8 Apr 1941

e8f10053a93c30bf7e4f811bcabb6174

German 2nd Panzer Division crossed from southern Yugoslavia into northern Greece near Dojran Lake. Elsewhere, German 73rd Infantry Division moved into the Monastir Valley and captured Prilep, Yugoslavia and prepared to move south toward Salonika, Greece. German 6th Mountain SS Division penetrated the Metaxas Line by crossing a 7,000 feet mountain range.

gr-yu3 Hotchkiss-Yugo1941

03bacdd34d931a1aa19f2caca6d8e329

 

Advertisements
Published in: on April 9, 2018 at 12:30 am  Comments (1)  

MYTH OF GUN CONTROL IN GERMANY, 1928-1945

 

by Dr. William L. Pierce

A common belief among defenders of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is that the National Socialist government of Germany under Adolf Hitler did not permit the private ownership of firearms. Totalitarian governments, they have been taught in their high school civics classes, do not trust their citizens and do not dare permit them to keep firearms. Thus, one often hears the statement, “You know, the first thing the Nazis did when they came to power was outlaw firearms,” or, “The first thing Hitler did in Germany was round up all the guns.”

One can understand why many American gun owners want to believe this. They see in the current effort of their own government to take away their right to keep and bear arms a limitation of an essential element of their freedom and a move toward tyranny, and they want to characterize the gun-grabbers in the most negative way they can. Adolf Hitler has been vilified continuously for the past 60 years or so by the mass media in America, and certainly no politician or officeholder wants to be compared with him. If the gun-confiscation effort can be portrayed convincingly as something of which Hitler would have approved, it will have been effectively tarred.

This identification of the inclination to deny citizens the right to keep and bear arms with National Socialism and Adolf Hitler has been strengthened recently by clever magazine advertisements which show Hitler with his arm outstretched in a Roman salute under a heading: “All in favor of gun control raise your right hand.” A Jewish group, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), quite noisy for its size, has been especially zealous in promoting the idea that the current gun-control effort in America has its roots in Germany during the Hitler period. This group has gone so far as to claim in several articles published in popular magazines read by firearms enthusiasts that the current restrictive legislation being proposed by the U.S. government is modeled on a gun-control statute enacted by Germany’s National Socialist government: the German Weapons Law (Waffengesetz) of March 18, 1938.

Again, one can understand the motivation of the JPFO. Many non-Jewish firearms owners are well aware that the movement to restrict their rights is led and promoted primarily by Jews, and anti-Jewish feeling has been growing among them. They know that the controlled news media, which are almost unanimously in favor of abridging or abolishing the Second Amendment, are very much under the influence of Jews, and they know that the most vocal anti-gun legislators in the Congress also are Jews. It is natural for a group such as the JPFO to mount a damage- control effort and attempt to prevent anti-Jewish feeling from becoming even stronger among gun owners. Their strategy is to deflect the blame from their kinsmen in the media and the government and direct it onto their most hated enemies, the National Socialists — or at least to create enough smoke to obscure the facts and keep the gun-owning public confused.

Unfortunately for those who would like to link Hitler and the National Socialists with gun control, the entire premise for such an effort is false. German firearms legislation under Hitler, far from banning private ownership, actually facilitated the keeping and bearing of arms by German citizens by eliminating or ameliorating restrictive laws which had been enacted by the government preceding his: a left-center government which had contained a number of Jews.

grip

It is not just that the National Socialist firearms legislation was the opposite of what it has been claimed to have been by persons who want to tar modern gun-grabbers with the “Nazi” brush: the whole spirit of Hitler’s government was starkly different from its portrayal by America’s mass media. The facts, in brief, are these:

  • The National Socialist government of Germany, unlike the government in Washington today, did not fear its citizens. Adolf Hitler was the most popular leader Germany has ever had. Unlike American presidents, he did not have to wear body armor and have shields of bulletproof glass in front of him whenever he spoke in public. At public celebrations he rode standing in an open car as it moved slowly through cheering crowds. Communists made several attempts to assassinate him, and his government stamped down hard on communism, virtually wiping it out in Germany. Between upright, law-abiding German citizens and Adolf Hitler, however, there was a real love affair, with mutual trust and respect.
  • The spirit of National Socialism was one of manliness, and individual self-defense and self- reliance were central to the National Socialist view of the way a citizen should behave. The notion of banning firearms ownership was utterly alien to National Socialism. In the German universities, where National Socialism gained its earliest footholds and which later became its strongest bastions, dueling was an accepted practice. Although the liberal-Jewish governments in Germany after the First World War attempted to ban dueling, it persisted illegally until it was again legalized by the National Socialists. Fencing, target shooting, and other martial arts were immensely popular in Germany, and the National Socialists encouraged young Germans to become proficient in these activities, believing that they were important for the development of a man’s character.
  • Gun registration and licensing (for long guns as well as for handguns) were legislated by an anti-National Socialist government in Germany in 1928, five years before the National Socialists gained power. Hitler became Chancellor on January 30, 1933. Five years later his government got around to rewriting the gun law enacted a decade earlier by his predecessors, substantially amel ior a ting it in the process (for example, long guns were exempted from the requirement for a purchase permit; the legal age for gun ownership was lowered from 20 to 18 years; the period of validity of a permit to carry weapons was extended from one to three years; and provisions restricting the amount of ammunition or the number of firearms an individual could own were dropped). Hitler’s government may be criticized for leaving certain restrictions and licensing requirements in the law, but the National Socialists had no intention of preventing law-abiding Germans from keeping or bearing arms. Again, the firearms law enacted by Hitler’s government enhanced the rights of Germans to keep and bear arms; no new restrictions were added, and many pre-existing restrictions were relaxed or eliminated.
  • At the end of the Second World War, American GIs in the occupying force were astounded to discover how many German civilians owned private firearms. Tens of thousands of pistols looted from German homes by GIs were brought back to the United States after the war. In 1945 General Eisenhower ordered all privately owned firearms in the American occupation zone of Germany confiscated, and Germans were required to hand in their shotguns and rifles as well as any handguns which had not already been stolen. In the Soviet occupation zone German civilians were summarily shot if they were found in possession of even a single cartridge.

Jews, it should be noted, were not Germans, even if they had been born in Germany. The National Socialists defined citizenship in ethnic terms, and under Hitler Jews were not accorded full rights of citizenship. National Socialist legislation progressively excluded Jews from key professions: teaching, the media, the practice of law, etc. The aim was not only to free German life from an oppressive and degenerative Jewish influence, but to persuade Jews to emigrate. The German Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, specifically excluded Jews from manufacturing or dealing in firearms or munitions, but it did not exclude them from owning or bearing personal firearms. The exclusion of Jews from the firearms business rankled them as much as any other exclusion, and in their typically ethnocentric fashion they have misrepresented the law involved as an anti-gun law in an effort to cast their enemies in a bad light.
It should be noted in passing that the restrictions placed on Jews by the National Socialists had the intended effect: between 1933 and 1939 two-thirds of the Jews residing in Germany emigrated, reducing the Jewish population of the country from 600,000 when Hitler became Chancellor in 1933 to 200,000 at the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939. Jews in the United States, looking at this period from their own narrowly focused viewpoint, have described these peacetime years of the National Socialist government as a time of darkness, terror, and regression, whereas for the German people it was a time of hope, joy, and spiritual and material renewal.

Much the same type of distortion is seen in the portrayal of the United States in the early 1950s: the so-called “McCarthy Era.” Senator Joseph McCarthy (Republican, Wisconsin) used his position as chairman of the Senate’s Government Operations Committee to expose the widespread communist infiltration of the U.S. government and other U.S. institutions which had taken place during the Second World War. A substantial majority of the communists who were dragged reluctantly out into the light of day by his efforts were Jews. As a result, the controlled media always have portrayed the period as one of terror and repression, when everyone was frightened of Senator McCarthy’s “witch-hunt.” Of course, it was nothing of the sort to non-Jewish Americans, who were not intimidated in the least. History viewed through a Jewish lens — i.e., through media controlled by Jews — always is distorted in a way corresponding to Jewish interests and concerns.

Both the German Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, enacted by the National Socialists, and the Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 12, 1928, which was enacted by an anti-National Socialist government, are given below in full, first in facsimile and then in English translation. A little background information first, however, may help the reader to understand their significance. After Germany’s defeat in the First World War (a defeat in which Germany’s Jews played no small part, demoralizing the home front with demonstrations and other subversive activity much as they did in America during the Vietnam war), the Kaiser abdicated, and liberals and leftists seized control of the government in 1918. Hitler, recovering in a military hospital from a British poison-gas attack which had blinded him temporarily, made the decision to go into politics and fight against the traitors he felt were responsible for Germany’s distress.

The tendency of Germany’s new rulers after the First World War was much the same as it is for the liberals in America today: they promoted cosmopolitanism, internationalism, and egalitarianism. By 1923 economic conditions in Germany had become catastrophic, and there was much public unrest. The communists had made major inroads into the labor movement and were a growing threat to the country.

Hitler had indeed gone into politics, and his National Socialists battled the communists in the streets of Germany’s cities and gradually came to be seen by many patriotic Germans in the working class and the middle class as the only force which could save Germany from a communist takeover and total ruin. Hitler’s National Socialists continued to win recruits and gain strength during the 1920s. The communists, with aid from the Soviet Union, also continued to grow. The political situation became increasingly unstable as the government lost popular support.

The government’s response was to substantially tighten up restrictions on the rights of German citizens to keep and bear arms. The Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April 12, 1928, was the most substantial effort in this regard. This law was enacted by a left-center government hostile to the National Socialists (the government was headed by Chancellor Wilhelm Marx and consisted of a coalition of Socialists, including many Jews, and Catholic Centrists).

Five years later, in 1933, the National Socialists were in power, Hitler headed the government, and the communist threat was crushed decisively. The National Socialists began undoing the social and economic damage done by their predecessors. Germany was restored to full employment, degeneracy and corruption were rooted out, Jews and their collaborators were removed from one facet of national life after another, and the German people entered a new era of national freedom, health, and prosperity.

Finally, in 1938, the National Socialist government got around to enacting a new firearms law to replace the one enacted by their opponents ten years earlier. The highlights of the 1938 law, especially as it applied to ordinary citizens rather than manufacturers or dealers, follow:

 

  • Handguns may be purchased only on submission of a Weapons Acquisition Permit (Waffenerwerbschein), which must be used within one year from the date of issue. Muzzle- loading handguns are exempted from the permit requirement. [The 1928 law had required a permit for the purchase of long guns as well, but the National Socialists dropped this requirement.]
  • Holders of a permit to carry weapons (Waffenschein) or of a hunting license do not need a Weapons Acquisition Permit in order to acquire a handgun.
  • A hunting license authorizes its bearer to carry hunting weapons and handguns.
  • Firearms and ammunition, as well as swords and knives, may not be sold to minors under the age of 18 years. [The age limit had been 20 years in the 1928 law.]
  • Whoever carries a firearm outside of his dwelling, his place of employment, his place of business, or his fenced property must have on his person a Weapons Permit (Waffenschein). A permit is not required, however, for carrying a firearm for use at a police-approved shooting range.
  • A permit to acquire a handgun or to carry firearms may only be issued to persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a permit. In particular, a permit may not be issued to:

 

  1. persons under the age of 18 years;
  2. legally incompetent or mentally retarded persons;
  3. Gypsies or vagabonds;
  4. persons under mandatory police supervision [i.e., on parole] or otherwise temporarily without civil rights;
  5. persons convicted of treason or high treason or known to be engaged in activities hostile to the state;
  6. persons who for assault, trespass, a breach of the peace, resistance to authority, a criminal offense or misdemeanor, or a hunting or fishing violation were legally sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than two weeks, if three years have not passed since the term of imprisonment.

 

  • The manufacture, sale, carrying, possession, and import of the following are prohibited:

 

  1. “trick” firearms, designed so as to conceal their function (e.g., cane guns and belt-buckle pistols);
  2. any firearm equipped with a silencer and any rifle equipped with a spotlight;
  3. cartridges with .22 caliber, hollow-point bullets.

That is the essence. Numerous other provisions of the law relate to firearms manufacturers, importers, and dealers; to acquisition and carrying of firearms by police, military, and other official personnel; to the maximum fees which can be charged for permits (3 Reichsmark); to tourists bringing firearms into Germany; and to the fines and other penalties to be levied for violations.

The requirements of “trustworthiness” and of proof of need when obtaining a permit are troubling, but it should be noted that they were simply carried over from the 1928 law: they were not formulated by the National Socialists. Under the National Socialists these requirements were interpreted liberally: a person who did not fall into one of the prohibited categories listed above was considered trustworthy, and a statement such as, “I often carry sums of money,” was accepted as proof of need.

The prohibitions of spotlight-equipped rifles and hollow-point .22 caliber ammunition were based on considerations that the former were unsporting when used for hunting, and the latter were inhumane.

Now read the German firearms laws for yourself, either in the original German exactly as they were published by the German government in the Reichsgesetzblatt or in the complete English translations which are provided here. If you want to skip over most of the legal gobbledygook and go directly to the most pertinent part of the National Socialist Firearms Law — the part pertaining to the purchase, ownership, and carrying of firearms by private citizens — turn to page 35 (Part IV of the Law). Note, as already mentioned above, that two separate and distinct types of permits are referred to: a Weapons Acquisition Permit (Waffenerwerbschein), required only for purchasing a handgun; and a Weapons Permit (Waffenschein), required for carrying any firearm in public. Interestingly enough, as also mentioned above, a hunting license could take the place of both these permits.

When you have read the two laws mentioned here, you will understand that it was Hitler’s enemies, not Hitler, who should be compared with the gun-control advocates in America today. Then as now it was the Jews, not the National Socialists, who wanted the people’s right of self- defense restricted. You will understand that those who continue to make the claim that Hitler was a gun-grabber are either ignorant or dishonest. And you will understand that it was not until 1945, when the communist and democratic victors of the Second World War had installed occupation governments to rule over the conquered Germans that German citizens were finally and completely denied the right to armed self-defense.

Published in: on April 9, 2018 at 12:19 am  Comments Off on MYTH OF GUN CONTROL IN GERMANY, 1928-1945  

Free Matt Hale

NqFtPVEwUAbfimb-800x450-noPad.jpg

As a direct result of Matt Hale filing document 211, and the ongoing petition campaign to have President Trump commute his sentence, the USA Maximum Security Prison in Florence Colorado has severely limited Matt’s already negligible human rights.

They have taken away his calls to his mother for 6 months and taken his personal property out of his cell, including his writing supplies. He is also not allowed to use the law library.

Write the warden at this address:           
Warden Paul Klein
U.S. Penitentiary Max
P. O. Box 8500
Florence, CO 81226
And sign the petition at link below.
https://www.change.org/p/donald-trump-free-political-prisoner-matt-hale
Published in: on March 26, 2018 at 7:09 pm  Leave a Comment  

RIP Fernand Kaiser Gruber

29496231_428780077571343_3415979539971440640_n.jpg

We are lowering the flags and calling for the last appeal

We call the volunteers, the last of the walloon people who fought alongside Leon Degrelle.

Unterscharführer Fernand Kaiser Gruber (1923-2018) from Belgium, on 16.03.2018 was recalled to the his rightful place among the heroes of his people, in Valhalla .

Honor His memory, may he rest in peace.

Published in: on March 23, 2018 at 7:31 am  Comments (1)  

The 80-th anniversary of the Anschluss – Austria is Awaken!

 

Published in: on March 13, 2018 at 11:05 pm  Leave a Comment  

Centennial Of George Lincoln Rockwell

st.Rockwell

Born March 9, 1918

Today March 9, 2018 marks the 100th anniversary of George Lincoln Rockwell’s birth. The man needs little to no presentation as his achievements have been covered far and wide, not only here, but also in a host of different websites all over the Internet. One is left to wonder what would have the über-Liberal mainstream media of today done with him had he been around in such an age like the one we have been so “privileged”, as White people, to live in. I suppose he would have been literary burned at the stake by the Jewish-Marxist inquisitorial front, but one is also left to think what George Lincoln Rockwell would have done with a tool such as the Internet had he had the chance to use it.

Published in: on March 10, 2018 at 4:16 am  Comments (2)  

Revisionist Heroine Does A Great Job Defending The Truth In Court

Singer-Songwriter Alison Chabloz arrives at court carrying flowers given to her by her admirers who followed her into the courtroom and sat in the public gallery. (Daily Mail Online)


ALISON CHABLOZ ARRIVED AT WESTMINSTER COURT YESTERDAY,  March 7, for the second leg of her trial for expressing views that are called “grossly offensive” because they mock revered Jewish figures like Elie Wiesel and Anne Frank. These views are embedded in songs she wrote and sang, that were uploaded onto the Internet.

Miss Chabloz made several excellent statements under questioning by Prosecutor Karen Robinson. When asked by Robinson whether she denied the holocaust, Chabloz said:

‘Deny the holocaust? I am sorry I do not understand this term. Who can deny the holocaust? It is a term that is meaningless in itself.’

Ms Robinson said: ‘In your police interview you made a distinction between holocaust denial and revisionism.’

Chabloz said: ‘You can call it holocaust denial but I prefer holocaust revisionism.

‘I think there should be an official scientific and forensic investigation. I doubt very much that a murder case would be brought to these courts without forensic investigation.

‘It is impossible to assess that the gas chambers actually existed to kill human beings without evidence. it is impossible to affirm that the supposed murder took place.

‘As the war years continued and got harder for everybody and we see the allied bombing of the German infrastructure – why would they not bomb the concentration camps?

‘A disproportionate amount of blame was put on the Germans by the victors. The victors got to write history.

It’s about furthering the globalist agenda

‘I would say that the so-called holocaust has been used to sustain the criminal state of Israel – it is used as a foundation myth.

‘By sending school children on trips to Auschwitz and inculcating them into believing in the gas chambers, the so-called holocaust is used as a weapon to prevent nationalistic feeling amongst European people.

‘It’s about furthering the globalist agenda.

‘It is certainly a topic worthy of investigation and of intelligent debate and discussion.’

Prosecutor Robinson questioned Chabloz on her police interview where she said, ‘My grandfather certainly didn’t fight for our towns and cities to be taken over by non-whites and non-Christians.’

Chabloz told her, ‘It’s my right to express those views.’

Ms Robinson said: ‘This is not an unqualified right – one cannot send material or matter on the internet which is grossly offensive.’

Chabloz retorted, ‘But it depends for whom doesn’t it, because there are plenty of parodies of Christian music that say Jesus was gay or that he must have been born by a donkey.

‘It is concerning that where I live, my people I love, my race, that we will become an ethnic minority.’

Ms Robinson told her, ‘The views you have expressed are anti-Semitic and racist. You said of the white race, “It breaks my heart to see that disappearing.” That is nothing more than racism.’

Really?! A UK representative of the Court and the legal system says it is racist (wrong) to not want your race to disappear!! Things are worse than I thought.

Loud booing at this remark

At this point there was loud booing from the public gallery and Chabloz’s barrister, Adrian Davies, rose to speak.

‘Now the witness is being treated much as a heretic during the inquisition, she is entitled to any political view that she wishes,’ Mr Davies said.

He believes that the statute is poorly set out (worded). The charges centre on whether embedding the hyperlink to the footage constitutes as sending, and if her songs were grossly offensive.

Chabloz was given bail again until the final submissions on 14 May and a verdict will be given on 25 May.

Published in: on March 9, 2018 at 9:24 am  Leave a Comment  

Soldiers of Europe: The Men of the Waffen-SS

"Neues Europa"

Published in „Siegrunen“ Magazine – Volume 6, Number 3, Whole Number 33,
January – March 1984

Since a number of „establishment“ historical books written about the Waffen-SS have liberally garnished their hatchet jobs with negative letters attributed to members of the Waffen-SS. we thought that it was high time that the more prevalent positive side of the picture was given some exposure. Hence the various European volunteer letters that will appear in this and future issues of SIEGRUNEN. The letters originally appeared in the SS wartime publication: Aufbruch, Briefe Germanischer Kriegsfreiwilliger, a booklet that was translated into a number of different languages for circulation in the appropriate countries at the time. The letters seem to accurately reflect the most widely held sentiments of the Germanic volunteers and provide an interesting glimpse into the motivating factors that made the Waffen-SS into a truly international army.

Letter from a Swiss…

View original post 1,557 more words

Published in: on March 7, 2018 at 11:37 pm  Leave a Comment  

How Hitler Spared Vimy Ridge

69552a807009a4705b67c7c2eb56202e--history-facts-war-memorials.jpg

When Hitler’s armies were advancing across France in 1940, the Canadian government put out a story that German troops were damaging the memorial at Vimy Ridge.

Walter Allward’s soaring monument had been unveiled only a short time before, in 1936, the only official ceremony (except for abdication) in the short reign of Edward VIII. A popular postage stamp was widely in circulation, so Canadians were thoroughly familiar with Vimy Ridge, and they were outraged. There was someone else who was outraged by this story; his name was Adolf Hitler.

The monument at Vimy Ridge was Hitler’s favourite memorial from World War I, because it is a monument to peace, not a celebration of war. There are no carved guns at Vimy Ridge, no helmeted soldiers, no stacks of cannonballs. Instead, the figures are of Canada grieving for her lost sons.

Hitler went to Vimy Ridge on June 2, 1940, called in the world’s press as best he could and insisted they take his picture on the unscathed steps. He then assigned special troops from the Waffen-SS to guard Vimy Ridge.

The SS had a vicious reputation – they were Hitler’s personal army, they guarded him. And it was also their job to protect Vimy Ridge, not only from Allied armies but also from regular Wehrmacht soldiers who, rather understandably, might want to deface it. No one would defy the SS.

Hitler’s plan was a great success. All the Australian war graves in France from World War I were destroyed in World War II. But the cemetery beside Vimy Ridge and the memorial itself remained untouched because the Waffen-SS did its job.

The Vimy memorial stands there today, ready for this week’s ceremonies, mainly because the government of Canada has invested a great deal of money in repairing it.

But the Vimy memorial is there at all because it was saved by its most infamous fan, Adolf Hitler.

vimy_dia_n1_0

d59220_91ab403fe18440788da2755b666e4e01

Published in: on March 6, 2018 at 8:42 am  Comments (2)  

Alison Chabloz Back In Court Tomorrow

dn 030518 b_thumb[2].png

Sven Longshanks is joined by Alison Chabloz to talk about her court case, which is due to be heard Wednesday 7th March at Marylebone Magistrates Court, 181 Marylebone Rd, Marylebone, London, NW1 5BR. Supporters are welcome and are a big help in stopping the media from showing her in a bad light, as they will be unable to portray her as a lone voice that is out of step with the general public. The rendezvous point for supporters will be outside Marylebone Station, leaving for the court at 9am.

Alison talks about her previous experience at the court, how the main prosecution witness had not even read the book which he was claiming to be defending. It will be Alison’s chance in the witness box this time, where she will be questioned by her own counsel and able to explain her reasons for writing a funny song about Jews who tell tall stories about the holohoax.

The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism are hoping to get her music banned for being ‘grossly offensive’ as they can then claim that any revisionist investigation of the gas chambers fairy tale is ‘grossly offensive’ and get the truth-teller prosecuted. This would mean Britain had a de facto holocaust denial law through precedent.

The question of whether or not posting a link to a file sharing site constitutes sending the material to a viewer will also be decided, but since you have to click to view anything, it is the viewer that is requesting the content be sent to them, not the person who uploaded it.

A Freedom of Information request has revealed that the CAS have been trying to bribe the police with days out at the synagogue, dinner dates and all sorts of other offers in the hopes that they would lock her up and throw away the key. Since this document was made public, she has had her computer given back, there has been less police intimidation and the information will now form part of her defence.

a4a79391565837473c56d0f2b3045cb1

Turn on the Telefunken to listen .

Published in: on March 6, 2018 at 8:31 am  Leave a Comment