a black day for the German fleet.

The main point was that the poor English listeners were left with the impression that no one in England or the wide world would have known about the sinking of the Royal Oak if the British Admiralty had not reported it. And the U-boat that sunk the Royal Oak was destroyed! Mr. Churchill could sleep in peace. There was no German witness to testify to what had really happened.

As previously mentioned, that was the plank that brought the lie down. Once the plank fell, everything fell apart. The commander of the German U-boat that had allegedly been sunk turned up alive — and reported that the Royal Oakhad been sunk and the Repulse torpedoed!

Well, Mr. Churchill, you probably had not expected that!

The First Lord of the British Admiralty must have been deeply shocked, since his reply to the communiqué released by the Supreme Command of the German Military was extraordinarily thin. The English Reuters agency reported that there was no comment in London to the German announcement of the torpedoing of the Repulse. London shipping circles laughed over these German propaganda methods.

One need only say this: They could not comment, they could not deny, but neither, of course, could they admit it. And shipping circles may have laughed, but Lloyds at least was pleased, since it does not insure warships. There are enough sunken merchant ships to pay for.

Naval circles in England that know the facts, however, probably did not laugh.

And what did the British Prime Minister have to say in his speech last Thursday, in which he rejected the Führer’s peace offer? He said: “The time for words is past. The time for deeds has come.”

It has come, Mr. Churchill. You are right! But not in the way you had expected!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

The Year 2000 by Joseph Goebbels

Friday, March 23rd, 2012

The three enemy war leaders, American sources report, have agreed at the Yalta Conference to Roosevelt’s proposal for an occupation program that will destroy and exterminate the German people up until the year 2000. One must grant the somewhat grandiose nature of the proposal. It reminds one of the skyscrapers in New York that soar high into the sky, and whose upper stories sway in the wind. What will the world look like in the year 2000? Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt have determined it, at least insofar as the German people are concerned. One may however doubt if they and we will act in the predicted manner.

No one can predict the distant future, but there are some facts and possibilities that are clear over the coming fifty years. For example, none of the three enemy statesmen who developed this brilliant plan will still be alive, England will have at most 20 million inhabitants, our children’s children will have had children, and the events of this war will have sunk into myth. One can also predict with a high degree of certainty that Europe will be a united continent in the year 2000. One will fly from Berlin to Paris for breakfast in fifteen minutes, and our most modern weapons will be seen as antiques, and much more. Germany, however, will still be under military occupation according to the plans of the Yalta Conference, and the English and Americans will be training its people in democracy. How empty the brains of these three charlatans must be — at least in the case of two of them!

The third, Stalin, follows much more far-reaching goals than his two comrades. He certainly does not plan to announce them publicly, but he and his 200 million slaves will fight bitterly and toughly for them. He sees the world differently than do those plutocratic brains. He sees a future in which the entire world is subjected to the dictatorship of the Moscow Internationale, which means the Kremlin. His dream may seem fantastic and absurd, but if we Germans do not stop him, it will undoubtedly become reality. That will happen as follows: If the German people lay down their weapons, the Soviets, according to the agreement between Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin, would occupy all of East and Southeast Europe along with the greater part of the Reich. An iron curtain would fall over this enormous territory controlled by the Soviet Union, behind which nations would be slaughtered. The Jewish press in London and New York would probably still be applauding. All that would be left is human raw material, a stupid, fermenting mass of millions of desperate proletarianized working animals who would only know what the Kremlin wanted them to know about the rest of the world. Without leadership, they would fall helplessly into the hands of the Soviet blood dictatorship. The remainder of Europe would fall into chaotic political and social confusion that would prepare the way for the Bolshevization that will follow. Life and existence in these nations would become hell, which was after all the point of the exercise.

Aside from domestic problems of economic, social and political nature, England would suffer a declining population that would leave it even less able to defend its interests in Europe and the rest of the world than it is today. In 1948, Roosevelt’s campaign for reelection would fail, just as Wilson’s did after the First World War, and a Republican isolationist would become president of the USA. His first official act would likely be to withdraw American troops from the European witch’s kettle. The entire population of the USA would doubtless approve. Since there would be no other military power on the continent, in the best case 60 British divisions would face 600 Soviet divisions. Bolshevism certainly would not have been idle during the period. A Labor government, perhaps even a radical half-Bolshevist one, would be in power in England. Under the pressure of public opinion whipped up by the Jewish press and a people weary of war, it would soon announce its lack of interest in Europe. How fast such things can happen is clear from the example of Poland today.

The so-called Third World War would likely be short, and our continent would be at the feet of the mechanized robots from the steppes. That would be an unfortunate situation for Bolshevism. It would without doubt leap over to England and set the land of classic democracy ablaze. The iron curtain would fall once more over this vast tragedy of nations. Over the next five years, hundreds of millions of slaves would build tanks, fighters, and bombers; then the general assault on the USA would begin. The Western Hemisphere, which despite lying accusations we have never threatened, would then be in the gravest danger. One day those in the USA will curse the day in which a long-forgotten American president released a communiqué at a conference at Yalta, which will long since have sunk into legend.

The democracies are not up to dealing with the Bolshevist system, since they use entirely different methods. They are as helpless against it as were the bourgeois parties in Germany over against the communists before we took power. In contrast to the USA, the Soviet system needs to take no regard for public opinion or its people’s living standard. It therefore has no need to fear American economic competition, not to mention its military. Even were the war to end as Roosevelt and Churchill imagine, the plutocratic countries would be defenseless before the competition from the Soviet Union on the world market, unless they decided to greatly reduce wages and living standards. But if they were to do that, they would not be able to resist Bolshevist agitation. However things turn out, Stalin would always be the winner and Roosevelt and Churchill the losers. The Anglo-American war policy has reached a dead end. They have called up the spirits, and can no longer get rid of them. Our predictions, beginning with Poland, are beginning to be confirmed by a remarkable series of current events. One can only smile when the English and Americans forge plans for the year 2000. They will be happy if they survive until 1950.

No thinking Englishman fails to see this today. The British prime minister wore a Russian fur coat at the Yalta Conference. This aroused unhappy comment in the English public. When the London news agencies later reported that it was a Canadian fur coat, no one believed them. People saw in the matter a symbol of England’s subordination to the Kremlin’s will. What happened to the days when England had an important, even decisive say in world affairs! An influential American Senator recently remarked: “England is only a small appendix to Europe!” His comrades treat it that way already. Has it deserved any better? At a dramatic moment in European history, it declared war against the Reich, unleashing a world conflagration that not only went out of control but threatens to leave England itself in ruins. A tiny extension of Germany into purely German territories to the East was sufficient ground to see a threat to the European balance of power. In the resulting war, England found it necessary to throw out its 200-year-old policy of the balance of power. Now a world power has entered Europe that begins to the East in Vladivostok and will not rest in the West until it has incorporated Great Britain itself into its dictatorship.

It is more than naive for the British prime minister to plan for the political and social status of the Reich in the year 2000. In the coming years and decades, England will probably have other concerns. It will have to fight desperately to maintain a small portion of its former power in the world. It received the first blows in the First World War, and now during the Second World War faces the final coup de grace.

One can imagine things turning out differently, but it is now too late. The Führer made numerous proposals to London, the last time four weeks before the war began. He proposed that German and British foreign policy work together, that the Reich would respect England’s sea power as England would respect the Reich’s land power, and that parity would exist in the air. Both powers would join in guaranteeing world peace, and the British Empire would be a critical component of that peace. Germany would even be ready to defend that Empire with military means if it were necessary. Under such conditions, Bolshevism would have been confined to its original breeding grounds. It would have been sealed off from the rest of the world. Now Bolshevism is at the Oder River. Everything depends on the steadfastness of German soldiers. Will Bolshevism to pushed back to the East, or will its fury flood over Western Europe? That is the war situation. The Yalta Communiqué does not change things in the least. Things depend only on this crisis of human culture. It will be solved by us, or it will not be solved at all. Those are the alternatives.

We Germans are not the only ones who say this. Every thinking person knows that today, as so often in the past, the German people have a European mission. We may not lose our courage, even though the mission brings with it enormous pain and suffering. The foolish know-it-alls have brought the world more than once to the edge of the abyss. At the last moment, the sight of the terrifying misery alarmed humanity enough for it to take the decisive step backwards at the critical moment. That will be the case this time as well. We have lost a great deal in this war. About all we have left are our military forces and our ideals. We may not give these up. They are the foundation of our existence and of the fulfillment of our historical obligations. It is hard and terrible, but also honorable. We were given our duty because we alone have the necessary character and steadfastness. Any other people would have collapsed. We, however, like Atlas carry the weight of the world on our shoulders and do not doubt.

Germany will not be occupied by its enemies in the year 2000. The German nation will be the intellectual leader of civilized humanity. We are earning that right in this war. This world struggle with our enemies will live on only as a bad dream in people’s memories. Our children and their children will erect monuments to their fathers and mothers for the pain they suffered, for the stoic steadfastness with which they bore all, for the bravery they showed, for the heroism with which they fought, for the loyalty with which they held to their Führer and his ideals in difficult times. Our hopes will come true in their world and our ideals will be reality. We must never forget that when we see the storms of this wild age reflected in the eyes of our children. Let us act so that we will earn their eternal blessings, not their curses.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

A Different World by Joseph Goebbels

Sunday, March 11th, 2012

It is astonishing, hardly believable, how the state of the world can change entirely within a short time. Modern war speaks its own language, and ideas and principles that twenty years ago were standard military theory and practice are now entirely outdated and antiquated. If one compares the world situation of Sunday, 7 December, the day when Japan gave President Roosevelt the appropriate answer to his impudent provocations and shameless affronts, with today, one will without doubt conclude that the position of the Axis powers has improved in a way that even a few days before military and political experts would have thought highly improbable.

All the confident predictions of the U.S.A. and England have collapsed. Those in Washington apparently thought the patience and untiring persistence of Japanese negotiators were signs of weakness. They were so surprised by the sudden attacking spirit of the Japanese army that they as yet have found no plausible explanation for what happened. The national enthusiasm, patriotic passion, and devotion of a military people have once again won a great triumph, while the liberal-democratic jugglers find themselves amidst the ruins of many of their vague hopes and dreams.

These developments have not surprised us. We have never considered Japan, its army, its people and its leaders any less than they are today. Japan suffers from the same unsolved problems as we and Italy. It has no room for its growing population. The land suffers from a growing shortage of raw materials and economic prospects. Its plans for a new order in the Far East are forced on it by nature and its geographical and territorial situation. Unless it wishes to give up all claims to being a great power, it must follow the laws fate ordains.

Clearly, Mr. Roosevelt and his plutocratic clique have never understood this, and probably never will. They see the national aspirations of Japan in the same way as a greedy capitalist, who would prefer to burn down his factory rather than give the workers what they need to maintain a basic existence — that which is absolutely necessary if they are even to maintain life. Giving them what they need would be no great sacrifice for the owner, but he stays firm out of principle. In relations between great powers there comes a time in which negotiations are making no progress, and one must turn to arms.

It is characteristic of the world-famed stubborn arrogance of the Anglo-Saxon warmongers and arsonist clique that they entirely underestimated Japan’s military capacities and possibilities, for which they have had to pay shockingly heavy price. In London and Washington they presumably are rethinking the hopes they had even two weeks ago about America’s entry into the war. In any event, one senses considerable disappointment in Mr. Roosevelt’s and Mr. Churchill’s public statements, and the criticism of their remarkably foolish behavior that has found its way past the dictatorship of a diligent censor shows that this disappointment is also shared by public opinion.

We certainly do not underestimate the possibilities remaining for England and the United States. We have frequently said that colossuses of the size of these two world powers do not fall in days, weeks, or even months. We have to assume a hard and pitiless fight stands before us in which there will be ups and downs, and that even we will not be able to avoid some occasional setbacks. That is not decisive. What is decisive is the fact that the chances of the Axis are far better, and that their leaders will not hesitate to take advantage of that fact.

One cannot ignore the military potential at their disposal. However, a comparison with the third year of the World War is entirely false here. We held firm then for four years, and lost only because of weak leadership. But Germany entered the war in 1939 far better prepared than it was in 1914. The difficulty then was to defeat France, Britain’s traditional continental ally. That we have already done. The Balkans are no threat any longer. The Soviet Union has lost its offensive capacity and is no longer a decisive factor in the war. Italy and Japan, two world powers that opposed us in the World War, now are fighting on our side. That counts twice for us, not to mention the countless spiritual and moral imponderables that favor us. Altogether, the present balance of forces is wholly different than it was during the World War.

We hardly find it necessary today to rely on a belief in our national invincibility to predict that victory is certain and inevitable. The facts lead to that conclusion. They speak unanimously for us. Our figures are accurate, and if the other side proposes different figures, they depend on bad bookkeeping.

The neutral nations agree more and more. The increasing difficulties of civilian life, unavoidable given the duration of the war, will not have much influence on the war’s outcome. They are about the same on both sides. If a longer than normal winter means that potatoes come to market later than usual, it hardly means that they grow any faster in England because it is governed by plutocrats instead of National Socialists. If there are transportation difficulties in fall and winter that affect big cities and industrial areas, things are no different for the enemy. People stand in lines in England outside tobacco stores just as they do here. The fact that certain goods and luxuries are available in shops there is only a matter of their high price, which keeps the masses from purchasing them, not the upper classes. This gives the appearance of prosperity, but not its reality.

The thing to keep in mind is that we do not consider these factors important to our chances of victory, while England has built its hopes on them. We sometimes make the mistake of seeing the difficulties in civilian life only here, assuming that the other side is living just as it did during peacetime.

That is hardly the case. The fact that England is an island is a disadvantage, not an advantage, given the nature of war today. From a military standpoint it would be difficult for us to invade Great Britain, but it would be at least as difficult, and probably more so, for England to invade Europe. We have the advantage of secure rail lines. England must bring in by ship everything that it cannot itself produce. Its fleet is in greater danger today than ever before, as was recently proven by its defeats in the Pacific. England will find it almost impossible to attack us. Its attacks on the periphery, even if they succeed, will not have a significant impact on the general situation. The British Isles are a prisoner of their own insularity. The war will end when London understands that. Until that happens, Great Britain will have to suffer recurring blows before at last the fatal one is struck.

Japan has shown once again the enormous power in a people’s national dynamics. One is deeply moved by the accounts of the heroic deeds of Japan’s death-defying naval airmen. Japan knows that, like Germany and Italy, it is fighting for its future, for its very life. The alliance of these three great powers that despite their millennia of history retain youthful vitality is natural, the result of the inescapable power of a bitter historical logic. They see in this war their best chance at national existence. Their leadership and their peoples know what is at stake. It is true that they were forced into this war, but they are fighting it offensively, not defensively. Their young men at the front burn with passion to solve the life problems of their nations with weapons. Never before have they had such an opportunity to test their courage, their strength, their manly readiness. They see themselves affronted and insulted by plutocracy’s leaders in a way that rules out any possibility of surrender. Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt still have no idea what they have gotten themselves into. They may have envisioned a pleasant war in which they would stroll to Berlin, Rome, and Tokyo, supported by the people of countries who had been seduced by their leaders. They overlooked the fact that these governments are only saying and doing what their people want, even insist on or demand.

There is no greater mistake than to assume a gap between these governments and their people. The World War was only an intimation of coming things for the oppresed nations, regardless of which side they were on. This war is fought by people who know what they are doing. It is not only a gigantic fight for their national honor or prestige, but also a struggle for the absolute basic essentials of life, for space, work, food, and life itself. It is a fight to end the eternal crises, for a radical solution to the growing problems of their nations, which cannot be mastered any longer within their own borders. The Axis powers have been forced to defend themselves. They will do so with no sentimental looking back. They are risking everything. They will not be stopped by humanitarian phrases. Democratic tricks will not work here; fighting is the only way.

A world determined by such factors is ever changing, as the events of the past two weeks demonstrate. It demands the highest degree of alertness and readiness. Leadership and people must always be on watch, ready to take advantage of any opportunity. The day will come when the enemy begins to crumble. No one can predict when that will be, but we all know that it will come.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Collymore sticking to Twitter despite 200 racist remarks per day

Saturday, March 10th, 2012

London, Mar 10 (ANI): Former England footballer Stan Collymore refuses to quit using Twitter even though he receives up to 200 hate messages on the micro blogging site.

The former Liverpool and England striker said that he had considered quitting Twitter because of the amount of daily abuse he was receiving, despite a law student appearing in court after sending him racially abusive tweets.

The talkSPORT radio pundit re-tweeted one of the racist messages he had received from one user who wrote: @StanCollymore why are u black? U look like a monkey.

Using the code name Wpww-hooligan-88m, the user’s Twitter profile states My blood is my honour, my race is my pride and whose profile picture is a swastika with the words white power on.

Collymore, 42, immediately tweeted back saying he has had enough.

Had enough of twitter tbf but won’t go because it’s a great work tool, and too much positive feedback. Sick of the daily abuse though.

I must get 150-200 abusive messages a day now, just constant reminders of stuff that happened a long time a go. Not nice at all.

Easy to say ignore it when you see it 200 times a day.

Thanks for the support from people who support clubs all over the place. You’re why I tweet, it’s really that simple. Really grateful, he wrote.ormer Spurs and England striker Gary Lineker messaged Collymore to offer his support.

@StanCollymore My God! What is wrong with people? Actually he doesn’t qualify as a human being. He is the animal! the Daily mail quoted him as tweeting.

Collymore replied: @garylineker Cheers Gary.Legend.

Lineker replied: @StanCollymore You should never ignore it! None of us should!

The latest abuse comes after a law student admitted racially abusing Collymore on Twitter.

Joshua Cryer, of Jesmond, appeared before Newcastle magistrates to face a public order charge after a complaint from the radio pundit.

The 21-year-old Newcastle University student has previously denied sending messages in January that were grossly offensive.

Magistrates adjourned the case for a further hearing on 21 March.

Cryer was arrested in January after Collymore reported the incident police.

In a tweet at the time he wrote to the student: Not having this cr*p any more. Joshua, I see you’ve deleted your tweets. I haven’t. Two officers have a statement and evidence. See you in court.

It is not the first that Collymore, who has publicly battled depression, has previously spoken about offensive messages he has received on the social networking site.

In 2009, he decided to quit his account, although he later re-joined, after receiving several spiteful messages. (ANI)

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Odinism in the Border Ballads

Tuesday, March 6th, 2012

The borders of England and Scotland are a wildly beautiful land of rugged mountains and deep, isolated valleys carved during the last ice age.

From the time of Edward I to that of James I, three hundred years, no king’s writ carried any weight in the borders. Queen Elizabeth once sent troops in to quell the independent borderers, but the Queen’s men simply disappeared and were never heard of again. It is thought that they were slaughtered to a man. One part of the borders was even known as “The Debatable Land”, since neither Scotland nor England even dared to claim it.

The people living on the borders had no protection from any government, so they relied on their families for support. Great clans sprawled across both sides of what is now the border, with names like Maxwell, Johnstone, Scott, Rutherford, Kerr, Trotter, Dixon, Selby, Gray, Ridley, Fenwick and Forster.

Life was harsh, and physical survival often depended on successful cattle-raiding. It is recorded that when the larder was bare, the woman of the family would sometimes bring a roasting dish to the table. Removing the lid, she revealed that the dish contained nothing but a horse-riding spur. That was the sign for the men of the clan to go out raiding.

In their isolated fastnesses the borderers kept alive many elements of an earlier Anglo-Saxon culture that had been suppressed elsewhere. It is no coincidence that the only Odinist song known from the Anglo-Saxon pre-Christian era, Teribus, survived in precisely this region. Through their ballads, in particular, the borderers kept alive older beliefs, thoughts, practices and folklore, passing them by word of mouth from generation to generation.

The ballads are essentially short stories in verse, swift, impersonal, terse and dramatic, turning the daily lives of the borderers into poetry that still ranks among the glories of English literature.

Murder, treason, love, and death all feature in the ballads, but so do magic, sorcery, and necromancy. The ballad world is one in which a woman might drown her sister to gain access to the sister’s lover. In the ballad that pursues this story, The Twa Sisters, a passing musician makes a harp of the dead girl’s breast bone and strings it with her golden hair. He takes the instrument to the wedding of the guilty sister to the drowned girl’s betrothed. There the harp speaks, accusing the murderess.

The ballads don’t just mention magic of this kind in passing. They insist on it. It is clearly an integral part of the life and thought of the people from whom the ballads sprang.

As the folklorist T. F. Henderson commented, the border ballads “bring us into immediate contact with the antique, pagan, savage, superstitious, elemental characteristics of our race.” (His language may be Christian, but at least he makes the point.)

More valuable than buried coins, the ballads are a treasure hoard of the traditions and usages of our ancestors. Taken collectively, they almost amount to a slightly corrupted autobiography of a late Anglo-Saxon, mostly pagan tribe.

J. A. MacCulloch discussed early forms of literature in a book called Childhood of Fiction. What he had to say there about folk-stories can be applied to those of the border ballads into which a degree of Christianity has intruded:

“The ideas of later ages have entered into and coloured these primitive stories; comparatively modern social customs and names jostle those of a remote antiquity without any feel of incongruity; the tales have a firm root in a past paganism, but they are full of later Christian conceptions. … But this is only the veneer of a later age; the material of the stories is old, so old as to be prehistoric.”

The Christian intrusions are obvious, and usually so inept that the essential viewpoint of the ballad is not twisted. A supernatural being, for instance, may be given a cloven foot to identify him as the devil. This sort of contamination is easily set to one side, and it is appropriate to recall York Powell’s comments on the ballads (in Corpus poeticum boreale):

“The religion of the … ballads, save for the few poems that deal with the popular Catholic mythology, is absolutely as heathen as that of the Helgi Lays; the sacredness of revenge, remorse, and love, the horror of treason, cruelty, lust and fraud are well given, but of Christianised feelings there are no traces. The very scheme on which the ballads and lays are alike built, the hapless innocent death of a hero or heroine, is as heathen as the plot of any Athenian tragedy can be.”

The magic that occurs in the ballads is quite straight-forward. It is not like the metaphors of later genres of poetry, and it requires no special pleading to be accepted. It is portrayed as something that unquestionably happens, that is simply part of the way things are – just like the ghosts and sorcerers of the Icelandic sagas.

The ballad characters inhabit a world that is only precariously stable. In several ballads (such as Child Rowland and Burd Ellen) this world is called “middle-eard”, which is, of course, cognate with the Norse “Miðgarðr”. Dwellers of other worlds, including the dead, can manifest in middle-eard. If a human kisses them, or accepts food from them, he or she will fall under the jurisdiction of the Otherworld to which they properly belong.

This is a common Germanic pagan theme, forming a main plot strand in Saxo’s account of King Gormo’s visit to Guthmund. In the ballads, though, it can appear with a beautiful and sudden brevity. The Unquiet Grave is a lovely example. A lover mourns his dead favourite for too long. Here is part of one version:

“The wind doth blow today, my love,
And a few small drops of rain;
I never had but one true-love,
In cold grave she was lain.

“I’ll do as much for my true-love
As any young man may;
I’ll sit and mourn all at her grave
For a twelvemonth and a day”

The twelvemonth and a day being up,
The dead began to speak:
“Oh who sits weeping on my grave,
And will not let me sleep?”

“Tis I, my love, sits on your grave,
And will not let you sleep;
For I crave one kiss of your clay-cold lips,
And that is all I seek.”

“You crave one kiss of my clay-cold lips?
But my breath smells earthy strong;
If you have one kiss of my clay-cold lips
Your time will not be long.”

Many of the ballads express ideas and themes that are similarly found in the sources on Norse and German paganism. Thus in both Allison Gross and The Laily Worm, the enchantress blows a horn as part of her magic. As the great ballad collector Francis James Child commented, “The horn is appropriate. Witches were supposed to blow horns when they joined the wild hunt”.

The Wild Hunt! Child’s comment here is as terse as any ballad, but it takes us straight back to the Wild Hunt of 1127 CE described in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle:

“… many people both saw and heard a whole pack of huntsmen in full cry. They straddled black horses and black bucks while their hounds were pitch black with staring hideous eyes. … All through the night monks heard them sounding and winding their horns.”

It is impossible to do justice here to all the aspects of Germanic pagan folklore that the border ballads, (which were composed right down to the seventeenth century), accept as being perfectly normal, unremarkable. Readers who wish to explore them fully should obtain a copy of Child’s The English and Scottish Popular Ballads, available in a handsome five-volume Dover reprint.

One question, though, needs to be raised here. What light do the ballads, with their unquestioning acceptance of the Germanic supernatural, shed on the religion of those who composed them, listened to them, and orally transmitted them?

Most of these people – but certainly not all – would have called themselves Christians. The threat of being burned at the stake would have seen to that. A brave few clearly set themselves apart from the official creed. Both the Christian writers and the essentially pagan composers of the ballads tended to call these people “witches”. But the “witches” portrayed in the ballads are far removed from the traditional image of the old peasant hag tortured into confessing to Christian fantasies such as congress with the devil.

For instance, Northumberland Betrayed by Douglas is concerned with the aftermath of a 1569 plot to depose Protestant Queen Elizabeth in favour of her Catholic rival Mary. The two nobleman heading this movement were the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland. Lacking money, troops and proper leadership, the insurrection petered out within a month. Westmoreland slipped away, but Lord Northumberland tried to escape to sanctuary across the border. Legal sanctuary should have been automatic, but it was not forthcoming. The Scottish Armstrong family stole all of Northumberland’s belongings, then betrayed him for a sum of money to the Regent of Scotland, who put him under a form of house arrest in William Douglas’ castle of Lochleven. In 1571 he was lured to Berwick, betrayed to the English forces, and beheaded in 1572.

The ballad follows this story closely, but incorporates other details. In particular, it adds another intriguing character to the whole sorry mess. This is Douglas’ sister, Mary Douglas. She is the only character that the ballad respects. Northumberland is an incompetent, trusting fool. Douglas is a smiling hypocrite who values money more than honour.

Mary, however, makes an unsolicited offer to help Northumberland flee to safety in Edinburgh. The Lord replies that he cannot believe Mary’s brother would ever betray him. Mary offers to show him what lies in store. He declines, priggishly saying he “never loved no witchcraft”, but allows his servant to go to her.

Mary instructs the servant to look through the hollow of her ring, and he sees the host of English lords waiting to seize his master. He asks how far away they are. Mary says fifty miles, adding that

“My mother, she was a witch woman,
And part of itt shee learned mee;
She wold let me see out of Lough Leuen
What they dyd in London cytye.”

The distraught servant is unable to convince his master, who goes off blithely and unsuspectingly into captivity – and execution. Having done her best to save Northumberland, Mary Douglas plays no further part in the ballad.

The magical device of seeing far-off people through a ring doesn’t sound at all like humble peasant “witchcraft”. It takes us straight back to Saxo, in whose pages Ruta’s arm is bent into a ring and, looking through it, Biarco sees Odin on a white horse.

During the period depicted in Northumberland Betrayed by Douglas, accusations of “witchcraft” were frequently made against high-born ladies in Scotland and the borders. Among those accused were the Lady Buccleuch, the Countess of Athole, and the Lady Foulis. The sister of the earl of Angus, Lady Janet Douglas, a relative of the Douglases of Lochleven, was burnt for “witchcraft” in 1537.

To gain a broader perspective on all this, we should remember that in Iceland as late as the seventeenth century people were still being burnt for the possession of runes. Clearly the ancient pagan practices were continued in both these isolated parts of the world, even after centuries of persecution.

We should also recall that the composer of the ballad seems to endorse both Mary Douglas’ magic and her character. The ballad makes it clear that if Northumberland hadn’t been such a fool, Mary would have saved him. Why? Mary wouldn’t have called herself an Odinist, and the ballad calls her a “witch”, but she is clearly an educated northern pagan. So why should she bother to try to save the life of some Christian partisan? Pagan horror of treason might explain her motives, or the sacredness of hospitality. But it is tempting to believe that Mary was not acting entirely on her own, and that there was more religious intrigue in the sixteenth century borderlands than the main participants, the Catholics and Protestants, were aware of.

The ballads, and the strange times in which they are set, need more study from an enlightened modern pagan perspective.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Is Scotland moving towards independence?

Friday, March 2nd, 2012

Scotland’s campaign for independence from England began almost as soon as the unification happened, back in 1707. The campaign for Scottish independence has picked up speed with Scotland’s first minister, Alex Salmond, announcing plans to hold an independence referendum in 2014. The two countries separating is once again becoming quite a plausible scenario. But for some there’s a lot at stake. Our correspondents Alix Bayle and Yong Chim report.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Hitler’s Order of the Day to Troops on the Eastern Front (October 2, 1941)

Tuesday, February 28th, 2012

Filled with the greatest concern for the existence and future of our people, I decided on June 22 to appeal to you to anticipate in the nick of time threatening aggression by one opponent. It was the intention of the Kremlin powers-as we know today-to destroy not only Germany but all Europe.

Comrades, meanwhile you will have gained two impressions: First, this opponent had armed himself for attack to such an extent that even gravest apprehensions have been surpassed. Second, God’s mercy on our people and the entire European world if this barbaric enemy had been able to move his tens of thousands of tanks before we moved ours! All Europe would have been lost, for this enemy does not consist of soldiers, but a majority of beasts.

Now, my comrades, you have seen with your own eyes “the paradise of workers and farmers.” In a country that, owing to its vastness and fertility, could feed the whole world, poverty rules to such an extent that we Germans could not imagine.

This is a result of nearly a 25-year Jewish rule that, as bolshevism, is basically similar to the general form of capitalism. The bearers of this system in both cases are the same: Jews and only Jews.

Soldiers, when I called on you on June 22 to ward off the terrible danger menacing our homeland you faced the biggest military power of all times. Thanks to your bravery, my comrades, we succeeded in barely 3 months in crushing this opponent’s tank brigades one after another, in annihilating countless divisions, in taking unsurveyable number of prisoners, in occupying vast regions-not empty space, but those spaces from which the opponent was living and from which his gigantic war industry was being supplied with all kinds of raw materials.

Within a few weeks his three most important industrial regions will be completely in our hands. Your names, soldiers of the German armed forces, and the names of our brave allies, the names of your divisions and regiments and your tank forces and air squadrons, will be associated for all time with the most tremendous victories in history.

You have taken more than 2,400,000 prisoners, destroyed or captured more than 17,500 tanks and more than 21,600 pieces of artillery. Fourteen thousand two hundred planes were brought down or destroyed on the ground.

The world hitherto never has experienced similar events. The territory the German and allied troops have occupied is more than twice as large as the German Reich of 1933, more than four times as large as the English motherland. Since June 22 the strongest fortifications have been penetrated, tremendous streams have been crossed, innumerable localities have been stormed and fortresses and casemate systems have been crushed or smoked out. From the far north where our superbly brave Finnish allies gave evidence of their courage a second time, down to Crimea you stand today together with Slovak, Hungarian, Italian and Rumanian divisions roughly 1,000 kilometers deep in the enemy’s country.

Spanish, Croat and Belgian units now join you and others will follow. This fight-perhaps for the first time-is recognized by all European nations as a common action to safeguard the future of this most cultural continent.

The work that has been achieved behind your tremendous front is gigantic. Nearly 2,000 bridges have been built, 25,500 kilometers of railways are functioning again; in fact, more than 15,000 kilometers of railways already have been changed to general European gauge.

Work is being done on thousands of kilometers of roads. Vast territories already have been taken over by the civil administration. Life there is quickly being restored according to reasonable laws. Vast quantities of foodstuffs, fuel and munitions are available.

This outstanding achievement of one struggle was obtained with sacrifices that, however painful in individual cases, in the total amount to not yet 5 per cent of those of the World War. No one knows better what you, my comrades, and with you are brave allied soldiers, have achieved suffered and sacrificed in these three and a half months than one who fulfilled his duty as a soldier in the past war. During these three and a half months, my soldiers, the precondition, at least, has been created for a last mighty blow that shall crush this opponent before Winter sets in.

All preparations, so far as human beings can foresee, have been made. Step by step, this has been prepared systematically to manoeuvre the opponent into such a position that we can now strike a deadly blow.

Today begins the last great, decisive battle of this year. It will hit this enemy destructively and with it the instigator of the entire war, England herself. For if we crush this opponent, we also remove the last English ally on the Continent. Thus we will free the German Reich and entire Europe from a menace greater than any since the time of the Huns and later of the Mongol tribes.

The German people, therefore, will be with you more than ever before during the few ensuing weeks. What you and allied soldiers have achieved already merits our deepest thanks. With bated breath, the blessing of the entire German homeland accompanies you during the hard days ahead. With the Lord’s aid you not only will bring victory but also the most essential condition for peace.


Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Boy, 7, in racist rap for Africa question

Monday, February 20th, 2012

A BOY of seven was accused of racism after asking a fellow pupil if he was “brown because he was from Africa“.

Elliott Dearlove’s mum Hayley White was summoned to the head’s office after the other boy’s mother complained.

Healthcare worker Hayley, 29, was read the school’s zero-tolerance policy on racism and asked to sign a form saying Elliott had made a racist remark.

But she said: “I refused to sign it. It was simply curiosity from a seven-year-old boy, nothing more.”

She added: “Elliott was extremely distressed by it all. He kept saying to me, ‘I was just asking a question. I didn’t mean it to be nasty.’ ”

Janet Adamson, head of Griffin Primary School in Hull, issued a statement saying: “We acted in accordance with council guidance on reporting racist incidents.”

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Conversion in Scandinavia

Sunday, February 12th, 2012

Attempts to convert Scandinavia began even before the Viking Age. The Anglo-Saxon St Willibrord led a mission to Denmark in 725, but although he was well-received by the king, his mission had little effect. The Frankish St Ansgar led a second wave of missionary activity from the 820s onwards – with the support of the Frankish Emperor Louis the Pious. Ansgar and his followers established missions in both Denmark and Sweden, with the support of local rulers, but made little impact on the population as a whole

Archaeological evidence suggests that Christianity was adopted piecemeal in Norway, with settlements converting or not depending on whether the local chieftain converted. The same idea can also be seen on a larger scale. In the mid-tenth century Hakon the Good of Norway, who had been fostered in England, tried to use his royal authority to establish Christianity. However, when it became clear that this would lose him the support of pagan chieftains, he abandoned his attempts, and his Anglo-Saxon bishops were sent back to England.

Harald Bluetooth of Denmark was apparently more successful. His famous runestone at Jelling tells us that he ‘made the Danes Christian’, and this is supported both by Christian imagery on Danish coins from his reign and by German records of the establishment of bishops in various Danish towns. This began the lasting conversion of the Danes. Although there may have been a brief pagan reaction after Harald’s death, the influence of the Church became firmly established once Cnut became ruler of both England and Denmark in 1018.

Further attempts by Anglo-Saxon missionaries in the late tenth century had only a limited effect in Norway and Sweden. Olaf Tryggvasson of Norway and Olof Tribute-king of Sweden were both converted, but this had limited effect on the population as a whole. A further wave of conversion in Norway under Olaf Haraldsson (St Olaf) (1015-30) was more successful and gradually led to lasting conversion. Sweden, however, faced a pagan reaction in the mid-11th century, and it was not until the 12th century that Christianity became firmly established.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook

Call to restore historic Norman castle site in Brinklow

Sunday, February 12th, 2012

KNOWN locally as “the Tump”, this overgrown mound doesn’t immediately strike you as a site of huge historical significance.

Many are unaware the quiet Warwickshire village of Brinklow is home to one of the best preserved moat and castle sites in the country.

It’s overgrown, litter strewn and eroded by the weather – but now a handful of villagers have united to save the 11th century castle grounds.

Brinklow Parish Council last week managed to secure the lease on the former grazing land for a peppercorn rent from a local farmer.

They have a £7,000 grant from Warwickshire County Council’s leader project to restore the site – now all they need are volunteers to help out.

“From the main road you would never know there’s such a historical castle just up there behind the church,” Councillor David Lowe said.

“We want to restore all this.

“We’ve already had working parties come up to clear some of the rubbish that has been left over decades.

“The land has all been churned up by cattle.

“Now we want to clear out dead vegetation, develop proper access ways and put up historical notice boards.”

The fortified site has an inner and outer defensive wall and moat, making it highly original.

Volunteers are needed to cut back overgrown vegetation which is stopping grass from growing. The lack of grass means heavy rain is washing loose soil down in to the moat.

The castle courtyard would have contained everything for the villagers to hold out under siege, from food stalls to a smithy and armed barracks.

Local historian Diane Lindsay, author of The History of Brynca’s Low, explained: “The double-bailey layout of the castle is extremely rare.

“If there was any trouble in the village, they would withdraw from the village to the outer bailey. And if it got worse they would withdraw to the inner bailey.

“When the Normans came here there was a lot of feuding over land.

“The castle was a place to subdue and show their authority over the population.

“It would have been built in France, brought over and assembled using slave labour.”

The castle was built on an ancient pagan burial mound. The Normans used it as a defensive sighting point for its position near the Roman Fosse Way.

Councillor Roger Pearson, chairman of Brinklow Parish Council, said: “We want to encourage this as a real recreational facility.

“We want to make a historical information packs and encourage local school groups to come here as educational projects.”

The group also wants overgrown bushes cut back to make the ancient site visible from the road

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook