Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel

Embed this content in your HTML


Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels

Channel Catalog

older | 1 | .... | 66 | 67 | (Page 68) | 69 | 70 | .... | 74 | newer

    0 0
    0 0

                On this date, January 20, 1942, at the Wannsee Conference held in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee, senior Nazi German officials discuss the implementation of the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question". 

     The 15 Attendees of the Wannsee Conference
    The Wannsee Conference (German: Wannseekonferenz) was a meeting of senior officials of Nazi Germany, held in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee on 20 January 1942. The purpose of the conference, called by director of the SS-Reichssicherheitshauptamt(Reich Main Security Office; RSHA) SS-ObergruppenführerReinhard Heydrich, was to ensure the cooperation of administrative leaders of various government departments in the implementation of the final solution to the Jewish question, whereby most of the Jews of German-occupied Europe would be deported to Poland and murdered. Conference attendees included representatives from several government ministries, including state secretaries from the Foreign Office, the justice, interior, and state ministries, and representatives from the Schutzstaffel(SS). In the course of the meeting, Heydrich outlined how European Jews would be rounded up from west to east and sent to extermination campsin the General Government(the occupied part of Poland), where they would be killed.
    Legalized discrimination against Jews began immediately after the Nazi seizure of poweron 30 January 1933. Violence and economic pressure were used by the Nazi regime to encourage Jews to voluntarily leave the country. After the invasion of Polandin September 1939, the extermination of European Jewry began, and the killings continued and accelerated after the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941. On 31 July 1941 Hermann Göringgave written authorization to Heydrich to prepare and submit a plan for a "total solution of the Jewish question" in territories under German control and to coordinate the participation of all involved government organisations. At the Wannsee Conference, Heydrich emphasised that once the deportation process was complete, the exterminations would become an internal matter under the purview of the SS. A secondary goal was to arrive at a definition of who was Jewish and thus determine the scope of the exterminations.
    One copy of the Wannsee Protocol, the circulated minutes of the meeting, survived the war to be found by Robert Kempner, lead U.S. prosecutor before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, in files that had been seized from the German Foreign Office. The Wannsee House, site of the conference, is now a Holocaust Memorial.

    0 0

    On this date, January 21, 2016, the Baton Rouge Serial Killer, Derrick Todd Lee died of heart disease at a hospital in Louisiana, where he was transported for treatment from Louisiana State Penitentiary, where he had been awaiting execution.. I will post the information about this serial killer from Wikipedia and other links.

    Derrick Todd Lee
    Derrick Todd Lee (Mugshot)

    Derrick Todd Lee
    November 5, 1968
    St. Francisville, Louisiana, U.S.
    January 21, 2016 (aged 47)
    Lane Regional Medical Center, Zachary, Louisiana, U.S.
    Cause of death
    Other names
    The Baton Rouge Serial Killer
    Criminal penalty

    Span of killings
    August 23, 1992–March 3, 2003
    Date apprehended
    May 27, 2003

    Derrick Todd Lee(November 5, 1968 – January 21, 2016), also known as the Baton Rouge Serial Killer, was an American serial killer. His killing spree began in 1992 and ended in 2003, and consisted of seven women.
    Prior to his murder charges, he had been arrested for stalking women and watching them in their homes. Lee was initially overlooked by police, because they incorrectly believed the killer was white. Lee was linked by DNA to the deaths of seven women in the Baton Rouge and Lafayette areas in Louisiana, and in 2004 was convicted, in separate trials, of the murders of Geralyn DeSoto and Charlotte Murray Pace. The Pace trial resulted in a death sentence.
    Newspapers suggested Lee was responsible for other unsolved murders in the area, but the police lacked DNA evidence to prove these connections. After Lee's arrest, it was discovered that another serial killer, Sean Vincent Gillis, was operating in the Baton Rouge area during the same time as Lee.
    Lee died on January 21, 2016, of heart disease at a hospital in Louisiana, where he was transported for treatment from Louisiana State Penitentiary, where he had been awaiting execution.


    0 0

    Ten years ago, on this date, January 23, 1997, a Prison escapee and repeat offender, Randy Greenawalt was executed by lethal injection in Arizona. This is another perfect example of letting a dangerous killer be kept alive. Please go to this blog post to learn more.



    0 0

                On this date, January 24, 1948, an Austrian SS female Nazi War Criminal, Maria Mandl was executed by hanging. Please go to this previous blog post to learn more.


    0 0

                On this date, January 24, 1989, one of America’s most notorious serial killer, Ted Bundy was executed by the electric chair. Please go to this blog post to learn more and also learnt about how he repented at the last moment.  


    Mug shot taken the day after sentencing for the murder of Kimberly Leach (State Archives of Florida)

    Theodore Robert Bundy (born Theodore Robert Cowell; November 24, 1946 – January 24, 1989) was an American serial killer, kidnapper, rapist, and necrophile who assaulted and murdered numerous young women and girls during the 1970s and possibly earlier. Shortly before his execution, after more than a decade of denials, he confessed to 30 homicides committed in seven states between 1974 and 1978. The true victim count remains unknown, and could be much higher.
    Bundy was regarded as handsome and charismatic by his young female victims, traits he exploited to win their trust. He typically approached them in public places, feigning injury or disability, or impersonating an authority figure, before overpowering and assaulting them at more secluded locations. He sometimes revisited his secondary crime scenes for hours at a time, grooming and performing sexual acts with the decomposing corpses until putrefaction and destruction by wild animals made further interaction impossible. He decapitated at least 12 of his victims, and kept some of the severed heads in his apartment for a period of time as mementos. On a few occasions, he simply broke into dwellings at night and bludgeoned his victims as they slept.
    Initially incarcerated in Utah in 1975 for aggravated kidnapping and attempted criminal assault, Bundy became a suspect in a progressively longer list of unsolved homicides in multiple states. Facing murder charges in Colorado, he engineered two dramatic escapes and committed further assaults, including three murders, before his ultimate recapture in Florida in 1978. He received three death sentences in two separate trials for the Florida homicides.
    Ted Bundy died in the electric chairat Raiford Prisonin Starke, Florida, on January 24, 1989. Biographer Ann Rule described him as "... a sadistic sociopath who took pleasure from another human's pain and the control he had over his victims, to the point of death, and even after." He once called himself "... the most cold-hearted son of a bitch you'll ever meet." Attorney Polly Nelson, a member of his last defense team, agreed. "Ted," she wrote, "was the very definition of heartless evil."

    0 0

                Cop Killer, Ronald Keith Spivey was executed by lethal injection in Georgia on this day, January 24, 2002. Please go to this blog post to learn more.


    Ronald Keith Spivey

    0 0

    What mop-haired teen ‘murderer’ Matthew Borges, 15, ‘told his friend after beheading and cutting up a classmate’
    He allegedly told a witness that he had 'stabbed a kid and cut his head off killing him'
    6th December 2016, 12:12 pm 


    A SCHOOLBOY charged with the “horrific” murder of a classmate who was found decapitated near a river in the US last week told someone he had “done something bad”, according to a police report.

    Matthew Borges appeared in Lawrence District Court amid to face a first-degree murder rap over the death of 16-year-old Lee Manuel Vilora-Paulino.

    Borges pleaded not guilty.

    Lee Manuel Vilora-Paulino, 16, was found on the banks of the Merrimack River in the city of Lawrence in Essex County, Massachusetts.

    Essex District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett told reporters during a news conference on Saturday that Viloria-Paulino’s body was so badly mutilated that an autopsy took 11 hours.

    The teenager’s arms had been hacked off and his head was found 45 metres away, the Eagle Tribune reported.

    “This was a horrific, horrific murder,” Blodgett told reporters. “While it shook the community, we were completely and totally resolved to bring this matter to justice.”

    The schoolboy was arrested without incident on Saturday – two days after Vilora-Paulino’s mutilated body was discovered.

    Carrie Kimball Monahan, spokesperson for the Essex District Attorney’s Office, said investigators “just don’t know” how the teens knew each other or what the motive was for the gruesome killing.

    “We’re not aware of what type of relationship they had,” Monahan told The New York Post.

    A witness, according to police documents filed in Lawrence District Court on Monday, told investigators that the suspect recently confessed to him that he had killed Viloria-Paulino.

    “[The suspect] told him he did something bad,” court documents state, according to

    “[The suspect] then told him that he stabbed a kid and cut off his head killing him.

    “When [The suspect] said this he was motioning with his hands as if he was stabbing someone and cutting someone’s head off.”

    The teen told police he and Viloria-Paulino had only walked to the remote section of Lawrence along the Merrimack River to smoke cannabis on November 18, claiming he parted with him afterwards.

    Relatives of Viloria-Paulino said the suspect had been at the family’s home just a few days before he went missing on November 18.

    They told the Boston Globe that the Lawrence Police Department insisted the teen had simply run away and declined to search for him – even after they filed a missing persons report.

    Police haven’t responded to that.

    Lawrence Mayor Daniel Rivera said he’s open to the possibility of launching an independent investigation into how police handled the case, he told the Eagle-Tribune.

    “This tore the city apart,” Rivera said. “This is not just a murder, two young people’s lives have ended.”

    0 0

                    On this date, January 27, 2016, a Cop Killer, James Garrett Freeman was executed by lethal injection in Texas. He was convicted of the March 17, 2007 murder of Game Warden Justin Hurst. I will post the information from Wikipedia.

    James Garrett Freeman

    Game Warden Justin Hurst
    (End of Watch: Saturday, March 17, 2007)

    James Garrett Freeman (November 12, 1980 – January 27, 2016) was an American man who was convicted, sentenced to death, and executed for murder in Texas.

    Freeman originated from Lissie, an unincorporated area in Wharton County, Texas. He was a welder, but was unemployed at the time he committed murder. He had no record of violence. On March 17, 2007 Freeman engaged in a high-speed chase with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department(TPWD) officers. At the Lissie Cemetery, where the chase ended, he fired at TPWD staff with an AK-47 and a Glock pistol. Justin Hurst, a 34-year old TPWD game warden, was struck twice and killed. Hurst had turned 34 that day. Freeman was shot four times and survived.

    Freeman, Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ)#999539, was convicted and sentenced to death. While on death row he was in Polunsky Unit. He was executed at Huntsville Unit on January 27, 2016, nine years after the murder.

    The Justin Hurst Wildlife Management Area (WMA) of the TPWD, located in Brazoria County, Texas, was renamed after the victim in 2007. It was formerly the Peach Point WMA.

    0 0

                On this date, January 28, 1948, two Japanese Sub Lieutenant, Mukai Toshiaki and Noda Tsuyoshi were executed by firing squad in Yuhuatai for their mass murdering spree during the Battle of Nanking in December 1937. 

    The December 13, 1937 article in the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun's Contest to kill 100 people using a sword series. Mukai (left) and Noda (right)

     Two Second Lieutenants in the 9th Infantry Regiment of the 16th Division, Mukai Toshiaki and Noda Tsuyoshi, who were tried in Nanking. (PHOTO SOURCE:

    The contest to kill 100 people using a sword(百人斬り競争hyakunin-giri kyōsō?) is a wartime account of a contest between two Japanese Army officers during the Japanese invasion of China over which of them could first kill 100 people with his sword. The two officers were later executed on war crimes charges for their involvement. Since that time, the historicity of the event has been hotly contested, often by Japanese nationalists or revisionist historians seeking to invalidate the historiography of the Nanking Massacre.

    The issue first emerged from a series of wartime Japanese-language newspaper articles, which celebrated the "heroic" killing of Chinese by two Japanese officers, who were engaged in a competition to see who could kill the most first. The issue was revived in the 1970s and sparked a larger controversy over Japanese war crimes in China, and in particular the Nanking Massacre.

    The original newspaper accounts described the killings as hand-to-hand combat; historians have suggested that they were more likely just another part of the widespread mass killings of defenseless prisoners.

    0 0

    Winston Churchill tried to execute Adolf Hitler? The intention of the British Prime Minister was to use the electric chair for the first time to execute him. (Photo:

    "Contemplate that if Hitler falls into our hands we shall certainly put him to death. Not a Sovereign who could be said to be in hands of Ministers, like Kaiser. This man is the mainspring of evil. Instrument - electric chair, for gangsters no doubt available on lend-lease."

    Adolf Hitler Speech at the Berlin Sportspalast
    January 30, 1942

    My German Fellow Countrymen and Women, My Comrades!

    At present everybody speaks before the forum which seems to them the most fitting. Some speak before a parliament whose existence, composition and origin are well known.

    I believed that I should return again today whence I came, namely to the people! Every person is a representatives of this nation, with the one difference that you do not receive any salaries, and often it is more difficult for you to come to such rallies, more difficult than for the so-called qualified representatives of those democracies.

    Before we enter the tenth year of the National Socialist German Reich, it seems appropriate to look into our past, and once again occupy ourselves with the principles of our existence, of our life, and of our victory.

    Quite often we hear today the remark that this war is really the second world war. It means that this struggle is identified with the first, which most of us lived through as soldiers. This is not only correct in that this struggle, too, encompasses almost the whole world, it is even more correct when we consider that it is a question of the same aims; that the same powers which brought about the first world war are responsible for the present one, and that these powers and states have the same aims which they had at that time (although they remained hidden at first glance then); they had the same intentions which are the true cause and purpose of this struggle.

    They are not only the same causes, but, above all, they are the same individuals. And I can proudly say that the only exceptions are the very nations which today are embodied as allies by the German Reich, by Italy, by Japan, and so on. For certainly no one can deny that Churchill even in 1914 was one of the most rabid war-mongers of his time; that Roosevelt was then the disciple of President Wilson; that the capitalistic countries then also had thrown the weight of their influence into the scales on the side of war; just as no one can deny the reverse, that we were entirely innocent in starting that war. We were all only very ordinary soldiers, just as you are now, my dear wounded men sitting here before me. Unknown and nameless men, whom duty had simply called, nothing else, and who in response had fulfilled their duty as faithfully as they were able.


    The same motive forces which were to blame for the first world war are now responsible for the second. I want to start by saying one thing:  Germany then was a monarchy; in other words not a National-Socialist dictatorship. The Germany of that period was democratic, that is, not a national-socialistic state, and the Germany of that period was parliamentarian, that is, not what Germany is today, to say nothing of all other differences. Therefore, there had to be reasons which led to the attacks of these powers then as today, and which had nothing to do with the respective forms of government, although both sides pretend that it is just this which called them into the field of battle. 

    We Germans cannot possibly imagine that if a country near us suddenly decides on a certain form of government, we must declare war on this country just because that particular form of government doesn't suit us. We can't understand this at all, and naturally the others can't understand it either. They did not enter the war for this reason. They did not enter and are not at war because they were irritated by the form of the state. They are capable of embracing the vilest type of government when necessary and of fraternizing with it. No, no, it is not a question of a form of a government, but other reasons which have also  previously brought them into a war against the German state. 

    At that time England was the principal initiator of this struggle, England, which over a period of 300 years, through a continuous succession of bloody wars, subjugated roughly a quarter of the globe. Because at that time it wasn't as if one day a few Indian princes or Indian localities or Indian representatives proceeded to London with the request "Britishers, come to India, reign over us or lead us," but it was the English who went to India and the Indian people did not want the British and tried to get rid of them by force. They forced their way in and could not be gotten rid of through more force. Through the use of force they subjugated this continent of over 380 million people, and kept them subjugated. 

    Only through force did they make one state after another pay them tribute and taxes. Behind this force, of course, stood the other one, which scents business everywhere where a state of disturbance exists: our international Jewish acquaintances. In this manner England, over a period of a few hundred years, has subjugated the world; and, to make secure this conquest of the world, this subjugation of the people, England endeavors to maintain the so-called balance of power in Europe. 

    This means in reality that it endeavors to make sure that no European state is able to gain over a certain measure of power and perhaps in this way rise to a leading-role in Europe. What they wanted was a disunited, disintegrated Europe, a Europe all of whose forces completely offset one another. 

    To reach this goal, England conducted one war after another in Europe. She has seen first its powerful position menaced by Spain. When they had finally conquered Spain, they turned their attentions to the Netherlanders. When Holland seemed to represent no further danger, British hate concentrated itself against France. And when finally France was crushed with the help of all Europe, to be sure, they then imagined that Germany must be, of necessity, the one factor which might possibly be able to unify Europe. 

    Then it was that the struggle against Germany began, not out of love for the nations or their people, but only in their own most selfish, rational interests, behind which, as previously said, stands the eternal Jewry, which, in every struggle between nations, is capable of making profits and winning wherever there is confusion and wrangling. It is well-known that they have always been the instigators of unrest among the nations, because they were able to profit only in time of unrest, and because a period of peace might lead to reflection and hence, also, to an insight into the ways of these evil-doers of all nations. 

    When, in 1914, a world coalition against the German Reich of that time was first brewing, they found justifications in these reasons. They then said, "Germany must first of all be freed from its Kaiser." This, of course, should have been of no concern to the English, but rather an internal matter for the German people. But the English always feel concerned for other nations, and for that reason they wanted to free Germany of its Kaiser, then as now. 

    They further said: "It is Germany's militarism which makes the German people unhappy and oppresses them." 

    The English are against the oppression and against the misery meted out today everywhere. Finally, they said, "There shall be no more war. Therefore let us wage war upon war." A wonderful, enticing, splendid perspective. If only one wanted to apply it in retrospect. That means, if one wanted to say, "We agree that war is an injustice because only brutal force decides war. We will eliminate all coercion. Hence we will abolish everything arisen through coercion up to now." 

    A very difficult beginning, indeed, because the whole world hitherto has been built up in accordance with the principle that might makes right. But still it would have been wonderful if England had led the way to the rest of the world in its abhorrence of war in this manner, that it would have liberated the fruits of its own wars, that is, that it would have placed them again at the disposition of the rest of the world. If England had done that, if it had therefore declared: "We abhor war. Therefore, we will immediately return South Africa; because we won it through war. We hate war. Therefore, we will return the East Indies; we also won those in a war. For instance, we hate war. Therefore, we will also leave Egypt; because this also we have subjugated through force. We shall also retire from the entire Near East; because this also became ours through force." 

    It would have been a beautiful gesture, to have declared war on war in this fashion. However, the struggle against war meant something entirely different in England; namely, this war against war was interpreted to mean the impossibility of making good the injustices already existing in this world: keep the power with him who already has it, and deny all possibility of power from him who has none. 


    It is about the same as the attitude we recognize also in domestic policy, when people say: "We want no change in the social order. He who is rich is to stay rich; he who is poor must stay poor. As things are, so are they willed; and as they are willed, so they are to remain; for man should not rise against that which is once willed, because it is so." 

    You know, my comrades, our National Socialist concepts are against this. We see in each situation and at each moment on this earth the evidence of an uninterrupted life process.  It is impossible to say at any given moment: "Here the evolutionary process stops,"for it is the nature of the evolution of all things that every halt to this life process must lead to extinction. On the contrary, it is the essence of Nature that again and again those who are the most competent are chosen and lifted up, meaning therefore, that one must open a pathway within the people so that those who are more competent are not locked in by a static social structure, that one must not allow financial circumstances of the people to halt the process. Instead, one must take care to ensure that a continuous stream of fresh blood rises from the bottom to the top and that everything above which is decadent, because it is lazy, should die, because it must die, because it is ready to die. One should not put a stop to this process.

    And so the talk of war on war has been proved quite false. The best proof for that is that the moment the war was over, the conditions for a new war could by no means be avoided, nor the instruments for waging the new war, either. It would have been a wonderful gesture if after the disarmament of Germany, as it had been promised in the treaty, England, America, and France had also disarmed. We suggested it to them often, begged them to at the time of the Weimar Republic, and still later demanded that they do it. 

    They did not even consider it. On the contrary, the wars went on. Only the defeated people, the German people, lost every prospect ever in this world to change its condition once more for the better. 


    The methods which they used in the first World War were like those with which they are fighting today. At first the war from outside, and war in the form of creating coalitions. Here fits a piece of Churchill's shamelessness, who says today: "England was never in a position to carry on war by herself alone against Italy or Germany." But this same man has through his lieutenant year after year given out promises of guarantee to the whole world. Then he himself admits that they were never in a position to fight alone. 

    But they guaranteed the Baltic states; they guaranteed the Balkans. They went on around: Every state in the world, they declared, needs a guarantee. Great Britain will put her whole strength behind them and will protect them. Today this same arch-liar says: "But we were really never in a position to carry on the war alone." But that is right; even in the World War they were not in a position to carry on the war alone. Therefore they cooked up a coalition against us of world-wide extent. 

    The methods have likewise remained the same. Promises to all those of little faith, the credulous, or stupid, who wanted to trust these promises, moreover, the attempt to allow their own interests to be represented with as much other blood as possible. 


    It must always be remembered that the British world empire in the 400 years since its origin had to shed in countless wars barely 10% of the blood that Germany needed to defend alone its bare existence, and in spite of that, we have always lost more and more. This truth is connected with the second British method, that is, with the method of division. In the time that the British Empire had its origin, Germany tore herself apart. There were at that time modes of thought that we no longer understand, modes of thought of a religious kind, that unfortunately were fought out only with the sword, modes of thought that became horrible among the people, that seem insufficient to us in their inner being. Only these grievous internal struggles, that cost the German people endless blood, gave England the opportunity, in this same period, to raise up a world claim that never belonged to her either in number or in significance. Then I must always point out that it is not true that we Germans are like upstarts, but if one wants to talk about upstarts, then it is unconditionally the English and not ourselves! We have an older history, and during the time when Europe had a powerful German Empire, England was a quite insignificant, small, green island. 

    In the last World War the possibilities of this dissolution lay in another sphere. The religious problems did not provoke any more bloodshed, especially since the priests themselves would not have been ready any more to sacrifice their lives for these causes. 

    After realizing the impossibility of involving the German people in a dark, dynastic and domestic crisis, there evolved a new possibility of playing the political parties' against one another. We lived through it then. The parties of the right and the parties of the left, which further splintered; a dozen bourgeois aspects, and a half dozen proletarian aspects. And having begun with these parties, from the bourgeoisie of the Zentrum Party up to the KPD (Communist Party of Germany), the German people were undermined and broken down  slowly from within. In spite of that, the course of the war was an immeasurably glorious one. The years 1914-1918 - they proved one thing: not even the opponents triumphed; it was a low, common revolt, plotted by Marxian-Zentrum-Liberal-Capitalistic subjects. The driving force behind all of it was the eternal Jew. They brought Germany to its collapse at that time. 


    We know this today from the verdict of the English themselves, that they  in 1918 were exhausted, just before their own collapse, when perhaps a quarter hour before 12 o'clock the revolt in Germany was realized. Only the cowardice of our former rulers, their indecision, their halfway measures, their own uncertainty brought it on. And so the First World War was lost not by the merit of our opponents, but exclusively by our own fault. 

    The consequences of this collapse in November were not that world democracies stretched out open arms to Germany, they were not concerned about freeing the German people from its burdens and lifting the German people to a higher standard of culture (an impossibility since they themselves had a much lower one); the consequence wasthe most frightful collapse, politically and economically, that a people has ever experienced. 


    At that time there came to us a man who has done the German people immeasurable harm, Woodrow Wilson, the man who lied with a straight face. If Germany would lay down her arms, then she would get a compassionate, an understanding peace! Then she would not lose her colonies! But the colonial problems were fixed up, all right! The man lyingly promised us that there would be a general disarmament, that we would then be accepted on equal terms among nations, peoples, etc. with equal rights! He lyingly promised us that then secret diplomacy would be done away with, and that we too would then enter into a new age of peace, of equality, of reason, etc.! This arch-liar's stooge was the President Roosevelt of today! He was his right hand man. Our German folk believed this man. They had no idea that they were dealing here with an American President, that is, with a man who has no regard for truths; who, for example, can calmly say before an election: "I shall vote against war," and after the election can say: "I vote for war." And who, when he is then called to answer for it, can explain as calmly as ever: "I said that then because I thought that there would be stupid people who would take it for the truth." 

    But we had no idea of a thing like this, that we were in fact dealing with a paralysis victim, with a madman, who was then head of this people, with which the German people had never in their history had a conflict! So there came the hour of the German people's worst disappointment:  got its disappointment at the moment when the German subordinate emissaries entered the car in the Compiegne forest, now known to us for the second time. And there right away came the rude question: "What are you gentlemen doing here?" There was an armistice which in reality meant total defenselessness. And the sequel to this armistice was then the peace treaty, the complete removal of our people's arms and therewith the removal of its rights, and with that the plundering and ravaging by an international financial combine which threw our people into the depths of misery. 

    They told us beforehand: "He who says that we intend to take away Germany's colonies lies!" They took them away from us! They said: "He who says that the intention is to take from Germany her merchant marine is not telling the truth!" They took it away from us! They said beforehand: "He who says that we want to take away part of the German people is inciting the people!" Later they took away one part after another! They had broken all their promises! In a few months the German people sank into a state of unimaginably deep despair and despondency-starving people without any hope. A people that did not get its prisoners of war back, even after the armistice and peace-treaty had been signed! A people that was not given food, even after it was defenseless! A people that was now repeatedly coerced,-if one carefully studies those times-from whom re-subjection was again and again demanded, extorted by some new repression. Even today, when one reflects upon this, one falls into a state of burning hatred and rancor against a world in which anything like this is possible. 


    Now it was at that time, my comrades, when everything was shattered, when the highest leadership of the Reich had fled abroad, when others were surrendering, when the armed forces had to give up their weapons, when the people themselves voluntarily disarmed; at that time when agitation could rage against Germany from within our borders, that one could read in the newspapers: "It is a good thing that we lost the war," that men without character could declare: "We were not able to win the war," it was at that moment, when anyone who even thought of Germany, or spoke about it, trembled to stand up, at that time, when the renunciation of life was being preached as an ideal, so to speak, and when one was ashamed to face the world as a German altogether, it was at that very time, my comrades, that I entered my political career with the determination to resurrect Germany! 

    It was such a mad determination in the eyes of those others, that my closest friends did not understand me. I found the strength for this determination only from my insight into the population. If, at that time, I had only known the upper ten thousand, believe me, my German people-I would not stand before you today, I would never have found courage for this thought which is capable of revolutionizing a people: Determination and Faith. I knew first and foremost the people itself; I knew my comrades; I knew that these men, who for years have done what could not be left undone, who have done work without precedence, could be trusted,-I knew that if they only would have had the right leadership, that they never would have agreed to a capitulation, not these comrades, since each knew that so many comrades had already fallen for what I was fighting for. I could not abandon that, for it would have been to betray my own comrades, who were just as badly treated by life as I myself, who had also contributed their lives to the cause. 

    I have come to know the great mass of the German people, ladies and gentlemen, from living with them. And these masses have not only upheld my belief in the people, but have restored it, and constantly strengthened it through all the years since then, in the face of contrary circumstances, or when any misfortune seemed to threaten the realization of my plans. It was clear to me that this whole development, just as in the last 20 years or 30 years before the war, could lead only to collapse. But I had already formed the resolve to declare war on this whole development. That is not merely to declare: "I will get a German Wehrmacht, I will get an army or an air-force"; it was clear to me that the inner structure of the social order must be altered, so that in the dead body of our people the blood would flow up from the bottom again, and that society should hold firmly to the goal. 

    I have always looked upon this undertaking as possible, as within the power of the country. But I was of the conviction that strength could only be given to a body in which the sight and the essence of the new condition was already incorporated. Therefore, I was resolved to build up a small movement, beginning with those people who should already have within themselves that which appeared later as really essential to the whole of society. And this was perhaps not so hard as I thought, inasmuch as I was already on guard against the danger of unworthy place-seekers or selfish persons joining my ranks. 

    For whoever joined this movement in those years from 1919-23 had to be a boundless idealist. Any other kind of man would only say: "He is an utter fool. He wants to build a new people, to found a new state, to organize a new Wehrmacht, to make the Germans free again-and he hasn't even a name, no money, no press, no political clique, nothing. The man is mad." They had to be boundless idealists who came to me then, for we had nothing at all to gain, but always only to lose, always to sacrifice. And I can say that of all my followers, all of them who at that time and later supported me: they had nothing to win, and everything to lose. And how many have lost everything, even their lives, for my sake. I have now begun this battle, first against stupidity, stupidity and inertia, under the so-called higher strata; I have begun it against the cowardice which spreads caste far and wide, the cowardice which always pretended to be cleverness and came around and said: "We must submit; we must be patient"; or, as Herr Erzberger said, "We must sign everything, we must sign everything they put before us; then they will forgive us; then it will be all right again." Against this immeasurable cowardice which did everything rather than take a stand, I had to fight then, in small and gradually larger circles. Often we have experienced that this part of society says, "But why do you go demonstrate on the streets? Can you not see that us others don't want this and that it leads inexorably to more conflict? Why? Because you are provocative, so stop provoking them, stand back, be quiet" And we were not quiet. I then formed the program: "The German street belongs to the German, not the Jew." And I have won the streets back for these German masses, not by the cleverness of the cowards, but the bravery of these daredevils who at that time attached themselves to me and who were ready to liberate the streets from our enemies, and carry the German colors back through these German streets, to the German markets, villages and cities. And I had at that time to fight on further against selfish interests of manyl individuals. The man of the Left said to me: "You are going against my interests" or "You are going against my interests. My interests are class interests. And these class interests oblige me to slay the other fellow." And the other spectrum said to me: "Sir, keep away from our interests. We have the interests of station, we too have our interests, stay away. Do not come in here!" I had to turn against both sides. And above the interests which seemed to be found in station or in class, stood the interests which lie in the people themselves, in that community which cannot be torn apart. All this appears today to be so obvious a thing to get all these truisms into the cross-grained skulls of our people from the Left and Right. 

    One group did not want to accept this idea, from pure doggedness, because they said: "What? We will break our enemies' heads in", and the others did not want to accept it because of their limitations or stupidity, because of sluggish thinking, when they said: That was not until now, why should we change now? You cannot demand of me that I should have anything to do with these persons who come from the people: That I cannot do. 

    Eventually you will even demand of me that I should add switch positions. We want to be a people as brothers, but with enough distance, with enough distance, gentlemen, not too close, and only during elections, not every day. 

    All that was thus not so simple, slowly to draw one thing after another out of this people, and how many have quite simply run away from it. It was not, indeed, my national comrades, as if every one who came to me at that time, on that account also remained with me. Many a time I had to bring fifty or sixty somewhere and three months later they were again only seven or eight. All the others were gone again. And one had to begin again. I made a calculation at that time. If I win a hundred over, and have only ten remain to me, and the other ninety always leave me, then gradually they will become a hundred if I win a thousand. If I win ten thousand, they will be a thousand, and gradually the number of those who remain will grow ever larger. And if one had departed for the second or third time, perhaps, then perhaps he will be embarrassed to go the fifth time, and then he too will remain.

    And thus, with unbelievable patience and with perseverance and persistence I will slowly build up a group that is a majority in the German Reich itself. The others may laugh or mock as much as they wish. It does not matter. They may go against us. That does not matter; then we will defend ourselves. We will not capitulate. We will not get off the street, we will not give up our places until we have the upper hand, or until others force us out themselves.

    The feeling of the National Socialist is today obvious to us. However at that time, these were new ideas, new learnings, which were neither understood, nor of course, accepted by many. And another thing was added to this, a cursed tradition, this question of education, into which every single man believes he was born differently,  behind which there lies a much more serious problem than any other; one individual could not bring himself to mix with the broad masses of the people, because he didn't belong to them socially; while another could not because he also came from others. It was a fight against traditions, and also, naturally, against the elements of cultural up-bringing. 

    Some said, "I, as a cultured person, cannot be made to expect to associate with such a village organization, in which a day-laborer leads the way." I had to first of all make them understand that leadership had nothing to do with an abstract learnedness, which had been pumped up in an institution of studies. One is studied, taught, hammered in, in God knows how many homework hours, and the other is innate and will always come to the fore, and will know how to find a following among his natural and necessary talents of leadership. It was a struggle against almost all of the things which we were accustomed to in life. Besides this, there was a fight against certain natural interests. "If I should really join you, I shall lose my business," (said one) and another would say: "It would be scandalous, because my colleagues would not stand for this." Can you imagine, my countrymen, what a hero one had to be to be the first National Socialist in any group, in any factory, and also, I concede, to be the first National Socialist in any salon? For some, they are bodily, the others because they are spiritually threatened. I do not know what is more evil, a bodily threat rather than a spiritual suppression which can perhaps break down a person even faster than a physical threat. There have been heroes who have come forward at that time. And I should like to explain something about that: These heroes have in reality continued the war of 1914-1918. One sees them yet so displayed as if they were soldiers (in my eyes) and their party, no, that the soldiers have been once, and indeed the best soldiers. They were the best soldiers that have ever been, who would not and could not bear the acquiescence, thus we recognize it today, that a really good National Socialist will also be always the best soldier. 

    And now came the organized opponents. There were originally approximately 46 or 47 parties, who hesitated accordingly to unite together the bicyclists, or the small gardeners, or cottagers, or other people. But there were some 48 parties. An Allied Opposition. And here above all the party secretaries, their functionaries, who saw in us the ruin of their existence. For where, after all, was a civil party position to arrive, represented by its syndics, party secretaries, and so on, and where a proletarian party itself, represented by trade-union leaders and again party secretaries, if now suddenly someone comes and says: "All that rubbish is again plain madness. You are fighting here for something that can be of no use to anyone. You will both have to get off your high horse. In the long run you cannot do without each other. It is more sensible for you to come to an intelligent agreement with each other than that you should each bring about the other's ruin." One could say that, of course, to the individual, but to a secretary it meant making the man think, immediately, that then his entire existence was over. If I say, religion is not a topic of political debate, what happens to the followers of the Zentrum Party? If I say, I cannot fight politically for economic interests, which must be solved, rationally, in economic terms, where, then, do the trade-union secretaries and the syndics get? And most of all, where then do the dear Jews get, who had, indeed, their interests so much in both camps, who on the one hand directed capital, and on the other hand led the anti-capitalists, and often, indeed, as one family with two brothers in both camps. 

    My dear comrades! When at that time I began this fight, I knew very well that it was a fight against an entire condition of things, and how hard it was only my fellow-fighters can know. 

    I can say that for me, the war has not ended since 1914. I have gone up and down the country, and from city to city, and have spoken and labored again and again, always with the single thought to loose the German people from this bond, to deliver them from their lethargy, and gather them together once more. 

    Not only have I found comrades in arms, but also countless people in the course of these years, who have now helped us, women and men, who have given all, for whom the Party, in particular, was everything. The other wretched bourgeois, especially, cannot understand that. Only those can understand who belong to National Socialism, for whom the movement means everything, so that they have thought of their movement the whole day, so that they have risked all, and have offered every sacrifice. Now the whole nation understands it; what then counted not even a thousand, today totals millions of fellow countrymen, who are going to the gathering places, and are giving, for the National Socialist Union, their last fur and pullover. 

    This good fortune, to be able to give, to be able to sacrifice for it, that millions today have, was had formerly by only the few National Socialists of our movement. How great the good fortune was only those can measure, apparently, who today can say of themselves: "I am doing everything for my people, everything for our soldiers, so that they may stand fast." 

    Now, my fellow countrymen, from this small beginning has sprung the German Union. Slowly, it is true, but it was well so; it needed time, but it came into existence. This movement exists today; it was not an uninterrupted growth, but there were then again also days of the most severe distress and of doubt, dark days. 

    I need only remember the year 1923. The enemy stood in the Ruhr district, Germany was in inflation, the whole German people ruined, and seemed to be going under in unparalleled misery. And the Jews triumphed over everything. They ruined our country and they profited by our misfortune. And then I tried at that time to grab in my hand the power to bring misfortune to a stop. And at the moment when I might have believed that I would get the power, then fate struck me down, and I came, instead of into power, into prison. 

    And then, at this time, then the movement had to prove itself, and, of course, I had to prove myself as well. And I may now say that at this moment, when I had yet scarcely come to my senses, I did not lose my head for a minute, but had soon recovered my faith. My enemies said, "Now he is dead! One need not hesitate further about it, one need never mention him again, National Socialism is dead!" After 13 months I came back and began again. And I think that this was maybe the most important thing for our party: any weakling can bear winning, but only the strong can bear the strokes of misfortune that fate deals! 

    Back then, I was the recipient of first major crisis within our movement. It was done with a few years later. Then after the first hard blow I got great increases in the movement. What that cost in work is known only to those who were there then. But I kept then also my boundless faith, faith in my own person, too, that nothing can break my composure. I took to heart  the saying of a German philosopher: "The blow that does not kill you makes you stronger." 


    At this time the rest of the world took no notice at all of us. The rest of the world listened to the Diplomats, and the diplomats moved in circles which at that time we National Socialists could not move in, were absolutely forbidden to move in, and as far as I am concerned, didn't have to move in. These diplomats sent wonderful reports to their governments, in which they depicted the political games within the Reich, and ignored the powers that would take over this entire Reich some day. They treated the Germany of that day as though there never would exist, or never had existed a National Socialism. 

    And how they treated this Germany! Their Germany, their democratic Germany. The child which they had suckled. This freak of parliamentary democracy, constitution of Weimar and body of laws from Versailles! How they mishandled this monster-child, oppressed it, wrung it out. If today they act as though they are against us National Socialists, or turn against National Socialist Germany, still, did they not also turn against formerly democratic Germany? Only there is one difference: they cannot hurt us at all, but unfortunately they could hurt the democratic Germany. To us it makes no difference what their opinion of us is: I have never, even to the slightest degree, counted on having foreign countries agree with or like me;  that doesn't matter to me in the least. If it should come to pass that my enemies should praise me, then the German nation can send me to the devil. 


    Adolf Hitler on the devil going to church.
    So to me, and to us, it doesn't matter; but they mistreated democratic Germany, that Germany, which crept, which was satisfied with a few crumbs which fell from the tables of these so-called "moneyed classes." They were treated like beggars, but they at least should have had the honor of sitting in Geneva. They were refused every human right, but they should have had the right, now and then, to participate in an international conference, or even to preside there.
    They misused the right of self-determination of the German nation, they didn't worry about anything, but they should at least have been allowed to speak on the subject of the rights of self-determination of other nations at the League of Nations in Geneva, and they would have been satisfied and happy with that. 

    The disarmament: If today it is said, that our Germany, this National Socialist Germany, forced us to arm (putting aside the fact of how often I asked them to disarm) There was once a Germany which had no arms at all. But why didn't they disarm then? They could have done it, or does anyone believe that perhaps Stresemann or Marx, or any one of these men, Wirth, Bauer, Eberth, Scheidemann, would have declared the might of war? Well, that cannot be told anyone. They didn't believe that themselves. That is when they should have disarmed. They didn't do it; on the contrary, they pushed the war on farther. Some of them got themselves well-fixed in one place, some in another. The English didn't worry any further about their Allies; they betrayed the Arabs on the subject of their self-determination, as for the Indian people, whom they needed in the war, they later on abruptly took away everything they had promised them. They knew very well why Germany had to be disarmed. They added all of this to the name Democracy. Everything crumbled piece by piece. And then the terrible unemployment. 

    Where were the miracle workers then? If today they can lie so in the newspapers, so that President Roosevelt declares that America will give the world a new economic order. It may very well be a new order, but a very miserable one. Such is the system, a system with which he has himself gone bankrupt, so that he now believes that only through a war can he preserve himself from the justice of the people. 

    Politico-economically, the German people has not received what was promised it before the days of the Versailles Treaty. On the contrary, as the other world went to pieces progressively, unemployment grew and continued to grow greater. The years 1913 to 1930 are years of continuous experimentation, continuous economic ruin, an uninterrupted prostitution of the political sovereignty of the German people; also an abandonment of economic materials. And we had to witness all this. 

    At that time I fought, but during those years, my countrymen, there were many setbacks: our Party was forbidden, I was gagged for two years, local groups were dissolved, then again, in  all German states the movement was forbidden. In short, there was a continuous fight against uninterrupted setbacks. 

    Then, finally, came September, 1930, and we walked into the Reichstag with our 106 mandates-another was added-107 mandates. Then we should have been given part in the government, but that was when the real opposition (sidetracking) came, and it grew greater uninterruptedly. It was a continuous battle. How many party members did we lose at the time? Many were foully murdered, over 40,000 wounded, we could count in these few years. Then came the year 1932. The first presidential election, again a setback. The second presidential election, the party caught itself, and so the fight for the inside power in this state has continued in battle after battle. It was a fight in which all was at stake. Many persons again had to pay with their lives that year. Many persons went to prison. And then came July, with an incredible victory. Then everyone cried: "This is the hour in which to take over power," and again the hour passed by, it had to go by. 

    And then came another reversal. And then-a final battle. And finally the day, the memory of which we are celebrating. 

    Now, my compatriots, I have related this to you only very briefly, in order to show you above all else that: the victory which we are celebrating today, did not come to us at that time as an easy gift, which fell into our laps. This victory was bound up with great efforts, with sacrifices, with deprivations, with unceasing labors, and also with setbacks. And if you had asked anyone on January 15, "Do you believe that this person"-that was I at that time-"will get into power?" everyone would have answered you, even on the 25th and the 28th, "Never." And when we did get into power on the 30th, then many a wise man said:-"It's only for six weeks." Today, it is nine years. 

    And now I must mention something else. I told you what I found conditions to be in the year 1919 to 1920, when I brought the party into existence; I have depicted for you the situation, after my first great defeat. 

    But I must recall to your memory, in just a few sentences, what I had taken upon myself on that 30th of January. It was a heritage which hardly anyone wanted any more to take over at all. 

    Everything ruined, the economy destroyed; 7,000,000 people without a living, and it was increasing from week to week; 7,000,000 part-time workers. The Reich finances an enormous deficit of nearly three billions. The states had incredible deficits, the communities were in debt, the peasantry was completely ruined and on the verge of having their land auctioned off, commerce came to a standstill, our shipping no longer in existence. In general, everything in Germany seemed now to be dead. 

    But I took that over. It was no bright heritage, but I looked upon it as an honor to take over something not at the moment when it is flourishing, but to take it over at the moment when others say: "Everything is already ruined. No one can help."
    I ventured it then. It was altogether clear to me that if it did not succeed I would probably be stoned. I would have been beaten to death, I dared and I won. Within a few years I had solved all the problems.

    In 1933 and 1934 I started by cleaning Germany up domestically. First I got rid of  the parties and similar silliness. Then I began to stabilize the German currency by relentless pressure from above. I began, however, to stabilize it not just by pressure from above, but by guaranteeing it and backing it up with German production. All that is easy to tell today, but it was not so easy then, for if it had been so easy, why did my opponents not do it? 

    I immediately began with the repression of all the foreign elements in Germany; I mean our cosmopolites. I began also at this time to bring individual provinces into the Reich. When the year '34 came, I had really got through with the most essential internal preparations toward getting for the German people at last the benefit of its labor. Instead of numberless economic organizations a combination of all in one single bureau. At first, of course, everyone complained whose interests were thereby threatened. But one thing no one can dispute, from either the right or left: In the end everything went better than before. And moreover what an individual perhaps had to give up for the moment he got back again, got back through reason which lay at the bottom of all transactions, through insight into what was necessary. 

    In '35 the freedom began already to permeate to external relations. You remember all that: introduction of military service; in '36 the throwing off of these oppressive Versailles shackles in regard to the Rhineland; recovery of our sovereignty; in '37 and '38 the completion of our armament, not without my having previously made numerous offers to the others, to obviate this armament. For one thing, my comrades, you must all admit, wherever you come from: Everywhere today you see works of peace which we could no longer continue on account of war. Everywhere you see great buildings, schools, housing projects, which the war has kept us from carrying on. Before I entered upon this war, I had begun a gigantic program of social, economic, cultural work, in part already completed. But everywhere I had in mind new plans, new projects. 


    This arch-liar today shows that Britain never was in a position to wage war alone. This gabbler, this drunkard Churchill. And then his accomplice in the White House, this mad fool. – Adolf Hitler
    When, on the other hand, I look at my opponents, what have they really done, now? They could rush easily enough into war. War did not rob them of a peaceful state, for they have accomplished nothing. This prattler, this drink-bold Churchill, what has he in reality accomplished in his life? This perfidious fellow is a lazybones of the first order. 

    If this war had not come, the centuries would have spoken of our generation and also of all of us and also of myself as the creator of great works of peace. But if this war had not come, who would speak of Churchill? Now he will one day be spoken of, to be sure, but as the destroyer of an empire, which he and now we destroyed. One of the most pitiful phrase-mongering natures of world history, incapable of creating anything, of accomplishing anything, or of performing creative acts, capable only of destroying. 

    Of his accomplice in the White House I would rather not speak at all, moreover-a wretched madman. 

    To be sure, the more we worked, the more we put Germany in order, the greater grew the hatred, unfortunately. For now there came something in addition. Now came the stupid hatred of the social strata abroad, who believed that the German model, the socialistic German model, could break in on them also, circumstances permitting. I have often heard that those in other countries said themselves: "Well, you know, for us those National Socialist ideas are, of course, not practicable." 

    But I do not even demand at all that they should be carried out. On the contrary, I am not here to concern myself with the happiness of other peoples, but I feel myself responsible exclusively for my own people. That is what I work for. To my sleepless nights I will not add a single one for other lands. 


    And yet right away they say: "And the example, your example, that's just it, the example that is offered. The example ruins the good morals"; that means in this case the bad habits and bad qualities. They said "They travel with their ships among us, we cannot permit that no yachts should land among us. Why not? That only spoils our working class." How will that spoil our working class? They do not perceive that the German workingman has worked more than ever before; why should he not then recover? Is it not above all a joke when that man from the White House says: "We have a World Program and this World Program will give mankind freedom and the right to labor." Mr. Roosevelt, open your eyes, we have had that in Germany for a long time already. Or when he says that care will be taken of illness. Go and look at the battle-cry of our party program that is National Socialistic, not its doctrine, my dear sir, those are high ideas like those of a Democrat. 

    Or when he says: "We wish to raise (the standard of) prosperity, even for the masses. Those are prominent things in our program." He could have done that much more easily if he had not started a war. For we have also done that without a war. You have a war! No, this capitalistic babble does not even think of doing such a thing. They see in us only the bad example, and in order to tempt their own people, they must meddle in our party program and there snatch out single sentences, these pitiful blunders, and even then they do it badly. 

    We have had a united world against us here, naturally, not only from the right but also from the left, as those on the left say to us, "If that succeeds; this experiment, it actually creates, it brings it about, that it does away with homelessness. It makes it ready and establishes a school system whereby every talented youngster, irrespective of what kind of position. He completes it and makes a lawyer out of a former farm worker. He completed it, and really introduced universal health care for the aged, the man who finally brings it about, who brings them to an ordered, assured standard of living, what will we do then? Why, we live by the fact that that does not exist. We do live by that. War, then, against this National Socialism." 

    We have now been at the helm for nine years. Bolshevism has now been at the helm since 1917, nearly 25 years. This struggle will render the verdict, if this Russia is compared with Germany. What have we created in nine years, what is the aspect of the German people, and what has been created there? I do not even want to talk about the capitalist states, they are not at all concerned about their unemployed for that reason. To the American millionaire the unemployed person is something natural, something he does not have to see at all, since he does not go to the neighborhoods where they are, and they do not come to the neighborhood where he sits; they under-took a hunger march on Washington, to be sure, to the White House or to the Capitol, but they are dispersed somewhere by the police before they can do it with rubber truncheons and tear gas, and so on, all of them things which do not exist in autocratic Germany. We have not used these measures against our people at all, we manage without rubber truncheons and without these things, without tear gas. We are resolute in our renunciation of them, while in the case of the enemy it is understood that at the moment of taking power they increased it and therein refuses to introduce a definite foreign policy. You know them already from my fighting period. 

    I wanted a close relationship with three countries, with England, with Italy and with Japan.