Quantcast
Channel: SAMURAI POLICE 1109
Viewing all 1603 articles
Browse latest View live

WAFFEN-SS

$
0
0


            I will post information about the Waffen-SS from Wikipedia and other links.


The Waffen-SS


Waffen-SS

Soldiers of the Waffen-SS receive decorations. 21 June 1940
Active
1933–45
Country
Nazi Germany
Allegiance
Adolf Hitler
Branch
Schutzstaffel
Type
Size
Part of
Garrison/HQ
Motto
Meine Ehre heißt Treue
(My Honour is Loyalty)
Colors
Black, White, Red
Engagements
Commanders
Ceremonial chief
Heinrich Himmler
Notable
commanders
The Waffen-SS (German pronunciation: [ˈvafən.ɛs.ɛs], Armed SS) was created as the armed wing of the Nazi Party's Schutzstaffel(SS, "Protective Squadron"), and gradually developed into a multi-ethnic and multi-national military force of Nazi Germany.

The Waffen-SS grew from three regiments to over 38 divisions during World War II, and served alongside the Heer (regular army) but was never formally part of it. Adolf Hitler resisted integrating the Waffen-SS into the army, as it was intended to remain the armed wing of the Party and to become an elite police force once the war was won. Prior to the war, it was under the control of the SS Führungshauptamt (SS operational command office) beneath Reichsführer-SSHeinrich Himmler. Upon mobilization its tactical control was given to the High Command of the Armed Forces (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht).

Initially membership was only open to people of Germanic "Aryan" origin, who were said to be the Herrenvolk(master race), according to Nazi racial ideology. The rules were partially relaxed in 1940, although groups considered by Nazis to be "sub-human" like ethnic Poles or Jews remained excluded. Hitler authorized the formation of units composed largely or solely of foreign volunteers and conscripts. Foreign SS units were made up from recruits in Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium (both Wallonia and Flanders), Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Galicia, Georgia, Hungary, India, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia (including Cossack and Tatar, Turkic SSR Republics), Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine, Independent State of Croatia, Asian Regiment, Arab Regiment, USA (15-20 volunteers) and a small number of British troops.

At the post-war Nuremberg trials the Waffen-SS was condemned as a criminal organisation due to its connection to the Nazi Party and involvement in numerous war crimes. Waffen-SS veterans were denied many of the rights afforded to veterans who had served in the Heer (army), Luftwaffe(air force) or Kriegsmarine (navy). An exception was made for Waffen-SS conscripts sworn in after 1943, who were exempted because of their involuntary servitude.

OTHER LINKS:






ADOLF HITLER’S SPEECH ON SEPTEMBER 1, 1939 AT THE REICHSTAG: “BOMBS WILL BE MET WITH BOMBS!”

$
0
0



            On this date, September 1, 1939, Adolf Hitler gave a speech at the Kroll Opera House, telling the Reichstag: “Bombs will be met with bombs.”


Adolf Hitler on wanting war.

World War 2: Adolf Hitler's speech to Reichstag
Hitler tells Reichstag: “bombs will be met with bombs".

7:43PM BST 31 Aug 2009

Article first published in the Daily Telegraph, Sept 2, 1939
 
Herr Hitler to-day addressed the Reichstag, which met in the Kroll Opera House. The diplomats’ box was filled as he entered, followed by Field Marshal Goering, and he was greeted with a loud burst of cheering. 

In opening the proceedings, Marshal Goering said: “More than 100 members are not among us because they are standing alongside the soldiers of the German army. They will do their duty and the German Reichstag will do its duty now.” 

As Herr Hitler rose to speak there was more cheering. He said: 

For months we have been suffering under the torture of a problem which the Versailles Treaty created – a problem which has deteriorated until it becomes intolerable for us. 

Danzig was and is a German city. The Corridor was and is German. Both these territories hold their cultural development exclusively to the German people. Danzig was separated from us. The Corridor was annexed by Poland. As in other German territories of the East, all German minorities living there have been ill treated in the most distressing manner. 

More than a million people of German blood had, in the years 1919-1920, to leave their homeland. As always, I attempted to bring about, by the peaceful method of making proposals for revision, an alteration of this intolerable position. 

It is a lie when the outside world said that we only tried to carry through our revisions by pressure. 

Fifteen years before the National Socialist party came to power there was the opportunity of carrying out these revisions by peaceful settlements and understanding. On my own initiative I have, not once but several times, made proposals for the revision of intolerable conditions. 

All these proposals, as you know, have been rejected – proposals for limitation of armaments and even, if necessary, disarmament, proposals for the limitation of certain methods of modern warfare.
You know the proposals that I have made to fulfil the necessity of restoring German sovereignty over German territories. 

You know the endless attempts I made for a peaceful clarification and understanding of the problem of Austria and later of the problem of the Sudetenland. Bohemia and Moravia. It was all in vain. 

‘Versailles not law to us’ - “signature obtained by force”
 
It is impossible to demand that an impossible position should be cleared up by peaceful revision and at the same time constantly reject peaceful revision. It is also impossible to say that he who undertakes to carry out these revisions for himself transgresses a law, since the Versailles “Diktat” is not law to us. 

A signature was forced out of us with pistols at our head and with the threat of hunger for millions of people. And then this document, with our signature, obtained by force, was proclaimed as a solemn law. 

In the same way I have also tried to solve the problem of Danzig the Corridor, and so on, by proposing a peaceful discussion. 

That the problems had to be solved was clear. It is quite understandable to us that the time when the problem was to be solved had little interest for the Western Powers. But that time is not a matter of indifference to us. 

Moreover, it was not, and could not be, a matter of indifference to those who suffer most. 

In my talks with Polish statesmen I discussed the ideas which you recognise from my last speech to the Reichstag. No one could say that this was in any way an inadmissible procedure or undue pressure. 

I then naturally formulated at last the German proposals, and I must once more repeat that there is nothing more modest or loyal than these proposals. 

I should like to say this to the world. I alone was in the position to make such proposals, for I know very well that in doing so I brought myself into opposition to millions of Germans. 

These proposals have been refused. Not only were they answered first with mobilisation, but with increased terror and pressure against our German compatriots, of Danzig – economically, politically, and in recent weeks, by military and transport means. 

Poland has directed its attacks against the free city of Danzig. 

Moreover, Poland was not prepared to settle the Corridor question in its reasonable way which would be equitable to both parties, and she did not think of keeping her obligations to minorities. 

I must here state something definitely: Germany has kept these obligations: the minorities who live in Germany are not persecuted. 

No Frenchman can stand up and say that any Frenchman living in the Saar territory is oppressed, tortured or deprived of his rights. Nobody can say this. 

For four months I have calmly watched developments, although I never ceased to give warnings. In the last few days I have increased these warnings. 

I informed the Polish Ambassador three weeks ago that if Poland continued to send to Danzig notes in the form of ultimatums, if Poland continued its methods of oppression against the Germans, and if on the Polish side an end was not put to Customs measures destined to ruin Danzig’s trade, then the Reich could not remain inactive. 

Blaming Poland - failure of mediation proposals 

I left no doubt that people who wanted to compare the Germany of to-day with the former Germany would be deceiving themselves. 

An attempt was made to justify the oppression of the Germans by claiming that they had committed acts of provocation. 

I do not know in what these provocations on the part of women and children consist, if they themselves are maltreated, in some cases killed. One thing I do know – that no great Power can with honour long stand by passively and watch such events. 

I made one more final effort to accept a proposal for mediation on the part of the British Government. They proposed, not that they themselves should carry on the negotiations, but rather that Poland and Germany should come into direct contact and once more to pursue negotiations. 

I must declare that I accepted this proposal, and I worked out a basis for these negotiations which are known to you. 

For two whole days I sat with my Government and waited to see whether it was convenient for the Polish Government to send a plenipotentiary or not. 

Last night they did not send us a plenipotentiary but instead informed us through their Ambassador that they were still considering whether and to what extent they were in a position to go into the British proposals. 

The Polish Government also said that they would inform Britain of their decision. 

Deputies, if the German Government and its leader patiently endured such treatment, Germany would deserve only to disappear from the political stage. But I am wrongly judged and if my love of peace and my patience are mistaken for weakness or even cowardice. I therefore decided last night, and informed the British Government that in these circumstances I can no longer find any willingness on the part of the Polish Government to conduct serious negotiations with us. 

These proposals for mediation have failed because in the meanwhile there first of all came as an answer the sudden Polish general mobilisation, followed by more Polish atrocities. These were repeated last night. 

Recently, in one night, there were as many as 21 frontier incidents: last night there were 14, of which three were quite serious. 

I have, therefore, resolved to speak to Poland in the same language that Poland for months past has used towards us. 

Italy thanked - no appeal for foreign help 

When statesmen in the West declare that this affects their interests. I can only regret such a declaration. It cannot for a moment make me hesitate to fulfil my duty. 

What more is wanted? I have solemnly assured them, and I repeat it, that we ask nothing of these Western States and never will ask anything. I have declared that the frontier between France and Germany is a final one. 

I have repeatedly offered friendship and, if necessary, the closest co-operation to Britain, but this cannot be offered from one side only. It must find response on the other side. 

Germany has no interests in the West, and our Western Wall is for all time the frontier of the Reich on the West. Moreover, we have no aims of any kind there for the future. This attitude on the part of the Reich will not change. 

The other European States understand in part our attitude. I should like here above all, to thank Italy, which throughout has supported us, but you will understand that for the carrying on of this struggle we do not intend to appeal for foreign help. 

We will carry out this task ourselves. The neutral States have assured us of their neutrality, just as we had already guaranteed it to them. 

With this assurance we are in solemn earnest, and as long as others do not violate their neutrality, we will likewise take every care to respect it. 

I am happy particularly to be able to tell you of one event. You know that Russia and Germany are governed by two different doctrines. There was only one question that had to be cleared up. 

Germany has no intention of exporting its doctrine. Given the face that Soviet Russia has no intention of exporting its doctrine to Germany. I no longer see any reason why we should still oppose one another. On both sides we are clear on that. 

Any struggle between our people would only be of advantage to others. We have therefore, resolved to conclude a pact which rules out forever any use of violence between us. 

Only military objectives - “whoever fights with gas”
 
It imposes the obligation on us to consult together in certain European questions. It makes possible for us economic co-operation, and above all it assures that the powers of both these powerful States are not wasted against one another. 

Every attempt of the West to bring about any change in this will fail. 

At the same time, I should like here to declare that this political decision means a tremendous departure for the future, and that it is a final one.

Russia and Germany fought against one another in the world war. That shall and will not happen a second time. 

In Moscow too this part was greeted exactly as you greet it. I can only endorse word for word the speech of the Russian Foreign Commissary Molotov. 

I am determined to solve (1) the Danzig question, (3) the question of the Corridor, and (3) to see to it that a change is made in the relationship between Germany and Poland that shall ensure a peaceful co-existence. 

In this I am resolved to continue the fight until either the present Polish Government is willing to bring about the change or until another Polish Government is ready to do so. 

I am resolved to remove from the German frontiers the element of uncertainty, the everlasting atmosphere of conditions resembling civil war. I will see to it that in the East there is, on the frontier, a peace precisely similar to that on our other frontiers. 

In this I will take the necessary measures to see that they do not contradict the proposals I have already made known in the Reichstag itself to the rest of the world; that is to say I will not war against women and children. 

I have ordered my Air Force to restrict itself to attacks on military objectives. If, however, the enemy thinks he can from that draw carte blanche on his side to fight by the other methods, he will receive an answer that will deprive him of hearing and sight. 

This night for the first time Polish regular soldiers fired on our own territory. Since 5.45 a.m. we have been returning the fire. And, from now on, bombs will be met with bombs. Whoever fights with poison gas will be fought with poison gas. Whoever departs from the rules of humane warfare can only expect that we shall do the same. 

I will continue this struggle, no matter against whom, until the safety of the Reich and its rights are secured. 

Goering as successor - “should anything happen to me”
 
For six years now I have been working on the building up of the German defences. Or 90 milliards have in that time been spent on the building up of these defence forces. They are now the best equipped, and are above all comparison with what they were in 1914. 

My trust in them is unshakable. When I called up these forces, and when I now ask sacrifices of the German people, and if necessary every sacrifice, then I have a right to do so, for I also am to-day absolutely ready, just as we were formerly, to make every personal sacrifice. 

I am asking of no German man more than I myself was ready throughout four years at any time to do. There will be no hardships for Germans to which I myself will not submit. My whole life henceforth belongs more than ever to my people. 

I am from now on just First Soldier of the German Reich. I have once more put on that coat that was the most sacred and dear to me. I will not take it off again until victory is secured or I will not survive the outcome. 

Should anything happen to me in the struggle then my first successor is Party Comrade Goering. Should anything happen to Party Comrade Goering my next successor is Party Comrade Hess. You would then be under obligation to give to them as Fuehrer the same blind loyalty and obedience as to myself. 

Should anything happen to Party Comrade Hess, then by law the Senate will be called and will choose from its midst the most worthy – that is to say, the bravest successor. 

As a National Socialist and as German soldier I enter upon this struggle with a stout heart. My whole life has been nothing but one long struggle for my people, for its restoration and for Germany. 

There was only one watchword for that struggle, faith in this people. One word I have never learned, that is, surrender. 

If, however, anyone thinks that we are facing a hard time, I should ask him to remember that once a Prussian King with a ridiculously small State opposed a stronger coalition, and in three wars finally came out successful because that State had that stout heart that we need in these times. 

I would, therefore, like to assure all the world that a November 1918 will never be repeated in German history. 

Just as I myself am ready at any time to stake my life – anyone can take it for my people and for Germany – so I ask the same of all others. 

Whoever thinks he can oppose this national command, whether directly or indirectly, he shall fall. We have nothing to do with traitors. 

We are all faithful to our old principle. It is quite unimportant whether we ourselves live, but it is essential that our people shall live, that Germany shall live. 

The sacrifice that is demanded of us is not greater than the sacrifice that many generations have made. 

If we form a community closely bound together by vows, ready for anything, resolved never to surrender, then our will will master every hardship and difficulty. 

And I would like to close with the declaration that I once made when I began the struggle for power in the Reich. I then said: “If our will is so strong that no hardship and suffering can subdue it, then our will and our German might shall prevail.” 

Herr Hitler then moved a Bill entitled “The Law for the Reunion of Danzig with the German Reich”. It was passed with acclamation. – Reuter and British United Press. 


Political cartoon depicts the murderous actions of Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin. [PHOTO SOURCE: http://www.markville.ss.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/history/american/websites/HIST10/andy_zeelie.htm]



Germany Could No Longer Remain Idle

By Adolf Hitler  
September 1, 1939
For months we have been suffering under the torture of a problem which the Versailles Diktat created - a problem which has deteriorated until it becomes intolerable for us. Danzig was and is a German city. The Corridor was and is German. Both these territories owe their cultural development exclusively to the German people. Danzig was separated from us, the Corridor was annexed by Poland. As in other German territories of the East, all German minorities living there have been ill-treated in the most distressing manner. More than 1,000,000 people of German blood had in the years 1919-1920 to leave their homeland.

As always, I attempted to bring about, by the peaceful method of making proposals for revision, an alteration of this intolerable position. It is a lie when the outside world says that we only tried to carry through our revisions by pressure. Fifteen years before the National Socialist Party came to power there was the opportunity of carrying out these revisions by peaceful settlements and understanding. On my own initiative I have, not once but several times, made proposals for the revision of intolerable conditions. All these proposals, as you know, have been rejected - proposals for limitation of armaments and even, if necessary, disarmament, proposals for limitation of warmaking, proposals for the elimination of certain methods of modern warfare. You know the proposals that I have made to fulfill the necessity of restoring German sovereignty over German territories. You know the endless attempts I made for a peaceful clarification and understanding of the problem of Austria, and later of the problem of the Sudetenland, Bohemia, and Moravia. It was all in vain.

It is impossible to demand that an impossible position should be cleared up by peaceful revision and at the same time constantly reject peaceful revision. It is also impossible to say that he who undertakes to carry out these revisions for himself transgresses a law, since the Versailles Diktat is not law to us. A signature was forced out of us with pistols at our head and with the threat of hunger for millions of people. And then this document, with our signature, obtained by force, was proclaimed as a solemn law.

In the same way, I have also tried to solve the problem of Danzig, the Corridor, etc., by proposing a peaceful discussion. That the problems had to be solved was clear. It is quite understandable to us that the time when the problem was to be solved had little interest for the Western Powers. But that time is not a matter of indifference to us. Moreover, it was not and could not be a matter of indifference to those who suffer most.

In my talks with Polish statesmen I discussed the ideas which you recognize from my last speech to the Reichstag. No one could say that this was in any way an inadmissible procedure on undue pressure. I then naturally formulated at last the German proposals, and I must once more repeat that there is nothing more modest or loyal than these proposals. I should like to say this to the world. I alone was in the position to make such proposal, for I know very well that in doing so I brought myself into opposition to millions of Germans. These proposals have been refused. Not only were they answered first with mobilization, but with increased terror and pressure against our German compatriots and with a slow strangling of the Free City of Danzig - economically, politically, and in recent weeks by military and transport means.

Poland has directed its attacks against the Free City of Danzig. Moreover, Poland was not prepared to settle the Corridor question in a reasonable way which would be equitable to both parties, and she did not think of keeping her obligations to minorities.

I must here state something definitely; German has kept these obligations; the minorities who live in Germany are not persecuted. No Frenchman can stand up and say that any Frenchman living in the Saar territory is oppressed, tortured, or deprived of his rights. Nobody can say this.

For four months I have calmly watched developments, although I never ceased to give warnings. In the last few days I have increased these warnings. I informed the Polish Ambassador three weeks ago that if Poland continued to send to Danzig notes in the form of ultimata, and if on the Polish side an end was not put to Customs measures destined to ruin Danzig's trade, then the Reich could not remain inactive. I left no doubt that people who wanted to compare the Germany of to-day with the former Germany would be deceiving themselves.

An attempt was made to justify the oppression of the Germans by claiming that they had committed acts of provocation. I do not know in what these provocations on the part of women and children consist, if they themselves are maltreated, in some cases killed. One thing I do know - that no great Power can with honour long stand by passively and watch such events.

I made one more final effort to accept a proposal for mediation on the part of the British Government. They proposed, not that they themselves should carry on the negotiations, but rather that Poland and Germany should come into direct contact and once more pursue negotiations.

I must declare that I accepted this proposal, and I worked out a basis for these negotiations which are known to you. For two whole days I sat in my Government and waited to see whether it was convenient for the Polish Government to send a plenipotentiary or not. Last night they did not send us a plenipotentiary, but instead informed us through their Ambassador that they were still considering whether and to what extent they were in a position to go into the British proposals. The Polish Government also said that they would inform Britain of their decision.

Deputies, if the German Government and its Leader patiently endured such treatment Germany would deserve only to disappear from the political stage. But I am wrongly judged if my love of peace and my patience are mistaken for weakness or even cowardice. I, therefore, decided last night and informed the British Government that in these circumstances I can no longer find any willingness on the part of the Polish Government to conduct serious negotiations with us.

These proposals for mediation have failed because in the meanwhile there, first of all, came as an answer the sudden Polish general mobilization, followed by more Polish atrocities. These were again repeated last night. Recently in one night there were as many as twenty-one frontier incidents: last night there were fourteen, of which three were quite serious. I have, therefore, resolved to speak to Poland in the same language that Poland for months past has used toward us. This attitude on the part of the Reich will not change.

The other European States understand in part our attitude. I should like here above all to thank Italy, which throughout has supported us, but you will understand that for the carrying on of this struggle we do not intend to appeal to foreign help. We will carry out this task ourselves. The neutral States have assured us of their neutrality, just as we had already guaranteed it to them.

When statesmen in the West declare that this affects their interests, I can only regret such a declaration. It cannot for a moment make me hesitate to fulfill my duty. What more is wanted? I have solemnly assured them, and I repeat it, that we ask nothing of those Western States and never will ask anything. I have declared that the frontier between France and Germany is a final one. I have repeatedly offered friendship and, if necessary, the closest co-operation to Britain, but this cannot be offered from one side only. It must find response on the other side. Germany has no interests in the West, and our western wall is for all time the frontier of the Reich on the west. Moreover, we have no aims of any kind there for the future. With this assurance we are in solemn earnest, and as long as others do not violate their neutrality we will likewise take every care to respect it.

I am happy particularly to be able to tell you of one event. You know that Russia and Germany are governed by two different doctrines. There was only one question that had to be cleared up. Germany has no intention of exporting its doctrine. Given the fact that Soviet Russia has no intention of exporting its doctrine to Germany. I no longer see any reason why we should still oppose one another. On both sides we are clear on that. Any struggle between our people would only be of advantage to others. We have, therefore, resolved to conclude a pact which rules out for ever any use of violence between us. It imposes the obligation on us to consult together in certain European questions. It makes possible for us economic co-operation, and above all it assures that the powers of both these powerful States are not wasted against one another. Every attempt of the West to bring about any change in this will fail.

At the same time I should like here to declare that this political decision means a tremendous departure for the future, and that it is a final one. Russia and Germany fought against one another in the World War. That shall and will not happen a second time. In Moscow, too, this pact was greeted exactly as you greet it. I can only endorse word for word the speech of Russian Foreign Commissar, Molotov.

I am determined to solve (1) the Danzig question; (2) the question of the Corridor; and (3) to see to it that a change is made in the relationship between Germany and Poland that shall ensure a peaceful co-existence. In this I am resolved to continue to fight until either the present Polish government is willing to continue to bring about this change or until another Polish Government is ready to do so. I am resolved t remove from the German frontiers the element of uncertainty, the everlasting atmosphere of conditions resembling civil war. I will see to it that in the East there is, on the frontier, a peace precisely similar to that on our other frontiers.

In this I will take the necessary measures to se that they do not contradict the proposals I have already made known in the Reichstag itself to the rest of the world, that is to say, I will not war against women and children. I have ordered my air force to restrict itself to attacks on military objectives. If, however, the enemy thinks he can form that draw carte blanche on his side to fight by the other methods he will receive an answer that will deprive him of hearing and sight.

This night for the first time Polish regular soldiers fired on our territory. Since 5.45 A.M. we have been returning the fire, and from now on bombs will be met by bombs. Whoever fight with poison gas will be fought with poison gas. Whoever departs from the rules of humane warfare can only expect that we shall do the same. I will continue this struggle, no matter against whom, until the safety of the Reich and its rights are secured.

For six years now I have been working on the building up of the German defenses. Over 90 millions have in that time been spent on the building up of these defense forces. They are now the best equipped and are above all comparison with what they were in 1914. My trust in them is unshakable. When I called up these forces and when I now ask sacrifices of the German people and if necessary every sacrifice, then I have a right to do so, for I also am to-day absolutely ready, just as we were formerly, to make every possible sacrifice.

I am asking of no German man more than I myself was ready throughout four years at any time to do. There will be no hardships for Germans to which I myself will not submit. My whole life henceforth belongs more than ever to my people. I am from now on just first soldier of the German Reich. I have once more put on that coat that was the most sacred and dear to me. I will not take it off again until victory is secured, or I will not survive the outcome.

Should anything happen to me in the struggle then my first successor is Party Comrade Goring; should anything happen to Party Comrade Goring my next successor is Party Comrade Hess. You would then be under obligation to give to them as Fuhrer the same blind loyalty and obedience as to myself. Should anything happen to Party Comrade Hess, then by law the Senate will be called, and will choose from its midst the most worthy - that is to say the bravest - successor.

As a National Socialist and as German soldier I enter upon this struggle with a stout heart. My whole life has been nothing but one long struggle for my people, for its restoration, and for Germany. There was only one watchword for that struggle: faith in this people. One word I have never learned: that is, surrender.

If, however, anyone thinks that we are facing a hard time, I should ask him to remember that once a Prussian King, with a ridiculously small State, opposed a stronger coalition, and in three wars finally came out successful because that State had that stout heart that we need in these times. I would, therefore, like to assure all the world that a November 1918 will never be repeated in German history. Just as I myself am ready at any time to stake my life - anyone can take it for my people and for Germany - so I ask the same of all others.

Whoever, however, thinks he can oppose this national command, whether directly of indirectly, shall fall. We have nothing to do with traitors. We are all faithful to our old principle. It is quite unimportant whether we ourselves live, but it is essential that our people shall live, that Germany shall live. The sacrifice that is demanded of us is not greater than the sacrifice that many generations have made. If we form a community closely bound together by vows, ready for anything, resolved never to surrender, then our will will master every hardship and difficulty. And I would like to close with the declaration that I once made when I began the struggle for power in the Reich. I then said: "If our will is so strong that no hardship and suffering can subdue it, then our will and our German might shall prevail."


September 1, 1939. 6 am. German troops start moving into Poland


JAPANESE INSTRUMENT OF SURRENDER (SEPTEMBER 2, 1945)

GASSED TO DEATH: JIMMY LEE GRAY (1949 TO SEPTEMBER 2, 1983)

$
0
0


          On this date, September 2, 1983, Jimmy Lee Gray was executed by the Gas Chamber in Mississippi. He was the first person executed in that State since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. He was a recidivist murderer who had killed and was on parole to murder again. I wish they should have kept the Gas Chamber and not change to lethal injection.

            Please go to this previous blog post to learn more about this pedophile.


Jimmy Lee Gray


Executions in California were carried out in the gas chamber at San Quentin State Prison. It was modified for the use of lethal injection, but has been returned to its original designated purpose, with the creation of a new chamber specifically for lethal injection.

ADOLF HITLER’S SPEECH AT THE BERLIN SPORTPALAST (SEPTEMBER 4, 1940)

$
0
0


 
Adolf Hitler on attacking and not defending

Adolf Hitler - speech at the Berlin Sportpalast
on the opening of the Kriegswinterhilfswerk


September 4, 1940

The first year of the war ended in these last days. The second began and with it the new Kriegswinterhilfswerk. The successes of the first year, my Volksgenossen, are unique-so unique in fact that not only our enemies had not envisioned the course of history in this manner, but many in the German Volk were hardly able to comprehend the greatness of the occurrences and the rapidity of events.

We cannot compare the first year of the war to the World War: for in it, despite the greatest of valor, despite the unheard-of, greatest of sacrifices, only partial results were obtained and no one, final solution. This time we need only look at the enormous triangle which is protected by the Wehrmacht today: in the East the Bug; in the North the North Cape, Kirkenes, and Narvik; in the South the border of Spain. A number of our adversaries have been eliminated. And the English owe it only to their fortuitous geographic position and to the enormous rapidity of their escape that they were spared a similar fate until now.

For matters are not standing as several British politicians attempt to portray the situation: that the British Army, tearing at its reins like a wild horse, is aflame with the desire to finally be unleashed, to hurl itself at the German enemy. It was surely close enough to us to satisfy this “desire” without much ado. It withdrew from our vicinity, and thus it is its lot to portray these pitiful retreats as great victories. And this is what all its “successes” look like! Besides the vast area already controlled by German troops at this time, our ally Italy has for its part taken the offensive in East Africa, strengthened its position there, and has beaten England back. Naturally, this is opposed by English “successes.” These are successes which defy comprehension by the normal, healthy human brain. We see time and time again how the English propaganda falls from one extreme to the next, from highs to lows, only to return to even greater highs a few days later.

Thus, one day, we read: “The die has been cast in this war. If the Germans fail to reach Paris-and in this they cannot succeed-then they will have lost the war. Should they still reach Paris, then England will still win the war.” England surely has fought through to many a success of this kind since that September 3. The most glorious of these victories was-although a disgraceful fiasco in our eyes-the flight from Dunkirk. Any port in a storm.

We need only read a British war bulletin to know what all these “successes” amount to. For instance, it says: “We were told that . . .” or “one gains the following information from well-informed circles . . .” or “one hears from knowledgeable officials . . .” or “from expert statements one can infer . .

.” One bulletin even read: “We believe we have cause to be permitted to believe that . . .” In this way any defeat can be transformed into a success! We were just moving into Poland when English propagandists declared that “well-informed circles” had related that the Germans had already suffered a number of grave setbacks: the Poles were victoriously advancing upon Berlin.

Only a few days later, these “well-informed circles” assured us that the tide had turned in the East for good.

Then came equally “well-informed experts” who remarked that, even if Germany should have gained a victory, which was not the case, then this victory was actually a defeat-as seen, naturally, from the viewpoint of higher strategic considerations. When we finally stood before Warsaw, they promptly changed their minds: “ . . . it would be correct to assume that the Allied attack in the West has achieved its first great victory, a breakthrough.” And thus matters went on until there was no more Poland.

And they said: “A great burden has been lifted from our shoulders. This Poland in the East was always a weak point for us. Now we can finally concentrate our efforts on a theater of war where we are superior to the Germans, as they will shortly realize.” Then there was calm for some time. This calm by itself naturally already constituted a consistent success of the British Armed Forces and an equally persistent failure for Germany. While the English worked throughout these months, we apparently slept through them! In this time, the English politicians saw it all, realized it all, and, above all, they grasped everything just in time. In the meanwhile, we missed out on everything.

This was until Norway. When operations began, English war reporters rejoiced at the “colossal mistake” we Germans had supposedly committed.

“Finally the Germans have made a mistake, and now they will have to pay for it,” so they wrote. And they were happy in England that finally they had been afforded the chance to measure themselves with the Germans.

They could have measured themselves with us at any hour, since in the West we lay but a few hundred meters apart. Still they pretended they could not possibly have seen us. And then, for the first time, good fortune afforded them the opportunity, thanks to our foolishness and in particular my own, to oppose us in armed conflict. And the conflict indeed came. It was truly an irony of fate that England owes perhaps the heaviest blow which it was dealt at the time to its very own propaganda.

Namely, as we had beaten the Norwegians back beyond Hamar and Lillehammer, a simple-minded British brigade marched unsuspectingly along the same road to Hamar. They had no connection with the rear, for this rear had been destroyed by our Stukas and fighters. They listened exclusively to British radio. And from the British radio, the commander of the brigade heard that we were far off still, far in front of Lillehammer, or rather, from his point of view, far behind Lillehammer. And that we had suffered a severe defeat.

And thus the British brigade commander marched into Lillehammer at the head of his brigade. There he laid his head to rest, with a chest at his side, filled with documents which read: “Top secret” and “Do not allow to fall into enemy hands.” And that very night, our troops rounded him up, along with his precious Ark of the Covenant. That’s what you get when you rely on Mr. Churchill the war reporter.

And the story was the same all over: they lied and they lied again. They were thrown back into the sea, and this was a “complete and great victory.” When they succeeded in salvaging a bit of rubble from Andalsnes or Namsos, they declared this, before the world, the most mighty success in the modern British history of war. We cannot measure ourselves with something like that, naturally! Still all this is opposed by hard facts: a few weeks later, there was no more Norway and the British Armed Forces were forced to withdraw from this country also.

Then came the hour of the confrontation in the West. And here, too, we did not come too late. For in particular in this campaign, the Allied coalition suffered nothing other than defeat.

The facts-the historic facts-bear witness to this. In spite of this, the campaign also ended in the obligatory great British victory, namely, the magnificent, the glorious feat of arms at Dunkirk. The traces of this glorious military achievement I have seen with my very eyes-it looked rather confused.

Now France has fallen, too. And what rationale has been contrived this time? When Norway had finally been cleansed of the Allies, they had declared: “This was precisely what we wanted. We only wanted to lure the Germans up here. This was a victory, an unequaled victory for us.” After France had been knocked to the ground for good, they had declared: “Now England, for the first time, can concentrate its forces. We are no longer forced to squander our troops and to dissipate our energies. We have now reached the strategic position we have always longed for and hoped for. We are now rid of the burden of France.

It only cost us precious British blood. And now we are in a position to confront the Germans quite differently.” Right at the beginning of the war, they had concerned themselves with certain prophecies regarding the length of the war. They had said: “The war will last three years; Britain will prepare itself for three years.” And rightly so, for these folk, who are immensely rich owners of war production shares, are clever enough to know that their new acquisitions cannot bear interest or be amortized within half a year, or even a year.

Therefore things had to take a bit longer. But I was equally careful and immediately said to the Reichsmarschall at the time: Goring, let us prepare everything for five years! Not because I believe that the war will last five years, but, come what may, England will break down! In one way or another! And I do not know of any deadline other than this one! Of course I will prepare everything in a prudent, cautious, and careful manner. You will understand that.

And when people in England today nosily inquire: “Well, why isn’t he coming?” Calm yourselves: he is coming! Curiosity killed the cat.

The world will be free! The nonsense that it will be possible for one nation to blockade a continent arbitrarily must be done away with. It must be made impossible in the future that such a pirate state, according to disposition and mood, can undertake from time to time to more or less subject 450 million human beings to poverty and misery. We as Germans, for all time, are fed up with having England tell us if we can perhaps do this or that; in the end, if a German is allowed to drink his coffee or not. If England does not like it, then it simply blockades coffee imports. Personally, I am not affected. I do not drink anything. But I am nettled that others should not be able to drink it.

At any rate, I find it insupportable that a nation of eighty-five million should be at the mercy of another people at any time-whenever it suits the plutocrats in London. So often have I extended my hand for an understanding with the English people. You know it yourselves: it was my foreign policy program. I have recently done so for the very last time. I now prefer to fight to finally arrive at a clear decision.

This clear decision can consist only in the removal of this regime of pitiful and base warmongers and in a situation being established in which it will be impossible for one nation to tyrannically run all of Europe in the future.

Here Germany and Italy will take care that history does not repeat itself a second time. And here nothing will help England and its allies: no Emperor Haile Sellassie, no Herr Bene_-nor anyone else: no King Haakon, no Queen Wilhelmina, and no French General de Gaulle. All these allies will be of no help. And whatever other designs they may entertain, or whatever else they may envision in the depth of their hearts-we will be on the lookout, we are ready for anything, determined in everything, and willing to take action at any time.

Nothing frightens us. We German National Socialists have graduated from the toughest school conceivable. First we were soldiers in the Great War, and then we were fighters in the resurgence of Germany. What we had to suffer in these years made us hard. Thus we cannot be intimidated by anything and nothing can surprise us.

When the English entered the war one year ago, they said: “We have an ally.” We were curious to see who that might be. They said: “It is a general, this ally, and his name is General Revolution.” Ha-ha! They have not an inkling of the new National Socialist German Volksstaat. And now London is waiting for this general to commence activities. On September 6, on September 7, nothing happened, and by September 8, there was great disappointment. For, according to their forecasts, this General Revolution was to rise up within a week’s time.

He was nowhere to be found.

Then they said: “We have another allied general; his name is General Hunger.” We had already anticipated that these great friends of humanity would undertake, as in the World War, to starve women and children. And we prepared ourselves. And this general, too, turned out to be a false speculation, a ghost, a jack-o’-lantern in the brain of Mr. Churchill.

Now they have traced a third ally. His name is General Winter. We made his acquaintance once before. And back then he failed, and he will fail and is destined to fail again this time. The English should not forget, if they insist on resorting to such obscure, foreign generals, to promote their own most important General to the rank perhaps of a British Field Marshal: namely, General Bluff. He is their only ally who actually merits so high a distinction. However, this general lacks his former bite. With him you might succeed in deluding the British people, but the German Volk knows England sufficiently well not to be deceived.

The blabbering of a Mr. Churchill or a Mr. Eden-to speak of the old Chamberlain good taste forbids-this blabbering leaves the German Volk cold, and, at best, elicits laughter. In standard German there is no appropriate term for a phenomenon like Duff Cooper. Here you must resort to dialect, and the Bavarian has coined a term which fittingly characterizes the man: Krampfhenne (nervous old hen)! The gentlemen ought to calm down as they cannot win the war with such weapons. The means for this, thank God, lie in our hands and will remain in our hands.

For when the bell tolls, we shall replace the Generals Hunger, Revolution, Winter, or Bluff, with General Action-and then we shall see who will hold his own better! I have already expressed the German Volk’s gratitude to its soldiers before the Reichstag. In these days, we all are moved by gratitude to our Luftwaffe, our valiant heroes, who fly to England day after day, to give our answer there to what the ingenious Mr. Churchill so recently invented. I will speak of this later.

Today I would like to address my thanks to the homeland for the year lying behind us; my thanks to the entire German Volk for the attitude it displayed during the many, not so easy events of this year. For perhaps many do not realize precisely what it means to evacuate, within a few weeks, over 700,000 people. Everything went according to plan. Then, however, everything was well prepared on our side-in contrast to the other side. But what the mass took upon itself in certain instances was often daunting. How it bore up under this truly inspires awe! We are happy that these people can now return to their homeland.

We must also thank those who have taken the most crucial precautions in this homeland, those who were responsible for all of this: the air-raid protection personnel; and, in particular, the colossal organization of the Red Cross, its doctors, its medical personnel, and its nurses. They have accomplished incredible things. Above all, we wish to think of the German woman, of the crowd of millions of German women, German mothers, and also German girls, who had to replace the men working in the cities and in the countryside. They took care of the provision of daily bread and saw to it that the soldier received the necessary weapons and ammunition.

At their side stood the millions of German workers in the ammunition factories, who placed themselves at the disposal of the fighting front, whether young or old, so that it should not be missing any of those items the lack of which led in the end to the breakdown of the year 1918.

It is truly magnificent to see our Volk at war and its total discipline. We realize this all the more in a time when Mr. Churchill is demonstrating to us the use of his invention: the nightly air raid. He does not do this because air raids at night are particularly effective, but because his Air Force cannot penetrate German airspace during the day. While the German pilots, the German planes, fly over English land day by day, no Englishman has yet managed to as much as cross the North Sea by daylight. That is why they come at night and drop their bombs-you know it well-indiscriminately and without plan on civilian residential centers, on farmsteads, and villages.

Wherever they see a light, they drop a bomb.

I did not answer for three months because I was of the opinion that they would ultimately stop this nonsense. Mr. Churchill perceived this as a sign of our weakness. You will surely understand that now we are giving our answers night after night, and this at an increasing rate.

And should the Royal Air Force drop two thousand, or three thousand, or four thousand kilograms of bombs, then we will now drop 150,000; 180,000; 230,000; 300,000; 400,000; yes, one million kilograms in a single night. And should they declare they will greatly increase their attacks on our cities, then we will erase their cities! We will put these nighttime pirates out of business, God help us! The hour will come that one of us will crack, and it will not be National Socialist Germany! In my life, I have once already waged such a fight unto the last. And then the enemy cracked who now has his seat in England as the last available island in Europe. It is precisely in view of this battle that it is all the more necessary to comprehend how important the fashioning and formation of our German Volksgemeinschaft is. We could not have achieved a single thing, if the German soldier had stood at the front, forlorn and on his own, without any connection to kindred souls at home. What makes the German soldier strong at the front is the awareness and knowledge that behind him stands an entire Volk united in iron determination and a fanatical will! And indeed, a Volk in the pursuit of loftier objectives. And these objectives go far beyond the mere winning of this war.

We want to build up a new state! That is why the others hate us so much today. They have often said as much. They said: “Yes, their social experiment is very dangerous! If it takes hold, and our own workers come to see this too, then this will be highly disquieting. It costs billions and does not bring any results. It cannot be expressed in terms of profit, nor of dividends. What is the point?! We are not interested in such a development. We welcome everything which serves the material progress of mankind insofar as this progress translates into economic profit. But social experiments, all they are doing there, this can only lead to the awakening of greed in the masses. Then we will have to descend from our pedestal. They cannot expect this of us.” And we were seen as setting a bad example. Any institution we conceived was rejected, as it served social purposes. They already regarded this as a concession on the way to social legislation and thereby to the type of social development these states loathe. They are, after all, plutocracies in which a tiny clique of capitalists dominate the masses, and this, naturally, in close cooperation with international Jews and Freemasons.

We know these enemies from our inner struggle, our dear old coalition of the System-Deutschland, a part of which has saved itself by swimming ashore.

They hate us because of our social attitude, and everything which we plan and implement based on this appears threatening. They are of the conviction that this development must be eradicated.

I am convinced, however, that the future belongs to this development, and that those states that do not follow suit will, sooner or later, break apart.

If they do not find a reasonable solution, the states with unresolved social problems will, sooner or later, arrive at an insane solution. National Socialism has prevented this in the German Volk. They are now aware of our objectives. They know how persistently and decisively we defend and will reach this goal.

Hence the hatred of all the international plutocrats, the Jewish newspapers, the world stock markets, and hence the sympathy for these democrats in all the countries of a like cast of mind. Because we, however, know that what is at stake in this war is the entire social structure of our Volk, and that this war is being waged against the substance of our life, we must, time and time again in this war of ideals, avow these ideals. And, in this sense, the Winterhilfswerk, this greatest social relief fund there is on this earth, is a mighty demonstration of this spirit.

Any person will judge me quite capable of having gone about the resolution of the financial aspect of this problem in a different manner. We could have generated the income, without much ado, by means of taxation. It would not have been necessary to build up this gigantic organization. We could have accomplished the same through the good offices of civil servants. But while the result might well have been as financially rewarding-perhaps even greater still-in terms of ideals, nothing comparable to what we possess could have been attained.

Thus, the value of this voluntary association of the German Volksgemeinschaft lies in its practical application: for one, the education of the one who gives, but also the education of the other who now voluntarily does the work. For there are two making sacrifices. The one makes a sacrifice in donating, the other in administering this donation and in doing so voluntarily. They all experience the practical education of the Volksgemeinschaft: every small girl who collects on the streets; and all those professionals who take turns lending their support, all the way up to the representatives of the state, of the economy, of the arts, and so on. And this is what is decisive, my Volksgenossen.

For all of us, in one way or another, are burdened with the heritage of the past, our descent, our social standing, our profession, and so on. We have the choice of making do without millions of men, who are irreplaceable in their national work and economic activities, because they are not yet mature enough for membership in such a community. From the start, National Socialism has maintained that man’s behavior is merely a product of education, habit, and heritage; it can thus be relearned. For the child who is reared by our Volk is not born with any prejudices of standing or class; these are instilled in him. Only in the course of his life is this differentiation artificially forced upon him. And to remove this is our mission if we are not willing to renounce the building of a truly organic, sustainable, human community. And this mission we have taken upon ourselves and are beginning to implement in all spheres of life. At the age at which a child formerly was judged old enough to be taught the differences in human existence, we begin with his education towards the community and we do not let go again.

And when this man or another comes to inquire about results-well, my dear friend, we began only a few years ago. First we did so with the Party as the community and then, for nearly eight years now, with the German Volk.

This was but a short time, but the results are already overwhelming when you consider how many centuries before sought the opposite. For this, the colossal demonstrations of our community speak. Only twenty years ago this would have been impossible; thirty years ago inconceivable; and forty years ago no one would have wanted this; but today it is a virtual reality. We educate man to a single conception of life, to a single, balanced conception of duty. And we are convinced that, after a certain period of such an education, men will emerge as products of this education who then will, to the same extent, represent the new ideas as today they still embody, in part, the old ones.

It was a laborious process of polishing and educating. But in the Winterhilfswerk already we can see: it is making progress. When the first Winterhilfswerk was called to life, many still went about Germany-you know what I mean, according to Ludwig Schmitz497-and said: “Who is coming along there? A man with a collection tin! About face right or left, march!” Or some other stupid comment.

That the situation has improved is evident already in the growing amount of donations. Persistence here, too, has led to success. And slowly, even the most thickheaded representative of the old order has to acknowledge: first, it is of no use anyway, the collectors come time and time again; and second, it is better to donate something; and third, everything considered, something is truly being achieved. And what is happening? The wounds we have healed in Germany! In how many instances did we help others out! In how many instances did we give people a leg-up! What gigantic social institutions have we created! Believe me, many people are against such reforms simply because of apathy or mental sluggishness! But once they do finally see results, they say: “Well, naturally one can contribute to this. I did not think, I could not imagine, either something so colossal coming of it, or it having such consequences. These are truly deeds of greatness which are being accomplished here.” And when these men then come to reflect upon themselves as representatives of the old stubborn opinions, then they are already on the way towards a new Germany.

By contrast, if thirty years ago we had told someone: “Sir, here take this collection tin. Now go stand at the street corner and ask people to donate something for their Volksgenossen”-then that someone would surely have said: “What for? I myself will give you something. But more you cannot ask of me. I am Mister So and So. Never would I think of doing anything of the kind. And what’s more: What will people think of me? What should I do if someone comes up to me and says something stupid?” Well, this man obviously is not all that much more intelligent than the person whom he considers to be stupid. You have to educate people to be considerate to one another. It is good if they see how ill-considered, how stupid some people are.

And precisely this great work has shown within a few years’ time how open to influence a Volkskorper is; how a great idea can lay hold of people in the end. This is true also of a great work, of a great achievement. And we are in fact laying hold of them from all sides. Everywhere this education is being conducted.

I do not know how often, in former times, people remarked on the Napoleonic phrase that every soldier carries the marshal’s baton in his knapsack. This was not meant literally, of course. For then it was simply inconceivable that a regular soldier set out on such a path. All this has changed today, top to bottom.

Whereas once the highest distinction was accorded only to officers, today a valiant non-commissioned officer or private may equally well earn it. The walls of a world of prejudice have been torn down. A world of prejudice is gone and, you may believe me, in the course of the decades it will become ever the more beautiful to live in this state. All the greater will be the tasks to be faced. They will draw our Volk ever closer together, will transform it into a closer community of even greater depths. And if there should still remain some who are not willing, under any circumstances, then we will just have to accord them an honorable funeral. For they are the representatives of a bygone era and, perhaps, of great interest in this respect. But the future belongs to the young nations who will solve this question. And we have undertaken its solution and we shall see to it.

In this context, the Winterhilfswerk constitutes a colossal demonstration of the community of the homeland in view of the colossal demonstrations of the community of our front. As a gigantic organism there fulfills its duty in a wellorganized manner, so the homeland does here and is prepared to undertake the same, willing to make any sacrifice this struggle for existence, for our future, will impose upon us. And when I pay tribute here once more to all those who have contributed to the first Kriegswinterhilfswerk or who were otherwise active as helpers, then, at the same time, I ask all of you: Fulfill anew your mission in this second Kriegswinterhilfswerk. May some of you become voluntary helpers while the others become voluntary contributors. And take care that this project should once more demonstrate to the world our indivisible sense of community, that it should finally recognize all speculations connected to “General Revolution” to be idiotic. Another general has taken the place of this general: the general of a common fulfillment of duty! It is the spirit of our Volksgemeinschaft which allows us to bear all this and which makes our Volk strong for all confrontations and decisions of the future! With this the individual contributes to breaking the will of our enemies, to robbing them of their illusions, and thereby does his part in the dissemination of correct information about our Volk. The more the other world sees this great Volk to be a single unit, the more it will recognize the hopelessness of its undertaking.

People who set forth on paths separate from one another could be broken.

But eighty-five million men who have one will, one resolve, and who are prepared to act-no power on earth can break them!



Hitler responds to Churchill's decision to target civilians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJcjXC3YRT8

 

 


THE ASSASSINATION OF WILLIAM MCKINLEY [SEPTEMBER 6, 1901]

$
0
0


          On this date, September 6, 1901, the 25th President of the United States, William McKinley, was shot and fatally wounded inside the Temple of Music on the grounds of the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York. McKinley was shaking hands with the public when he was shot by Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist. The President died on September 14 from gangrene caused by the bullet wounds.

            Please go to this previous blog post to learn more about the assassination.

Leon Czolgosz shoots President McKinley with a concealed revolver. Clipping of a wash drawing by T. Dart Walker.


KURT EBERHARD (SEPTEMBER 12, 1874 TO SEPTEMBER 8, 1947)

$
0
0


            On this date, September 8, 1947, Brigadeführer Kurt Eberhard, committed suicide in prison custody. I will post information about him from Wikipedia.


Kurt Eberhard


Kurt Eberhard (born September 12, 1874 in Rottweil- died September 8, 1947 in Stuttgart) was a German officer. He rose to the rank of Brigadeführer of the SSand in the German army. During World War II Eberhard was given the command over the occupied city of Kiev in Ukraine. He was involved in planning and supervising the Babi Yar massacres during which from 100,000 to 150,000 people were murdered. He was captured by US authorities after the end of World War II, in November 1945, and kept in captivity in Stuttgart. He committed suicide on September 8, 1947.

PRIZRAK BRIGADE

$
0
0


I, the warrior of Novorossiya Armed Forces, do take the oath and solemnly swear to be an honest, brave, discipline and vigilant warrior. Strictly keep military secrets, unquestioningly follow the laws of military regulations and orders of commanders and superiors. I do swear that I will be serving honestly and according to conscience sacredly cherish the high title of soldier which is granted to me by my people. I do swear to protect the freedom of Novorossiya and all Russia land, with all my strength, courage, skills, with dignity and honor, not sparing my blood and my very life to achieve complete victory over the enemy. And if I ever break this solemn oath taken by me, let the severe punishment of our laws fall on me, as well as hatred and contempt of working people and my brothers in arms.


The revolutionary Ghost Brigade of Novorossiya.



Prizrak Brigade
Бригада «Призрак» meaning "Ghost Brigade"
 Service sleeve insignia of the Prizrak Battalion
Active
Since April 2014
Allegiance
Novorossiya
  • Lugansk People's Republic
Branch
Army
Role
Infantry Brigade
Size
about 3,000 troops
Part of
United Armed Forces of Novorossiya
Garrison/HQ
Luhansk
Nickname(s)
Ghost Brigade
Commanders
Current
commander
Yuri Shevchenko

The "Prizrak" Brigade (in Russian Бригада «Призрак») meaning "Ghost Brigade" commanded by Aleksey Mozgovoy, is an infantry unit of the Lugansk People's Republic. The full name of the Brigade is Mechanized Brigade Prizrak.

History

The unit was established in late 2014 after pro-Russianprotesters occupied the RSA buildings in Luhansk. Its was first platoon. In August 2014 the unit became a battalion and the fighters rise to 1,000. The commander of the Brigade Aleksey Mozgovoy claimed in late December 2014 to have up to 3,000 fighters.
Soldiers of the Prizrak Brigade marching for the oath taking on September 9, 2014.


Alexei Mozgovoy and his Prizrak Brigade







Soldiers of the Prizrak Brigade lined up for the oath taking on September 9, 2014.



Alexei Mozgovoy speaks to Yuri Shevchenko



[eng subs] Militia brigade "Ghost" takes oath to Novorossia 09/09/14







CARJACKER & RAPIST CAL COBURN BROWN EXECUTED IN WASHINGTON ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2010

$
0
0


            On this date, September 10, 2010, a carjacker and rapist murderer, Cal Coburn Brown was executed by lethal injection in the State of Washington. He was convicted of raping and stabbing Holly Carol Washa to death on May 24, 1991. Although he was put to death 19 years after the murder and 17 years after being sentenced to death, the victims’ families did not regret watching him die, even two years after witnessing the execution


 

Cal Coburn Brown


            Please go to this previous blog post to learn more about this killer.



JOSEPH OBERHANSLEY THE CANNIBAL OF JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA

TWO SPEECHES BY ADOLF HITLER IN NUREMBERG ON SEPTEMBER 12, 1938

$
0
0


            I will present these two Speeches of Adolf Hitler in Nuremberg on September 12, 1938.

REMINDER: Keep in mind, I am not antisemitic and I have Jewish friends too. I do it for educational purposes.



Adolf Hitler – speech on the “Wehrmacht Day”
 (Short excerptions)

September 12, 1938

Soldiers of the German Wehrmacht! As in years past, you have assembled in Nuremberg for this year’s Reich Party Congress. For the first time, you stand here as soldiers of the Greater German Reich! We owe it to two facts that this age-old dream has become reality: First, the highly successful creation of a truly German Volksgemeinschaft.

It was the prerequisite for the realization of this dream.

Second, the build-up of the new German Wehrmacht whose soldiers finally realized the dream through their invasion. We can draw two conclusions from this: First, we acknowledge the necessity of the existence of the Movement, the Movement which in less than two decades’ time succeeded in liberating the German Volk from its greatest inner confusion and chaos and leading it to the unity which we see today. The teachings of National Socialism and of the Party are guarantors of this inner German Volksgemeinschaft.

Second, the lesson we have learned from this is how important it is that the internally restructured German Volksgemeinschaft be outwardly protected.



Adolf Hitler – closing speech at the NSDAP congress in Nuremberg


September 12, 1938


And yet we look back upon these times with the greatest feeling of pride.

Today we feel doubly close to those times because first of all, in our midst we see the fighters of the eldest German Ostmark who until recently were subject to a like persecution because of their National Socialist conviction. They stand amongst us today as Volksgenossen and citizens of the German Reich. What have they not had to go through, suffer through?! How many of their comrades were slain, how many injured in body and spirit, how many lost their livelihoods for many years, and how many ten thousands were imprisoned in jails, penitentiaries and Anhaltelagers?! The second reason for which we reflect upon these times with particular emotion is the fact that the events we experienced and suffered in our own nation at the time are precisely those we are witnessing on the world stage today.

And above all: our enemies today remain weltanschaulich the very same ones.

Almost every year, we could step before the nation with quiet confidence and await its judgment.The greatest approval ever granted the leadership of a Volk became ours on April 10 of this year.The Volk acknowledged and confirmed that it regards the new form of state and its leadership as institutions that strive to the best of their abilities to serve the Volk and to lead it once more to freedom and greatness and to ensure its economic well-being.

And still, what we are witnessing today on a larger scale is precisely the same we experienced in the decades of internal struggle. Ever since the day we assumed power, we have been surrounded by a hostile environment. The connivance between the gilded, capitalist democratic movement in our parliament on the one hand and with Marxism on the other in their war on National Socialism is today mirrored in a like conspiracy, albeit on a larger scale, involving the democracies and the Bolshevists as they make war on the state constituted by the National Socialist Volksgemeinschaft.

Perhaps the most persuasive evidence of the insincerity of their fight against the National Socialist Party as it struggled for power at the time is the fact that no matter whether they were bourgeois nationalists, capitalist democrats, or Marxist internationalists, they formed a unitary front against us in all decisive battles. At the time, many of our Volksgenossen were forced to realize just how dishonest the political battle was and of how little import morals were in this fight as they saw those parties fighting us on nationalist grounds, yet were not reluctant to conspire with Marxist internationalists to that end.

And vice versa, our Volksgenossen had to realize just how dishonest and fraudulent those parties were who claimed to persecute us for socialist reasons and then went to ally themselves with the worst proponents of capitalism prior to entering into the unitary front against us. The Center Party claimed to be fighting us because we were hostile to the Church, and yet to this end it entered into a holy alliance with atheist Social Democrats and did not shrink from uniting with the Communists. And on the other hand, Communists fought us because, as they claimed, we represented the Reaktion in their eyes. Yet they cast their ballot together with the true reactionaries against the vote of the National Socialist Party in the Reichstag.

It was indeed a display of such duplicity that one could only turn from it in disgust. Today we feel equally repelled as we watch the so-called international world democracies who supposedly advocate liberty, fraternity, justice, the right to self-determination of the peoples, etc., as we see these states ally themselves with Bolshevist Moscow.349 One day, perhaps someone will ask why we concern ourselves so much with the democracies and why we treat them in so negative a manner. This is the case because: First, as those attacked we are forced to counter.

Second, the conduct of these phenomena is so revolting.

Dishonesty sets in the minute these democracies claim to represent government by the people and decry authoritarian states as dictatorships. I believe that I can confidently state that today there are only two world powers who can honestly claim to have 99 percent of their people backing the government. What in other countries goes by the name of democracy is in most cases little other than the apt manipulation of public opinion by means of money and the press, and the equally apt manipulation of the results hereby achieved. How easily, however, are these supposed democracies stripped bare of their pretenses when one takes a close look at their stance in matters of foreign policy which constantly change to suit the purpose of the moment. There we witness how truly repressive regimes in small countries are actually being glorified by these democracies if it suits their needs. Yes, they even go so far as to fight for them, while on the other hand, they themselves actively repress inconvenient rallies in those states where such protest does not suit them. They fail to acknowledge this activism, attempt to subvert it or simply misinterpret its significance. And this is not all: these democracies even glorify Bolshevist regimes if it happens to suit their purpose, and this in spite of the fact that the latter style themselves as the dictatorship of the proletariat.

In other words, these supposed democracies decry regimes that are backed by 99 percent of their constituents as dictatorships, while at the same time they praise other countries as highly respectable democratic institutions even though these call themselves dictatorships and even though these can only subsist on the basis of mass executions, torture, etc. Is it not one of the greatest ironies in history that in the midst of upright prototype democrats in Geneva, the blooddrenched proponent of one of the cruelest tyrannies of all time moves about freely as a highly respected member of the Council?350 We in Germany have already witnessed the alliance of Jewish capitalism with an abstract version of communist anti-capitalism, and we have seen the Rote Fahne, the Vorwarts and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung march hand in hand here. It is the same all over the world. Bolshevist Moscow has become the highly revered ally of capitalist democracies! [-] For fifteen years, they have acted in gruesome defiance of the most natural interests of their peoples, yes, acting contrary to any standards of human dignity. Indeed, they drew up Diktats with a pistol in hand only to, at a later date, lament the “unilateral” transgression of holy rights and the breach of all the more holy contracts. Without so much as a thought for the opinion of the natives, they have led a drive for the bloody subjugation of entire continents.

However, the minute that Germany mentions the return of its colonies, they declared that-out of concern for the indigenous people there-one could not possibly abandon the natives to so horrid a fate. At the same time, they did not distance themselves from dropping bombs out of planes onto their own colonies. And all this to use the force of reason to persuade the dear colored compatriots to submit to the foreign rule a hit longer. Of course, the bombs thus employed were bombs with civilizing warheads which one must absolutely not confuse with those brutal ones Italy used in Abyssinia.

Throughout the democratic countries, one laments the unimaginable cruelty with which first Germany, and now Italy as well, are striving to rid themselves of the Jewish element. However, all these great democratic empires have altogether little more than a few persons per square kilometer. In Italy and in Germany this number exceeds 140 persons. For decades, Germany nevertheless took in hundreds of thousands upon hundreds of thousands of Jews without batting an eyelid.

Now that the burden has become overbearing and the nation is no longer willing to have its life blood sucked out of it by these parasites, it is now that there is great lament abroad. However, not a word is heard in these democratic countries about replacing this hypocritical lamentation with a good deed and assistance. No, to the contrary, all one hears is cold reasoning claiming that in these states there is regretfully no space either! Evidently, they expect us to bear up under this burden of Jewry despite our 140 persons per square kilometer, while the democratic world empires with their few people per square kilometer could not possibly shoulder this burden. Alas, no help. But morals! And thus we find the National Socialist Reich faced with the same phenomenon and forces that we had fifteen years to get to know as a party.

Insofar as this is indicative of the hostile attitude of the democratic states toward Germany, this matters little to us. Besides, why should we fare any better than the Reich before us? On a side note, I will admit quite openly that I find it easier to bear insults from someone who can no longer rob me than to be robbed by someone who praises me for letting it happen. Today we are insulted. Yet we are in a position-praise the Lord-to prevent Germany from being ravaged and raped. The state before us was blackmailed for fifteen years.

For this, admittedly, it received compensation-the somewhat sparse recompense, at least in my eyes-of praise for having been a good little democratic state.

This comportment becomes unbearable for us the minute a major part of our Volk is placed at the mercy of impertinent abusers, ostensibly without any means of defending itself, while the brunt of democratic rhetoric pours forth as a threat to our Volksgenossen. I am speaking of Czecho-Slovakia.


This state is a democracy, that is to say it was founded on democratic principles. The majority of its people was simply forced to submit to the structure construed at Versailles without any one asking for its opinion. As a true democracy, this state immediately began to suppress the majority of its people, to abuse there and to rob them of their inalienable rights. Gradually, one attempted to impress upon the world that this state had a special military and political mission to fulfill.

The former French Minister of Aviation, Pierre Cot,352 has explained this to us recently. According to him, Czechoslovakia exists for the purpose of providing a base, in the event of war, for launching aerial attacks and dropping bombs upon German cities and industrial plants. Needless to say, we may assume that these will once again be equipped with those warheads of the famed civilizing variety.

However, this mission stands in opposition to the desires of the majority of the inhabitants of this state, and is alien to their philosophy of life and contrary to their vital interests. That is why the majority of its citizens were silenced. Any protest against this fate would have been an assault upon the aims incarnate in this state and hence would have been in violation of its constitution. Drawn up by the democrats, this constitution was less suited to realizing the rights of the people affected and was instead more tailored toward accommodating the political expediencies of the people’s oppressors. Political expediency necessitated as well that a structure be construed that accorded the Czech people a position of preeminence in this state. Whoever protested against this usurpation became an “enemy of the state” and hence, in accordance with democratic norms, he was outlawed. Providence has thus called upon the socalled people of the Czech state-admittedly voicing its intent through the good offices of the architects at Versailles-to stand guard lest someone rise in opposition to this ultimate purpose of the state.

Should someone nevertheless venture to step forth from amongst the majority of the oppressed peoples in this state and voice opposition to this end, then it is naturally permissible that he be beaten hack with the full force at the state’s disposal and, if so desire or need be, he could also simply be murdered.

If this now did not concern us, if this were some foreign affair, we, like so many others, might take note of it simply as a most interesting display of the democrats’ understanding of the rights of peoples to self-determination.

However, the nature of the affair involves an obligation of us Germans.

Amongst the suppressed minorities in this state, there are also three and a half million Germans, roughly as many people of our race as Denmark has in inhabitants.353 These Germans are God’s creatures as well. The Almighty has not created them so that the construction arrived at in Versailles might place them at the mercy of an alien power they hate. And He has not created seven million Czechs either so that they may reign over these three and a half million, keep them in tutelage, and even far less did He create them to ravage and torture.

The situation in this state has become unbearable, as is well known. In a political context, three and a half million people there are robbed of their right to self-determination in the name of the right to self-determination as construed by a certain Mister Wilson. In an economic context, these people are being ruined methodically and hence are subject to a slow but steady extermination.

The misery of the Sudeten Germans defies description. One desires to destroy them. In a humanitarian context, they are being oppressed and humiliated in an unprecedented fashion.

When three and a half million members of a Volk of eighty million may not sing a song they like because the Czechs dislike it, when they are beaten until they bleed simply because they wear stockings which the Czechs care not to see, when they are terrorized and abused because they greet one another in a fashion the Czechs cannot bear even though they were merely greeting one another and no Czech, when they are persecuted because of every little detail connected to the expression of their nationality, and when they are hunted down as though animals, yes, then this may leave those renowned representatives of democracy cold, who knows, they might actually enjoy it since those affected are a mere three and a half million Germans. All I can say to these representatives of democracy is that this does not leave us cold, no, if these tortured creatures can find neither justice nor help by themselves, then they will receive both from us. There must be an end to the injustice inflicted upon these people! I have already stated this quite openly in my speech of February 20. It was a short-sighted enterprise which the architects of Versailles conceived when they gave birth to the abnormal structure of the Czechoslovakian state. It could pursue its mission to ravage and rape a mass of millions of other nationalities only as long as the brother nations themselves suffered from the abuse inflicted upon the world at Versailles.

However, to believe that such a regime could continue to sin eternally and endlessly means to succumb to an inconceivable delusion. In my speech before the German Reichstag on February 20, I had pointed out that the Reich will no longer stand for any further oppression and persecution of these three and a half million Germans. And I implore all foreign statesmen not to think this mere rhetoric.

For the sake of peace in Europe, the National Socialist State has made enormous sacrifices, enormous sacrifices for the entire nation. It did not harbor any thoughts of so-called revenge; rather, it has banished all such thoughts from all private and public spheres of life. In the course of the seventeenth century, France slowly penetrated Alsace-Lorraine and took it from the Old German Reich in the midst of peacetime.

Following a dreadful war in 1870–71 which had been forced upon Germany, the Reich reclaimed these territories, and they were returned to it. They were lost once more after the World War. To us Germans, the cathedral in Strasbourg means a lot. And when we did not pursue the matter any further, we refrained only in the service of a lasting peace for Europe. No one could have forced us to cede these claims voluntarily had we not wished to give them up in the first place! We gave them up because we willed an end to this constant argument with France once and for all. The Reich has espoused a similar stance and has taken similarly determined steps along its other borders as well. Here National Socialism acted highly responsibly and set an example. We made the greatest of sacrifices and distanced ourselves voluntarily from any further demands so that Europe might enjoy a peaceful future and so that a passage might be cleared, at least on our part, for reconciliation of all peoples worldwide. We acted in an exceedingly loyal fashion.

Neither press, silver screen, nor stage were allowed to propagate a diverging opinion. Not even in literature did we allow for an exception. In a related spirit, I offered solutions for a reduction of tensions in Europe, an offer that was refused for reasons we still fail to comprehend. We voluntarily restricted our power in this important realm in the hope that we should never again be forced to use arms against this one other state in question.354 This did not happen because we would not have been able to produce 55 percent more ships; it occurred because we wished to contribute to a final reduction of tensions and to a pacification of the situation in Europe. Since we found a great patriot and statesman in Poland willing to enter into an agreement with Germany, we immediately seized the opportunity, and arrived at a treaty that no doubt is of far greater import to peace in Europe than all the talk in the halls of the League of Nations’ temple in Geneva.

Germany today possesses many a completely pacified border and Germany is determined, and has stated as much, to accept these borders as inviolable and unchangeable in order to give Europe a feeling of security and peace.

Apparently, however, this self-denial and self-discipline on the part of Germany has been misinterpreted as a sign of weakness. Hence today I would like to set things right: I do not believe that we would be rendering peace in Europe a great service if we pronounced our disinterest in all European affairs. In particular, Germany would not be doing anyone a great service if it remained unmoved by the suffering and plight of three and a half million Volksgenossen and if it did not take an interest in their fate. We understand when England and France pursue their interests in the world.

I wish to point out to the statesmen in Paris and London that there are German interests as well and that we are determined to pursue these under all circumstances. At this point I would like to remind them of my speech before the Reichstag in 1933, in which I openly avowed before all the world that there were questions of national concern in which our path was clearly predetermined. I would rather submit myself to any ordeal, danger, or torment than to fail in the fulfillment of such prerogatives.

No European state has done as much as Germany in the service of peace! No one has made greater sacrifices! One must bear in mind, however, that there is a limit as to how much one can sacrifice, and one should not confuse National Socialist Germany with the Germany of Bethmann-Hollweg and Herding.

When I make this declaration, I do so because of an event that occurred in the course of this year, an event that forces all of us to reconsider our stance to date. As you well know, my Party Comrades, Czechoslovakia has finally announced local elections to be held this year after infinitely postponing any form of plebiscite. Even Prague has finally admitted to the untenable nature of its present position. It fears the unity of the Germans and of the other nationalities. It is convinced that it has to resort to extraordinary measures in order to exert pressure in the election process and thus to manipulate the outcome of the election. Evidently, the Czechoslovakian Government has concluded that this can be achieved only through a brutal policy of intimidation.

Apparently, the Czech state felt that a display of its military might was particularly well suited to this end.

This was especially geared toward the Sudeten Germans to serve as a warning not to speak up for their national interests and to vote accordingly. In order to somehow justify this attempt at intimidation before the eyes of the world public, the Czech Government, i.e. Herr Beneš, fabricated the lie that German troops had been mobilized for an invasion of Czechoslovakia.

In this context, let me today state the following: the creation of such lies is nothing new. About a year ago, the press in a certain country invented a story according to which 20,000 German soldiers had landed in Morocco.356 The Jewish proponent of this lie in the press hoped to thereby cause a war.

At the time, it had sufficed to address a short statement to the French Ambassador to resolve the situation. And in this instance as well, we immediately assured the ambassador of another great power of the falsehood of the Czech allegations. The statement was issued once more, and the Prague Government was immediately informed of its content. Nevertheless, the Government in Prague exploited this deception as a pretext for its terrorist blackmail and manipulation of the election.357 All that I can do in retrospect is to assert that, for one, not one German soldier had been called up other than those serving anyway at this point in time.

Secondly, not one regiment, not one additional unit, had marched to the border.

Indeed, not one soldier served in a garrison other than the one assigned to him for peacetime during this period.

To the contrary, orders were issued to avoid taking any steps that might be construed as a means for exerting pressure on Czechoslovakia on our part.

Nonetheless, a base and vile campaign against us was launched in which all of Europe was organized in the service of a government in pursuit of criminal goals. This government’s sole ambition lay in the manipulation of the election by the exertion of military pressure in an effort to intimidate its citizens and thus rob them of their right to vote. And all this was merely a means of obtaining moral legitimacy which this government felt it needed. Indeed, it had no scruples to cast suspicion on one great state, to alarm all of Europe and to, if need be, plunge Europe into a bloody war.

The Reich Government undertook no such steps, and, in fact, Germany had no such intentions; quite to the contrary, it was convinced that the local elections would do justice to the Sudeten German cause. This lack of activity was then construed as a sign that the German Government stepped down because of the determined stance of the Czechs and of the early intervention by England and France.

You will understand, my Party Comrades, that a great power cannot tolerate such a base incursion [the partial mobilization of Czechoslovakian troops on May 20/21] a second time. As a consequence, I have taken the necessary precautions. I am a National Socialist and as such I am accustomed to strike back at any attacker. Moreover, I know only too well that leniency will not succeed in appeasing, but will merely encourage the arrogance of so irreconcilable an adversary as the Czechs.

Let the fate of the Old German Reich be a warning to us. Its love for peace drove it to the brink of self-destruction. Nonetheless, the Old Reich could not prevent the war in the end. In due consideration thereof, I took steps on May 28 which were very difficult: First, I ordered a far-reaching intensification and the immediate implementation and execution of the reinforcements announced for Army and Luftwaffe. Second, I ordered the immediate expansion of our fortifications to the West. I can assure you that ever since May 28, the construction of one of the most gigantic fortresses of all time has been underway there.

To this end, I entrusted Dr. Todt, the Generalinspekteur for road construction in Germany, with a new commission. Within the framework of the projects undertaken by the fortress construction inspectorate, he has achieved one of the greatest accomplishments of all time, thanks to his extraordinary organizational talents.

Let me point out a few figures to you. At present at work on the fortification of our Western frontier, a project actually begun over two years ago, are: 278,000 laborers in the Todt organization in addition to 84,000 [other] laborers, in addition to 100,000 men of the Reich Labor Service and numerous pioneer battalions and infantry divisions. Besides the materials that are brought to the construction sites via different transportation routes, the German Reichsbahn alone transports 8,000 freight cars a day.

The daily consumption of gravel amounts to over 100,000 tons. The fortification of Germany’s western border will be completed prior to the onset of winter. Its defensive capacity is already assured as of this day. Once completed, it will consist of over 17,000 armored plates and concrete structures. The German Volk in arms stands behind this front of steel and concrete made up of three fortified lines and in some locations actually consists of four fortified lines up to fifty kilometers deep. I have made this greatest effort of all time in the service of peace. Under no circumstances, however, am I willing to quietly stand by and observe from afar the continued oppression of German Volksgenossen in Czechoslovakia.

It’s all tactics. Herr Beneš talks, wants to organize negotiations. He wishes to resolve the question of procedure in accordance with the Geneva Conventions and hands out little favors to placate the people. Things cannot go on this way! This is not a question of empty diplomatic phrases. This is a question of right, the question of a right not granted. What we Germans demand is the right to self-determination, a right every Volk possesses, and not an empty phrase. Herr Beneš is not supposed to grant the Sudeten Germans any favors. They have a right to their own way of life, just as any other people do.

The consequences will be grave ones should, perchance, the democracies persist in their conviction that they must continue to, by any and all means, accord their protection to the oppression of German men and women! I believe it to be in the service of peace, if I leave no doubts as to this fact.

I am asking neither that Germany be allowed to oppress three and a half million Frenchmen, nor am I asking that three and a half million Englishmen be placed at our mercy. Rather I am simply demanding that the oppression of three and a half million Germans in Czechoslovakia cease and that the inalienable right to self-determination take its place.

We would truly regret if this were to cloud or damage our relations to the other European states. Yet the fault would not be ours. It is the business of the Czechoslovakian Government to come to terms with the true representatives of the Sudeten Germans and, in one way or another, to reach some form of understanding with them. Nevertheless, it is my business and, my Volksgenossen, it is the business of all of us to take care that justice not be perverted into injustice. After all, this matter involves our German Volksgenossen. I am not in the least willing to allow foreign statesmen to create a second Palestine right here in the heart of Germany. The poor Arabs are defenseless and have been abandoned by all. The Germans in Czechoslovakia are neither defenseless nor have they been abandoned. Please note this fact.

I feel compelled to broach this topic at that Party Congress in which the representatives of our German-Austrian Gaus participate for the first time.

Better than anyone else they know how painful it is to be separated from the mother country. Easier than anyone else they will grasp the full import of my exposition on this day. With greater enthusiasm than any, they will agree with me when I state before the entire Volk that we would not deserve to be Germans if we were not willing to take such a stance, and to bear up under the consequences one way or another.

When we bear in mind the intolerable impertinence with which even a small state dared to approach Germany in the last months, then we realize that the only explanation possible is revealed in the unwillingness to recognize that the German Reich is more than just a peace-loving, upstart state.

Standing in Rome in the springtime, I felt deep inside that we assess historic developments in far too restricted a manner, investigating time periods far too short to be revealing. One thousand or fifteen hundred years are no more than a few dynastic successions.

What exhausts itself in a certain period, can rise again in the same time period. Today’s Italy and today’s Germany are living proof of this. Both are nations that have regenerated, indeed, that might be regarded as new nations in this context. However, their roots spring not from the grounds of more recent ages but rather they reach back into ancient history. The Roman Empire breathes once more. The phenomenon of Germany as a state is not new either, although it has made its appearance more recently.

I had the insignias of the Old German Reich brought to Nuremberg for a reason. I wish to call to mind, and this not only for the benefit of the German people but also for that of all peoples, that more than half a millennium prior to the discovery of the new world, a gigantic Germanic-German Reich358 stood on these grounds. Dynasties came into being and dissipated. Outward forms changed. Yet while the Volk has been rejuvenated, its essence has remained the same it has always been. The German Reich has long been dormant.

Now the German Volk has awakened and once more bears its crown of 1,000 years high on its head. All of us who bear witness to this historic resurrection feel great pride and happiness. We stand before the Almighty in humble gratitude.

For the rest of the world this should be an inspiration as well as a lesson learned, an inspiration to reflect upon history from a more elevated point of view, and a lesson not to succumb to the same mistakes as in the past.

In truth the new Roman-Italian empire and the Germanic-German Reich are ancient structures. You need not love them and yet no power on earth shall ever again remove them.

Party Comrades! National Socialists! The first Reich Party Congress of Greater Germany ends at this hour. All of you are still under the spell of the great historic events of these past days. This demonstration of our Volk’s power and determination has reinforced the nation’s pride and your confidence in it.

Return to your homes now and carry in your hearts that same faith which you have cherished throughout almost two decades as Germans and as National Socialists.

You now have the right to proudly carry your heads high again as Germans.

It is the duty of all of us to never again bow our heads to any alien will. To this let us pledge ourselves, so help us God!


This depends exclusively on the power of our own weapons and, therefore, depends upon the carriers of those weapons themselves.

No negotiations, no conferences and no other agreement has accorded us Germans the natural right to unity. We had to take justice into our own hands, and we were able to do so thanks to your existence, my soldiers! And it is thus that the two greatest institutions of our Volk must fulfill two identical missions. National Socialism has to educate our Volk within to form this Vol ksgemeinschaft. The Wehrmacht has to instruct this same Volk to defend this Volksgemeinschaft outwardly. So it is you, my soldiers, who were immediately charged with the fulfillment of a mission in this new Reich. And this fulfillment has earned you the love of the German Volk. It relied upon you and it has realized that it can rely upon its sons in uniform. For you carry the best weapons available today, you receive the best training, and I know that you also possess the best of character.

You fit in well with the eternal, everlasting front constituted by Germany’s soldiers. In the past months, I repeatedly had the opportunity to convince myself of this. I saw it at the maneuver sites, shooting stands, and training camps, and it was with great contentment that I realized that the German nation can once more look to its soldiers with great pride. And it is that for which I thank you! Yet, we do not serve for the sake of gratitude, praise, or recompense unless this gratitude, praise and recompense is at the service of what we value the most in this world: our Volk and our German Reich!

Deutschland-Sieg Heil!


THE BATHROOM DOOR FIELD MARSHAL: HAJIME SUGIYAMA (JANUARY 1, 1880 TO SEPTEMBER 12, 1945)

$
0
0


            70 years ago on this date, September 12, 1945, Japanese Field Marshal Hajime Sugiyama committed suicide by shooting himself. Please go to this previous blog post to learn more.

Hajime Sugiyama (杉山 Sugiyama Hajime)

ROBERT BLECKER WANTS ME DEAD [THE EXECUTION OF DARYL HOLTON (NOVEMBER 23, 1961 TO SEPTEMBER 12, 2007)]

$
0
0


            On this date, September 12, 2007, Daryl Keith Holton was executed by the electric chair in the Tennessee. He was convicted of murdering four children (3 of them were his sons) on November 30, 1997.  He needed a suicide assist and decided to choose the electric chair, instead of the lethal injection. Please go to this previous blog post to learn more.


THE NAZI BUTCHER: AMON GOETH (11 DECEMBER 1908 TO 13 SEPTEMBER 1946)

$
0
0


            On this date, 13 September 1946, the Nazi Butcher A.K.A Amon Goeth was executed by hanging in Kraków, Poland. Please go to this previous Blog Post to learn more about this Nazi War Criminal.


Amon Leopold Goeth's mug shot (1945)


SATANIC WHITE SUPREMACIST: STEVEN WOODS EXECUTED IN TEXAS ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2011


JUVENILE-SERIAL KILLER ON THE LOOSE: CHARLIE BRANDT (1957 TO SEPTEMBER 13, 2004)

$
0
0


On this date, September 13, 2004, a Juvenile who later became a serial killer, Charlie Brandt, who murdered again when he was an adult, committed suicide by hanging himself. Please go to this previous blog post to learn more about this serial killer.


Charlie Brandt



MAMORU TAKUMA (23 NOVEMBER 1963 TO 14 SEPTEMBER 2004)

$
0
0


            On this date, 14 September 2004, Japanese mass murderer, Mamoru Takuma was executed by hanging in Osaka, Japan for the Osaka School Massacre on 8 June 2001. Please go to this blog post to learn more about this sadistic killer. 


Mamoru Takuma 宅間

EXONERATED 27 FROM THE U.S.A DEATH ROW - FROM INNOCENT TO GUILTY: JOSEPH GREEN BROWN (MURDERED AGAIN ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2012)

$
0
0


Whenever the Abolitionists mention about innocent people who had been freed from death row, they never want to mention anything about repeat offenders. There is one man who was released from death row and has been able to go free and kill again. Not at all a good propaganda tool for Abolitionists who want to use the term, ‘innocent on death row’ to fool the public into preserving killers. The next time, if any abolitionists want to mention innocent on death row, tell them about Joseph Green Brown. Please go to this previous blog post to learn more about this ‘innocent man’.

 

Joseph Green Brown

THE NUREMBERG RACE LAWS (SEPTEMBER 15, 1935)

$
0
0


             80 years ago on this date, September 15, 1935, the Nuremberg Laws deprive German Jews of citizenship. I will post information about the Nuremberg Race Laws from Wikipedia and other links.


Instructional Chart
The Nuremberg Laws (German: Nürnberger Gesetze) were antisemitic laws in Nazi Germany. They were introduced on 15 September 1935 by the Reichstag at the annual Nuremberg Rally of the Nazi Party (NSDAP). The two laws were the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour, which forbade marriages and extramarital intercourse between Jews and Germans and the employment of German females under 45 in Jewish households, and the Reich Citizenship Law, which declared that only those of German or related blood were eligible to be Reich citizens; the remainder were classed as state subjects, without citizenship rights. A supplementary decree outlining the definition of who was Jewish was passed on 14 November, and the Reich Citizenship Law officially came into force on that date. The laws were expanded on 26 November to include Romani people and Black people. Out of foreign policy concerns, prosecutions under the two laws did not commence until after the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin.

After they seized power in 1933, the Nazis began to implement their policies, which included the formation of a national community based on race. Chancellor and Führer(leader) Adolf Hitler declared a national boycott of Jewish businesseson 1 April 1933, and the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service, passed on 7 April, excluded most Jews from the legal profession and civil service. Books considered un-German, including those by Jewish authors, were destroyed in a nationwide book burning on 10 May. Jewish citizens were harassed and subjected to violent attacks. They were actively suppressed, stripped of their citizenship and civil rights, and eventually completely removed from German society.

The Nuremberg laws had a serious economic and social impact on the Jewish community. Persons convicted of violating the marriage law were imprisoned, and (subsequent to 8 March 1938) upon completing their sentences were re-arrested by the Gestapo and sent to Nazi concentration camps. Non-Jews gradually stopped socialising with Jews or shopping in Jewish-owned stores, many of which closed due to lack of customers. As Jews were no longer permitted to work in the civil service or government-regulated professions such as medicine and education, many formerly middle-class or wealthy business owners and professionals were forced to take menial employment. Emigration was problematic, as Jews were required to remit up to 90 per cent of their wealth as a tax upon leaving the country. By 1938 it was almost impossible for potential Jewish emigrants to find a country willing to take them. Mass deportation schemes such as the Madagascar Plan proved to be impossible for the Nazis to carry out, and sometime around December 1941, Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated. The total number of Jews murdered during the resulting Holocaust is estimated at 5.5 to 6 million people, and estimates of the number of Romani killed in the Porajmosrange from 220,000 to 1.5 million.


Title page of RGB I No. 100 proclaiming the laws, issued 16 September 1935
Background

Prior to the formation of the German Empire in 1871, the legal status of Jews varied from place to place within the German Confederation and the Kingdom of Prussia. Jews became equal citizens with the creation of the new constitution that soon followed. However, they still faced discrimination and antisemitism. Nationalist sentiments and the idea of Germans as a separate race took hold at the beginning of the 20th century. Jews, with their different culture and ancestry, were viewed (particularly by proponents of the Völkisch movement) as being members of a separate and inferior race. Several nationalistic and antisemitic groups (some with memberships of hundreds of thousands of people) formed after the First World War. These groups committed acts of violence against Jews and lobbied for their disenfranchisement and removal from German society.

The National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP; Nazi Party) was one of several far-right political parties active in Germany at the time. The party platform included removal of the Weimar Republic, rejection of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, radical antisemitism, and anti-Bolshevism. They promised a strong central government, increased Lebensraum(living space) for Germanic peoples, formation of a national community based on race, and racial cleansing via the active suppression of Jews, who would be stripped of their citizenship and civil rights. The Nazis proposed national and cultural renewal based upon the Völkisch movement.

Nazi eugenics and racial belief

Main articles: Nazi eugenics and Nazism and race

Nazi racial beliefs arose from earlier proponents of a supremacist conception of race such as Arthur de Gobineau, who published a four-volume work titled An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races (translated into German in 1897). In it, de Gobineau proposed that the Aryan race was superior, and urged the preservation of its cultural and racial purity. Houston Stewart Chamberlain's work The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century (1900), one of the first to combine Social Darwinism with antisemitism, describes history as a struggle for survival between the Germanic peoples and the Jews, whom he characterized as an inferior and dangerous group. The two-volume book Foundations of Human Hereditary Teaching and Racial Hygiene (1920–21) by Eugen Fischer, Erwin Baur, and Fritz Lenz, used pseudoscientific studies to conclude that the Germans were superior to the Jews intellectually and physically, and recommended eugenicsas a solution. Madison Grant's work The Passing of the Great Race(1916) advocated Nordicism and proposed using a eugenic program to preserve the Nordic race. After reading the book, Hitler called it "my Bible". The Nazis embraced the concept of Nordicism and wished for the Nordic race to dominate Germany, but they did not discriminate against Aryans who did not have Nordic physical characteristics.

While imprisoned in 1924 after the failed Beer Hall Putsch, Hitler dictated Mein Kampfto his deputy, Rudolf Hess. The book is an autobiography and exposition of Hitler's ideology in which he laid out his plans for transforming German society into one based on race. In it he outlined his belief in Jewish Bolshevism, a conspiracy theory that posited the existence of an international Jewish conspiracy for world domination in which the Jews were the mortal enemy of the German people. Throughout his life Hitler never wavered in his world view as expounded in Mein Kampf. The NSDAP advocated the concept of a Volksgemeinschaft("people's community") with the aim of uniting all Germans as national comrades, whilst excluding those deemed either to be community aliens or of a foreign race (Fremdvölkische).


Israel's Department Store in Berlin on April 1, 1933 at the start of the Nazi boycott of Jewish-owned businesses. These are members of the SA (Sturmabteilung) holding placards that say: "Germans defend yourselves! Don't buy from Jews." ("Deutsche! Wehrt Euch! Kauft nicht bei Juden!")
Nazi Germany

Discrimination against Jews intensified after the NSDAP seized power; following a month-long series of attacks by members of the Sturmabteilung(SA; paramilitary wing of the NSDAP) on Jewish businesses, synagogues, and members of the legal profession, on 1 April 1933 Hitler declared a national boycott of Jewish businesses. By 1933, many people who were not NSDAP members advocated segregating Jews from the rest of German society. The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service, passed on 7 April 1933, forced all non-Aryans to retire from the legal profession and civil service. Similar legislation soon deprived Jewish members of other professions of their right to practise. In 1934, the NSDAP published a pamphlet titled "Warum Arierparagraph?" ("Why the Aryan Law?"), which summarized the perceived need for the law. As part of the drive to remove Jewish influence from cultural life, members of the National Socialist Student League removed from libraries any books considered un-German, and a nationwide book burning was held on 10 May. Violence and economic pressure were used by the regime to encourage Jews to voluntarily leave the country. Legislation passed in July 1933 stripped naturalised German Jews of their citizenship, creating a legal basis for recent immigrants (particularly Eastern European Jews) to be deported. Many towns posted signs forbidding entry to Jews. Throughout 1933 and 1934, Jewish businesses were denied access to markets, forbidden to advertise in newspapers, and deprived of access to government contracts. Citizens were harassed and subjected to violent attacks.

Laws promulgated in this period that were not aimed directly at Jews included the Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring (passed on 14 July 1933), which called for the compulsory sterilisation of people with a range of hereditary, physical, and mental illnesses. Under the Law against Dangerous Habitual Criminals (passed 24 November 1935), habitual criminals were forced to undergo sterilisation as well. This law was also used to force the incarceration in prison or Nazi concentration camps of "social misfits" such as the chronically unemployed, prostitutes, beggars, alcoholics, homeless vagrants, and Romani people.


The SA had nearly three million members at the start of 1934.
"The Jewish problem"

Disenchanted with the unfulfilled promise of the NSDAP to eliminate Jews from German society, SA members were eager to lash out against the Jewish minority as a way of expressing their frustrations. A Gestaporeport from early 1935 stated that the rank and file of the NSDAP would set in motion a solution to the "Jewish problem ... from below that the government would then have to follow". Assaults, vandalism, and boycottsagainst Jews, which the Nazi government had temporarily curbed in 1934, increased again in 1935 amidst a propaganda campaign authorised at the highest levels of government. Most non-party members ignored the boycotts and objected to the violence out of concern for their own safety. The Israeli historian Otto Dov Kulka argues that there was a disparity between the views of the Alte Kämpfer (longtime party members) and the general public, but that even those Germans who were not politically active favoured bringing in tougher new antisemitic laws in 1935. The matter was raised to the forefront of the state agenda as a result of this antisemitic agitation.

The Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick announced on 25 July that a law forbidding marriages between Jews and non-Jews would shortly be promulgated, and recommended that registrars should avoid issuing licenses for such marriages for the time being. The draft law also called for a ban on marriage for persons with hereditary illnesses.

Dr. Hjalmar Schacht, the Economics Minister and Reichsbankpresident, criticised the violent behaviour of the Alte Kämpfer and SA because of its negative impact on the economy. The violence also had a negative impact on Germany's reputation in the international community. For these reasons, Hitler ordered a stop to "individual actions" against German Jews on 8 August 1935, and the Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick threatened to take legal action against Party members who ignored the order. From Hitler's perspective, it was imperative to quickly bring in new antisemitic laws to appease the radical elements in the NSDAP who persisted in attempting to remove the Jews from German society by violent means. A conference of ministers was held on 20 August 1935 to discuss the question. Hitler argued against violent methods because of the damage being done to the economy, and insisted the matter must be settled through legislation. The focus of the new laws would be marriage laws to prevent "racial defilement", stripping Jews of their German citizenship, and laws to prevent Jews from participating freely in the economy.

NSDAP dignitaries at the 1935 Nuremberg Rally
Events at Nuremberg

The seventh annual Nazi Party Rally, held in Nuremberg from 10–16 September 1935, featured the only Reichstag session held outside Berlin during the Nazi regime. Hitler decided that the rally would be a good opportunity to introduce the long-awaited anti-Jewish laws. In a speech on 12 September, leading Nazi physician Gerhard Wagner announced that the government would soon introduce a "law for the protection of German blood". The next day, Hitler summoned the Reichstag to meet in session at Nuremberg on 15 September, the last day of the rally. Franz Albrecht Medicus and Bernhard Lösener of the Interior Ministry were summoned to Nuremberg and directed to start preparing a draft of a law forbidding sexual relations or marriages between Jews and non-Jews. The two men arrived on 14 September. That evening, Hitler ordered them to also have ready by morning a draft of the Reich citizenship law. Hitler found the initial drafts of the Blood Law to be too lenient, so at around midnight Frick brought him four new drafts that differed mainly in the severity of the penalties they imposed. Hitler chose the most lenient version, but left vague the definition of who was a Jew. Hitler stated at the rally that the laws were "an attempt at the legal settlement of a problem, which, if this proved a failure, would have to be entrusted by law to the National Socialist Party for a definitive solution." Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels had the radio broadcast of the passing of the laws cut short, and ordered the German media to not mention them until a decision was made as to how they would be implemented.


Reich Citizenship Law


Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour


Text of the laws

Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour

Moved by the understanding that purity of German blood is the essential condition for the continued existence of the German people, and inspired by the inflexible determination to ensure the existence of the German nation for all time, the Reichstag has unanimously adopted the following law, which is promulgated herewith:

Article 1
  1. Marriages between Jews and subjects of the state of German or related blood are forbidden. Marriages nevertheless concluded are invalid, even if concluded abroad to circumvent this law.
  2. Annulment proceedings can be initiated only by the state prosecutor.
Article 2

Extramarital relations between Jews and subjects of the state of German or related blood are forbidden.

Article 3

Jews may not employ in their households female subjects of the state of German or related blood who are under 45 years old.

Article 4
  1. Jews are forbidden to fly the Reich or national flag or display Reich colours.
  2. They are, on the other hand, permitted to display the Jewish colours. The exercise of this right is protected by the state.
Article 5
  1. Any person who violates the prohibition under Article 1 will be punished with a prison sentence.
  2. A male who violates the prohibition under Article 2 will be punished with a jail term or a prison sentence.
  3. Any person violating the provisions under Articles 3 or 4 will be punished with a jail term of up to one year and a fine, or with one or the other of these penalties.
Article 6

The Reich Minister of the Interior, in co-ordination with the Deputy of the Führer and the Reich Minister of Justice, will issue the legal and administrative regulations required to implement and complete this law.

Article 7

The law takes effect on the day following promulgation, except for Article 3, which goes into force on 1 January 1936.

Reich Citizenship Law

The Reichstag has unanimously enacted the following law, which is promulgated herewith:

Article 1
  1. A subject of the state is a person who enjoys the protection of the German Reich and who in consequence has specific obligations toward it.
  2. The status of subject of the state is acquired in accordance with the provisions of the Reich and the Reich Citizenship Law.
Article 2
  1. A Reich citizen is a subject of the state who is of German or related blood, and proves by his conduct that he is willing and fit to faithfully serve the German people and Reich.
  2. Reich citizenship is acquired through the granting of a Reich citizenship certificate.
  3. The Reich citizen is the sole bearer of full political rights in accordance with the law.
Article 3
The Reich Minister of the Interior, in co-ordination with the Deputy of the Führer, will issue the legal and administrative orders required to implement and complete this law.

Classifications under the laws

 

1935

Classification
Translation
Heritage
Definition
Deutschblütiger
German-blooded
German
Belongs to the German Race and nation; approved to have Reich citizenship
Deutschblütiger
German-Blooded
1/8 Jewish
Considered as belonging to the German race and nation; approved to have Reich citizenship
Mischling zweiten Grades
Mixed race (second degree)
1/4 Jewish
Only partly belongs to the German race and nation; approved to have Reich citizenship
Mischling ersten Grades
Mixed race (first degree)
3/8 or 1/2 Jewish
Only partly belongs to the German race and nation; approved to have Reich citizenship
Jude
Jew
5/8, 3/4, or 7/8 Jewish
Belongs to the Jewish race and community; not approved to have Reich citizenship
Jude
Jew
Jewish
Belongs to the Jewish race and community; not approved to have Reich citizenship

Special Cases with First Degree Mischlings
Date
Decree
15 September 1935
A Mischling will be considered a Jew if they are a member of the Jewish religious community.
15 September 1935
A Mischling will be considered a Jew if they are married to a Jew. Their children will be considered Jews.
17 September 1935
A mixed-race child that is the issue of a marriage with a Jew that is born after 17 September 1935 will be classified as a Jew. Those already born before 17 September 1935 will still be classified as Mischlings.
31 July 1936
A mixed-race child originating from forbidden extramarital sexual intercourse with a Jew that is born out of wedlock after July 31, 1936 will be classified as a Jew.



Chart to describe Nuremberg Laws, 1935. The "Nuremberg Laws" established a pseudo-scientific basis for racial identification. Only people with four German grandparents (four white circles in top row left) were of "German blood". A Jew is someone who descends from three or four Jewish grandparents (black circles in top row right). In the middle stood people of "mixed blood" of the "first or second degree." A Jewish grandparent was defined as a person who is or was a member of a Jewish religious community. Also includes a list of allowed marriages ("Ehe gestattet") and forbidden marriages ("Ehe verboten").

Impact


While both the Interior Ministry and the NSDAP agreed that persons with three or more Jewish grandparents would be classed as being Jewish and those with only one (Mischlingeof the second degree) would not, a debate arose as to the status of persons with two Jewish grandparents (Mischlinge of the first degree). The NSDAP, especially its more radical elements, wanted the laws to apply to Mischlingeof both the first and second degree. For this reason Hitler continued to stall, and did not make a decision until early November 1935. His final ruling was that persons with three Jewish grandparents were classed as Jewish; those with two Jewish grandparents would be considered Jewish only if they practised the faith or had a Jewish spouse. The supplementary decree outlining the definition of who was Jewish was passed on 14 November, and the Reich Citizenship Law came into force on that date. Jews were no longer German citizens and did not have the right to vote. Civil servants who had been granted an exemption to the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service because of their status as war veterans were forced out of their jobs on this date. A supplementary decree issued on 21 December ordered the dismissal of Jewish veterans from other state-regulated professions such as medicine and education.

While Frick's suggestion that a citizenship tribunal before which every German would have to prove that they were Aryan was not acted upon, proving one's racial heritage became a necessary part of daily life. Non-government employers were authorised to include in their statutes an Aryan paragraph excluding both Mischlinge and Jews from employment. Proof of Aryan descent was achieved by obtaining an Aryan certificate. One form was to acquire an Ahnenpass, which could be obtained by providing birth or baptismal certificates that all four grandparents were of Aryan descent. The Ahnenpass could also be acquired by citizens of other countries, as long as they were of "German or related blood".

Under the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour (15 September 1935), marriages were forbidden between Jews and Germans; between Mischlingeof the first degree and Germans; between Jews and Mischlinge of the second degree; and between two Mischlinge of the second degree. Mischlingeof the first degree were permitted to marry Jews, but they would henceforth be classed as Jewish themselves. All marriages undertaken between half-Jews and Germans required the approval of a Committee for the Protection of German Blood. Few such permissions were granted. A supplementary decree issued on 26 November 1935 extended the law to "Gypsies, Negroes, and their bastards." Estimates of the death toll of Romani people in the Porajmos range from 220,000 to 1,500,000.

Persons suspected of having sexual relations with non-Aryans were charged with Rassenschande(racial defilement) and tried in the regular courts. Evidence provided to the Gestapo for such cases was largely provided by ordinary citizens such as neighbours, co-workers, or other informants. Persons accused of race defilement were publicly humiliated by being paraded through the streets with a placard around their necks detailing their crime. Those convicted were typically sentenced to prison terms, and (subsequent to 8 March 1938) upon completing their sentences were re-arrested by the Gestapo and sent to Nazi concentration camps. As the law did not permit capital punishment for racial defilement, special courts were convened to allow the death penalty for some cases. From the end of 1935 through 1940, 1,911 people were convicted of Rassenschande. Over time, the law was extended to include non-sexual forms of physical contact such as greeting someone with a kiss or an embrace.

For the most part, Germans accepted the Nuremberg Laws, partly because Nazi propaganda had successfully swayed public opinion towards the general belief that Jews were a separate race, but also because to oppose the regime meant leaving oneself open to harassment or arrest by the Gestapo. Citizens were relieved that the antisemitic violence ceased after the laws were passed. Non-Jews gradually stopped socialising with Jews or shopping in Jewish-owned stores. Wholesalers who continued to serve Jewish merchants were marched through the streets with placards around their necks proclaiming them as traitors. The Communist party and some elements of the Catholic Church were critical of the laws. Concerned that international opinion would be adversely swayed by the new laws, the Interior Ministry did not actively enforce them until after the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin that August.

The Interior Ministry estimated there were 750,000 Mischlinge as of April 1935 (studies done after the war put the number of Mischlinge at around 200,000). As Jews became more and more excluded from German society, they organised social events, schools, and activities of their own. Economic problems were not so easily solved, however; many Jewish firms went out of business due to lack of customers. This was part of the ongoing Aryanizationprocess (the transfer of Jewish firms to non-Jewish owners, usually at prices far below market value) that the regime had initiated in 1933, which intensified after the Nuremberg laws were passed. Former middle-class or wealthy business owners were forced to take employment in menial jobs to support their families, and many were unable to find work at all.

Although a stated goal of the Nazis was that all Jews should leave the country, emigration was problematic, as Jews were required to remit up to 90 per cent of their wealth as a tax upon leaving the country. Anyone caught transferring their money overseas were sentenced to lengthy terms in prison as "economic saboteurs". An exception was money sent to Palestine under the terms of the Haavara Agreement, whereby Jews could transfer their wealth and emigrate to that country. Around 52,000 Jews emigrated to Palestine under the terms of this agreement between 1933 and 1939.

By the start of the Second World War in 1939, around 250,000 of Germany's 437,000 Jews had emigrated to the United States, Palestine, Great Britain, and other countries. By 1938 it was becoming almost impossible for potential Jewish emigrants to find a country that would take them. After the 1936–39 Arab revolt, the British were disinclined to accept any more Jews into Palestine for fear it would further destabilize the region. Nationalistic and xenophobicpeople in other countries pressured their governments not to accept waves of Jewish immigrants, especially poverty-stricken ones. The Madagascar Plan, a proposed mass deportation of European Jews to Madagascar, proved to be impossible to carry out. Sometime around the German failure in the Battle of Moscow in December 1941, Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated immediately. The total number of Jews murdered during the resulting Holocaustis estimated at 5.5 to 6 million people.


Beginning in 1941, Jews were required by law to self-identify by wearing a yellow badge on their clothing.


Legislation in other countries

Allies of the Nazis passed their own versions of the Nuremberg laws. In 1938, Fascist Italy passed the Italian Racial Laws, which stripped Jews of their citizenship and forbade marriages between Jewish and non-Jewish Italians. Hungary passed laws on 28 May 1938 and 5 May 1939 banning Jews from various professions. A third law, added in August 1941, defined Jews as anyone with at least two Jewish grandparents, and forbade sexual relations or marriages between Jews and non-Jews. In 1940 the ruling Iron Guardin Romania passed the Law Defining the Legal Status of Romanian Jews, in 1941 the Codex Judaicus was enacted in Slovakia, in 1941 Bulgaria passed the Law for Protection of the Nation, and in 1941 the Ustashain Croatia passed legislation defining who was a Jew and restricting contact with them.

Existing copies

An original typescript of the laws signed by Hitler was found by the US Army's Counter-Intelligence Corps in 1945. It wound up in the possession of General George S. Patton, who kept it, in violation of orders that such finds should be turned over to the government. During a visit to Los Angeles, he handed it over to the Huntington Library, where it was stored in a bomb-proof vault. The library revealed the existence of the document in 1999, and sent it on permanent loan to the Skirball Cultural Center, which placed it on public display. The document was transferred to the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington in August 2010.

OTHER LINKS:








PRESIDENT YAHYA JAMMEH’S SPEECH TO THOUSANDS OF YOUTH IN KANILAI, GAMBIA (SEPTEMBER 15, 2012)

$
0
0


            On this date, September 15, 2012, the Gambian President, Yahya Jammeh gave a speech to thousands of Youths in Kanilai, Gambia, defending the use of the death penalty in his country.


The Gambian Firing Squad

GAMBIA READY TO REPEAL CAPITAL PUNISHMENT LAW

September 20, 2012: President Yahya Jammeh of the Gambia has given the strongest hint yet that his government is prepared to repeal the country's controversial death penalty laws.

Mr Jammeh who has already announced suspension of all executions of death row inmates, said changes to the capital punishment laws in the country’s constitution will only be made when the Gambian people express a desire for him to repeal the law and not through international pressure and condemnation.

“I am working for you and I’ll live for you and die for you,” Mr Jammeh told a group of youth in his native village, Kanilai, some 43 kilometres away from the capital, Banjul where he is on his annual leave.

“I will not succumb to human pressure to change the death penalty, no way, but if you the Gambian people plead with me to halt the executions, I will suspend it because whatever I do, I do it for your interest. If you Gambians want the death penalty to be removed from the constitution, it will be removed.”

Mr Jammeh added: “The death penalty has nothing to do with politics. If I am to sign 10, 000 death warrants to save 1.6 million Gambians, I will do it. If any country has a citizen in the Gambia and do not want them to face the firing squad, let them not kill any person in the Gambia. I am not a colony of European Union and I am nobody’s colony.”

The Gambian leader who has come under criticism since he announced the execution by a firing squad of nine death row inmates last months, said he took an oath of office at the beginning of his tenure to execute the functions of the Office of the President without fear or favour, affection or ill will and he will not in anyway succumb to any human pressure in the execution of his mandate.
(Source: JollofNews, 20/09/2012)

 

Gambia: The Execution of Murderers

By Hon. Lamin Saine, 28 September 2012
 
Nine individuals on death row have been executed and opinions on the matter differ and vary. Not only are People entitled to their opinions but also, the great generalities of our constitution, like most others, have a content and a significance that vary from time to time. That should not pose too much of a problem! As a result, free decisions made in the different circumstances see through transitory particulars and reach permanent solutions.

For me, all this looks to judgements as to the handling of a national security and governance problem with implications for the sovereignty of The Gambia. There lies the moral justification for the president's approval.Was itright or wrong for The President to have given approval for the execution of the nine convicted murderers?

We, in The Gambia, believe in God and our different religious beliefs and doctrines and general conditions of human existence incline us, even You the reader and myself, to think of human life as an absolute value,,so sacred, as not to be sacrificed under any circumstances. An analysis of the cases in point give a clear indication that this cannot be accepted as a dogma, as much may be conceived by imagination and there would be injustice, if this conception is applied to all ordinary relations of society. The conduct/behaviour of certain human beings in their interactions in societies have given rise to complexities necessitating Exceptions to be part of laws protecting the right to life, and also derogations to some other rights.

Section18 of The 1997 Constitution of The Gambia provides in its sub section i that: "No person shall be deprived of his or her life intentionally of right to life except in the execution of a sentence of death imposed by a court of competent jurisdiction in respect of a criminal offence for which the penalty is death under the Laws of The Gambia as they have effect in accordance with subsection (2) and of which he or she has been lawfully convicted.

Here, I wish to share an inspiration relating to ideas propounded by John Locke, an English philosopher and physician regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers, whose writings influenced 18th century French Philosophers like Voltaire, and Rousseau, many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American revolutionaries. His contributions to classical republicanism and liberal theory are reflected in the United States Declaration of Independence, while his arguments concerning liberty and the social contract, later influenced the written works of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and other Founding Fathers of the United States.

His influence straddled both the 17th and early 18th century, and even extends to our days. The fundamental constitutional principle, he holds and which I consider quite valid and particularly relevant to the present debate, is that "the individual can do anything but that which is forbidden by law, and the state may do nothing but that which is authorised by law." This principle, applied to our present case, concretely and simply illustrates the facts that, individuals, the convicted murderers,have done what is forbidden by law and that, the state in reaction has done nothing, but what is authorised by law.

Evidently, in a typical democracy, where, therefore there is rule of law, legal pundits hold that, " the central institutions for interpreting and creating law are the three main branches of government , namely an impartial judiciary , a democratic legislature , and an accountable executive. While all these organs of the state are created and bound by law, an independent legal profession and a vibrant civil society support their progress and blow the whistle when the former err.The media and NGOS to influence policy by advocacy and playing the role of the watchdog. There is a strong feeling, which seems to lie deep in human nature, that disputes at law should be decided right. At the very worst, that they should be decided right within the presuppositions and the terms of the particular legal system in which they are decided.

Well, readers will recall that, of late there has been an unprecedented upsurge in violent murder crimes committed in The Gambia, calling therefore, for something to be done to curb it. Whose moral duty is it to do so? Our courts, i.e. our independent judiciary as mentioned above, were the proper ones that have jurisdiction for the particular cases. Where else would anyone want the cases to be decided? Britain, America or Senegal?

The defendants had been through due process. There is ample evidence to the fact that witnesses have given testimonies at public hearings and the media amplified the processes. The competent courts were, in each case, persuaded that the allegations of murder brought before them were of legal consequence. The corresponding punishment had preexisted the commission of the crimes and sufficiently provided for by a legislature democratically elected. The head of the Executive, which is accountable, is under oath to uphold the Constitution with discretion to approve the execution or exercise the prerogative of pardon, as provideding The Constitution thus:

Prerogative of mercy

(1) The president may, after consulting the Committee established by subsection (2)-
(a) grant to any person convicted of any offence a pardon either free or subject to lawful conditions;
(b) grant to any person a respite, either indefinite or for a specified period, of the execution of any punishment imposed on that person for any offence;
(c) substitute a less severe form of punishment for any punishment imposed on any person for any offence;
(d) remit the whole or any part of any punishment imposed on any person for such an offence or any penalty otherwise due to the State on account of any offence.

(2) There shall be a Committee on the exercise of the prerogative of mercy consisting of the Attorney General and three other persons appointed by the president subject to confirmation by the National Assembly.

The question which arises, is: which of the two actions was to be taken?

Normally, court decisions reach out beyond the individual case and enter into moulding and channelling the action of the community. The action, then ceases to be merely a regulation of a single actual dispute and becomes a regulation, and if all goes well, an anticipation and prevention, of potential crimes or disputes vastly greater in number than the actual.

In the present circumstances, there was public outcry that innocent lives were being taken by murderers with impunity and that it was high time a solution to halt the terrible mischief was found. The media express strong disapproval of the calamity and civil society lobbied state action to bring the threat to an end. What is the best way to do so?

Should President Jammeh deviate from what legislation commands him to do and congratulate murderers and commiserate with families of victims? Won't that have been excellent recipe for lawlessness and anarchy? What about the President's oath to uphold the rule of law?

Are we to fold our arms and cynically sit by and look the other way, thus allowing the unprecedented upsurge of murders to reach astronomical proportions before taking action? Who would anyone have blamed for taking the law into his/her own hands? How about the prospect of vengeance or mob justice?

Hasn't the application of the death penalty simply functioned as a last-resort machinery to take care of the slaughtering spree? Did the executions come as too much of a surprise to the interested parties, i.e.the convicted murderers, families of the victims and the rest of society, on the death row of the criminal murderers, living in perpetual fear or their lives, wondering who was next in the firing line of the murderers?

To a large degree the interested parties, lest they were living in a dream world, foresaw what any responsible and reasonable government authority will do about the madness so that potential murderers can reshape their affairs in consequence, i.e. be deterred from disillusionment of killing and getting away with it.

It was in this spirit that President Jammeh said, "Our objective is to create a peaceful, happy and crime-free nation, and to reinforce security measures."The Gambian president made the remarks following the upsurge of crimes such as murders, robbery with violence and abductions.

QUI DIT MIEUX? What other means, than application of the law,would work out to a settlement? Has the president done more than adhere to the use of that tool of such invaluable social readjustment in a chaotic murder spree? That tool called legislation, which is an authoritative command to the official, whether judicial or executive, henceforward to act in new ways dictated whenever a certain type of case may come before him.

Now to what others are saying!

As for those enemies of The Gambia, making dangerous and unguarded statements from Senegal and beyond, and even recommending sanctions against The Gambia, they should not be heeded for they are known for catching fire whenever President Jammeh sparks. They and other like-minded persons who display insensitivity to the agony and suffering of family members of the victims of the convicted persons,cannot claim love for human beings.

May I ask them how long it will take them to learn that fratricidal conflicts are a foolish and cruel method of settling bilateral questions and international differences as compared with dialogue? Have we not learnt any lesson from the events of 1981? how many Senegambian citizens perish? How many remain maimed? Who wants a repeat of those massacres? Who in the two countries can assert he or she is not related to someone in the other country? Who are the advocates of a suicide pact? Is anyone deceiving him/herself that it would be a walk-over and that there would be winners rather than losers on both sides?

WARNING!

The president and patriotic Gambians are made of stuff sterner than the impression that the gullible clowns want to bandy around. I don't think they want a Senegambia populated by widows and orphans!

I advise that Satan's advocates should not be heeded and/or given undue attention.Their ideas should be ignored because they contain assertions which are so partial, so faulty, so provocative they cry out loud for revision and rejection in the light of the analysis I have advanced above and that I shall supplement below. If our brothers are angry, and have hurriedly made utterances that are uncalled for, then they ought to mark a short pose of introspection, in view of the long standing relationship between us. we know from long experience that a letter or message sent, by way of threat, in fury, merely put sin the hands of the addressee in preserve, a poison to be used against the sender long in future.

For obligation of Gambia to consult or perhaps to obtain permission before acting, one should refer to questions of sovereignty and the terms of our bilateral and international relations. The 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations is salient here and the relevant Article which deals with the matter, provides:

"Article 36. Foreign nationals who are arrested or detained be given notice "without delay" of their right to have their embassy or consulate notified of that arrest. If the detained foreign national so requests, the police must fax that notice to the embassy or consulate, which can then check up on the person. The notice to the consulate can be as simple as afax, giving the person's name, the place of arrest, and if possible, something about the reason for the arrest or detention.

The Gambia Police Force should be given credit for their adherence to the strict application of this article and I am sure, this can be confirmed by the Consular Sections of The Guinea Bissau, Conakry, Ghanaian, Nigerian, Senegalese, SierraLeonean and United States Embassies in The Gambia. The Gambia government should also be commended for not allowing dissidents of other nations to use the country as a haven for hauling insults and threats to the governments of the nations they belong to. I think this stance should be reciprocated by our neighbours and other friends.
Readers, please read below and tell me if The Gambia needs a lesson on democracy from Amnesty International and others trying to school us in the subject. Many need to look in their backyard because eyes can see beyond the limits of what is paraded outwardly as a front.Charity begins at home! For instance----


Application of the treaty by the United States.

In March 2005, the United States pulled out of the Optional Protocol to the Convention, which allows the International Court of Justice to have compulsory jurisdiction over disputes arising under the Convention. In June 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled that foreign nationals who were not notified of their right to consular notification and access after an arrest may not use the treaty violation to suppress evidence obtained in police interrogation or belatedly raise legal challenges after trial ( Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon ).

In March 2008, the Supreme Court further ruled that the decision of the International Court of Justice directing the United States to give "review and reconsideration" to the cases of 51 Mexican convicts on death row was not a binding domestic law and therefore could not be used to overcome state procedural default rules that barred further post-conviction challenges. Here, we are confronted with a situation, where some nations have the power to end men's lives, if it serves their national security interests, but why does poor Gambia not have the same rights?

Reader, I have deliberately put the two research outcomes from the Internet on the same paradigmatic axis for your appreciation of double standards. Amnesty draws attention to human rights abuses and campaigns for compliance with international laws and standards. It works to mobilise public opinion to put pressure on governments that let abuse take place. The objective of the organisation is "to conduct research and generate action to prevent and end grave abuses of human rights, and to demand justice for those whose rights have been violated."

Do Mexicans have Rights?

Let me quote here from this lovely and reliable source of knowledge called The Holy bible. King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.). Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. Amnesty International was founded in London in 1961, following the publication of the article " The Forgotten Prisoners " in The Observer 28 May 1961 Need we remind them to help all nations take care of their own long list of persons on Death Row or others held in detention centres for various security and public order concerns?

Before concluding, let us have a quick look again at the background: Following spate of murders, and death sentence convictions,

Dawda Bojang, a Gambian national,was sentenced to death and executed for murdering a British citizen;

Lamin Darboe, a Gambian national was sentenced to death and executed for murdering a Mauritanian national, Three Gambian , former soldiers,were sentenced to death and executed for murdering Gambian citizens;

Tabara samba, a Senegalese national, was sentenced to death and executed for murdering a Gambian national to mention only some cases. Does nationality of a particular country make one life more valuable than another? Was Tabara executed because she was Senegalese? These matters need handling with caution and rationality.

Yahya Jammeh, who with others took over the reins of power in 1994 did so with the aim of saving Gambians from economic and other serious hardships. No sooner he settle, he embarked on further programmes to help sustain life. These include HIV and hypertension treatment and then the infertility treatment.He should therefore be viewed as a helper to sustaining life rather than one depriving people of it.

We still have vivid memories of his intervention in the evacuation of Gambians and other nationals from Ivory Coast in 2002during crisis leading to the death of General Robert Gueye, then from Libya, recently and from Liberia many years ago. " His intention is sane and clear yet different individuals have their own opinions about it. Our Constitution guarantees such rights.

However, life is such that in the mental background that such developments as murders and executions,are bound to create,every problem finds its setting. We may try to see things as objectively as we please, None the less, we can never see them with any eyes except our own. 
According to Benjamin CARDOZO, all our lives, forces which we do not recognize and cannot name, draw us into making choices. They are:

1.--inherited instincts, 2.traditional beliefs, 3.acquired convictions, and the resultant is an outlook on life. In conclusion, I hope that this write-up will help readers understand that the particular object sought by the executions was directed toward facilitating and improving men's coexistence in The Gambia and regulating with fairness and equity our relations life in common.

In a case like this the principle of executive clemency seems admirably -called for to mitigate the rigours of the law. I totally, therefore, agree with and join my fellow Gambians who love peace and justice and who made the appeals hey have addressed to the President. There was every certainty that these requests for clemency was going to be heeded, coming as they do from those were at the origin of the request for the murders to be halted. One cannot but recognise and praise the President's quality of being amenable to negotiation and reconciliation, more so when it regards demands by the people whose affairs,he is presiding over.



Published on Monday, 24 September 2012 15:53 | Written by Ousman Sillah
 
According to news on GRTS television, the APRC party on Saturday, 15 September, 2012, mobilized young people from around the country and outside to go to President Yahya Jammeh's home village of Kanilai in Foni to help in the workon his 8 Kilometre long farm and after which they were gathered for a rally that was addressed by the president. After the speeches by various speakers, including the Minster of Youth and Sports, the President was invited to address the gathering. He started with the usual greetings, followed by his address, which was done mainly in the Wollof language with remarks here and there in the Mandinka and English languages. It is in this speech that the President first spoke about the executions after they were carried out. Here is the translated version of the aspect of the President's speech to the young people who gathered at Kanilai which deals with his opinion on the executions.

Excerpts From The Speech of the President:

Some people would stand now to talk about the killings. There is someone who escaped the law after cutting Abdou Njie into pieces, but unfortunately the foreign embassy's intervened in the case and it was dismissed, otherwise he too would have been cleared. The laws of the Gambia have nothing to do with politics. The law is very clear. It says that Yahya Jammeh or any other person does not have the right to eat until one is full and go to someone else's compound and stab the person with a knife and kill him/her. The law says if you do this the law will kill you. This is what the law says. If you kill a person unlawfully you too have to be killed. If you want to kill someone and you know what will happen then it is you who killed yourself. What is the population of the Gambia? Out of 1.6 million, we killed nine because they killed others. If you did not plead with me, if the elders of this country did not plead with me, I would have proceeded with the executions. .... But let me make it clear. Before I came here, I watchedBBC World News and heard them say that Yahya Jammeh has given orders to suspend the executions till later. They added that it was the international community that criticized me and the African heads of state but most importantly there was also pressure from the European Union that is why I stopped. Do I look like anybody who will succumb to human pressure? No way! But if youthe Gambian people want me to stop I will stop because whatever I do I do it for your interest. I live for you, I die for you (English). Whatever you tell me that is what I will do. If you ask me to abolish the death penalty, we will do so. But if tomorrow anyone kills your relative, don't ask what the government is doing about it. It has nothing to do with politics. Now if you have your citizens here and you don't want them to face the firing squad let them not kill anybody because we have all nationalities here ..... there are some countries whose citizens are not on death row (English). ... If I have succumbed to pressure I would not have killed anyone, because on the first day I made the announcement there was a lot of noise and if I had succumbed to pressure then no one would have been killed. So they got it damn wrong that I suspended the executions because of external pressure (English). They said they put pressure on me by criticizing me and that is why I stopped the killing. This is not true. You know I have long been swearing to put a stop to the killing because it was increasing.... The reason why I left it there is because the Constitution of The Gambia states that if a person is to be killed it is the president who should sign the death warrant. My role is to sign. And if I have to sign 10,000 death warrants to save the lives of 1.6 million Gambians I will do it with pleasure. I will not allow less than one percent of the population to hold 1.6 million Gambians hostage (English). I will not allow this small percentage from preventing people from even going to pray to worship Allah. This I will not accept. So now, I swore to the Constitution on your behalf that I will abide by it. The Constitution states how the law should operate but it again states that it has given me the prerogative of mercy. It states that if I see that someone is to be pardoned the law has given me the authority to pardon such a person. I, Yahya Jammeh, for someone who eats until he is well fed, drinks alcohol until he is drunk, or become insolent, if you go and kill someone who has done nothing to you if the law condemns you I will not pardon you. Why is that? If someone kills and you pardon the person then you should pardon all the rest. I have sworn to uphold the Constitution without fear or favour, affection or ill will. Now how can I pardon others and then have others executed? Is that fair? You the Gambians, you are the ones who made me to swear before the Constitution, so if you ask me to wait, I must pay heed to your request. This is why at the time when I swore to execute the death row inmates if you had begged me then they would not have been killed. But you didn't beg me. But at the time even if you had begged me I would have proceeded with the executions because I had already sworn to do it. This is an indication now that Yahya Jammeh does not only talk without action, as some may say by callingme a bluff when I talk. If there is a country whose people are here who killed people and you said they should not be killed, that is not going to happen in the Gambia. So let them leave the country and that is all I want to tell them. The Gambia is not the colony of any regional or sub-regional organization. The Gambia is a sovereign country. So the youth of the Gambia and the elders and women...The reason why I said I am not telling you anything new, it was in 1994 that I told you that I will transform the Gambia into a city state. It was in 1994 that I said with the grace of Allah wherever you go to the Gambia you will find electricitythere. Although, now it is not everywhere that you can find electricity, but Gambia is the only country in Africa where one can find 80% of the rural population with electricity and running water due to our hard work and the true friends of the Gambia. We live for the almighty Allah and we will die for the almighty Allah. Have I ever promised you and then tell you if it pleases the European Union or the IMF and World Bank? Did I ever say this? Whatever I tell or promise you I would say if it pleases the Allah and Prophet. They cannot propaganda Yahya Jammeh. I made it very clear that Gambia will never be enslaved twice. Four hundred years of colonization. If you want to re-colonise the Gambia you will fight for ten million years and you will not colonise one inch of the territory. Youths of the Gambia thank you very much (English). You know that 98% of what is produced from the farms (owned by the president) goes to you. From 1994 to date, I have been supporting the educationof so many children and go to the records. And I am not looking at anybody's face. For our survival as a country, we don't depend on anybody. It is Allah who provides for us. So let us make efforts to develop our country by working for what we eat and eating what we work for. Because for Africa they even use food as a weapon. When an African country has a problem, before they help you, they place conditions that are unacceptable. What is that? Wickedness. That's why I want you to open your eyes and ears. Then be serious with your education, those in other skills should pursue their trade. I cannot say that the young people do not have problems. Even, for me as President I have problems. And my problem is that I do not have enough money to turn Gambia into a city state in one day. That's my problem. If I had this money then none of you would be poor. Then all these things we are talking about would have been done....Those that are talking where do they find all the problems solved....I am not a politician, I'm a leader. I want to develop the Gambia; I want to develop Africa so that tomorrow Africa....Gambia is no one's colony. We depend on the almighty Allah for our survival. The only crime they say I have committed is that I don't accept re-colonisation. If that is the only crime I have committed then I will love to be a criminal.... I thank you the youth. I want to tell you something, the Gambian youth and other good people that any time I betray you or I betray Africa then let the almighty Allah destroy me. Thank you.


President's Address to Thousands of Youths in Kanilai
Published on Sep 25, 2012
The President of the Republic has vowed that he will not in any way succumb to any human pressure in the execution of his mandate. His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Jammeh made the remark while addressing over 4000 youths on Sunday, 16th September 2012, who were at the weekend in Kanilai to weed his 8-kilometer farm.


Viewing all 1603 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images