During his hate-filled reading of the grounds for my sentence, Presiding Judge Rieder of Munich District Court II found it appropriate to remark that six years behind bars would “finally put an end to the Mahler Show.” [Implying that the “Holocaust Show” will go on forever]
I have reason to hope that his prognostication will not be fulfilled, but it does give a good description of the tone and atmosphere of my entire trial.
It reveals the mission and the modus operandi of our “Holocaust” Judiciary, which was created to intervene in an aspect of contemporary history that upsets world Jewry.
To illustrate this, let me quote Michael Friedman, probably the best-known Jew in Germany.
In an interview that appeared in the December 2007 issue of the Viennese magazine DIE JÜDISCHE, Mr. Friedman is quoted as follows:
“ Horst Mahler is the DUNKELBRAUNSTE UNKULTUR (darkest-brown abomination) on the rightwing scene…”
[“Brown” is a code word for nationalist and “dark” indicates intensity].
“It is important to talk to Mahler since there are millions of the “light-brown persuasion” [moderate nationalists] standing behind him.
Most of these are not skinheads; they are ordinary members of the middle class.
Since there are 80 million Germans who say that Hitler had his good points, and 20 percent of all Germans do not want to have Jews as neighbors, this amounts to 16 million Germans!
Thus, Horst Mahler represents a sizeable group in Germany, and that makes him significant.
This is why I find Horst Mahler interesting: his views are an admonition that he should be taken seriously.
When an individual represents a political tendency that represents millions of followers, that tendency becomes a phenomenon that can be reported in different ways.”
A very different Jew, Gérard Menuhin, son of the world famous violin virtuoso Yehudin Menuhin, has a very different way of describing the situation that causes millions of Germans to “stand behind me.”
Mr. Menuhin posted the following on his website <http://www.gerard-menuhin.de/Kolumne/Antifa_-_die_nuetzlichen_Idioten_der_Maechtigen.html>
“…It is as though one were transported back to the time of the French Revolution!
In those days the victims of the Revolution, not all of whom were aristocrats, were guillotined to the accompaniment of virulent hatred and the analphabetic howling of an artificially aroused and manipulated mob.
In those days, France had been bankrupted by loans from foreign countries.
It was said that the masses had organized the Revolution, which meant that it made no difference whether the victims were male or female.
Something similar occurred on the evening of 11 September of this year, as two women and their escort were on their way to a meeting of their political party in Neukölln.
They were attacked by a mob of leftist ‘Chaoists’ — surrounded, insulted, kicked and beaten with chairs.
The vicious mob did not go away until their victims lay injured and bleeding.
Why were they attacked?
Was it because they wanted to participate in an open and public meeting of a legitimate political party?
Was it because they were striving for a different Germany?
Perhaps they were attacked because they had visions of a better Germany – a culturally cohesive country in which normal school education would again be possible and in which young Germans could again find vocational training and appropriate employment.
Perhaps they were attacked because they had visions of a Germany in which criminality among foreigners would be suppressed according to the law; a Germany in which tax monies would be spent for useful and necessary purposes in Germany and in which German soldiers would be used exclusively for defense of their neutral fatherland, instead of mercenaries for foreign powers.
The Use of Violence Against Dissidents
Needless to say, the creation of a benevolent Germany did not correspond to Allied plans.
I deliberately use the designation ‘Allies’ to refer to Germany’s enemies because, sixty-five years after World War II, they are still occupying Germany.
Servile German politicians are still carrying out enemy orders – to an even greater extent than during the postwar period!
The excesses of the French Revolution were committed under high sounding but meaningless slogans such as ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.’
Today one proclaims less eloquent slogans such as ‘Tolerance,’ ‘Anti Racism’ and ‘Anti Fascism,’ but the masses still go along so that they will not have to worry about life and limb.”
What jurist in the so-called “Federal Republic of Germany” knows what was the principal war aim of both the USA and the USSR – the cornerstone of their alliance against the Reich?
And what jurist knows who were the originators of the war?
In his book “One World,” Wendell Willkie, who was the special envoy of President Franklin Roosevelt, wrote that Roosevelt’s and Stalin’s War Aim Number One was “the Abolition of Racial Exclusiveness.”
With regard to the German Reich, the following entry is found in the official record of the discussions between President Roosevelt and Marshal Stalin during the Teheran Conference of 28 November – 1 December 1943:
…The discussion turned to the question of their intended treatment of Nazi Germany after the War.
The President said that in his opinion it is very important that the concept of the German Reich not be allowed to remain in the consciousness of the Germans and that the very word “Reich” be stricken from the German language.
Marshal Stalin replied that it is not enough to merely eliminate the word.
Instead, the Reich itself must be so thoroughly eradicated that it would never again be in a position to hurl the world into war.
He said the victorious Allies would have failed in their mission if they did not keep in their hands every strategic position and institution necessary to avoid a resurgence of German militarism.”
In a memorandum to the US Secretary of State dated 6 April 1945, Roosevelt re-emphasized his intent to eliminate the word “Reich” from the German vocabulary.
This is significant!
The memorandum presents plans for the destruction of the Reich: plans that could be implemented only against a starving and defenseless nation following its military defeat!
In pursuance of their war aims, our enemies were plotting to continue the war against the Reich even after the unconditional capitulation of the German military forces.
Their plans were to continue the war with psychological weapons.
This brings up the question of whether and to what extent Allied ethnocide constitutes genocide in the sense of the United Nations Convention Against Genocide..
The German Parliament’s Resolution No. 13/4445 dated 23 April 1996 suggests that FDR’s memorandum corresponds to the United Nations interpretation of genocide:
Throughout history the Tibetans have retained a unique ethnic, cultural and religious identity.
In view of this fact, the Federal Parliament condemns the policy of the Chinese government toward Tibet, which results in the destruction of Tibetan identity.
This is particularly true with regard to the immigration and settlement of large numbers of Chinese; of compulsory abortions; of political, religious and cultural repression; and subjugation of the country under a Chinese controlled administration.”
The American ruling circles strongly favored a policy of genocide against the Germans, as is evidenced by the fact that their highest representatives did not hesitate to express their murderous intentions in the most vicious and bloodthirsty terms.
When hostilities began on the Eastern Front in June 1941, subsequent President Harry Truman expressed the following: “If we see that Germany is winning we should help Russia; and if we perceive that Russia is winning, we should help Germany.
In this way we assure that as many as possible are killed on both sides — even though I would not like to see a victory for Hitler under any circumstances.”
How many German jurists know that, following his appointment as head of the US Navy in 1917, Franklin Roosevelt relentlessly pursued the complete destruction of Germany as his principal objective?
Even during World War I he already favored the “unconditional capitulation” of the Reich!
How many jurists realize that Roosevelt’s “Crusade for Democracy” was directed squarely against the concept of national self-determination — against the very idea of the nation state?
His great ambition was to install the United Nations as a world government and to serve as its first General Secretary..
Perhaps the greatest aversion to the idea of the nation state was expressed by the Jew Carl J. Man, the Federal Republic’s principal “re-educator” and founder of the “science” of political science.
In his book “The New Belief in the Common Man” (1942), he wrote:
“We hope we have shown that both ‘state’ and ‘sovereignty’ are symbols of totalitarian government.”
Alter, Bärsch and Berghoff also attempted to demonstrate how the nation as such is a source of animosity against Jews.
How many jurists know that throughout 1941, President Roosevelt repeatedly but unsuccessfully attempted to provoke the Reich into military actions against the US Fleet?
How many jurists are familiar with the way in which he deliberately provoked Japan into attacking on Pearl Harbor in order to manipulate the American populace into supporting war?
He desperately wanted war with the Reich in order to bring the US out of the Great Depression!
He hoped that, in view of Germany’s and Japan’s mutual assistance treaty, the Reich would declare war on the US after Washington had declared war on Japan.
Roosevelt’s fondest hope was fulfilled.
How many German jurists know that in 1941, when the Reich had won the European war, Churchill’s intent was to expand it into another world war?
By involving the USA and USSR, he intended to enlarge the war in Europe in hopes of regaining the former power of the British Empire.
At the zenith of his successes in the European war, Hitler directed peace overtures to the British government by way of middlemen.
Sir Robert Vansittart, chief adviser to Foreign Minister Lord Halifax, sent him the following letter in order to block these overtures:
To the Minister: URGENT
I hope you have instructed Mr. Mallet in detail that under no circumstances is he to meet with Dr. Weißauer.
The very future of civilization is at stake.
It is a matter of “You or Us,” and either the German Empire or our country will perish… not just be defeated, but be completely annihilated!
I believe it will be the Reich that is annihilated.
This is something entirely different from merely saying that Germany must be defeated.
For 75 years the German Reich and the idea of a Reich have been a curse on the whole world; and if we do not stop it this time, it will surely stop us.
The enemy is not Nazism, it is the German Reich!
Those who have not realized this have not realized anything; and they will draw us into a sixth war if we survive the fifth.
All possibilities for compromise are passé.
It is now a struggle to the end — a struggle to the bitter end.
I trust that Mr. Mallet will have received extremely categorical instructions.
We have had more than enough of people like Dahlerus, Goerdeler, Weißauer and consorts.”
Can you (German) jurists with good conscience continue to cultivate ignorance of historic events and maintain “good faith” in the propaganda lies of the Reich’s enemies?
Do you not reproach yourselves for facilitating cultural genocide against our Volk?
Without realizing it, you have degraded yourselves to myrmidons, to henchmen of Jewish supremacism.
As judges, you should take nothing into consideration except application of the law as it is written.
That is all you are obligated to do.
What Justice?
Justice is the general will of a free and self-governing commonwealth of a Volk, which is the only legitimate lawgiver.
If a nation is subjugated to the compulsion of a foreign will, then one is dealing with commands and decrees, not with justice and law.
What kind of justice are you applying?
As judges, you have sworn the following oath (Section 38 DRiG):
“I swear to exercise the office of judge true to the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany.
I swear that I will judge to the best of my knowledge and conscience, without personal considerations, and that I will strive for nothing except truth and justice, so help me God.”
To whom did you swear this oath – to the German Volk or to its foreign masters?
Did you not believe the Basic Law to be the Constitution of the German national state at time you took this oath?
Did you not believe that the Federal Republic is the legitimate state of the German nation?
Were you aware that Prof. Carlo Schmid explained in detail to the Parliamentary Committee that the Basic Law is in fact not a constitution and the Federal Republic not a valid state, and that the majority of the Committee understood this?
If it turns out to be true that:
-You were deceived by false teachings in schools and universities.
– The “Basic Law” is not a valid constitution.
– The Federal Republic of Germany is not a genuine state, but rather an organization for exercising foreign domination over the German people.
– The creation of this organization violates international law (Article 43 of the Hague Convention on Land Warfare).
– The Basic Law of the Federal Republic (the Preamble and Article 146) is intended to deceive in order to make an illegal construct of foreign occupation appear to be a legitimate German state.
What personal conclusions would you reach?
Would you keep quiet in order to avoid jeopardizing your prestigious and well-compensated positions as judges?
Would you continue to carry out the will of foreign masters and incarcerate citizens of the Reich who expose this swindle and try to restore the ability of the Reich to function again?
Or, would you remain loyal to the Reich and resist the decrees of our enemy occupiers?
Did you choose a juristic career in order to use the power and influence of the position to serve the enemies of the German nation?
You must answer for yourselves the question of whether the Federal Republic is the legitimate national state of the German nation or merely an “organizational form of a modality of foreign domination” as the Father of the Federal Republic defined it.
Without a clear answer to this question, you cannot possibly know whether the regulations that you are applying (for example Section 90a, 92, 130 of the Penal Code of Federal Republic) are legitimate German law or the decrees of a foreign power or powers.
In case you agree with the Founding Father, you as judges must reject the existing regulations by ignoring them, if you wish to remain loyal to your oath!
If you saw through the swindle and if, when taking the oath, you realized that the Basic Law is an occupation statute and the Federal Republic is an illegal construct, then you are not bound by the oath.
This is because the oath violates Article 45 of the Hague Convention, which prohibits an occupying power from demanding oaths of loyalty.
I do not assume that you betrayed your fatherland for thirty pieces of silver.
I hold to the German legal principle that the honesty of a countryman should not be questioned unless there is strong reason for doing so.
Even Judas Iscariot had a conscience, since he was destroyed by his own treachery.
I have described the situation against which 20% of all Germans are beginning to revolt (Michel Friedman’s number).
Sylvia Stolz, on the other hand, remarks that it is Friedman’s fond wish that the number were only 20%!
In reality it is around 95%, as high as in Adolf Hitler’s day, according to Aly Götz in SPIEGEL Magazine.
General Günzel also gives this percentage in his letter to Martin Hohmann, a member of the German Parliament.
Slowly but surely, the false concept of history that was forced on Germany at gunpoint is beginning to totter.
Even the Jewish publication FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG is cautiously calling for correction of the prevailing myth that Adolf Hitler was a monster with sole responsibility for starting World War II.
For example, on page 3 of the FAZ issue of 13 August 2008 we read the following:
“He would bet fifty to one that Germany would not attack Czechoslovakia in the near future.
He would prefer if Czechoslovakia caused a war, as was noted in a memorandum of the Czech Foreign Ministry in April 1938 regarding his utterances in diplomatic discussions.
In London he was considered up-and-coming, a representative of a camp that rejected National Socialism and included a range of opinions from far left to conservative.
His name: Winston Churchill.
With statements of the future wartime prime minister, who at that time still held no public office, we can consider the European crises of the year 1938 opened.
Several sides were pushing for war.
…The ruling circles of Great Britain as early as the First World War had discussed whether the founding of new states such as Czechoslovakia was in England’s interests.
At the Treaty of Versailles, important personages including Lloyd George had spoken against it, primarily with the pragmatic argument that circumstances at the time did not allow the creation of small states..
They pointed out that politically, there was no future in arbitrarily suppressing the overwhelming German ethnic economic and ethnic influence in central Europe.
It was unwise to force significant German ethnic groups into unstable new states in which they were certain to be dissatisfied.
Churchill was agitating for a quick war, observing that Czechoslovakia was likely to collapse soon from its own ethnic tensions and internal contradictions.
The seemingly insolvable problems caused by superior German strength in the region led to attitudes that went far beyond the contest with National Socialism and aimed for extremely radical change.
“What we want is that the German economy should be completely destroyed!”
These were the words that Churchill snapped at former Chancellor Heinrich Brüning, who was living in London exile.
The French ambassador in Berlin, Francois-Poncet, expressed himself in even more drastic terms..
He is quoted as having written to Churchill, “Maybe one has to live with them, but it would be better if one could drive the Germans out of Europe like the Arabs were once driven out of Spain.”
The Munich agreement pretended to be democratically correct, but in view of the heated situation, it was entirely anachronistic.
Chamberlain undertook a second step by proposing and signing the German-English consultation agreement that he hoped would bring ‘peace in our time.’
He was never forgiven for this, which was a great injustice.
In 1938 there were too many leaders who wanted to let their weapons speak for them.”
I would like to add a few illuminating points to the prevailing historical picture of those days.
These points will provide a different perspective and help to make my own actions more understandable..
A key concept that helps to explain the history of the 20th Century is the Dictate of Versailles, about which the US President Hoover had this to say:
“The worst war of all time has been concluded by a peace that is not a peace treaty at all, but rather a continuation of the war…
If Europe does not adopt reason as its adviser, it is going to perish because of Versailles.”
It was inevitable that the Germans, in asserting their right to exist, would throw off the yoke of Versailles.
This is what Germany did under Adolf Hitler.
According to the acknowledgement of Foreign Minister Lord Halifax this was the reason for unleashing the Second World War against the German Reich:
“We have now forced Hitler into a war so that he can no longer by peaceful means revoke one part of the Versailles Treaty after another..”
[Lord Halifax, English ambassador in Washington, 1939 (cf. “Nation Europa”, 1954, Band 1, page 46)]
In this connection the speech of World War I Prime Minister Lloyd George, delivered on 29 November 1923 in the Lower House, is quite significant.
He explained:
“…The Allied signatories of the Versailles Treaty formally promised the Germans that they would disarm if Germany disarmed first. Germany waited fourteen years for the victors to keep their promise!…
In the meantime every Allied country increased its armaments and even guaranteed loans to Germany’s neighbors so that they could build powerful military forces on Germany’s borders. Are we really surprised that the Germans were finally driven to revolution and revolt against the chronic treachery of the great powers?”
(From Sündermann, H. “Das dritte Reich”, Leoni, 1964, p. 37)
This is supported in a speech of Molotov, foreign minister of the USSR, given on 31 Oct 1939:
“Fear of losing their predominance dictated the British and French governments’ incitement of war against Germany. The British government has proclaimed that the war against Germany has as its aim nothing more and nothing less than the destruction of ‘Hitlerism.’ Such a war cannot be justified.”
Today it seems impossible that the Polish government would have been a major advocate of war, but it is was.
This neglected detail of contemporary history has now been thoroughly researched and the results have been made available in Michael Birthelm’s HANDBUCH ZUR BEFREIUNG (Liberation Handbook.)
Consider the following quotation from a speech by Rydz-Smigly, Inspector General of the Polish army and influential Polish statesman following the death of Marshal Josef Pilsudski.
Addressing Polish officers in the summer of 1939, he said:
“Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it, no matter how hard it tries.”
In additional support of this, Dr. Heinz Splittgerber in his book UNKENNTNIS ODER INFAMIE? (Ignorance or Infamy?) quotes the Polish ambassador in Paris on 18 August 1939:
“The Polish army will attack Germany on the first day of the war.”
However, Poland was nothing but a puppet of the US East Coast Oligarchy, as is clarified in a diary entry by the former US Minister of Defense James Forrestal dated 12 December 1945:
…”I asked Joe Kennedy (US Ambassador in London) about his conversations with Roosevelt and Chamberlain in 1938. He said that in 1939 it had been Chamberlain’s conviction that Great Britain had nothing with which to fight and consequently they could not risk going to war with Hitler… Neither the French nor English would have made Poland a cause for war if they had not been constantly egged on by Washington. He said America and World Jewry had forced England into war.”
(From “The Forrestal Diaries”, New York, 1951, pp. 121-. Quoted in G. Franz-Willing “Kriegsschuldfrage”, Rosenheim, 1992, p. 112)
The role of world Jewry in provoking World War II has been extensively researched, as the following quotations show:
“We succeeded in bringing the United States into the First World War. If they, regarding Palestine and the Jewish military forces do as we say, we can bring the Jews in the US to the point where they will bring the US into a Second World War.”
[Weizmann to Churchill, September 1941 (cf. Lenski, R. “Der Holocaust vor Gericht”, Samisdat Publ. 1993, page 555 Source: David Irving]
It is our task to mercilessly wage war against Germany, our State Enemy No. 1.”
[Bernhard Lecache, President of the Jewish World League, 9 November 1938.]
“It is our task to organize a moral and economic blockade of the German Reich and to partition the nation… to finally bring about a war without quarter.”
[Lecache, Paris, 18. November 1938 (cf. Lecache, B. “Le droit de vivre”)]
“Our interests as Jews demand the final annihilation of Germany.”
[W. Jabotinski, Founder of IRGUN ZWAI LEUMI, January 1934 (cf. Walendy, “Historische Tatsachen”, Heft 15, S. 40)]
There is no reason to doubt the sincerity of Adolf Hitler regarding his desire for peace, as expressed in a message to his architect Prof. Hermann Gießler:
“I want peace – and I will do everything in my power to make peace. It is still not too late. For the sake of peace I will go to the limits of the possible, I will do everything that the dignity of the German nation will allow. I am all too familiar with the horrors of war! I of think of the loss of German blood – it is always the best who are killed, the most gallant and selfless, whose mission it would have been to embody and lead the nation! I have no need to make a name for myself through war, like Churchill. I want to make a name for myself by bring order to the German Volk. I want to secure its unity and its territory. I want to develop National Socialism, I want to secure the environment!”
[Adolf Hitler in a conversation with his architect, Prof. Hermann Giesler. From page 395 of Giesler’s book EIN ANDERER HITLER.]
I agree with the opinion expressed by Mahatma Gandhi:
The last war showed more clearly than ever the satanic nature of civilization… Every civilized law was broken by the victors. No lie was too vicious for them to use…
[Mahatma Gandhi, “Hier spricht Gandhi.” 1954, Barth-Verlag, München.]
Against this same background I delivered the following observations ten years ago, at the convention of the National Party of Baden-Württemberg on 25 April 1999, under the title: “As the Most Advanced Stage of Imperialism, Globalism Compels the Resurrection of the German Nation.”
I.
Today the international community finds itself in a “centralized confrontation” with the United States.
Not only is the political independence of other countries at risk, along with their entire spectrum of economic, monetary, judicial, linguistic, audiovisual and cultural self determination, but their very identity (from JUNGE WELT, 12 February 1999..)
We do not hear this from the mouths of “responsible” politicians in this country.
In other countries, however, influential persons such as the French presiding foreign minister, Hubert Védrine, openly express such opinions.
And Jacques Chirac, the President, backs the minister by urging the other countries of the world to join together for the sake of “collective sovereignty” in order to defend themselves against American domination.
In Germany, Chancellor Helmut Schmidt castigated
“global madness” and the propelling force of “speculative robber capitalism” that bears the label “Made in the USA (DIE ZEIT NR. 37/98).
He has called for a “mighty national effort of will” as well as for leadership.
In the issue of STERN Magazine for April 1999, he complained about “Domination by the USA.”
Referring to the war in the Balkans, he admitted that “we violated international law as well as the Charter of the United Nations.”
The acting German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer allowed the SPIEGEL to quote him remarking:
“The Americans wanted the war.”
He characterized the role of the Germans in this sordid game with the words “We had no possibilities of influencing anything.” (SPIEGEL 16/19999 S. 25)
Alas, such warnings are never expressed in public political debate.
Instead, our people are duped and deceived with the most despicable hypocrisy.
The World is out of joint – who will set it straight?
The bloc system that resulted from World War II gave the European nations the longest period of peace in history, but
the collapse of the Soviet Union has ended this era. however.
War has returned to Europe.
In such a situation, we have good reason to again turn our attention to War and Peace.
Despite the wide distribution of weapons of mass destruction, war continues to be the continuation of politics by other means – even in the last years of the 20th Century.
In view of the increased technological potential for destruction, any war in our time threatens to deteriorate and grow and lead to the destruction of huge masses of people.
For this reason it is indispensable to find a way back to peace and stability at the end of the Second Millennium.
II. “I Have a Dream” of a Powerful Germany
Dedicated to Peace.
At present, peace cannot be guaranteed by any sort of world government.
Perhaps it never can be.
At present, world government is dominated by the “Hyperpower” USA and therefore cannot pursue the peaceful goals for which it was ostensibly organized.
The “New World Order” as unilaterally declared by President George Bush is nothing other than modernized nomadic despotism.
Until the USA disintegrates from its own inner tensions and contradictions, a stable world order is imaginable only as a tripolar system whose power centers are:
1. The United States of America;
2. The German Reich, which was not destroyed in 1945, but merely rendered incapable of acting in concert with the other European nations, including Russia; and
3. The Asian-African band of states joined by China and Japan.
The interaction of the European Coalition with the band of Asian and African states must curtail American cultural and economic imperialism and put an end to disastrous “globalization.”
A new agreement between the USA and the European Coalition would restrain any imperialistic ambitions of China and/or Japan, while hegemonic efforts of the European Coalition could be defused by an alliance of the USA with China and Japan.
Making Possible New Policies
New international policies would make it possible for industrially weak regions to develop their own national economies.
Socioeconomic deserts could become livable areas for those who are born there, who would no longer have to become nomads in order to survive.
Although the United States does not realize it, it would also be in its vital interest for development to take place.
The USA, like all nations and populations, is also victimized by the massive movements of nomadic global finance, which are directed by a handful of speculators.
Every day, unimaginable sums of money flow from one part of the globe to another.
They feed on profits that result from fluctuations in exchange rates, changes so small that they are often measured in percentages of a percent.
These transactions are completely disconnected from productive economic activity, and to speak of “investment” in such a context is not only misleading — it is a deliberate deception.
It hides the fact that the world finance market has degenerated into a huge casino in which “independent” traders have become helots for the global gamblers.
As George Soros, the principal “global player” recently remarked, these huge masses of vagabond capital act like economic “wrecking balls” that demolish not just buildings but entire national economies.
Ultimately they will also lay waste to the USA, the home sweet home of Globalism.
Soros is such a powerful “lone wolf” speculator (even though he denies it) that he leveraged the British Pound out of the European Monetary Union, making billions in profit.
He is so powerful that his Quantum Fund initiated the Thai currency crisis and with it the Asian crisis.
According to testimony given by US Acting Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, Soros is so powerful that the US, Germany, France and Great Britain correlate their monetary policies with him.
According to United Nation reports, the wealth of 358 billionaires exceeds the total income of the countries in which 45 percent of the world population lives — 2.7 billion persons!
[Quoted from the “Second Interim Report of the Enquete-Kommission DEMOGRAPHISCHER WANDEL (Demographic Change), Bundestagsdrucksache 13/11460 S. 383, Fn. 1044).
According to an analysis published in LE MONDE, these hyper-rich oligarchs constitute an informal World Management Club, they are uncontrollable, they are answerable to no one, and they are oriented toward nothing except private profit.
Their actions make the conspiratorial theories and lurid tales about secret societies appear unimaginative by contrast.
These oligarchs do not have to conspire in order to grab power.
They already possess the most secure power imaginable, money power, and they will not lose their power until the present world financial system collapses.
Surprisingly, George Soros is a competent, objective and perspicacious critic of Globalism.
His depiction of global connections gives us the picture of a monstrous global Octopus holding the world in a deadly embrace.
It will squeeze and choke the world until all the world’s breath is gone, or until the nations of the world unite to defend themselves and overthrow it.
It is this ownership of the media that contributes most to making it a threat to all mankind.
We do not realize at first hand how the media manipulates our thoughts, wishes and feelings.
The media and educational institutions constitute an occupying power directed by the American East Coast Oligarchy using very subtle methods.
This oligarchy is not recognized for what it is, and this is particularly true in Germany.
Many critics of Capitalism within the ranks of the ‘68ers are unknowing mercenaries for the East Coast Oligarchy, functioning in the web of the media as teachers and professors, authors, publishers, journalists, and editors.
They have made peace with the Octopus and betrayed their own nation.
Most of they even the existence of the German Nation, declaring the idea of nation a “WAHNGEBILDE” (phantom.)
It is important to note that only this Octopus is the enemy, not the nations on whose territories it has built bases and whose military strength it has incorporated into its own global force.
Their combatants in the media, along with their numerous Quislings in the political apparatus of the present German regime are mostly not traitors.
Instead, they too are victims of the economic constraints of the System of psychological warfare against the German Reich.
The German Nation should treat them like the Chinese Red Army, under leadership of Mao Tse Tung, treated the soldiers of the Kuomintang: if they change sides and begin to struggle on behalf of their own country, the German nation should receive them with open arms.
IV.
Supported by Carl Marx’s insights into unregulated functioning of “the Market,” I have been convinced for over thirty years that “Free Trade” as imposed by USA must necessarily lead to the collapse of the global financial system.
In his recently published book “The Crisis in Global Capitalism,” George Soros contributes convincing arguments in support of this prognosis.
The global economy is kept afloat by three huge bubbles:
1. National Indebtedness: For many years the capitalist countries have continually increased their national indebtedness, which has devoured the savings of their people.
2. Consumer Credit: Continually increasing consumer credit has turned the masses into slaves of the banks.
3. Inflation of the Stock Markets: This has pushed the prices of stocks to fantastic heights, which created the illusion of wealth, but nothing more.
None of these bubbles will peacefully shrink to manageable size and when one bursts, all three must burst.
And they will burst – make no mistake!
On this count the designers of “Global Swindle Inc.” all agree, speaking behind the backs of their hands.
At the present stage of the game, stock-market bells can begin ringing the GÖTTERDÄMMERUNG of Globalism any time.
It could happen in a number of different ways, of course.
The most likely scenario is a complete global collapse in the near or intermediate future.
The consequence can only be a deep and long lasting depression.
Even the wealthy industrial countries will be confronted with bare survival.
When collapse comes, the German government will resort to the stringencies of a war economy in order to avoid mass starvation.
It will do the following:
1. Introduce emergency money into circulation as a national currency;
2. Distribute food ration cards in order to make basic necessities available at affordable prices;
3. Place bankrupt firms under state control in order to maintain the means of production;
4. Introduce voluntary labor service; and
5. Mobilize the Volk for the reconstruction of an independent national economy dedicated to public good.
Germany’s neighbors will do the same thing, and there will be no more talk of “European Union” or “Global Economy.”
When collapse comes, where will be the political “Left” and “Right?”
They will both be on Germany’s side, as in 1945.
The Germans will again pitch in and come together as we did then.
We not allow ourselves to be destroyed – or we will cease to exist.
We are facing Chaos.
And yet, we should not fear Chaos as an unmitigated evil.
It will be the primordial soup out of which our Volk will emerge in a new form.
We should welcome Chaos as a challenge and a test of our endurance.
We Germans should now concentrate all our spiritual and intellectual powers on the question:
What comes after collapse (which is never the end, but rather a progression to something new)?
Most certainly, the collapse will shake financial fundamentalism (the cult of money) to its foundations.
In addition, the “gospel” of the market’s inherent necessity will lose its power to compel.
The nations will realize that this “gospel of necessity” led to the following:
1) Created millions of unemployed.
2) Allowed worldwide 7 million children to die of starvation yearly (UNICEF Report for 1997).
3) Created fabulous wealth for the above mentioned 358 Oligarchs (so great that they became completely above the law).
4) Brought about the situation in which, according to UNO Reports, there were in 1995 (before the Asian crisis) 89 countries that were in worse condition than 10 years before; and in 70 developing countries, the level of income was even lower than in the ‘60s and ‘70s.
5) Rewarded unscrupulous egotism and made appear ridiculed dedication to the common good, as well as all moral orientation.
6) Threatened freedom to a greater extent than the totalitarian ideologies had done (according to George Soros.)
George Soros’ analysis shows that because of the Asian crisis, the great Asian capital conglomerates have now fallen into the hands of East Coast oligarchs.
(In the Confucian tradition these conglomerates were once in the possession of great families.)
It is not clear whether this was deliberately planned or whether it was merely exploited as a welcome opportunity; but the same fate is now befalling the industrial complexes in Brazil.
As Soros observes, the East Coast Oligarchy anticipates the collapse of the world finance market in the near future.
The oligarchs cannot rule out that the depression will call forth worldwide powers of national resistance that will put an end to Globalism.
Many signs indicate that this process is slowly entering the consciousness of the elite and that it is taking political form.
The process is of course opposed by these Oligarchs, whose domination rests on free trade.
To assure the continuing enforcement of their interests, the American war machine with its countless weapons of mass destruction is placed at their disposal.
Thus the question is raised of whether the Balkan War and the never-ending wars against Iraq and Afghanistan do not comprise the second act of the Third World War, which actually began long ago.
The Oligarchs are determined to assure that the coming depression does not culminate in a world nationalist overthrow of Globalism, but rather its restoration on an expanded level.
Such a restoration would imply the worldwide takeover of the remaining independent capital by the Oligarchs.
If this concept does indeed underlie the Balkan war, then the USA has already achieved two important war aims:
1. It has freed itself from the restrictions of international law by creating a precedent, since the war was fought without a mandate of the United Nations.
2. It has involved Germany in another war against a traditional ally of Russia, thereby blocking the vitally necessary reconciliation of the two European powers, which is greatly feared by the US.
Logical Cunning: Striking
the Octopus with its Own Powers
For the first time, the constellation arising from the Balkan war contains the possibility that the German Reich will grow and develop into a national state in the full sense of the word.
For 500 years, the critical motivation in the foreign policies of the West European powers France and England has been to hinder unification and development of the Reich into a nation state.
Before America appeared on the stage as a transatlantic empire, England and France were free to expand across the Atlantic and form their colonial empires.
The expansion was possible because of the absence of a powerful state in Central Europe.
Out of this developed interest in keeping Germany in the condition of a patchwork of ducal states.
The disintegration of the Carolingian Empire showed that Europe had evolved as a structured power, but its time had not yet come as a unified power.
The situation has now changed, however.
In relation to the hyperpower USA, France and England can continue to have significance only as the western piers of a powerful Europe.
It is not power interests that will continue to give direction to history, but rather the will to survive.
This is Germany’s hour.
The USA is showing unmistakable signs of decadence.
Its power, the power of the Dollar, has taken global form and separated itself from the American population and their economic existence.
Their financial economy has gutted their productive economy, and American power is now based in the financial net of the East Coast.
On the East Coast there are just a few dozen speculators who control the financial economy; the global empire of financial fundamentalism exists within their net.
Their rule is purest parasitism, a deadly danger for all mankind.
Europe’s center must now be firm and secure so that the major powers in concert can assert their interests in the creation of a new order of peace.
For all Europe it is vitally necessary that Russia, a Christian nation, turn toward the Christian West so that it will not be driven to side with China.
This can be accomplished only with a strong and spiritually secure Germany as the center of Europe, which will build Russia’s bridge to the West.
That is the reason why the West European powers also need a secure and powerful Germany.
The core of Europe must again be substantial and secure in order to fulfill this task.
Furthermore, Germany’s neighbors will accept it as a strong central power strong central power only if it desists from obtaining weapons of mass destruction.
It is questionable whether the changed power structure in the order of European national structure can be accomplished without military means.
Today the threat of military force is quite common.
Henry Kissinger has intimated that the US would hinder a rapprochement between Germany and Russia with force if necessary.
In his column in DER WELT on Sunday, 1 March 1992, he boldly announced that, in the American view, it is the mission of NATO and the European Community to restrain Germany and keep it under tight control.
Lord Ismay, the General Secretary of NATO, has formulated the mission of NATO as follows: “To keep the Americans in Europe, the Russians out of Europe, and the Germans down.”
Kissinger: “If the two powers (Germany and Russia) become too close, the danger of hegemony arises…
The great accomplishment of the Western leaders in the postwar era consisted of recognizing the fact that under extreme circumstances, America would be compelled to reestablish a balance if it were not a major party to the maintenance of stability from the very beginning.”
We have strong good reasons for interpreting the recent NATO games to be a veiled warning by the East Coast Oligarchy.
As reported in Time Magazine, these games included deployments in Magdeburg, Schwedt and Frankfurt/Oder.
The already completed transplantation of foreign ethnicities into our midst offers the USA the possibility of creating at any time a pretext for intervention by the USA under cover of NATO.
Such an intervention would be allowable under the newest doctrine of NATO, which has now been adopted by Germany through its participation in the war against Serbia.
It would be a very easy matter for the CIA to instigate ethnic conflicts in our fatherland.
The globalist planners on the American East Coast have overlooked just one thing: the existence of a fundamentalist Islamic VOLK in Germany.
This foreign Volk, whose tendency is to become the majority here, is leading to a political orientation that is hostile to Zionist domination.
Money Power should not be underestimated, but it is going to have a limited effect in the restructuring of the world.
There are two principal reasons for this:
1. As a power in relations between states, money is a universal system and therefore the center and fulcrum of Globalism.
However, resistance is growing against Globalism.
It is what must be overcome — not only as a spiritual phenomenon (“The American Way of Life”) but as an economic power as well.
Globalism is not just the subject of the process, but its object as well: it is what must be overcome.
2. The global money system is threatened with collapse.
In past decades, three mega bubbles (the above mentioned indebtedness, consumer credit and speculative funds) have developed.
These are now closely interconnected, and a bursting of any of these bubbles would be incompatible with the continued existence of the System.
It is inevitable that they will burst.
When it comes, this bursting will inevitably cause a deep, worldwide, long lasting Depression.
The Depression will destroy not only the appearance of wealth – it will destroy real wealth for the foreseeable future.
The effects of this process on mankind’s living conditions will make political relationships chaotic in all the countries that are subject to Globalism.
The capability of the hyperpower and its satellites to intervene with money instead of military power will vanish for the following reasons:
1) The credit system will be directly affected by the crisis and will no longer have access to sufficient means;
2) The American government will lose its creditworthiness, which will result in a state credit crisis.
The social crisis in the US will absorb whatever means are available at the same time as the necessity of worldwide intervention.
The formation of a European Coalition that includes Russia can succeed only if the principal nation in the middle of Europe – Germany – is present as a great power and aware of its role in the interests of the entire continent.
As long as Germany refuses to consider itself a Nation, the formation of stable legal relations among the European nations will not be possible.
As long as Germany refuses to consider itself a Nation, it will remain a Trojan Horse of the American hyperpower in the heart of Europe.
If this does not change, Russia will have no choice except to torn toward China and India.
The consequence of this will be that the Europeans will assume ever more clearly the stamp of vassals of the USA in its efforts to contain the block of China, Russia and India, which will be dominated by China.
In the ensuing wars, Germans will be the preferred cannon fodder.
Germany cannot remain aloof from the process of reconstruction and realignment.
The only choice we have is whether to be the hammer or the anvil.
In order to be the hammer, we must have moral substance within our VOLK, which we seem to have lost.
V. Islamic Fundamentalism – A Beneficial Shock Treatment for Us Germans
In the Asiatic-African belt of countries, Islam is rising to become the predominant spiritual power, and its missionizing power is already challenging the European nations as well as the USA.
It is encountering a spiritual vacuum in the West.
Such a spiritual vacuum is to the spiritual realm of mankind what Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome is to the biological realm.
It is obvious to all that Western Civilization and the New World are caught up in a severe spiritual crisis.
Through their rediscovery and continuance of German idealistic philosophy, they now recognize Nihilism as a negative system of faith, and they recognize the “American Way of Life” as a nihilistic cult.
Since the beginning of the Enlightenment, we in the West have realized that the existence of God cannot be proven.
Our conviction cannot retreat from this realization.
However, it is equally certain that the nonexistence of God cannot be proven
Thus, each of us is faced with the decision of whether he wants to believe in God.
It has become a matter of emotion rather than a matter of reason.
It would be reasonable to reject belief in God only if it were logically possible to satisfactorily and empirically answer every significant question that ever affected mankind without the concept of God.
The program of the Enlightenment was precisely this:
The Rationalists created their “scientific” picture of the world precisely on this basis.
In this worldview all propositions that contradict themselves are rejected as logically invalid.
With this presupposition, however – as Goethe pointed out – life itself cannot be comprehended.
It is as untenable as the assumption that absolute space and time exist, which was disproved by Einstein.
German Idealism demonstrated that there is not a single proposition that does not contradict itself.
Hegel introduced his great dissertation with the proposition:
“Contradiction is the sign of truth, and the absence of contradiction the sign of fallacy.”
Since that time all the sciences have come to this understanding.
Rationalists have rejected this idea, which Hegel himself called “speculative,” as being mythical and occult.
In the opinion of Bertrand Russell, Karl Popper, Andre Glucksmann and others, Hegel’s “speculative thinking” led straight to Auschwitz.
They could appear convincing in this only because the scientific worldview had brought forth seemingly boundless materialistic wealth based on technology.
This materialistic success had abandoned the question of whether the truth is concerned with noncontradictory thought as being superfluous and incomprehensible.
Furthermore, metaphysics had been the bulwark of the Church since the beginning of the Enlightenment, and it was believed that Hegel’s speculative thinking would destroy the Church’s metaphysical thought structure.
German Idealism seemed a faded leaf on the rapidly growing branch of the Industrial Revolution with its religion of Progress.
The claims of VERNUNFT (Reason, rationality) as opposed to the works of VERSTAND (apprehension, recognition) kept quiet.
It is not true that Vernunft became our doom, but rather that it was ignored in our century.
Strangely enough it was Adorno and Horkheimer, the fathers of the Frankfurt School, who prepared the way for the reversal with their realization that the principle of contradiction was the fascist system “in a nutshell.”
Most recently, George Soros alongside Hegel, Ernst Mach, Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg, Paul Watzlawick, Paul Searle, Niklas Luhmann and others have shown that all theories about scientific and sociological processes must be considered invalid.
Soros attributes his spectacular successes to precisely this insight.
This confirms that the essential questions concerning life and society can find no answers in the “scientific” worldview.
It confirms that that such “bargained” answers rely on Alchemy.
Only superficially do they have a scientific veneer; in reality, they are invalid.
Thus, it is not rational to reject God!
This realization alone is a triumph over nihilism.
The promise of the Enlightenment (that Man can regain paradise through the accomplishments of his intelligence – as the “realm of Man”) has proven a tragic illusion.
The century that is now ending has been the blackest time in all history, throughout the world.
Never before has mankind been so hollow and so unworthy as the people in the “Western Community of Values,” which in reality is no longer a community.
It cannot be a community because it recognizes no real values.
Never before did so many men die at the hands of Man.
Never did Man so lower himself through beastly cruelty against his own kind as in the 20th Century.
Never has our species’ fear of self-annihilation been greater than it is now.
The resurrection of the God who had been murdered by the Enlightenment occurred as a gift of the Holy Ghost in Philosophy.
It is simultaneously the AUFHEBUNG (elevation) – (in the threefold Hegelian sense of BEENDEN, ERHALTEN AND ERHÖHEN– the opposites of the three Abrahamic religions.
This concludes the Enlightenment and the age of the atomistic individual.
The age of contemplative perception has now begun.
In it (the age of contemplative perception) the community of the VOLK as well as that of the family is perceived as person, in the sense of Latin PERSONARE .
( PERSONATE = PERMEATE, RESOUND) .
Absolute spirit, which permeates AND resounds in the individual, assumes a higher GESTALT (configuration).
In nations as in individuals, this higher GESTALT includes spiritual and intellectual forces that are not yet understood.
These forces enable Man to accept sorrow and inequality thankfully, as a gift, and to raise himself above it.
The individual who finds his way to Spirit no longer lives his life in opposition to Nature, but rather in accordance with it.
Such an individual practices modesty and is truly humble in relation to all Creation.
Excessive sustentation as well as insufficient sustentation, destruction of the environment and overpopulation can then be stricken from mankind’s catalog of problems.
It is fruitless to think about Germany and a new order of peace in a way that is basically different from this.
Only God can conceive of Germany as a VOLK and a nation, precisely on account of its history.
Hegel taught us that the history of the German VOLK, like all history, is progress in the awareness of freedom.
As a part of German history, the period from 1933 to 1945 is, even in its negativity, a moment in the increasing consciousness of freedom.
Our VOLK will no longer be constrained in feelings of eternal and guilt and shame.
In the Temple of Philosophy, victims find consolation and delinquents find absolution.
In the First Book of Samuel (Chapter 15, Verse 3) the Chosen People are commanded:
“Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them: put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
This has to be interpreted differently from the way it is interpreted in “Illuminism” (a pejorative term referring to the Enlightenment).
Whoever turns away in horror because he considers it unique and incomprehensible, simply does not get the message.
That person is obliged to follow a mistaken path and repeat the process until he finally comprehends the message that is inherent in the event.
The historical view, however, which does not turn away from horror but rather sees the work of God in it, leads to knowledge, which is true reconciliation.
Only this liberating insight banishes the danger that darkness will return and be repeated…
This is because the spirit that truly comprehends itself becomes a different spirit in the process.
The spirit that is aware of itself does not repeat itself.
The power to change horror (the negativity within it) through knowledge into something positive is the most singular aspect of German Idealism.
Nothing else is equal or even similar to this special capacity.
This spirit is still present in the German VOLK, although deeply covered over.
The highest goal we can set for ourselves is to bring it to new life.
VI. Theses For a New Germany
1. Germany’s situation is very serious.
Our country is caught in a crisis in which our people act paralyzed, powerless and incapable of responding to overwhelming developments.
These final crises of the Federal Republic are threatening to weaken our VOLK to the point where the necessary new beginning will be impossible.
Historically, political regimes have had a future only when they were able to solve the serious problems of the commonwealth.
If they were unable to do this, their end could not be averted.
The Federal Republic is going to collapse.
Will it take Germany with it into the abyss with it?
Every historical event stands under the rule of contingency, meaning that it can turn out in a certain way, or quite differently.
2.
Only a firm regime can lead the way out of a corrupted
democracy that ends in anarchy.
An adequate number of men and women must join together who in the interregnum are ready and willing to take the rudder of state from the slipping hand of the rotten expiring system.
What will their goal be?
The Reinstatement of National Jurisdiction Over All the Existential Concerns of the German Nation!
This imperative is the ALPHA UND OMEGA , the Be All and End All, the most pressing requirement for the rehabilitation and rebuilding of our fatherland.
First of all, the most crude and primitive evils must be overcome in short order and with decisive measures.
After the restoration of domestic peace and inner unity a general statement must be made concerning the future form of our commonwealth.
3.
We dedicate our work to the common good that has been hollowed out through special social, individual and group interests.
Individual corrections and private efforts at damage control will not be adequate: We Need a Workshop For a New Germany!
We are not talking about actively combating the present ruling system, whose self-destruction has developed an ominous dynamic of its own, but rather conceptual provisions and considerations for the period to follow.
4.
We want to be able to offer suggestions to our people.
We want to make suggestions about how to solve growing emergencies and we want to suggest which alternative models are appropriate and desirable for the reconstruction of our commonwealth.
Suggestions are not commands, and there will certainly be other suggestions that might be better than ours.
We think of our work as a contribution to form a new national will and purpose, in which every German is allowed to participate with ideas and concepts.
The process is certain to be a drastic spiritual and intellectual convalescence.
We cannot avoid this if the remedy is to be effective.
5.
The restoration of freedom is a basic prerequisite for restoring a creative atmosphere.
The exhausting and never-ending alternations of prosecution and defense introduced by the so-called “antifascist movement” after 1945, and have continued for 65 years, must finally be overcome.
The same is true of conditioned Pavlovian reflexes: the automatic responses that follow every emotive word must finally be abandoned.
These repressive reflexes have flattened our intellectual niveau and detracted us from what is really important.
We have to put aside the disastrous civil divisions in our society, which resemble fronts of a civil war.
We must overcome such divisions between “right,” “left” and especially the intolerant “militant middle” that hinder political functioning of the inner unity of our nation.
We must put an end to the incitements, defamations, threats and use of force against dissidents, which are poisoning the intellectual climate in our country.
Today’s crushing dictatorship of opinion must finally be relegated to the dustbin where it belongs.
A free society offers all its countrymen the necessary space and opportunity to openly discuss fundamental subjects of national import.
6.
We Germans comprise a SCHICKSALSGEMEINSCHAFT, sharing a common destiny, and this includes responsibility for the future of our land.
Even if we are no longer aware of this in our liberalistic and atomized society: we are brothers and sisters who, after many years of separation and divisiveness, have to begin all over again to understand and reach agreement with one another.
Love, not hate must be the model for our new Germany.
Only in a new communal awareness can we unleash the powers that are necessary to again make something of ourselves.
We have the choice of opening a new chapter in our history with our unified efforts, or exiting the world stage as a totally defeated VOLK and fade away to the end of our existence.
The nation is lost that asks “What is going to happen to us?” instead of “What do we do now?”
7.
What is to be done at this moment?
We Germans need a new picture of ourselves.
However, the beginning of a picture is always a concept.
This is where we have to begin, in accordance with Hegel’s dictum of 1808:
“If we can revolutionize the realm of vision, reality will not be able to hold out.”
We are working on that now!
The task of liberating Germany is not feasible without determined leadership, in which the Trinity of God is present as the resurrected Absolute Spirit in German philosophy.
It might will be that, when the time comes, a more worthy and competent leadership personality than I will appear.
Until that is the case, I am prepared to fill the vacuum.
ES LEBE DAS HEILIGE DEUTSCHE REICH!
Long live the Holy German Empire!
Horst Mahler