He was an American Jew, how his role with Wilson administration proves the "stab in the back" myth directed against German Jewry? The Jews of Germany couldn't held responsible for the action of the whole Jewry. Bernarad Baruch of USA and two others German Bankers, (Warburg and Malchior, both Jews) who represnt the German gov at Versailles were all on the technical leval. The injustice of the accord (huge reparation payments to the victors) had done by France who repeated the same trick Germany did her few years before (when France lost to Germany of Bismark). Indeed Warburg didn't want the job and Malchior claimed he asked German gov *not to sign* the accord.
Germany lost the First World War because the United States had entered it against Germany and the Central powers .
During WWI Germany was very popular among the Jews. In America, the Jews were pro German (and anti Czarist Russia), the very same reason why the British tried to buy Jewish sympathy with Balfour declaration. Even East European Jews were enthusiastic to the prosepect of German domination (the German occupied territories in WWI gained them civil rights for the first time). It said by doing these favor to East European Jews Germany tried to gain American Jewry support for its stand, which they gave.
MvictorP (along the line of right wingers) says
Yeah, okay, I can buy that. The "treason" took place just after Russia pulled out of the war, but it was at the PPC that it was officialized.
And yes, as I also wrote, the little German-jewish guys were German patriots all the way. Their elite and International Jewry, however, not-so all the way. Up to the Czar's fall and the Balfour declaration, in fact. After that, they were zionists first, and anything else, second.
The Jewish delegation was at the PPC to receive the fruits of their labour, e.i. Palestine, via tha Balfour declaration, which was obtained by Rotschild in 1917.
I believe that the first blow International Jewry delivered to Germany was at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, and that was certainly paramount in Hitler's mind at the time he wrote Mein Kampf. Read Benjamin Freedman's account on this from one of my posts, in this very thread. This was "dolchstoÃŸlegende" only by name.
International Jewry hated the Czar, under wich they were persecuted. And the Bolchevic movement did include Jewish members, althought I do not believe that the movement in itself was a creation on International Jewry.
In fact, according once again to Freedman, Jew banks refused to invest a buck to France and Britain as long as they were siding with pre-revolution Russia. Once Russia was done, and the Balfour declaration obtained, Jew money stopped flowing Germany's way.
How did American entrance to WWI had anything to do with Jewish influence or Balfour declaration? America didn't enter the war because the Jews pushed her, did she? She entered it because German submrine warfare.
MvictorP quotes one, Benjamin Freedman, to base his opinion of Jewish power responsible for the entry of the US in WWI and having backstabbed Germany:
About US entry in WWI:
Within two years Germany had won that war: not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week's food supply facing her -- and after that, starvation.
At that time, the French army had mutinied. They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting. They were picking up their toys and going home, they didn't want to play war anymore, they didn't like the Czar. And the Italian army had collapsed.
Now Germany -- not a shot had been fired on the German soil. Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany. And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms. They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis. That means: â€œLet's call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.â€
Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously! They had no choice. It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.
While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and -- I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make if anyone here is curious, or doesn't believe what I'm saying is at all possible -- the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: â€œLook here. You can yet win this war. You don't have to give up. You don't have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany. You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.â€
The United States was not in the war at that time. We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful. They [Zionists] told England: â€œWe will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.â€
In other words, they made this deal: â€œWe will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.â€
Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever. It's absolutely absurd that Great Britain -- that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine -- should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.
However, they made that promise, in October of 1916. October, nineteen hundred and sixteen. And shortly after that -- I don't know how many here remember it -- the United States, which was almost totally pro-German -- totally pro-German -- because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.
The Jews didn't like the Czar, and they didn't want Russia to win this war. So the German bankers -- the German-Jews -- Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood aside and they said: â€œAs long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!â€ But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.
Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal. At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green. Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they'd been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good. They were villains. They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses. They were cutting off babies' hands. And they were no good.
Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.
About backstabbing Germany at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919:
Now, that is where all the trouble started. The United States went in the war. The United States crushed Germany. We went in there, and it's history. You know what happened. Now, when the war was ended, and the Germans went to Paris, to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, there were 117 Jews there, as a delegation representing the Jews, headed by Bernard Baruch. I was there: I ought to know. Now what happened?
The Jews at that peace conference, when they were cutting up Germany and parceling out Europe to all these nations that claimed a right to a certain part of European territory, the Jews said, â€œHow about Palestine for us?â€ And they produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration. So the Germans, for the first time realized, â€œOh, that was the game! That's why the United States came into the war.â€ And the Germans for the first time realized that they were defeated, they suffered this terrific reparation that was slapped onto them, because the Zionists wanted Palestine and they were determined to get it at any cost.
Now, that brings us to another very interesting point. When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it. Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany.
You had Mr. Rathenau there, who was maybe 100 times as important in industry and finance as is Bernard Baruch in this country. You had Mr. Balin, who owned the two big steamship lines, the North German Lloyd's and the Hamburg-American Lines. You had Mr. Bleichroder, who was the banker for the Hohenzollern family. You had the Warburgs in Hamburg, who were the big merchant bankers -- the biggest in the world. The Jews were doing very well in Germany. No question about that. Now, the Germans felt: â€œWell, that was quite a sellout.â€
DolchstoÃŸlegende - It seemed the stab in the back legend came after the Germans over-estimated the Jewish power to push the string behind the scene. As long America did kept its isolationist stand the Germans believed it all to do because the Jews kept favor with them. When finally America did chose to enter the war, the German may thought it was Jewish responsibility. And that the Balfour declaration changed everything. Which is totally foolish. Up until the Holocaust the American Jews didn't give a damn about Zionism and Palestine.
So what was the stab in the back legend rational? The Zionist theme is modern twist. The German Jews could not care less about some desert in the Levant. The backstabbing of Germany by the Jews referred to the behaviour of the Marxist Germans (most of them Jews), like Kurt Eisner and Rosa Luxemburg. Hitler and the Nazis didn't speak about the Zionists, Palestine or Balfour declaration even once. The Zionism was quite popular among the "realistic Nazis" who saw it as a way to move their Jewish community. This "popularity" is still used by Marxists and Orthodox Jews against Israel.
No doubt that part of the British reason to give their clueless declaration was to pull the Jewish support. Another reason was to sway away the Jews from revolutionary Marxists parties. The main problem was Marxism.
On 8 February 1920, Winston Churchill, then the Secretary for War, told readers of the Illustrated Sunday Herald about â€œTrotsky ... [and] ... his schemes of a world-wide communistic state under Jewish dominationâ€. However, Churchill had his chosen Jewish opponents of Bolshevism â€“ the Zionists. He wrote hotly of â€œthe fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr Weizmann in particularâ€. â€œTrotsky,â€ Churchill declared, was â€œdirectly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal ... The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.â€
New Statesman - This monstrous canker. Was the creation of Israel ...
The British brought it on themselves. Without the Balfour Declaration and their active connivance in the 1920s and 1930s, there could never have been a Jewish state. Segev maintains that this support arose not so much from sympathy for Jewish aspirations, or pity for their sufferings, as from fear: "They believed the Jews controlled the world."
There is some truth in this - Lloyd George, for one, was convinced that Jewish influence in Washington was so significant that it had to be appeased at any cost. Field Marshal Wilson wrote indignantly in 1921: "The 'Frocks' seem to think that by handing over Jewland to the Jews they will make friends of those other Jews who govern finance in Chicago, Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, Moscow, etc." But, he insisted: "I entirely disagree with them."