This originally appeared as “Obscuring the Jewish Issue in Media #2 - Banking Dynasties” on The Occidental Observer in October 2022. It so starkly revealed the origins of Jewish power over the U.S. starting in 1913 and expanding to today, that I felt it needed to be re-written outside that essay series focused on media, and presented on its own terms focused on the overwhelming lever of control, Jewish banking.
As does Goodson, John Kenneth Galbraith (the only non-Jewish mentor of Schwab) details the planned creation of the Great Depression in his 1950s book The Great Crash.
It's minor, but I would not call Tragedy & Hope a novel. Unless I missed something.
In Footnote 12, Conjuring Hitler says international bankers funded and supported Hitler. This is a common claim but I have found no credible evidence for it. Henry Ashby Turner writes in Big Business and the Rise of Hitler (he is no fan) that the NSDAP was funded by membership dues, fees at events, sales of literature, and little contributions from industrialists hedging their bets.
Good catch on the Tragedy & Hope classification, I updated it.
Re: Conjuring Hitler, have you read it? I thought the argument presented was strong. Also it matches up with what former South African central banker Stephen Mitford Goodson (who had excellent credentials) argued in his book A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind. He was allegedly murdered by globohomo a couple years ago for writing it...
No I have not read Conjuring Hitler. I am quickly disappointed with many books on Hitler that claim he was funded by Rothschilds, Jews, etc. All my other studies show this was lies and the funding sources were better known.
Here is an example later in your excellent essay: "Max financed the German struggle in World War I and later the Nazi regime." Sutton says someone named Sydney Warburg financed Hitler, but no one to my knowledge has ever identified a living person by that name. It all has the stink of anti-Hitler defamation propaganda, especially so that no model of self-financing a successful national party can be beheld.
Thanks Karl, I don't know who Syndey Warburg is but I have read of Paul and Max Warburg, along with others. I can understand why you could think that attributing Hitler's rise to international financiers would detract from his popularity among the German population, but my take is more nuanced.
Specifically, I believe that international financiers *did* support Hitler's rise, just like they supported the rise of the Bolsheviks, in order to turn each against each other so that the financiers could dominate the European continent. This is classic Mackinder Heartland Theory, which was very strongly believed by the British at the time, that the European continent would either be dominated by a German+Russian alliance or, if they could be split, then by the sea powers (British and Americans): https://katehon.com/en/article/heartland-theory-and-duality-landpower-vs-seapower . It's the same logic why the British/Americans dynamited Nordstream 2, by the way, to prevent any further German/Russian integration...
This argument doesn't mean that Hitler's base of support was inorganic. Additionally, I believe that Hitler dramatically outperformed the international financier's expectations (who intentionally set up Germany for destruction in order to further global centralization and control and as a sacrificial offering to the Demiurge), both because of Hitler's strategic abilities, luck, and the extremely high competence of the average German soldier. Indeed, one analysis shows that a 1% increase in GDP toward armament could have won Barbarossa for Germany: https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=243557
With that said, the President of the Reichbank, Hjalmar Schacht, fed ultra-confidential German production figures to fellow Mason and head of the Bank of England Montagu Norman, who used that information to calculate what would become the Allies dramatically outproduced what would become the Axis anywhere from a 3:1 to a 10:1 ratio depending on category, from oil to air and naval forces to manpower to tank production to munitions, which gave them the comfort level they desired of an assured victory before green-lighting the manipulation of the world toward war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II#Production_summaries_1939%E2%80%931945
With respect to "Conjuring Hitler" specifically, his approach is neutral toward the subject matter, scholarly, and he uses sources that you would likely appreciate such as David Irving.
Not just Hitler's popularity with the German people at the time, but today's people of the world today. Essential for the Jewish banksters to demonize any successful model that challenges their financial hegemony, and Hitler was the greatest challenge they ever saw.
I can see the logic in a strategy to build up two opponents in order to incite them against each other, then profit from both sides and glory in the mass death as Jewish banksters seem to do. But why attribute this funded build-up to Hitler (who didn't spend much of it all on military in the peace years, and even as you say restricted it in war years so as to supply the domestic German people, who had suffered enough)? Why not attribute it to Napoleon, Hussein, Assad, Gaddafi, Iran... Because they were self funded, the greatest threat to the Jew World Order, as you say in Appendix A (paraphrase). Same with Germany.
Degrelle said Hitler basically kept Schacht on a short leash, using him to advise the German revival, then firing him when he was no longer needed.
After the Bolshevik (Jew) take-over, alliance between the former Russia and Germany was impossible. Everyone knew it, especially Hitler. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a delaying tactic for both sides, neither sincere. Stalin was playing the British/French against Germany to weaken them all for the final Soviet mass invasion and take-over of all Europe, including Britain. Hitler knew that too, but he needed the Soviets off his back while he neutralized the French/British threat.
There is no dispute over whether Stalin was planning to launch Operation Thunderbolt a couple/few weeks after Barbarossa. That is a certainty according to Viktor Suvorov in Icebreaker and The Chief Culprit. BTW, increased funding for Barbarossa was by no means the only factor. Germany desperately needed resources it could not buy no matter how much it spent, and so Barbarossa was not just a defensive pre-emptive strike military campaign, but also a resource access campaign. This caused a dispute between Hitler and his generals, who did not appreciate the need for resource targets along with military.
I have come to distrust select presentations of Irving. I think the Jews got to him and he was forced to introduce certain anti-German propaganda points into his histories.
Finally, quantity of weapons was no sure strategy against Germany, when quality of new wonder weapons were emerging. Richard Tedor said he found out the German V2 rocket program was delayed by 1 year by a Communist subversive/saboteur. That might have won Germany the war, or deployment of the new nerve gas. Or more jet fighters and bombers. If the bankers tried to build up Germany as a controlled combatant, they were playing with fire and it damn near backfired on them. I don't believe that theory.
Yes, another factor is that Germany had no oil at all. It got all of its oil from Romania and the Soviet Union. Therefore if the Soviet Union was going to attack Germany (as Hitler correctly believed and as you point out Suvorov's thesis) it would simply attack Romania (which bordered the SU) and Germany would be starved of oil and fall very quickly. Therefore it was forced to attack preemptively.
As mentioned below, I addressed World War 2 differently than the others, even though the international financier motivations of control were the same, because of how emotional and polarizing WW2 is. It is addressed within "Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks: Part 2".
But in Appendix A no mention of outside funding for NSDAP, and indeed a fully state-owned bank issuing notes without interest. I'm puzzled by the discrepancy. Are you saying Hitler received Dulles & Rothschild funding early on, then turned on his creditors and launched the state-owned free currency system later?
Appendix A arguments are mostly from Goodson. He argues that the international financiers gave Germany room to rebuild itself in order to be destroyed later. Goodson argues that Germany had a quasi state-owned free currency system under Schacht, then Schacht finally applied the breaks once Germany was judged to have received sufficient growth. Hitler got mad and fired him instead of agreeing to the break on German growth, and that's specifically what caused the war. I will quote Goodson:
"In January 1939 maers came to a head when the President of the Reichsbank, Hjalmar Schacht, refused extension of three billion Reichsmarks worth of Offa and Mefo bills, because of fears of “inflation”. On 7 January 1939 Schacht sent Hitler a memorandum signed by himself and the eight other board members of the Reichsbank, which contained the following main points.
1. The Reich must spend only that amount covered by taxes.
2.Full financial control must be returned to the Ministry of Finance. (Then forced to pay for anything the army desired.)
3. Price and wage control must be rendered effective. The existing mismanagement must be eliminated.
4. The use of money and investment markets must be at the sole discretion of the Reichsbank. (This meant a practical elimination of Göring’s Four Year Plan).”
Schacht concluded his memorandum with the ambiguous words: “We shall be happy to do our best to collaborate with all future goals, but for now the time has come to call a halt.”[252] By these means Schacht intended to collapse the German economy,[253] which during the period 1933-39 had increased its Gross National Product by 100 percent. From being a ruined and bankrupt nation in January 1933 with 7,500,000 unemployed persons,[254] Hitler had transformed Germany into a modern socialist paradise. He was justifiably angry and rejected the recommendations of the Reichsbank as “mutiny”.[255] Two weeks later Schacht was sacked. Roger Elletson describes this momentous event as follows: “On 19 January 1939, Schacht was summarily dismissed, and the Reichsbank was ordered to grant the Reich all credits requested by Hitler. This decisive action essentially emasculated both the Reichsbank’s control over domestic monetary policy, and the German power base of international Jewry. It had the effect of removing from Jewish bankers the power to deflate and destroy the German economy.
Excluding the implications of the interest rate paid on the MEFO bills, Germany could now be viewed as being on a “Feder System”,
rather than a “Schacht System”. The Reichsbank effectively became an arm of the government, with the only real change being in the fact that bills were now monetised, or discounted, under the auspices of the State rather than some Jewish lackey in the Reichsbank presidency.”[256] Thus only in January 1939 did the Reichsbank become an authentic State Bank. Schacht’s dismissal also terminated the transfer of confidential information regarding all Germany’s economic developments,[257] which he had been deviously giving without interruption to Montagu Norman,[258] a fellow mason and Governor of the Bank of England (1920-44).
A new Reichsbank law, which was promulgated on 15 June 1939, made the bank “unconditionally subordinated to the sovereignty of the state.”
I am reading Part 2. Excellent research and presentation.
I object to the link in Footnote 5, which goes to a Catholic site, title "As Many Abortions as Possible." More anti-German atrocity stories. Its sources are highly questionable, including Jews Raul Hilberg the holohoax promoter, Levin the holohoax promoter, Jew Grossman (who cites Weimar porn, not NS), commie Arendt, "Hitler's Table Talk," which has been discredited as propaganda, and more.
I find I have a hard time tolerating the anti-NS war propaganda and atrocity stories. We should suspect every time now and omit when we know it's lies.
Hi Karl, I have heard other objections to that link, so with this in mind I will remove it. Just to be clear, there is a three parter "Goals, Motivations and Strategies of the Owners of Modern Society", and you are commenting on part 2 of that. But that 3 parter is followed by an additional two parter called "Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks" and I am referencing specifically the second part of that in the comments here. Regarding Hitler's Table Talk, everything I have read is that it is a legitimate source (and there is a key segment referenced in "Deeper Societal Trends"), although a number of the points made in it were mis-translated into the English version (as pointed out, I believe, by Richard Carrier and others).
I appreciate that NF. The IDF calls itself "the world's most ethical army," or some nonsense. This is a deliberate reversal of reality, as they so often do. In fact the German Wehrmacht and in particular the SS was the world's most ethical army at the time, and might still hold that honor today. Telling that the IDF broadcast porn when they invaded Palestine. Most of the NS leadership including the military leadership were Christians, Catholics and Lutherans, including Hitler as Catholic, and this accusation of using pornography as a weapon is completely unfounded. In fact the NS were strongly opposed to pornography, prostitution and all forms of perversion and degeneracy the Jews were pushing in Weimar, and one of Hitler's first laws was to ban it. The book burnings were entirely of pornographic smut and marxist literature out of the Institute for Sex Research run by the perverted Jew Magnus Hirschfeld. These book burnings were instigated by German students, not the administration, though the NSDAP approved. Most mothers today would as well.
I don't recall now where I learned HTT is suspect, nor the details, but I internalized that view and have dismissed it as a viable source ever since. I know I will have to find my evidence, but might not be able to.
A number of points made in it were mistranslated... We can probably identify which ones. Hitler raving about killing all the Jews. Hitler raving about taking over the world. More gas chambers!
Basically, he thinks the German translation into French and/or English was intentionally brutalized, and he also believes that the original German version involved shorthand dictated notes that contained errors due to the transcriber's misunderstanding of various Hitler points. But Carrier also reaffirms Hitler's attacks on Paul of Tarsus, which is the point I focus on...
Re: Hirschfeld, he was even pushing transgenderism back then...
"John Foster Dulles arranged financing for Hitler, but he was never a Nazi." I would have to see proof or evidence for this. The financing, not Dulles as NS. If so, how much? At what time? How were the funds transferred? Why did Hitler need them and what did he spend them on?
In my studies, NS Germany never took significant funds before or during the War. Hitler Democrat by Degrelle says they funded the revival with MeFo Bonds, based on the value of the 3 largest German corporations. One was IG Farben, explaining the ongoing demonization propaganda against that firm. Henry Ashby Turner's work Big Business and the Rise of Hitler seems definitive on NSDAP funding, and it was not Dulles, Rothschild, Warburg, but self-funded with limited hedge bets by Thyssen and a couple other industrialists.
Hi Karl, yes, the pattern is the same, but World War 2 is such a polarizing, emotional topic that I thought it would be better to frame it in a different manner, which is approached in "Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks: Part 2" and then within the Appendix.
Hi Karl, that quote is from Mullins. It's been awhile since I've read "The World Order: Our Secret Rulers", and I can go refresh my memory if you like, but I assume he is referring to the Dawes plan, which per Dulles's wiki: "As a partner in Sullivan & Cromwell, Dulles expanded upon his late grandfather Foster's expertise, specializing in international finance. He played a major role in designing the Dawes Plan, which reduced German reparations payments and temporarily resolved the reparations issue by having American firms lend money to German states and private companies. Under that compromise, the money was invested and the profits sent as reparations to Britain and France, which used the funds to repay their own war loans from the U.S. In the 1920s Dulles was involved in setting up a billion dollars' worth of these loans.
After the Wall Street Crash of 1929, Dulles's previous practice brokering and documenting international loans ended. After 1931 Germany stopped making some of its scheduled payments. In 1934 Germany unilaterally stopped payments on private debts of the sort that Dulles was handling. In 1935, with the Nazis in power, Sullivan & Cromwell's junior partners forced Dulles to cut all business ties with Germany. Dulles was then prominent in the religious peace movement and an isolationist, but the junior partners were led by his brother Allen, so he reluctantly acceded to their wishes."
In 1931 Germany was granted a reprieve on payments because the world-wide Great Depression imposed by Jewish banksters made payments impossible. So France occupied the Ruhr. Hitler advocated active resistance in the Ruhr, and would not allow NSDAP to join a coalition of passive resistance.
It was after 1/30/33 that Hitler himself stopped reparations payments. I'd have to research the date. He gave a speech. In 1936 Germany marched into the Rhineland and re-occupied its old territory. IT was a bold move and some wondered if France/Britain would go to war, but Hitler did not flinch and the move was unopposed.
Amazing article filled with facts most even still dont know, i love the reference to Eustace Mullins book, he was first writing about it but still alot refer to Edward Griffin and his book about the FED, but even Mullins said in interviews Griffin copied him.
Warburg came from Italy/Bologna, so called black nobility(guess people dont want to say sephardic jew so they say black nobility), he only changed his name in germany(after the town Warburg were he first arrived), the internet says his prior name was "del banco" which would be sure hilarious, maybe he noticed its too obvious with lastname "bank".
Mullins seems more iconic than Griffin, though neither featured the Jewish Issue.
Yeah, The Bank would be too obvious wouldn't it? LOL. So take up a German town name, sure that's brilliant.
Mark Weber disputed me when I said if one man was responsible for the Fed, it was Warburg. Weber insisted one man could not have achieved such a thing, and referred to the 11 other banks than NYC. I said those were fronts and I referenced 6 books or entries that named Warburg as architect. One was by Warburg himself, but not published until 1975. The Minneapolis Fed bank has its own entry celebrating Warburg as creating the Fed. That clinches it.
I relied on the Spivak Wikipedia entry. If you go to that link, use control-F, enter "Business Plot" you will find the reference under the "Career" section.
Wikipedia relies on Spivak's article found here as a PDF:
This Video or Article with my comments is Referenced Here:
{Broken link for full URL display - if printed for reference}
-
https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-1984
[ https://stevenwork.substack. com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-1984]
Archived: https://archive.is/Y2pbY [completed same day]
DropBox: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yagpdos0utc0cl29f3pv3/Multiverse-Journal-Index-Number-1984-August-11th-2023-Friday-Morning.pdf?rlkey=bv4yuogfbdqt66hecjy215abt&dl=0
[ https://www.dropbox. com/scl/fi/yagpdos0utc0cl29f3pv3/Multiverse-Journal-Index-Number-1984-August-11th-2023-Friday-Morning.pdf?rlkey=bv4yuogfbdqt66hecjy215abt&dl=0]
-
https://www.facebook.com/Steven.Work/posts/pfbid0Yq54DY3a7CNTd1jC7YQyb1Ed2wvdZZ1GEDQZBB1P6NLHgwSrrezSm8XLftp4xhKTl
[ https://www.facebook. com/Steven. Work/posts/pfbid0Yq54DY3a7CNTd1jC7YQyb1Ed2wvdZZ1GEDQZBB1P6NLHgwSrrezSm8XLftp4xhKTl]
Archived: https://archive.ph/rXXT8
DropBox Files: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/g5r7cq48zpezqyn4qt5xw/Facebook-Multiverse-Journal-Index-Number-1984-August-11th-2023-Friday-Morning.pdf?rlkey=w972fya9xe309kq0k736ijwmo&dl=0
[ https://www.dropbox. com/scl/fi/g5r7cq48zpezqyn4qt5xw/Facebook-Multiverse-Journal-Index-Number-1984-August-11th-2023-Friday-Morning.pdf?rlkey=w972fya9xe309kq0k736ijwmo&dl=0]
-
https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1536848162398933002
https://gab.com/StevWork/posts/110871839946744204
Archived: https://archive.ph/Dre1L
https://twitter.com/StevWork/status/1690113506756997120
[ https://twitter. com/StevWork/status/1690113506756997120]
-
{Today's videos & Articles}
DropBox Files: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/yc2s2rh8mnfb9b7h3bn91/h?rlkey=5914ulotctok22wtjlpk7ecj0&dl=0
[ https://www.dropbox. com/scl/fo/yc2s2rh8mnfb9b7h3bn91/h?rlkey=5914ulotctok22wtjlpk7ecj0&dl=0]
-
August 11th, 2023, Friday Morning, Index Number 1984:
Hi Karl, nice article. I cover similar themes as what you cover in this article from a somewhat different angle here, which I think you may appreciate: https://neofeudalism.substack.com/p/goals-motivations-and-strategies
As does Goodson, John Kenneth Galbraith (the only non-Jewish mentor of Schwab) details the planned creation of the Great Depression in his 1950s book The Great Crash.
Good link NF. I am reading through it.
It's minor, but I would not call Tragedy & Hope a novel. Unless I missed something.
In Footnote 12, Conjuring Hitler says international bankers funded and supported Hitler. This is a common claim but I have found no credible evidence for it. Henry Ashby Turner writes in Big Business and the Rise of Hitler (he is no fan) that the NSDAP was funded by membership dues, fees at events, sales of literature, and little contributions from industrialists hedging their bets.
Good catch on the Tragedy & Hope classification, I updated it.
Re: Conjuring Hitler, have you read it? I thought the argument presented was strong. Also it matches up with what former South African central banker Stephen Mitford Goodson (who had excellent credentials) argued in his book A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind. He was allegedly murdered by globohomo a couple years ago for writing it...
No I have not read Conjuring Hitler. I am quickly disappointed with many books on Hitler that claim he was funded by Rothschilds, Jews, etc. All my other studies show this was lies and the funding sources were better known.
Here is an example later in your excellent essay: "Max financed the German struggle in World War I and later the Nazi regime." Sutton says someone named Sydney Warburg financed Hitler, but no one to my knowledge has ever identified a living person by that name. It all has the stink of anti-Hitler defamation propaganda, especially so that no model of self-financing a successful national party can be beheld.
Thanks Karl, I don't know who Syndey Warburg is but I have read of Paul and Max Warburg, along with others. I can understand why you could think that attributing Hitler's rise to international financiers would detract from his popularity among the German population, but my take is more nuanced.
Specifically, I believe that international financiers *did* support Hitler's rise, just like they supported the rise of the Bolsheviks, in order to turn each against each other so that the financiers could dominate the European continent. This is classic Mackinder Heartland Theory, which was very strongly believed by the British at the time, that the European continent would either be dominated by a German+Russian alliance or, if they could be split, then by the sea powers (British and Americans): https://katehon.com/en/article/heartland-theory-and-duality-landpower-vs-seapower . It's the same logic why the British/Americans dynamited Nordstream 2, by the way, to prevent any further German/Russian integration...
This argument doesn't mean that Hitler's base of support was inorganic. Additionally, I believe that Hitler dramatically outperformed the international financier's expectations (who intentionally set up Germany for destruction in order to further global centralization and control and as a sacrificial offering to the Demiurge), both because of Hitler's strategic abilities, luck, and the extremely high competence of the average German soldier. Indeed, one analysis shows that a 1% increase in GDP toward armament could have won Barbarossa for Germany: https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=243557
With that said, the President of the Reichbank, Hjalmar Schacht, fed ultra-confidential German production figures to fellow Mason and head of the Bank of England Montagu Norman, who used that information to calculate what would become the Allies dramatically outproduced what would become the Axis anywhere from a 3:1 to a 10:1 ratio depending on category, from oil to air and naval forces to manpower to tank production to munitions, which gave them the comfort level they desired of an assured victory before green-lighting the manipulation of the world toward war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II#Production_summaries_1939%E2%80%931945
With respect to "Conjuring Hitler" specifically, his approach is neutral toward the subject matter, scholarly, and he uses sources that you would likely appreciate such as David Irving.
Good debate here NF. I must move on now but looking forward to more as appropriate. I will try and look at part 2.
Interesting.
Not just Hitler's popularity with the German people at the time, but today's people of the world today. Essential for the Jewish banksters to demonize any successful model that challenges their financial hegemony, and Hitler was the greatest challenge they ever saw.
I can see the logic in a strategy to build up two opponents in order to incite them against each other, then profit from both sides and glory in the mass death as Jewish banksters seem to do. But why attribute this funded build-up to Hitler (who didn't spend much of it all on military in the peace years, and even as you say restricted it in war years so as to supply the domestic German people, who had suffered enough)? Why not attribute it to Napoleon, Hussein, Assad, Gaddafi, Iran... Because they were self funded, the greatest threat to the Jew World Order, as you say in Appendix A (paraphrase). Same with Germany.
Degrelle said Hitler basically kept Schacht on a short leash, using him to advise the German revival, then firing him when he was no longer needed.
After the Bolshevik (Jew) take-over, alliance between the former Russia and Germany was impossible. Everyone knew it, especially Hitler. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a delaying tactic for both sides, neither sincere. Stalin was playing the British/French against Germany to weaken them all for the final Soviet mass invasion and take-over of all Europe, including Britain. Hitler knew that too, but he needed the Soviets off his back while he neutralized the French/British threat.
There is no dispute over whether Stalin was planning to launch Operation Thunderbolt a couple/few weeks after Barbarossa. That is a certainty according to Viktor Suvorov in Icebreaker and The Chief Culprit. BTW, increased funding for Barbarossa was by no means the only factor. Germany desperately needed resources it could not buy no matter how much it spent, and so Barbarossa was not just a defensive pre-emptive strike military campaign, but also a resource access campaign. This caused a dispute between Hitler and his generals, who did not appreciate the need for resource targets along with military.
I have come to distrust select presentations of Irving. I think the Jews got to him and he was forced to introduce certain anti-German propaganda points into his histories.
Finally, quantity of weapons was no sure strategy against Germany, when quality of new wonder weapons were emerging. Richard Tedor said he found out the German V2 rocket program was delayed by 1 year by a Communist subversive/saboteur. That might have won Germany the war, or deployment of the new nerve gas. Or more jet fighters and bombers. If the bankers tried to build up Germany as a controlled combatant, they were playing with fire and it damn near backfired on them. I don't believe that theory.
Yes, another factor is that Germany had no oil at all. It got all of its oil from Romania and the Soviet Union. Therefore if the Soviet Union was going to attack Germany (as Hitler correctly believed and as you point out Suvorov's thesis) it would simply attack Romania (which bordered the SU) and Germany would be starved of oil and fall very quickly. Therefore it was forced to attack preemptively.
As mentioned below, I addressed World War 2 differently than the others, even though the international financier motivations of control were the same, because of how emotional and polarizing WW2 is. It is addressed within "Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks: Part 2".
But in Appendix A no mention of outside funding for NSDAP, and indeed a fully state-owned bank issuing notes without interest. I'm puzzled by the discrepancy. Are you saying Hitler received Dulles & Rothschild funding early on, then turned on his creditors and launched the state-owned free currency system later?
Appendix A arguments are mostly from Goodson. He argues that the international financiers gave Germany room to rebuild itself in order to be destroyed later. Goodson argues that Germany had a quasi state-owned free currency system under Schacht, then Schacht finally applied the breaks once Germany was judged to have received sufficient growth. Hitler got mad and fired him instead of agreeing to the break on German growth, and that's specifically what caused the war. I will quote Goodson:
"In January 1939 maers came to a head when the President of the Reichsbank, Hjalmar Schacht, refused extension of three billion Reichsmarks worth of Offa and Mefo bills, because of fears of “inflation”. On 7 January 1939 Schacht sent Hitler a memorandum signed by himself and the eight other board members of the Reichsbank, which contained the following main points.
1. The Reich must spend only that amount covered by taxes.
2.Full financial control must be returned to the Ministry of Finance. (Then forced to pay for anything the army desired.)
3. Price and wage control must be rendered effective. The existing mismanagement must be eliminated.
4. The use of money and investment markets must be at the sole discretion of the Reichsbank. (This meant a practical elimination of Göring’s Four Year Plan).”
Schacht concluded his memorandum with the ambiguous words: “We shall be happy to do our best to collaborate with all future goals, but for now the time has come to call a halt.”[252] By these means Schacht intended to collapse the German economy,[253] which during the period 1933-39 had increased its Gross National Product by 100 percent. From being a ruined and bankrupt nation in January 1933 with 7,500,000 unemployed persons,[254] Hitler had transformed Germany into a modern socialist paradise. He was justifiably angry and rejected the recommendations of the Reichsbank as “mutiny”.[255] Two weeks later Schacht was sacked. Roger Elletson describes this momentous event as follows: “On 19 January 1939, Schacht was summarily dismissed, and the Reichsbank was ordered to grant the Reich all credits requested by Hitler. This decisive action essentially emasculated both the Reichsbank’s control over domestic monetary policy, and the German power base of international Jewry. It had the effect of removing from Jewish bankers the power to deflate and destroy the German economy.
Excluding the implications of the interest rate paid on the MEFO bills, Germany could now be viewed as being on a “Feder System”,
rather than a “Schacht System”. The Reichsbank effectively became an arm of the government, with the only real change being in the fact that bills were now monetised, or discounted, under the auspices of the State rather than some Jewish lackey in the Reichsbank presidency.”[256] Thus only in January 1939 did the Reichsbank become an authentic State Bank. Schacht’s dismissal also terminated the transfer of confidential information regarding all Germany’s economic developments,[257] which he had been deviously giving without interruption to Montagu Norman,[258] a fellow mason and Governor of the Bank of England (1920-44).
A new Reichsbank law, which was promulgated on 15 June 1939, made the bank “unconditionally subordinated to the sovereignty of the state.”
I am reading Part 2. Excellent research and presentation.
I object to the link in Footnote 5, which goes to a Catholic site, title "As Many Abortions as Possible." More anti-German atrocity stories. Its sources are highly questionable, including Jews Raul Hilberg the holohoax promoter, Levin the holohoax promoter, Jew Grossman (who cites Weimar porn, not NS), commie Arendt, "Hitler's Table Talk," which has been discredited as propaganda, and more.
I find I have a hard time tolerating the anti-NS war propaganda and atrocity stories. We should suspect every time now and omit when we know it's lies.
Hi Karl, I have heard other objections to that link, so with this in mind I will remove it. Just to be clear, there is a three parter "Goals, Motivations and Strategies of the Owners of Modern Society", and you are commenting on part 2 of that. But that 3 parter is followed by an additional two parter called "Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks" and I am referencing specifically the second part of that in the comments here. Regarding Hitler's Table Talk, everything I have read is that it is a legitimate source (and there is a key segment referenced in "Deeper Societal Trends"), although a number of the points made in it were mis-translated into the English version (as pointed out, I believe, by Richard Carrier and others).
I appreciate that NF. The IDF calls itself "the world's most ethical army," or some nonsense. This is a deliberate reversal of reality, as they so often do. In fact the German Wehrmacht and in particular the SS was the world's most ethical army at the time, and might still hold that honor today. Telling that the IDF broadcast porn when they invaded Palestine. Most of the NS leadership including the military leadership were Christians, Catholics and Lutherans, including Hitler as Catholic, and this accusation of using pornography as a weapon is completely unfounded. In fact the NS were strongly opposed to pornography, prostitution and all forms of perversion and degeneracy the Jews were pushing in Weimar, and one of Hitler's first laws was to ban it. The book burnings were entirely of pornographic smut and marxist literature out of the Institute for Sex Research run by the perverted Jew Magnus Hirschfeld. These book burnings were instigated by German students, not the administration, though the NSDAP approved. Most mothers today would as well.
I don't recall now where I learned HTT is suspect, nor the details, but I internalized that view and have dismissed it as a viable source ever since. I know I will have to find my evidence, but might not be able to.
A number of points made in it were mistranslated... We can probably identify which ones. Hitler raving about killing all the Jews. Hitler raving about taking over the world. More gas chambers!
Here is Richard Carrier in detail on HTT which is relevant to both of our comments: https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/18147
Basically, he thinks the German translation into French and/or English was intentionally brutalized, and he also believes that the original German version involved shorthand dictated notes that contained errors due to the transcriber's misunderstanding of various Hitler points. But Carrier also reaffirms Hitler's attacks on Paul of Tarsus, which is the point I focus on...
Re: Hirschfeld, he was even pushing transgenderism back then...
This gives a different account:
https://www.ihr.org/other/economyhitler2011.html
Supported by this:
https://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p299_Degrelle.html
(not sure why these aren't hyperlinks. Copy and paste please)
Thanks, I will check them out (although they are long so not at the moment).
"John Foster Dulles arranged financing for Hitler, but he was never a Nazi." I would have to see proof or evidence for this. The financing, not Dulles as NS. If so, how much? At what time? How were the funds transferred? Why did Hitler need them and what did he spend them on?
In my studies, NS Germany never took significant funds before or during the War. Hitler Democrat by Degrelle says they funded the revival with MeFo Bonds, based on the value of the 3 largest German corporations. One was IG Farben, explaining the ongoing demonization propaganda against that firm. Henry Ashby Turner's work Big Business and the Rise of Hitler seems definitive on NSDAP funding, and it was not Dulles, Rothschild, Warburg, but self-funded with limited hedge bets by Thyssen and a couple other industrialists.
Why do you in your essay use Gaddafi and Hussein as examples, as well as N Korea and Iran, but not NS Germany? The pattern is the same.
Hi Karl, yes, the pattern is the same, but World War 2 is such a polarizing, emotional topic that I thought it would be better to frame it in a different manner, which is approached in "Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks: Part 2" and then within the Appendix.
Hi Karl, that quote is from Mullins. It's been awhile since I've read "The World Order: Our Secret Rulers", and I can go refresh my memory if you like, but I assume he is referring to the Dawes plan, which per Dulles's wiki: "As a partner in Sullivan & Cromwell, Dulles expanded upon his late grandfather Foster's expertise, specializing in international finance. He played a major role in designing the Dawes Plan, which reduced German reparations payments and temporarily resolved the reparations issue by having American firms lend money to German states and private companies. Under that compromise, the money was invested and the profits sent as reparations to Britain and France, which used the funds to repay their own war loans from the U.S. In the 1920s Dulles was involved in setting up a billion dollars' worth of these loans.
After the Wall Street Crash of 1929, Dulles's previous practice brokering and documenting international loans ended. After 1931 Germany stopped making some of its scheduled payments. In 1934 Germany unilaterally stopped payments on private debts of the sort that Dulles was handling. In 1935, with the Nazis in power, Sullivan & Cromwell's junior partners forced Dulles to cut all business ties with Germany. Dulles was then prominent in the religious peace movement and an isolationist, but the junior partners were led by his brother Allen, so he reluctantly acceded to their wishes."
In 1931 Germany was granted a reprieve on payments because the world-wide Great Depression imposed by Jewish banksters made payments impossible. So France occupied the Ruhr. Hitler advocated active resistance in the Ruhr, and would not allow NSDAP to join a coalition of passive resistance.
It was after 1/30/33 that Hitler himself stopped reparations payments. I'd have to research the date. He gave a speech. In 1936 Germany marched into the Rhineland and re-occupied its old territory. IT was a bold move and some wondered if France/Britain would go to war, but Hitler did not flinch and the move was unopposed.
Amazing article filled with facts most even still dont know, i love the reference to Eustace Mullins book, he was first writing about it but still alot refer to Edward Griffin and his book about the FED, but even Mullins said in interviews Griffin copied him.
Warburg came from Italy/Bologna, so called black nobility(guess people dont want to say sephardic jew so they say black nobility), he only changed his name in germany(after the town Warburg were he first arrived), the internet says his prior name was "del banco" which would be sure hilarious, maybe he noticed its too obvious with lastname "bank".
Mullins seems more iconic than Griffin, though neither featured the Jewish Issue.
Yeah, The Bank would be too obvious wouldn't it? LOL. So take up a German town name, sure that's brilliant.
Mark Weber disputed me when I said if one man was responsible for the Fed, it was Warburg. Weber insisted one man could not have achieved such a thing, and referred to the 11 other banks than NYC. I said those were fronts and I referenced 6 books or entries that named Warburg as architect. One was by Warburg himself, but not published until 1975. The Minneapolis Fed bank has its own entry celebrating Warburg as creating the Fed. That clinches it.
Mr. Haemers, would you please provide the source of John Spivak's quote? Thank you for your wonderful work!
I relied on the Spivak Wikipedia entry. If you go to that link, use control-F, enter "Business Plot" you will find the reference under the "Career" section.
Wikipedia relies on Spivak's article found here as a PDF:
http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/spivak-NewMasses.pdf