WWII: Espionage and the US funding of the Conquering Communists of Europe

Feature Image: Harry Dexter White (Weit), U.S. Treasury Department official, Communist and active Agent of Soviet Espionage

The covert European Revolution and how it was funded

In 1943, the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) was established (2years before the U.N. was founded) – clearly an organisation with post-war objectives. When the war ended, UNRRA set up “Displaced Persons” camps. In 1946, British General Sir Frederick Morgan, was Chief of Operations of the UNRRA in Germany (before his dismissal). He stated at a press conference in Frankfurt and charged, that an organised Jewish group was sponsoring an exodus of Jews from Poland into the U.S. zone of Germany… “They certainly do not look like a persecuted people. I believe they have got a plan, a positive plan, to get out of Europe.”

220px-frederick_e-_morganThey had an abundance of money, to a great extent U.S. occupation marks, printed by the Jewish Bolsheviks, who had been given the U.S. printing plates. General Morgan not only knew of the arming and military training many “Displaced Persons” were receiving before traveling to Palestine (many forced), he also knew – besides the abundance of U.S. Occupational Marks, that a great proportion of the $3.7 billion UNRRA funding contributed [by U.S. $2.7 billion, Britain $625 million and Canada $135 million and other sources] was being used purely for Zionists agenda’s. His position in Germany was eliminated following publication of “off the record” comments he made concerning incompetence and corruption within UNRRA, which was mainly concerning the diversion of UNRRA resources to support Zionist ambitions in Palestine.
Morgan was appalled at the corruption, so much so, that he wrote;
“…to have been rejected for such service (to a corrupt organisation),
I have always felt to have been a high honour.”


Jews from Poland were pouring into Western Germany from the East and passing ‘through’ the UNRRA operated camps. In these camps many of them received paramilitary tactical training, for the invasion of Palestine, from uniformed, non-commissioned officers (many Haganah and Palmach Operatives].
This immense army of carpetbaggers who followed the American and British armies into Germany, were joined by a similar army of occupiers from the Soviet east. These occupiers wore British, American and Soviet uniforms, but all displayed the same ethnicity.

In the wake of the advancing American forces, a sinister fifth column followed, the members of which in ninety-nine per cent of the cases, were not Americans. This vengeful army was made up of emigrants from Eastern European countries, of black market operators from Brooklyn ghettos, of Czech, Polish and Hungarian Jews.

Simultaneously, as the conquering flood began to move eastwards, a mass of several hundred thousand released from the internment camps surged toward Poland, Hungary, Romania and Yugoslavia, to become officers in the Communist police forces and other terror organizations; and to assume judicial powers in the people’s tribunals, so as to be able to pass sentence upon innocent people in an orgy of purported retribution. They filled all major and minor posts in the C.I.C., organised according to the Morgenthau Plan, they swarmed in the O.S.S. (predecessor of the CIA), in the various commissions searching for [“alleged”] war criminals, as well as in the American security organisations. They became mayors of German towns and commandants of P.O.W. camps (administering more cruelly, the very things they had accused as crimes against Hitler) and they administered [now] LaGuardias U.N.N.R.A. They occupied key positions in the American forces, thus exercised control over them and, refugees swarmed into the best hotels and the remaining vacant homes of the expelled German citizens – citizens (men, women and children) who were either tortured in camps, bestially raped, murdered or sold off into slavery around the world.
These refugees were welcomed with open arms by the Soviet MVD who were in control of the Eastern European countries… who financially facilitated these purportedly ‘poor persecuted people’ or rather, “Displaced Persons” with US Occupational Marks and/or U.N.N.R.A. funding.

General George Patton wrote scathingly on how “Displaced Person,” meaning “Jews,” were living it up as virtual privileged saints in Germany after the war.

But where did they get the abundance of U.S. Occupation Marks?

Enter, Harry Dexter White.

Harry Dexter White
(Weit), youngest child of Jewish Lithuanian immigrants to America, Joseph Weit and Sarah Magilewski, was an American economist, senior U.S. Treasury department official and an active agent of Soviet espionage. He was the senior American official at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference, at which he dominated and imposed his vision of post-war Financial Institutions, over various objections of the British. After the war, White was a major architect of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

Harry Dexter White (left) with John Maynard Keynes at the Bretton Woods Conference

White was a dedicated internationalist and his energies were directed at continuing the ‘Grand Alliance‘ (often called the “Strange Alliance” as it united the world’s greatest capitalist, colonial and communist states – the U.S., U.K. and Soviet Russia).
As head of the “INDEPENDENTLY-FUNDED” Office of Monetary Research, White was able to appoint staff without the normal civil service regulations or background inquiries.

He himself was also just simply appointed assistant to Henry Morgenthau, Jr., the Secretary of the Treasury, to act as liaison between the Treasury and the State Department on all matters bearing on foreign relations. He was also made responsible for the ‘management and operation of the Exchange Stabilization Fund’ which was not subject to any legislative oversight (established in 1934). He eventually came to be in charge of international matters for the Treasury, with access to extensive confidential information about the economic situation of the USA and its wartime allies.

According to Henry Morgenthau’s son, White was the principal architect of the Morgenthau Plan.
The Morgenthau Plan (signed by Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin), as authored by White, was to take all industry out of Germany, eliminate its armed forces, condemn at least two million Germans to slavery-like forced labour in Russia and convert the country into a pastoral community, in the process eliminating Germany’s economy and its ability to defend itself.
White opined that if the Russians needed two million German labourers to reconstruct their devastated areas, he saw nothing wrong with it; it was “in the interest” of Russia and even Germany that the labour force come from the ranks of the Gestapo, the S.S., the National Socialists party and the German people themselves.

“That’s not a punishment for crime,” he stated, “that’s merely a part of the reparations problem in the same way you want certain machines from Germany.”

Former President Herbert Hoover would in March 1947 remark;

“There is the illusion that the New Germany left after the annexations can be reduced to a ‘pastoral state’. It cannot be done unless we exterminate or move 25,000,000 people out of it.”

Dismantling of German heavy industry in the west, agreed upon at the Potsdam Conference, continued until 1951.


On March 20, 1945, State Department security officer, Raymond Murphy, interviewed Whittaker Chambers, a defecting Soviet. His notes record that Chambers identified White as “a member at large but rather timid”, who had brought various members of the American communist underground into the Treasury.

Senator William Jenner’s, Subversion in Government Departments Investigation-(Full report here), by the ‘Senate Internal Security Subcommittee’ (SISS), looked extensively into the problem of unauthorized and uncontrolled powers exercised by “non-elected officials” – specifically White. Part of its report looked into the implementation of Roosevelt administration policy and was published as the ‘Morgenthau Diary’ – The report stated;

“The concentration of Communist sympathizers in the Treasury Department, and particularly the Division of Monetary Research, is now a matter of record. White was the first director of that division; those who succeeded him in the directorship were Frank Coe [Executive Director of the Board of Economic Warfare and member of Silvermaster Spy Ring] and Harold Glasser [Spokesman of UNRRA and member of the Perlo Spy Ring]. Also attached to the Division of Monetary Research were William Ludwig Ullman, Irving Kaplan, and Victor Perlo [Head of Perlo Spy Ring]. White, Coe, Glasser, Kaplan, and Perlo were all identified as participants in the Communist conspiracy.”
[Most, also Members of the War Production Board]

The committee also heard testimony by Henry Morgenthau’s speech-writer, Jonathan Mitchell, that White had tried to persuade him that the Soviets had developed a system that would ‘Supplant Capitalism and Christianity.’

November 7, 1945, defecting Soviet espionage courier, Elizabeth Bentley, told investigators of the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation), that in late 1942, or early 1943, she learned from Soviet spies, Nathan Gregory Silvermaster (Leader of the Silvermaster Spy Ring) and Ludwig Ullmann (assigned to the Pentagon and White’s Administrative Assistant) that one source, of the government documents they were photographing and passing on to her and NKVD spymaster, Jacob Golos (Bolshevik Revolutionary), was Harry Dexter White.

In 1953, Senator Joseph McCarthy and Eisenhower administration Attorney General, Herbert Brownell, Jr. revealed that the FBI had warned the Truman administration about White before the President appointed him to the IMF. Brownell made public the FBI’s November 8, 1945 letter to the White House warning about White and others, and revealed that the White House had received the FBI report on “Soviet Espionage in the United States,” including the White case, six weeks before Truman nominated White (Weit) to the IMF.

July 31, 1948, Bentley told the ‘House Committee on Un-American Activities’ that White had been involved in espionage activities on behalf of the Soviet Union during World War II and had passed sensitive Treasury documents to Soviet agents. Bentley said White’s colleagues passed information to her from him. In her 1953 testimony Bentley said that White was responsible for passing Treasury plates for printing Allied military marks in occupied Germany to the Soviets, who thereupon printed currency with abandon, sparking a black market and serious inflation throughout the occupied country, costing the U.S. tax payers a quarter of a billion of dollars. However the alternative explanation (and subsequent admission) that Treasury officials feared that denying Soviet use of the plates in their occupation sector would “endanger postwar cooperation.”

Bentley wrote in her 1951 autobiography that she had been “able through Harry Dexter White to arrange that the United States Treasury Department turn the actual printing plates over to the Russians”

Although several had accused Bentley of lying, Bentley’s testimony would later be corroborated by a memorandum found in Soviet archives after half a century. In it, Gaik Ovakimian, head of the American desk of the NKVD (for which Bentley worked), cites a report from New York (where Bentley was based) from April 14, 1944 (when Bentley was running the Silvermaster group) reporting that, “following our instructions” via Silvermaster, White had obtained “the positive decision of the Treasury Department to provide the Soviet side with the plates for engraving German occupation marks.”

On August 13, 1948, White testified before HUAC and denied being a communist. He died three days later of a heart attack, on August 16, 1948, age 55. An overdose of digitalis was reported as the cause of death.

Further Reading:
FBI Silvermaster File – here
The Morgenthau Plan: Directive (JCS) 1067 – here
‘Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments’ Report – here
Investigation of the House Committee on un-American Activities Committee – here
Ware Spy Ring – here
The Biggest Revolution You Never Heard Of: 1945 Europe – here
Hollywood Blacklist: Conspirators of Communist Propaganda in the Entertainment Industry – here
Waldorf Statement – here
Three former FBI Agents of American Business Consultants Inc. concerning ‘Red Fascists and their Sympathizers’ identifies 151 Entertainment Industry Professionals and On-Air Journalists of Communist Subversive Propaganda in, ‘Counter Attack’ – here
The ‘Red Channels’ List – here


N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.

harry weit - communist spy

‘Declaration of War’ List: 1933 – 1941

“Germany is too strong, we must destroy her.”
∼ Winston Churchill, Nov, 1936.

For over seven decades now, people of the world have been convinced of Germany’s sole culpability for the total State of War that descended on the world during the 1940’s… the biggest international blood-bath known in history, which destroyed the culture, heritage and generations of millions of people from many nations – the blood-bath the profiteers like to call “The Good War.”
However, any discerning look at the facts and the multitude of nations, peoples, finance and politics involved, it should lead one who has a logical mind, to wonder how just one nation can be painted as the sole villain… as is the case with WWI also.
(See: WWI: War Germany Did Not Want… Blamed For Entirely – Pt 1)

March 1939:
Poland, who was already occupying German territory since WWI, invades her smaller neighbour, Czechoslovakia.

August 25, 1939:
On the 3rd of September 1939, King George VI read the famous Kings Speech addressing the nation and the world. The speech that began with, “In this grave hour, perhaps the most fateful in our history …” was to inform the world that Germany had allegedly invaded a sovereign nation, that the world was at war due to this military attack and the Allies of the world should unite steadfastly against this surprise aggression of a common enemy to all peaceful peoples… However, the draft of this speech is dated the 25th of August, 1939 – a week before Germany entered the Corridor to liberate the German people.

1st September 1939:
Following numerous and well documented Polish violations of Germany’s borders, as well as bestially massacring ethnic Germans and refusal to negotiate, or consider Hitler’s Peace Proposals… Germany retaliates to liberate the German victims and reclaims the stolen territory.
Who Really Wanted War?
France and England Deliberately Destroy Poland

The following list itemises the ‘Declarations of War’ and the recognition’s of the ‘State of War’ – beginning with the ‘International Jewish Nation’ declaring total world wide Economic Warfare on Germany, followed by the Polish attack on Germany, on 31st Aug/1st September 1939, through to 1941.


[The term “on” is used to indicate, for example, where Great Britain Declared War “on” Germany. Where time is given, it is the local time of the Capital who Declared War.]

Note: Jewish Bolshevik Russia (U.S.S.R.) was not a signatory to the Geneva Convention, thus did not abide itself to the Laws of War, therefore, did not conduct any formalities such as declarations, legal honour on the battle field or treatment of POW’s – Do what thy Wilt


International Jewry Declared War on Germany – March 24, 1933.

International Jewry Financial Warfare on “Anti-Semitic States” -January, 1938.

Poland Declared War on Germany – Midnight, August 31/September 1, 1939.
[See: the German White Book]

Great Britain on Germany – September 3, 1939, 11:am

France on Germany – September 3, 1939, 5:pm.

India on Germany – September 3, 1939.

Australia on Germany – September 3, 1939.

New Zealand on Germany – September 3, 1939.

Union of South Africa on Germany – September 6, 1939.

Canada on Germany – September 10, 1939.


Norway and Germany – No formal declaration

Belgium and Germany – No formal declaration.

Luxembourg and Germany – No formal declaration.

The Netherlands on Germany – May 10, 1940.

Canada on Italy – June 10, 1940.

Italy on France – June 10, 1940.

New Zealand on Italy – June 11, 1940.

Australia on Italy – June 11, 1940.

Union of Africa on Italy – June 11, 1940.

Greece on Italy – October 28, 1940.

Greece and Germany – No formal declaration.

Germany on Yugoslavia – April 6, 1941.

Italy and Yugoslavia – No formal declaration.

Yugoslavia on Bulgaria – April 6, 1941.

Yugoslavia on Hungary – April 10, 1941.

Bulgaria on Greece – April 24, 1941.

Bulgaria on Yugoslavia – April 24, 1941.

Italy on U.S.S.R. – June 22, 1941.

Germany on U.S.S.R. – June 22, 1941.

Rumania and U.S.S.R. – No formal declaration.

Finland and U.S.S.R. – No formal declaration.

Hungary on U.S.S.R. – June 27, 1941.

Great Britain on Rumania – December 7, 1941.

Great Britain on Hungary – December 7, 1941.

Canada on Finland – December 7, 1941.

Canada on Rumania – December 7, 1941.

Canada on Hungary – December 7, 1941.

New Zealand on Finland – December 7, 1941.

New Zealand on Rumania – December 7, 1941.

New Zealand on Hungary – December 7, 1941.

Japan on the United States – December 7, 1941.

Japan on Great Britain – December 7, 1941.

Australia on Finland – December 8, 1941.

Australia on Rumania – December 8, 1941.

Australia on Hungary – December 8, 1941.

Union of South Africa on Finland – December 8, 1941.

Union of South Africa on Rumania – December 8, 1941.

Union of South Africa on Hungary – December 8, 1941.

Great Britain on Japan – December 8, 1941.

The United States on Japan – December 8, 1941.


Canada on Japan – December 8, 1941, as of December 7, 1941.

Australia on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Free‘ France on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Union of South Africa on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Costa Rica on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Dominican Republic on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Guatemala on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Haiti on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Honduras on Japan – December 8, 1941.

El Salvador on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Panama on Japan – December 8, 1941.

The Netherlands on Japan – December 8, 1941.

The Netherlands Indies on Japan – December 8, 1941.

Cuba on Japan – December 9, 1941.

China on Japan – December 9, 1941.

China on Italy – December 9, 1941.

China on Germany – December 9, 1941.

Germany on the United States – December 11, 1941.

Italy on the United States – December 11, 1941.


The United States on Germany – December 11, 1941.

The United States on Italy – December 11, 1941.

Costa Rica on Germany – December 11, 1941.

Costa Rica on Italy – December 11, 1941

Cuba on Germany – December 11, 1941.

Cuba on Italy – December 11, 1941.

Nicaragua on Germany – December 11, 1941.

Nicaragua on Italy – December 11, 1941.

Guatemala on Germany – December 11, 1941.

Guatemala on Italy – December 11, 1941.

Dominican Republic on Germany – December 11, 1941.

Dominican Republic on Italy – December 11, 1941.

Poland on Japan – December 11, 1941.

Haiti on Germany – December 12, 1941.

Haiti on Italy – December 12, 1941.

Honduras on Germany – December 12, 1941.

Honduras on Italy – December 12, 1941.

El Salvador on Germany – December 12, 1941.

El Salvador on Italy – December 12, 1941.

Panama on Germany – December 12, 1941.

Panama on Italy – December 12, 1941.

Rumania on the United States – December 12, 1941.

Bulgaria on the United States – December 13, 1941.

Bulgaria on Great Britain – December 13, 1941.

Hungary on the United States – December 13, 1941.

Czechoslovakia on All Nations who are in a State of War with either Great Britain, the United States or the U.S.S.R. – December 16, 1941.

Albania on the United States – December 17, 1941.

Nicaragua on Bulgaria – December 20, 1941.

Nicaragua on Hungary – December 20, 1941.

Nicaragua on Rumania – December 20, 1941.

Belgium on Japan – December 20, 1941.

Haiti on Bulgaria – December 24, 1941.

Haiti on Rumania – December 24, 1941.

Haiti on Hungary – December 24, 1941.

Great Britain on Bulgaria – December 27, 1941, as of December 13, 1941.

The Netherlands on Italy – December 30, 1941, as of December 11, 1941.

Union of South Africa on Bulgaria – December 31 1941, as of December 13, 1941.

As Jewish-Bolshevik Russia was not subject to formal Declarations (due to refusal to be signatory to Geneva), the above list does not include the Red Army’s attack on Finland (November 30, 1939), bombing of Sweden (February 21, 1940), the invasion of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (June 18, 1940) loading citizens onto cattle-cars to be railroaded off to Siberian death camps, as the Bolsheviks released Partisan criminals from jail to take the positions of the expelled local authorities – as the Ukrainians were also subject to in 1940… and that Stalin had forced Rumania to surrender Bessarabia [Moldavia] (June 27, 1940). Of course the ‘Kings Speech’ or the Allies concern about the peoples of sovereign nations, did not apply to the peoples subject to the terror of Jewish-Bolshevism.

German sole culpability?
One might have to wonder where both WWI and WWII are concerned, that after both events and the multitude of special interests on financial, political, corporate and national levels, why, regarding both wars, is the sole blame on the shoulders of the one nation who did not instigate hostilities, either physically or formally? And further, was the only nation to initiate repeated Peace Proposals?



N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.


The Jewish Question? Why a “Solution” to a “Question” – or was it a “Problem”?

Who coined the term, what is the historically enduring question and why is there a need of a question?

The ‘Jewish Question’ first became a political topic in Great Britain around 1750, initially intended to be a neutral expression to create political thought and discussion, regarding the continual negative attitude toward Jews, who were persistently surrounded by historical friction, from a national, ethical, religious, political and legal view-point, to which a ‘Solution’ needed to be sought.


Hopkinsville Kentuckian, September 4, 1913

The styled slogan of it being a ‘Question’ was a political and linguistic approach to address what was actually an incessant ‘Problem.’ A ‘Question’ provokes an ‘Answer’ – a ‘Solution’ is only ever in direct response to a ‘Problem’ – in this case, ‘The Jewish Problem.’ Unless it is, of course, manipulation of a Problem-Reaction-Solution, in which case, ‘Who Benefits’, then indicates who or what is behind the deliberate cause of any political problem.
The histories of Jewish emancipation and the canard of European Anti-Semitism are filled with a great variety of proffered “Solutions to the Jewish Question.”

220px-Bruno_BauerFrom 1750’s Great Britain, the Question was next discussed in France – ‘la question juive’ – after the French Revolution in 1789, before arriving in Germany via Bruno Bauer’s treatise “Die Judenfrage” (The Jewish Question).
From that point hundreds of tractates, pamphlets, newspaper articles and books were written on the subject, with many offering ‘Solutions’ to the ‘Problem’ including resettlement, deportation and assimilation of the Jewish population. Similarly, yet out-weighing in abundance, hundreds of pieces of literature were actually written by Jewish intellectuals themselves, whom, opposing these solutions and, although having offered solutions such as integration and education, the most favourable solution  to meet these sub-solutions, was complete freedom in all civic positions in order to administer them.

This debate, however, ultimately resulted in confusion at not being able to ascertain whether the problem of the ‘Jewish Question’ had more to do with the problems posed by the German Jews themselves, or their opponents? Was it ‘Anti-Semitism’ or ‘Anti-Gentilism’?

From around 1860, under the newly coined description to the historical problem, Jews were described as a stumbling block to the identity and cohesion of the German nation and as enemies within the Germans’ own country. The Question was declared by many as a racial ideology and cultural problem, unsolvable through integration and that the removal of Jews from their over-representation and socially dominant positions, of the press, education, culture, state politics and economy, was necessary to restore ethical and cultural balance back into the lives of the German people.

12163827392An early use of the expression “Jewish question” appeared during the ‘Jew Bill of 1753’ debates in England, though not yet a political slogan. It was formally called; The Jewish Naturalisation Act – 1753.
Joseph Salvador, a prominent Banker and leader of London’s Sephardi Jewish community, petitioned the government for legislation to enact a wide range of accommodations for foreign and local Jews, financial benefits for the higher classes being dominant… The contradictions within the petition and the legal implications, left puzzled those who debated it and wondering what was the true intent behind the Bill itself, as it would open up further hostilities toward Jewry. This was a foreign concept to the XVIII century Christian mind, which could not understand the intentional purpose – and ultimate benefit – of civil unrest and political chaos.

Although the Bill passed, it was hurriedly repealed a few months later, citing; “Wherein the motives of all parties interested therein are examined: the principles of Christianity, with regard to the admission of Jews are fully discussed […] Wherein the false reasoning, gross misrepresentation of fact and Perversions of Scripture, are fully laid open and detected.” It was colloquially termed an “Abandonment of Christianity.”

Bruno Bauer, in his book; ‘The Jewish Question’ published in 1843, argued that Jews could achieve political emancipation, only if they relinquished their particular religious consciousness, since political emancipation requires a secular state, which he assumed did not leave any “space” for social identities such as religion. True political emancipation, for Bauer, required the abolition of religion.

karl-marx-on-the-jewish-questionMordechai Levi ( better-known as Karl Marx), replied to Bauer in his 1844 essay titled, On the Jewish Question.’ Marx contradicted Bauer’s view that the nature of the Jewish religion prevented Judaism’s assimilation. Instead, he focused on the specific social and economic role of the Jewish group in Europe which, according to Marx, was lost when capitalism, the “material basis for Judaism,” assimilated the European societies as a whole.
Marx argued, that Bauer was mistaken in his assumption that in a ‘secular state’, religion would no longer play a prominent role in social life. In Marx’s analysis, the ‘secular state’ is not opposed to religion, but rather actually presupposes it.

After a century of political discussion, the abundance of printed material disseminated into the psyche of the newly-literate populations of Europe, along with the Jewish Enlightenment movement (Haskalah) and, a succession of Revolutions, the progression of the Question expansively grew into an international geopolitical question, from its initial discussions on mere internal, civic issues.

herzlthTheodore Herzl, stated in his  1896 pamphlet, ‘Der Judenstaat’ (The Jews’ State);
“The ‘Jewish Question’ persists wherever Jews live in appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with Jewish immigrants. We are naturally drawn into those places where we are not persecuted, and our appearance there gives rise to persecution. This is the case, and will inevitably be so, everywhere, even in highly civilised countries—see, for instance, France—so long as the ‘Jewish Question’ is not solved on the political level.”

The ‘British Uganda Programme’ or, the ‘Uganda Scheme,’ was a plan in the early 1900s to give a portion of British East Africa to the Jewish people as a homeland. The idea was brought to the Zionist Congress at its sixth meeting in 1903, at Basel. There a fierce debate ensued. The African land was described as an “ante-chamber to the Holy Land” and a Nachtasyl (temporary night shelter), and many felt that accepting the offer would make it more difficult to establish a Jewish State in Palestine and, also that the Jewish nation would not be able to claim itself as native to the land of Africa. Before the vote on the matter, the Jewish-Russian delegation stormed out in opposition. According to Author, Zionist, later Territorialist and close associate of Theodore Herlz – Israel Zangwill, who, as President of the International Jewish Territorial Organisation, stated during his address at the annual Vienna Conference, that; “the gradual abandonment of the [Uganda] project, [was] partly from the fear that our neo-Jewish civilisation, would be based on black labour.”

The Uganda Debate is still used as a metaphor in present-day Israeli politics. Israeli occupiers place supreme importance on settling in the Biblically-hallowed Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and some have used the term “Latter-Day Ugandists” to describe others who are willing to accept a Jewish state based on the 1947 United Nations plan or, the 1949 Armistice Agreements (excluding the West Bank). This term implies that liberal Israelis—like the adherents of the Uganda Programme or Latter-Day Ugandists, are simply interested in a place where Jews can live in peace, and care little about supposed historical and/or biblical matters.

weizmann1Chaim Weizman (first President of Israel) stated in a 1907 speech;
“The governments of the world will pay attention to us, only as they will ‘become convinced’ that we are capable of ‘Conquering Palestine’ through persistent practical work.
Political Zionism means, to make the ‘Jewish Question’ an ‘International Question.’ It means going to the nations and saying to them: “We need your help to achieve our aim; but we ourselves are doing all in our power to strengthen our position in the land, because we regard Palestine as our homeland.” We must explain Zionism to the governments in such a manner that they shall understand it as the Jews understand it.”
How the Palestinians understand it, was not proffered at all.

Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-2006-1009-500,_Archim_GerckeIn National Socialist Germany, the term “Jewish Question” (Judenfrage) referred to the sense that the existence of Jews in Germany had posed great problems for the nation, especially well-founded since the 1848 Revolution, the 1918 Revolution, the 1919 Communist-Spartacist Uprising, the repeated and deliberate economic crashes and escalated problems, moreover, since the Treaty of Versailles. In 1933 – the same year International Jewry Declared War on Germany – theorists Johann von Leers and Achim Gercke, both proposed that this particular Jewish problem and, the Jewish Question over all, could be solved most humanely by resettling Jews in Madagascar or elsewhere in Africa. Both intellectuals discussed the pros and cons of supporting the German Zionist Jews as well, but von Leers asserted that establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine would create humanitarian and political problems for the region. This percipient prediction has since been proven so, since The Benefit of WWII, led to the establishment of a Jewish [Terrorist] State in Palestine, which has caused the region to be consumed with wars, terrorism, genocide and chaos, ever since.

AlfredRosenberginBerlinThese theories were expanded on and proposed to the International Refugee Committee (today, International Rescue Committee), between National Socialist representative, Alfred Rosenberg, IRC Director George Rublee and other international delegates.
Rosenberg reflected on all possible proposals and after a process of elimination, such as rejecting Alaska – as it offered too harsh a climate – proposed Guiana or Madagascar, as both had been officially offered by other governments prior.
Opposing a Jewish ‘Reservation’ in Palestine, Rosenberg said it was too small and experience had shown that the British Mandate Government of Palestine could not come to agreement with the Arabs. Further he asserted, that the territory should be set aside with contributions by “Jewish Millionaires and billionaires from all the world,” to the International Refugee Committee in London. Supervision of the ‘Reservation’ by a police administration under the command of a Governor or a League of Nations was also an important recommendation by Rosenberg.
He added, “If the democracies want to prove the truth of their friendship for Jews now, they must within a reasonable time make clear, which of these territories shall be established as a Jewish Reservation.”
“I stress the word “Reservation” for there can be no talk either at present or in the future about a Jewish-State…” Rosenberg said.


After nearly two centuries of progressive political manoeuvring, debates, revolutions and the overthrow of Autocratic political systems (except the short revival in the Third Reich) that could not have their policies rapidly manipulated by infiltration, like Democracy caters to (WWI – the final implosion of the old world Autocratic systems; German, Russian, Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Empires) and before the world could examine the economic, political and social systems of Germany that brought it such prosperity – while the rest of the world suffered the Depression – the time was ripe for the finalè to establish a new world capital and a state of eternal Jewish impunity from accountability… and the mother of all excuses and political sympathy was required for this purpose – a travesty – a Holocaust!
It was make-or-break and no Atrocity Propaganda was neglected, because a Nachtasyl would never be acceptable.

The Final Solution: Germany’s Madagascar Resettlement Plan – see here


“It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish State in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organization for their international world swindle, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university of budding crooks.”
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

The only “Questions” that should be accurately answered and absent of fanciful theories of unfounded prejudice is…

Why hasn’t there been a persistent;
“Asian Question”
“Indian Question”
“African Question”
“European Question”
“Arab Question”
“Aboriginal Question”
“Polynesian Question”
“Spanish Question” or
“All other peoples Question”
just the “Jewish Problem”?

And now, we have an additional modern day Question/Problem to find a ‘Solution’ for…
How do we hold criminals accountable, now that a ‘Jurisdictional-State [of Impunity]’ has been established, as a safe-haven for criminals to shelter and to retreat to?

N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic

Jewish Population Increases from Before to After WWII: 15,748,091 – 15,753,638 ∼ Jewish World Almanac

Jewish Population Records Before and After WWII

From the Jewish World Almanac’

Jewish world population 1933:    15,315,859
Jewish world population 1938:    15,748,091
Jewish world population 1948:    15,753,638

Jewish population in Germany 1938:   210,000

According to various Jewish sources, the Jewish world population of 2015, was still just under 16,000,000 – due to ethnic fertility and reluctance to assimilate.

Jewish Population Records

Jewish Population Records 2

Jewish Population Records 3



“No Poison Gas Was Ever Used… Witnesses Have Lied” ∼ Allied Committee Of Inquiry

“It could be proven that torture was used to extract confessions, and witnesses have lied”



Memo Nr: 31/48

“The Allied Committee of Inquiry has to date proven that no poison gas was ever used to kill prisoners in the following concentration camps……

Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Flossenburg, Gross-Rosen, Mauthausen, and satellite camps..Natzweller, Neuengamme, Niederhagen(Wewelsberg), Ravensbruck, Sachsenhausen, Stutthoff, Theresienstadt, In all cases where gassings were alleged, it COULD BE PROVEN THAT TORTURE WAS USED TO EXTRACT CONFESSIONS, AND WITNESSES HAVE LIED. Any former inmate who, during their debriefing continues to allege that Poison gas was used to murder people – in particular Jews – are to be reported to this office, and if they insist on lying further, they are to be charged with perjury.”

Signed Major Miller
Commanding Officer..Allied Military Police Vienna

Witnessed by: Lieutenant Lachout MP

[Note: Auschwitz was not included in this camp list, as it was under the jurisdiction of the Jewish Bolshevik Soviets, not the Allies.]

Allied Military Police - Vienna

N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.


Declassified documents Confirm Dresden Holocaust which Churchill claims is “Impressive”

Churchill: Terror and Destruction is “Impressive”

Winston Churchill reveals his blood-lust for terror and admits the atrocity of the genocide of Dresden

Churchill wrote in a memo dated 28th March, 1945, of his concerns regarding the All-lies “wanton destruction” and “increasing terror” of Germany.
The destruction and terror was not his concern, he found that to be “impressive” – it was (as the lines of complete victory were within sight), that if the All-lies continued the terror and destruction, they would come into possession of a completely ruined land, with nothing left for them to pillage from, for themselves.
Even though he acknowledges the terrorism and the annihilation of Dresden and its people, only for the sake of All-lied reputation (the worst single premeditated genocide in a few short days, in recorded history), he still, only in this late date, wished to begin targeting military and oil locations (instead of people), purely for interests of material benefit of the All-lies, not for any remorse or for the reduction in suffering of the German people.

As Churchill’s cold, callous character and intentions were clarified in his personal writings, General Ismay had to rewrite it for him, in attempt to present Churchill in a more reasonable fashion, whilst erasing his admission in regards to Dresden and of his blood-lust for destroying a people, their cities, their culture and their history.

First quote: Churchill’s personal thoughts.
Second quote: General Ismay’s rewrite on behalf of the Prime Minister.


10 Downing Street,

See General Ismay’s minute on 30/3/45 submitting a redraft of this on 30/3

“It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land. We shall not, for instance, be able to get housing materials out of Germany for our own needs because some temporary provision would have to be made for the Germans themselves. The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing. I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforth be more strictly studied in our own interests rather than that of the enemy.

The Foreign Secretary has spoken to me on this subject, and I feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives, such as oil and communications behind the immediate battle-zone, rather than on mere acts of terror and wanton destruction, however impressive.”



10 Downing Street,

C.A.S. (copy sent)

“It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of the so called “area bombing” of German cities should be reviewed from the point of view of our own interests. If we come into control of an entirely ruined land, there will be a great shortage of accommodation for ourselves and our Allies: and we shall be unable to get housing materials out of Germany for our own needs because some temporary provision would have to be made for the Germans themselves. We must see to it that our attacks do not do more harm to ourselves in the long run than they do to the enemy’s immediate war effort. Pray let me have your views.”



Source: UK National Archives.

The plan to genocide the German people via aerial bombardment was manifested by the ‘Dehousing Paper’ enacted in British Parliament – here

Churchill Memo Dresden

Dresden fires seen for miles

The following short documentary film, briefly examines the genocide of the people of Dresden, to which Sir Winston Churchill referred to as “Impressive.”

On the 70th Anniversary of the Dresden Holocaust, former British POW, Victor Greg, recalls what he describes as the Allies “Pure Evil” attacks on the civilian and refugee population of Germany.


The ‘Dehousing Paper’ – the Real Extermination Policy – How to Murder 25 Million Germans and get away with it

The British R.A.F. policy to murder at least a third of Germany’s civilian population and “Break their spirit” – manifested from the ‘Dehousing Paper’


On 30 March 1942, Professor Frederick LindemannBaron Cherwell, the British government’s Chief Scientific Adviser (appointed by Churchill), who wielded more influence than any other civilian adviser and was said to have “an almost pathological hatred for Germany, and an almost medieval desire for revenge” as part of his character – sent to the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, a memorandum, which after it had been accepted by the Cabinet, became known as the ‘Dehousing Paper.’

The paper was delivered during a debate within the British government about the most effective use of the nation’s resources in waging war on Germany. Should the Royal Air Force (RAF) be reduced to allow more resources to go to the British Army and Royal Navy, or should the strategic bombing option be expanded to civilian targets?

The paper argued that the demolition of people’s houses (containing mostly women and children, as men were absent on military duties) was the most effective way to affect the German morale, even more effectively than killing their relatives.
Given the known limits of the RAF in locating targets in Germany at the time and providing that the planned resources were made available to the RAF in the near future, destroying about thirty percent of the “Housing Stock” of Germany’s fifty-eight largest towns was considered the most effective use of the aircraft of RAF Bomber Command, because it would “Break the spirit of the Germans.”
After a heated debate by the government’s military and scientific Advisers, the Cabinet voted for the “Expanded” strategic bombing campaign, over the other options available to them… in complete violation and defiance of all International Humanitarian Laws, the Hague Conventions, Laws of War and the Geneva Conventions – essentially, voted to approve of committing War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.

Since November 1941 the RAF had been husbanding its resources and awaiting the introduction of large numbers of four-engined “heavy” bombers and the GEE radio-navigational device into front-line service.
Bombing policy had, in actuality, already moved away from attempts at precision bombing.

The paper was produced by Cherwell and the information was given by the researchers in response to questions posed by Cherwell.

“The following seems a simple method of estimating what we could do by bombing Germany.

We know from our experience that we can count on nearly fourteen operational sorties per bomber produced. The average lift of the bombers we are going to produce over the next fifteen months will be about 3 tons. It follows that each of these bombers will in its life-time drop about 40 tons of bombs. If these are dropped on built-up areas they will make 4000–8000 people homeless.

In 1938 over 22 million Germans lived in fifty-eight towns of over 100,000 inhabitants, which, with modern equipment, should be easy to find and hit. Our forecast output of heavy bombers (including Wellingtons) between now and the middle of 1943 is about 10,000. If even half the total load of 10,000 bombers were dropped on the built-up areas of these fifty-eight German towns, the great majority of their inhabitants (about one-third of the German population) would be turned out of house and home… [that is political linguistics for saying, mass murder, terrorism or genocide]

Investigation seems to show that having one’s home demolished is most damaging to morale. People seem to mind it more than having their friends or even relatives killed. At Hull signs of strain were evident, though only one-tenth of the houses were demolished. On the above figures we should be able to do ten times as much harm to each of the fifty-eight principal German towns. There seems little doubt that this would break the spirit of the people.

Our calculation assumes, of course, that we really get one-half of our bombs into built-up areas. On the other hand, no account is taken of the large promised American production (6,000 heavy bombers in the period in question). Nor has regard been paid to the inevitable damage to factories, communications, etc, in these towns and the damage by fire, probably accentuated by breakdown of public services.”

Source: Wikipedia
Featured picture above:
German victims of the February 1945 genocidal attack on Dresden
often claimed as Jewish victims by “German Atrocities”

ChurchillStated in British Parliament 1943

Lindemann believed that a small circle of the intelligent and the aristocratic should run the world, resulting in a peaceable and stable society, “led by supermen and served by helots.” Many sources say he was Jewish, others do not, but for an immigrant born in Germany and the son of a wealthy banker, to hold such hated toward Germans, one can only surmise. Sometimes considered to be anti-democratic, insensitive and elitist, Lindemann was in complete support and promotion of eugenics, he held the working class, homosexuals, Germans and blacks in contempt and, supported sterilisation of who he saw as mentally incompetent. Referring to Lindemann’s lecture on Eugenics, Mukerjee concluded science could yield a race of humans blessed with “the mental make-up of the worker bee”….At the lower end of the race and class spectrum, one could remove the ability to suffer or to feel ambition….Instead of subscribing to what he called “the fetish of equality,” Lindemann recommended that human differences should be accepted and indeed enhanced by means of science. It was no longer necessary, he wrote, to wait for “the haphazard process of natural selection to ensure that the slow and heavy mind gravitates to the lowest form of activity.”

Pictures: Lindemann’s “Housing Stock” turned
“Out of House and Home”

Holocaust: (frm Greek) Holos Kaustos – ‘Whole Burnt’

0c08ee0df5579e72440d4afe0471ad51A Real ‘Holocaust Survivor’

Declassified documents confirm the horror of this policy and that Winston Churchill finds this kind of wanton destruction and terror “Impressive”see here

“The destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilized community life throughout Germany is the goal… It should be emphasized that the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives; the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale; and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy.  They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories.”
Air Marshal Arthur Harris (aka ‘Bomber Harris’), Bomber Commander, British R.A.F., October 25, 1943 – Rhetoric and Reality in Air Warfare, Tammi Biddle (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002), p. 220.

“Will there be room [for the German refugees, fleeing before the Red army] in what is left of Germany? We have killed six or seven million Germans and probably there will be another million or so killed before the end of the war.”
– Winston Churchill, as noted by James F. Byrnes‘ at the Plenary Session at Yalta, February 7, 1945 – 5 days before the Dresden Holocaust – (H. S. Truman Library, Independence, Missouri)

“The Prime Minister said that we hoped to shatter twenty German cities as we had shattered Cologne, Lubeck, Dusseldorf, and so on. More and more aeroplanes and bigger and bigger bombs. Marshal Stalin had heard of 2-ton bombs. We had now begun to use 4-ton bombs, and this would be continued throughout the winter. If need be, as the war went on, we hoped to shatter almost every dwelling in almost every German city.”
– Official transcript of the meeting at the Kremlin between Winston Churchill and Josef Stalin on Wednesday, August 12, 1942, at 7 P.M.

“The destruction of factories, which was nevertheless on an enormous scale, could be regarded as a bonus.  The aiming-points were usually right in the center of the town.”
– Arthur Harris, Bomber Offensive (London: HarperCollins, 1947), p. 147.


Somehow, War Criminals who, in complete contravention of every International Convention and Treaty they were signatory to; intentionally planned, voted for and physically conducted one of, if not the biggest Crimes Against Humanity ever committed… then exhalted themselves into a position of Prosecution against the defeated at the Nuremberg Show Trials, while proclaiming themselves exempt from the so-called law which they administered – in the biggest spectacle of ‘Conflict of Interest‘ the world has ever been subjected to!
Therefore, legally speaking, all findings of the Nuremberg Show Trials should be revoked and a new trial convened, in order to bring light to; the true crimes and partied criminals – who have never been brought to accountability – public acknowledgement of the true victims, posthumous exoneration for those convicted at the Show Trials and in the very least… an apology!

“We should never allow ourselves to apologize for what we did to Germany.”
– Winston Churchill to John Lawrence, quoted in Max Hastings, Bomber Command (NY: Dial Press, 1979), p. 107.

Watch ‘Hellstorm’ – the documentary film exposing the
Real Genocide of WWII Germany

“The millions of Jews living in America, England, France, North Africa and South, not forgetting Palestine, have decided to carry on the war in Germany to the very end. It is to be a war of extermination.”
~ ‘The Jewish newspaper, ‘Central Blad Voor Israeliten’ in Nederlands (13 September 1939)

In a BBC interview, allied witness and British POW, Victor Gregg, confirms the genocidal Western policy as “Pure Evil” – 70 years after he survived the unnecessary Holocaust of Dresden in February, 1945… at wars end, when German defeat was clearly evident and All-lied victory was already in sight – none of these people were a threat to anybody.

Victor Gregg speaks of the RAF Bomber Pilots who were just “Doing their job” and “Following orders” – they are not to be blamed?

History should not be judged by double standards!

Further reading: The Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust, by Mark Weber

N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.

Stalin’s Order #227: Unarmed Human-shields used as defense – Order #270: “No Surrender…Fight to the End” or be shot by Command.

“NOT A SINGLE STEP BACK” Stalin’s Order No. 227

“You have to be brave to be a coward in the Red Army” ~ Joseph Stalin



Soviet Stamp: “Not one step backwards”

Approximately 8.7 million Red Army soldiers died during WWII. A great majority of these soldiers were not willing, patriotic Russians, but rather Ukrainian, Belorussian and many members of other nationalities which came (usually by force) from all over the Soviet occupied empire and the Gulag Death Camp system.

Soviet Russia defeated Germany because it had many more men and absolutely no scruples in regard to how many would die, in order to defeat the Third Reich.

Stalin declared in the Preamble of the August 1942 Order No. 227 – that the ‘Iron Law’ of discipline for every officer, soldier, political officer should be; “Not a Single Step Back” without order from higher command.
Company, battalion, regiment and division Commanders, as well as the Commissars and political Officers of corresponding ranks who retreat, without order from above, are Traitors of the Motherland. They should be treated as Traitors of the Motherland.

Although Penal Battalions (shtrafbats) were used prior to this August 1942 order, it introduced severe disciplinary punishments, including summary execution and forcing disgraced Officers to the Front-lines with other prisoners, all being unarmed.

Under Stalins Order No. 227, the idea for fighting Germans was, to throw as many men at the German defenses, until the Germans, literally, ran out of bullets. Among the armed soldiers, were hundreds of ‘Unarmed Penal Battalions’ (initially consisting of 800 Soviet Prisoners per Battalion) sent to charge the German lines.

Section 1 (c) of the Supreme Command Order 227;

“These battalions should be put on the more difficult sections of a Front, thus giving them an opportunity to redeem their crimes against the Motherland by blood.”

Stalin’s blindness to Hitler’s pre-invasion manoeuvres, which allowed the Germans to occupy Russia’s industrial heartland… it was only then, with reluctance, did Stalin shift more of his attention from killing Russian citizens to killing more Germans. These military tactics, if they can be dignified with such a term, in effect were, “Killing two birds with one stone.”

All Red Army soldiers (unarmed or not) who showed any sign of resistance to these inhumane tactics, was shot on the spot. In fact, trailing the Red Army was the NKVD army, which numbered several hundreds of thousands, and its sole purpose was to keep the Red army advancing forward, at any cost… the ultimate cost, was death by purportedly, fellow countrymen.

Sections 2, (a) and (b)

2. “The Military Councils of armies and first of all army commanders should:

a) In all circumstances remove from offices corps and army commanders and commissars, who have allowed their troops to retreat at will without authorisation by the army command, and send them to the Military Councils of the Fronts for court-martial;

b) Form 3 to 5 well-armed guard (barrage) units (zagradotryads), deploy them in the rear of unstable divisions and oblige them to execute panic-mongers and cowards at site in case of panic and chaotic retreat…”

Section 3 (b);

b) “Provide all possible help and support to the guards (barrage) units (zagradotryads) of the army in their work of strengthening discipline and order in the units.

This order is to be read aloud in all companies, troops, batteries, squadrons, teams and staffs.”

The People’s Commissar for Defense

Stalin’s Order #270

Order of the Supreme Command of the Red Army on August 16, 1941, No. 270; “On the responsibility of the military for surrender and leaving weapons to the enemy”

Order No. 270 was issued by Stalin on 16 August 1941, which commanded the Red Army personnel to “Fight to the Last.” This banned army personnel from surrendering and set out severe penalties for deserters and senior officers regarded as derelicting their duties.

The first article directed that any Commanders or Commissars “tearing away their insignia and deserting or surrendering” should be considered Malicious Deserters. The order required superiors to shoot these Deserters on the spot. In the event they did desert or surrender, their family members were then subjected to arrest too.

I Order (Stalin)
“That commanders and political officers who, during combat tear off their insignia and desert to the rear or surrender to the enemy, be considered malicious deserters whose families are subject to arrest as a family, for violation of an oath and betrayal of their homeland.

All Higher commanders and commissars are required to shoot on the spot any such deserters from among command personnel…”

The second article demanded that encircled soldiers must use every possibility to fight on, and to demand that their commanders organise the fighting; according to the order, anyone attempting to surrender instead of fighting must be killed and their family members deprived of any state welfare and assistance.
The order also required division commanders to demote and to shoot on the spot those commanders who failed to command a battle directly in the battlefield.

“…Encircled units and formations to selflessly fight to the last, to protect material like the apple of their eye, to break through from the rear of enemy troops, defeating the fascist dogs.

That every soldier is obliged, regardless of his or her position, to demand that their superiors, if part of their unit is surrounded, to fight to the end, to break through, and if a superior or a unit of the Red Army – instead of organizing resistance to the enemy – prefers to become a prisoner, they should be destroyed by all means possible on land and air, and their families deprived of public benefits and assistance.

Division commanders and commissars are obliged to immediately shift from their posts commanders of battalions and regiments, who hide in crevices during battle and those who fear directing a fight on the battlefield; to reduce their positions, as imposters, to be demoted to the ranks, and when necessary to shoot them on the spot, bringing to their place bold and courageous people, from among junior command personnel or those among the ranks of the Red Army who have excelled”

This order is to be read in all companies, squadrons, batteries, teams and staffs.

Headquarters of the Supreme Command, Red Army
Chairman of the State Defence Committee, J. Stalin

Between the years 1941-1942 alone, up to 200,000 Red Army soldiers were executed by the NKVD. However, since Order No. 227, the Battalions were increased in number and men within each increased also. Estimates on how many Red Army prisoner/soldiers, “Deserters” and “Panic-mongers” were executed throughout the war, are estimated between hundreds of thousands to a million… but one cannot truly know the true loss of life under these Orders.

Commenting on Order No. 270, Stalin stated:
“There are no Soviet prisoners of war, only traitors.”

Stalin’s conviction toward his own orders were demonstrated when [ironically] the “apple of his eye,” Yakov Dzhugashvili – Stalin’s eldest son – who served as an Artillery Officer in the Red Army, was captured by the Wehrmacht (German Army) on 16 July 1941, during the Battle of Smolensk, in the early stages of Operation Barbarossa.

There is debate as to whether Yakov was captured or surrendered, however in 2013, Der Spiegel provided evidence that Yakov had surrendered. A letter written by Dzhugashvili’s Brigade Commissar to the Red Army’s Political Director, quoted by Spiegel, states that after Dzhugashvili’s battery had been bombed by the Germans, he and another soldier initially put on civilian clothing and escaped, but then at some point Dzhugashvili stayed behind, saying that he “wanted to stay and rest.”
Further support to his surrender, was given by his wife during interrogation – pursuant to the Articles of Order 270, upon her arrest – that it was her request that he surrender to stay alive. She repeated this in her Memoirs.


Other sources suggest that the retreating Yakov Dzhugashvili was handed over to the Germans by his father’s unhappy subjects, the Muzhiks (Russian Peasants), who hated the Kolkhoz system and the Soviet power in general. In the first hours of capture, the panic-stricken young man got rid of his Officer’s insignia and hid among the masses of POW’s. Unfortunately for him he was recognized by one of his former comrades who immediately turned him in.
In either event, whether surrendering or not fighting to the end, was – according to Stalin –  traitorous to the Motherland and attracted severe punishment, even when returned after the war.

Stalin first learned of his son’ capture via a communiqué  received from the Germans, which included a picture of his son with German Officers. Stalin reacted (referring to an earlier suicide attempt by Yakov), “The fool – he couldn’t even shoot himself!” An angry Stalin blamed Yakov for “surrendering like a coward” to the enemy.
The Germans showered the Soviet trenches with leaflets, stating that – with the exception of “NKVD and Commissars” – they promised good treatment for those Red soldiers who surrendered unarmed. Several leaflets featured a photograph of Yakov accompanying the Wehrmacht Officers. Printed on the back of one of the publications was a copy of the letter Yakov had written to his father, which had been forwarded to Stalin;

“Dear Father! I have been taken prisoner. I am in good health. I will soon be sent to a camp for officers in Germany. I am being treated well. I wish you good health. Greetings to everyone. Yasha.”

Yakov was temporarily housed at a guarded villa in Berlin, then several temporary Officers camps, but later transferred to the Sachsenhausen camp.
On January 31, 1943, during the Battle of Stalingrad (August 1942 to February 1943), Generalfeldmarschall Friedrich Paulus was captured by the Red Army, along with 107,000 other Axis Servicemen (only 6,000 were ever seen alive again, by 1955). As Hitler noted that there was no precedent of a Generalfielmarschall ever being captured and kept alive, so he attempted to negotiate the POW trade of Yakov for Freidrich Paulus. Stalin’s response was, “I have no son called Yakov” and, “I will not trade a Marshall for a Lieutenant.”

The circumstances of Yakov’s death a few months later remain unclear, but by the time he reached the Sachsenhausen camp and, given his previous psychological health and repeated suicide attempts, his nerves had deteriorated considerably. He had constant visitors from Berlin seeking translations, radio broadcasts and photographing him, was detested by fellow British POW’s, who often physically fought him (one such occurrence that same day) and he is said to have attempted suicide from the electric perimeter fence of the camp, or had unknowingly wandered toward it, or attempted escape. In any event, he ignored repeated orders to move away from the fence and return to barracks, or he would be shot.
He did not follow the orders and after nearly two years as a POW, he was shot on April 14, 1943.
This was seen by Stalin as a more honorable death and Stalin’s attitude towards his son softened slightly.


N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.

Stalin’s Order #0428 – A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words… is it Really?

Order # 0428 – the ‘Torch-Men-Order’

Many ask, “How can [so-called] ‘Holocaust Deniers’ and Revisionists, deny the photographic evidence of German Soldiers killing civilians?”
The so-called, proof in pictures…

What is Order #0428 – commonly known as?
[now confirmed by todays Russian Government]

Stalin’s Order #0428, commanded on the 17th November 1941, declared that Partisans wearing German uniforms, particularly those of the Waffen-SS, were to destroy all settlements within a swathe of about 40 – 60 km depth from the main battle lines and to ruthlessly kill the civilian population. With these tactics it was important to leave a few survivors, who would report the staged “German Atrocities.”
This method of warfare was also confirmed by German soldiers who captured many Jewish-Russian Partisans wearing German uniforms.

Almost daily, reports were being issued by the media, that the German forces advanced with the declared politics and aim of a “Scorched Earth” approach, which devastated the vast Russian lands in the most horrific way.
Apart from the logical fact that no invader destroys the very infrastructure necessary for his advancement in an occupied territory, Germany’s Program, called “Ostacker Programm” (Eastern fields program) was designed to restore the devastated lands.

(Archive Series 429, Rolle 461, General’s Headquarters of the Army, Division, foreign Units East II H 3/70 Fr 6439568. Filed: National Archive Washington)
[1][in progress] “Fackelmänner Befehl” (torch men-order) confirmed.
Russian Security Service FSB published Stalin’s order No. 0428, as follows;

‘Deutsche Greueltaten’
‘German Atrocities’

“All settlements, in which German troops are found, up to a depth of 40 – 60km from the main lines of battle, are to be destroyed and set on fire, also 20-30km from the roads. For the destruction of the settled areas in the required radius, the air force will be made available, also artillery and rocket-launchers will be used extensively, as well as intelligence units, skiers and Partisan divisions, who are equipped with bottles with flammable liquid. These hunting expeditions in their activities of destruction are to be dressed to the greatest extent in German soldier’s uniforms and uniforms of the Waffen-SS looted from the German army.

This will ignite hatred toward all fascist occupiers and make the conscription of partisans from the outlaying areas of fascist territories easier. It is important to have survivors who will tell about “German atrocities”. For this purpose every regiment is to form hunter-units of about 20- 30 men strong with the task to detonate and incinerate the villages. We have to select brave fighters for this action of destruction of settled areas. These men will be especially recommended to receive bravery awards when working in German uniforms behind enemy lines and destroying those settlement outposts. Among the population we have to spread the rumor that the Germans are burning the villages in order to punish the Partisans.”

If the Jewish Bolsheviks were purposely sacrificing people in these ways, to create anti-German propaganda, there is no doubt they would have photographed these horrors to drive the message home.
No doubt, from this time originate the famous ‘Atrocity Photos’ of mass-executions which are the favourites of the press.
Furthermore, this does not reconcile with the Official ‘Holocaust’ narrative, of the Germans going to great extent to conceal their crimes by burning records and millions of bodies, which is one of the excuses as to why the Allies could not find any evidence to the purported mass gassings of internees. The ‘Official’ narrative would have us believe that the Germans (in the middle of war and Soviet advancement) hunted through millions of documents to dispose of records of killing people – by burning them – but insure they developed hundreds of incriminating photographs to leave behind, accessible for the world to see?

Additionally, with hands tied behind the back and the single shot to the back of the neck/head, was the method and training of the Cheka and NKVD, for singular executions.
As was proven with the Bolshevik crime of the Katyn Forest Massacre.


The fear and hate hysteria created from imagery, was not just limited to performing in front of the camera… simply manipulating the imagery by superimposing over innocent photo’s for the desired effect, was also utilised… here is just a small example of many.

photoshop propaganda


N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.

Bolshevik Plan to Conquer All Europe

Former Soviet Military Intelligence Officer, discloses the Bolshevik Plan to invade and conquer all of Europe.

All Bolshevik preparations were for invasion, not defense.

In his book ‘Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War?’ Viktor Suvorov, who defected to the west in 1978, gives an indepth, detailed look at the origins and development of World War II, but in particular, the background to Hitler’s ‘Operation Barbarossa’ attack against Soviet Russia in June, 1941.

The colloquial view of Germany’s attack, is that it abruptly forced a neutral, non-aggressive Soviet Russia into war. This illogical view also paints that Stalin was surprised and had naively trusted the German Fuhrer.
However, prior to Hitler’s preventative invasion, Court Historians neglect to mention the Red Army’s attack on Finland (November 30, 1939), bombing of Sweden (February 21, 1940), the invasion of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (June 18, 1940) and that Stalin had forced Romania to surrender Bessarabia [Moldavia] (June 27, 1940).

From evidence and among many other witnesses, Suvorov details the Bolsheviks responsibility for the war’s outbreak and progression. Above all, he details the vast Soviet preparations for an invasion of Europe in the summer of 1941 with the goal of Sovietising Europe.

“For Lenin, as for Marx, world revolution remained the guiding star, and he did not lose sight of this goal. But according to the minimum program, the First World War would only facilitate a revolution in one country. How then, would the world revolution take place thereafter? Lenin gave a clear-cut answer to this question in 1916: “as a result of the second imperialist war”…”

Initially the ‘Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’ was made up of only a handful of constituent republics. Lenin and the other Soviet leaders intended that more republics would be added to the USSR until it encompassed the entire globe. Thus, writes Suvorov, “the declaration accompanying the formation of the USSR was a clear and direct declaration of war on the rest of the world.”

Soviet Preparations

Throughout history, every army has had a basic mission, one that requires corresponding preparations.
An army whose mission is basically defensive is accordingly trained and equipped for defensive war.
It heavily fortifies the country’s frontier areas, and employs its units in echeloned depth.
It builds defensive emplacements and obstacles, lays extensive minefields, and digs tank traps and ditches.
Military vehicles, aircraft, weapons and equipment suitable for defending the country are designed, produced and supplied.
Officers and troops are trained in defense tactics and counter-offensive operations.

An army whose mission is aggressive war acts very differently.
Officers and troops are trained for offensive operations.
They are supplied with weapons and equipment designed for attack, and the frontier area is prepared accordingly.
Troops and their material are massed close to the frontier, obstacles are removed, and minefields are cleared.
Maps of the areas to be invaded are issued to officers, and the troops are briefed on terrain problems, how to deal with the population to be conquered, and so forth.

Carefully examining the equipping, training and deployment of Soviet forces, as well as the numbers and strengths of Soviet weaponry, vehicles, supplies and aircraft, Suvorov establishes in great detail that the Red Army was organized and deployed in the summer of 1941 for attack, not defense.

Peculiar Tanks

ussr-tank-factory-a67xmbGermany entered war in 1939 with 3,195 tanks. As Suvorov points out, this was fewer than a single Soviet factory in Kharkov, operating on a, so-called, “peacetime” basis, was turning out every six months.

By 1941 everyone recognized the ‘Tank’ as the primary weapon of an army of attack in a European land war. During this period, Suvorov shows, the Soviets were producing large quantities of the well armed ‘Mark BT’ tank, predecessor of the famed T34 model. ‘BT’ were the initials for the Russian words “high speed tank.” The first of this series had a top speed of 100 kilometers per hour, impressive even by today’s standards. But as Suvorov goes on to note, this weapon had a peculiarity:

“…Having said so many positive things about the numbers and quality of Soviet tanks, one must note one minor drawback. It was impossible to use these tanks on Soviet territory …Mark BT tanks could only be used in an aggressive war, only in the rear of the enemy and only in a swift offensive operation, in which masses of tanks suddenly burst into enemy territory …”

The Mark BT tanks were quite powerless on Soviet territory. When Hitler began Operation Barbarossa, practically all the Mark BT tanks were cast aside. It was almost impossible to use them off the roads, even with caterpillar tracks. They were never used on wheels. The potential of these tanks was never realized, but it certainly could never have been realized on Soviet territory. The Mark BT was created to operate on foreign territory only and, what is more, only on territory where there were good roads …

To the question, where could the enormous potential of these Mark BT tanks be successfully realized?… there is only one answer: in central and southern Europe. The only territories where tanks could be used, after their caterpillar tracks were removed, were Germany, France and Belgium … Caterpillar tracks are only a means for reaching foreign territory. For instance, Poland could be crossed on caterpillar tracks which, once the German autobahns had been reached, could then be discarded in favour of wheels, on which operations would then proceed …

It is said that Stalin’s tanks were not ready for war. That was not so. They were not ready for a defensive war on their own territory. They were, however, designed to wage war on others.”

Airborne Assault Corps

Similarly designed for offensive war are paratroops. This most aggressive form of infantry is employed primarily as an invasion force. Germany formed its first airborne assault units in 1936, and by 1939 had 4,000 paratroops.

And the USSR? Suvorov explains: “By the beginning of the war [1939], the Soviet Union had more than one million trained paratroopers — 200 times more than all other countries in the world put together, including Germany… It is quite impossible to use paratroopers in such massive numbers in a defensive war…. No country in history, or indeed all countries in the world put together, including the Soviet Union, has ever had so many paratroopers and air assault landing sub-units as Stalin had in 1941.”

As part of the planned invasion, in early 1940 orders were given for large-scale construction of airborne assault gliders, which were produced in mass quantity from the spring of 1941 onward. The Soviets also designed and built the remarkable KT “winged tank.” After landing, its wings and tail-piece were discarded, making the KT instantly ready for combat. The author also describes a variety of other offense-oriented units and weapons, and their deployment in June 1941 in areas and jumping-off points right on the frontiers with Germany and Romania. All these weapons of offensive war became instantly useless following the Barbarossa attack, when the Soviets suddenly required defensive weapons.
Suvorov tells of a secret meeting in December 1940, attended by Stalin and other Politburo members at which General Pavel Rychagov, deputy defense minister and commander of the Soviet air force, discussed the details of “special operations in the initial period of war.” He spoke of the necessity of keeping the air force’s preparations secret in order to “catch the whole of the enemy air force on the ground.” Suvorov comments:

“It is quite obvious that it is not possible to ‘catch the whole of the enemy air force on the ground’ in time of war. It is only possible to do so in peacetime, when the enemy does not suspect the danger.
Stalin created so many airborne troops that they could only be used in one situation: after a surprise attack by the Soviet air force on the airfields of the enemy. It would be simply impossible to use hundreds of thousands of airborne troops and thousands of transport aircraft and gliders in any other situation.”

Suvorov also reports on the dismantling in June 1941 of the Soviet frontier defense systems, and the deployment there of masses of troops and armour poised for westward attack.

Stalin Preempted

During the period just prior to the planned Soviet invasion, the USSR’s western military districts were ordered to deploy all 114 divisions, then stationed in the interior, to positions on the frontier. Thus, remarks Suvorov, June 13, 1941, “marks the beginning of the greatest displacement of troops in the history of civilization.”

Such a massive build-up of forces directly on the frontier simply could not be kept secret. As Suvorov notes, Wilhelm Keitel, Field Marshal and Chief of Germany’s armed forces High Command, spoke about the German fears during a postwar interrogation:

“All the preparatory measures we took before spring 1941 were defensive measures against the contingency of a possible attack by the Red Army. Thus the entire war in the East, to a known degree, may be termed a preventive war … We decided … to forestall an attack by Soviet Russia and to destroy its armed forces with a surprise attack. By spring 1941, I had formed the definite opinion that the heavy build-up of Russian troops, and their attack on Germany which would follow, would place us, in both economic and strategic terms, in an exceptionally critical situation … Our attack was the immediate consequence of this threat …”

In 1941, Admiral N. G. Kuznetsov was the Soviet Navy minister, as well as a member of the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist Party. In his postwar memoirs, published in 1966, he recalled:

“For me there is one thing beyond all argument — J. V. Stalin not only did not exclude the possibility of war with Hitler’s Germany, on the contrary, he considered such a war … inevitable … J. V. Stalin made preparations for war … wide and varied preparations — beginning on dates … which he himself had selected. Hitler upset his calculations.”

Suvorov comments:
“In early 1941 the Soviet Union had vastly more paratroops than all other countries combined. Parachutists, by their nature, can only be used in offensive operations.”

The admiral is telling us quite clearly and openly that Stalin considered war inevitable and prepared himself seriously to enter it at a time of his own choosing. In other words, Stalin was preparing to strike the first blow, that is to commit aggression against Germany; but Hitler dealt a preventive blow first and thereby frustrated all Stalin’s plans …

“Let us compare Keitel’s words with those of Kuznetsov. Field Marshal Keitel said that Germany was not preparing an aggression against the Soviet Union; it was the Soviet Union which was preparing the aggression. Germany was simply using a preventive attack to defend itself from an unavoidable aggression. Kuznetsov says the same thing — yes, the Soviet Union was preparing for war and would inevitably have entered into it, but Hitler disrupted these plans with his attack. What I cannot understand is why Keitel was hanged [at Nuremberg], and Kuznetsov was not.”

Suvorov believes that Hitler’s preemptive strike came just two or three weeks before Stalin’s own planned assault. Thus, as Wehrmacht forces smashed Soviet formations in the initial weeks of the ‘Barbarossa’ attack, the Germans marvelled at the great numbers of Soviet tanks and other material destroyed or captured – an enormous build-up sufficient not just for an assault on Germany, but for the conquest of all of Europe. Suvorov writes;

“Hitler decided that it was not worth his while waiting any longer. He was the first to go, without waiting for the blow of the ‘liberating’ dagger to stab him in the back. He had begun the war in the most favourable conditions which could possibly have existed for an aggressor; but given the nature of Stalin’s grand plan, he could never have won it. Even in the most unfavourable conditions, the Red Army was able to ‘liberate’ half of Europe …”

As devastating as it was, Hitler’s assault was not fatal. It came too late to be successful. “Even the Wehrmacht’s surprise attack on the Soviet Union could no longer save Hitler and his empire,” Suvorov writes. “Hitler understood where the greatest danger was coming from, but it was already too late.” With great effort, the Soviets were able to recover from the shattering blow. Stalin succeeded in forming new armies to replace those lost in the second half of 1941.

As Suvorov repeatedly points out, the widely accepted image of World War II, and particularly of the roles of Stalin and Hitler in the conflict, simply does not accord with reality:

“In the end … Poland, for whose liberty the West had supposedly gone to war, ended up with none at all. On the contrary, she was handed over to Stalin, along with the whole of Eastern Europe, including a part of Germany. Even so, there are some people in the West who continue to believe that the West won the Second World War.
Stalin became the absolute ruler of a vast empire hostile to the West, which had been created with the help OF the West. For all that, Stalin was able to preserve his reputation as naive and trusting, while Hitler went down in history as the ultimate aggressor. A multitude of books have been published in the West based on the idea that Stalin was not ready for war while Hitler was.”

Nothing could be further from the truth!

The Institute For Historical Review

N. Jones is a Writer, Researcher, Historian and Literary Critic.