|
| |
HITLER
THE ONLY TRUE DEMOCRAT
Adolf Hitler is invariably described as a dictator. In
fact he was the only war leader who was legitimately and overwhelmingly
elected in a free vote by his people.
The election on July 31st 1932 was a major victory for the National Socialists.
They polled 13,574,000 votes. With 38% of the total votes cast NSDAP became
the largest Party in the Reichstag with 230 seats. The Social Democrats had
133 seats and the Communists just 89. On January 30th Adolf Hitler was
democratically appointed Chancellor of Germany.
At the polls of March 5th the NSDAP polled 17,277,180 votes; an increase of
5.5 million bringing their voting percentage up to 44%. In coalition with the
Nationalists who had polled 3,136,760 votes this showed an overwhelming
majority of Germans had made their preference for German nationalism clear.
In Adolf Hitler's first appeal to the German nation on February 1st 1933 he
asked to be allowed just four years in order to carry out the task of national
reconstruction. On March 29th 1936 the German nation was given the opportunity
to express their approval or disapproval of the National Socialist State.
| TOTAL QUALIFIED VOTES |
|
45,453,691 |
| TOTAL VOTES CAST |
|
45,001,489 (99%) |
| VOTES 'NO' OR INVALID |
|
540,211 |
| VOTES FOR HITLER'S NSDAP |
|
44,461,278 (98.8%) |
THE SAAR TERRITORY: The Versailles Treaty had
deprived Germany of the Saar territory falsely claiming that the region was
French with a French population of 150,000. In fact the French population was
just 2,000 and for every French citizen in the Saar there were 250 Germans
living there.
On January 13th 1935 the electorate was asked whether they wished to remain
French become part of Hitler's Third Reich.
| IN FAVOR OF UNIFICATION WITH GERMANY |
|
477,119 |
| THOSE FAVORING NO CHANGE |
|
46,513 |
| IN FAVOR OF REMAINING FRENCH |
|
2,124 |
On March 13th 1938 the Austrian Government enacted a
plebiscite for the reunion of Austria with the Third Reich. On 18th March 1938
Hitler dissolved the Reichstag and announced conformity with the plebiscite,
which was called on April 10th 1938 .
AUSTRIA: THE RESULTS
| ENTITLED TO VOTE |
|
4,474,138 |
| ACTUAL VOTE |
|
4,460,778 (99.07%) |
| TOTAL VALID VOTES |
|
4,455,015 |
| VOTES IN FAVOUR OR UNIFICATION |
|
4,443,208 (99.73%) |
| VOTES AGAINST UNIFICATION |
|
11,807 |
| SPOILT PAPERS |
|
5,763 |
GERMANY: THE RESULTS
| ENTITLED TO VOTE |
|
45,073,303 |
| ACTUAL VOTE |
|
44,872,702 (99.55%) |
| TOTAL VALID VOTES |
|
44,803,096 |
| VOTES IN FAVOUR OF UNIFICATION |
|
44,362,667 (99.02%) |
| VOTES AGAINST UNIFICATION |
|
440,429 |
| SPOILT PAPERS |
|
69,606 |
"Most foreign observers present in Vienna that day accepted
that the polling had been free from any open intimidations." - Gordon
Brook-Shepherd, British Correspondent.
| "The papers conducted by Lord Rothermere and Lord
Beaverbrook are not newspapers in the ordinary acceptance of the term.
They are engines of propaganda, for the constantly changing policies,
desires, personal wishes, personal likes and dislikes of two men... it
is power without responsibility" - Stanley Baldwin, British Prime
Minister |
BRITAIN STEALS THE FUHRER'S ECONOMIC MIRACLE
Adolf Hitler introduced the superior barter system of trade and variable
Deutsche mark trading rates. Such innovation gave Germany a trading advantage
over Britain's complex usury-linked system. Germany's economic success caused
the British establishment to glow 'incandescent with indignation' This was the
true reason for Britain's belligerency for people won't give their sons lives
for trade wars; The Second World War needed to be dressed up as a patriotic
war.
Hitler's Germany had never expressed any criticism of Britain, had never
threatened Britain, and had no designs on Britain. British historians never
show examples of German hostility towards Britain simply because it didn't
exist.
The German people and their leadership admired the British Empire and looked
upon their British cousins as blood brothers with a common heritage. Defending
Poland was merely the pretext for a war to remove a more successful competitor.
BRITAIN STEALS THE FUHRER'S CLOTHES
Ironically changing circumstances led to Britain adopting the German leader's
innovative trading system. Many people thought it strange that after years of
demonising Germany's trading methods as being unfair Britain adopted them
herself.
On March 5th 1940 the British Export Council's White Paper admitted: "The
Council places no limits on the expedients they would be prepared to consider,
involving barter arrangements and trade negotiations and insurance
facilities (such as guaranteed export credits) for foreign trade."
From this point on there were devised two different valued pounds: one pegged
at $4.02 for the home market and the other a 'free' pound sterling which
dropped the first week of April 1940 to $3.44. This was virtually identical to
the German practice of assigning the mark a different value depending on where
it was being spent.
If you can't fight them join them. Adopting the same trading practices as
Hitler's Germany 'neutral U.S.A.' then assisted Britain in buying Latin
American raw materials at advantageous prices and then literally burning them.
This was termed the 'Buy and Burn Policy.' The U.S. also proscribed 1,800
South American firms thus preventing them from trading with Hitler's Germany.
BUT YOU WON'T FIND THIS IN BRITISH ARCHIVES
In the summer of 1940, when the world stood on the
brink of disaster, Britain was 'at bay' and France, Poland, the Low Countries,
Denmark, Norway were all in German hands, the German Leader offered peace
terms that were so generous that if you were allowed to read them you would
ask, 'well what on earth went wrong?'
On July 19th 1940 the German Leader rose to address the Reichstag in Berlin.
In the Kroll Opera House ablaze with flowers, the Fuhrer set out his peace
terms saying, "In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience
to appeal once more to reason and common-sense in Great Britain . . . I
consider myself in a position to make this appeal I am not the vanquished
seeking favours but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I see no reason
why this war must go on. I am grieved to think of the sacrifices which it will
claim. I would like to avert them."
Hitler then declared that he was prepared to pull out of all these countries,
and Czechoslovakia; all except those regions which were historically German
and accepted as such under international law. Through his emissaries the
fuehrer made approaches through all the usual diplomatic procedures, in an
effort to placate the British un-elected British Government and to avoid
further bloodshed.
AND WHO WAS IT WHO REJECTED PEACE?
Who rejected these peace offerings? Why have the
facts been made available only through German, Swedish and the American
archives? Why, none other than Winston Churchill and his warmonger cabinet of
course.
He had just been handed supreme power, he would be a dead-end premier, the
Focus Group of warmongers would be thwarted; as would everyone who wanted a
central European war and the carve ups that would follow. Churchill got his
war! Fifty million people would lose their lives, many of Europe's fines
cities would be reduced to rubble, and eleven formerly free countries would be
ceded to the Soviet slave regime.
Britain would sacrifice 350,000 lives, 290,000 servicemen and sailors, 60,000
civilians. Hitler prophesied that the war would cost Britain its Empire.
Hitler was of course right.
Yet within a short time the vanquished Germany population would be 20% richer
than the British people and Britain's humiliating departure from the European
exchange rate mechanism was a demonstration of the power of the German Mark
MOSLEY WAS RIGHT
Sir Oswald Mosley who fought all the way to his
prison cell to avoid war with Germany said twenty-five years after the war's
end that 'the loss of the empire and the reduction of Britain to the position
of an American satellite' would be the only clear result.' Again, he was
right. They even threw this politician's young wife, and mother of infant
children, into Holloway Prison. Her offence? Being his wife.
Continue reading
|