If you’re under 75 years old and grew up in a ‘western’ country, chances are you remember from childhood that one of the things that made the Nazis especially wicked was their notion of ‘racial’ supremacy and Hitler’s lunatic ambition to spawn a ‘Master Race’.

Whether via my parents, school education, books, comics, movies or the mass media – from a fairly early age I absorbed the notion that under Adolf Hitler’s leadership, the Nazis – and they alone – sought to promote their ‘race’ to superdude status.

Wicked Uncle Adolf: we learnt at school that he wanted a Master Race, of people like him (with blonde hair)

I can’t recall the number of times I’ve heard reasoning along the following lines:

The Nazis believed the Aryans are a Master Race and wanted to lord it over the rest – didn’t they?

That’s why we had to fight them to the end – wasn’t it?

Sure, the 60 million or so deaths (and tens of millions of refugees) of World War Two were a lot of ‘collateral damage’ – but it was all worth it, wasn’t it?

After all, we can’t take chances with nutcases who want to take over the world – can we? Thank heavens for Winston Churchill! etc. etc.

It’s scary, persuasive stuff that may well have convinced all but the most recalcitrant pacifists to join the military struggle against Nazi Germany.

If you follow politics, you’ve probably heard plenty of politicians complaining about the lies of their opponents.

It’s a staple diet of democratic political discourse. Does a day go by when Parliament (or Congress) is in session in which copious accusations of lying aren’t hurled across the chamber? If so, I must have missed them.

Arlen Specter: these days, he a Senatorial liar; Adolf would not have been surprised

But how many politicians do you know who admit to telling lies? Telling lies themselves, that is – and not just lies but really big lies. Politicians like that are certainly unusual.

I’ll thicken the plot. How many politicians do you know who brag about telling really big lies in a best selling book published before their political career gets underway? Such a politician would be rare indeed.

Yet that’s what a lot of people seem to believe about Adolf Hitler. If they don’t actually believe this, they certainly like to make out they do.

Take this quotation, which has become famous thanks to its frequent repetition on the Internet:

By the 1930s, it seemed the long political career of Winston Churchill was all but over.

He was a man out of time – an old imperial War Horse in an era when the patience of the British people for war-mongering was wearing thin. While Winston fulminated against Indian independence and beat the old imperial drum for more military spending, the world seemed to be moving on.

Winston Churchill: catspaw for Zionist interests?

The Great War of 1914-18 had bled the British people dry. Gandhi’s non-violent campaign for Indian independence was earning widespread respect. The peace movement was on the ascendant, having won support from some of the country’s finest intellects such as Aldous Huxley. Many hoped the age of British militarism was drawing to a close – and a slow, dignified decolonisation process lay ahead. In that scenario, Britain would remain a prosperous, productive and uniquely well-connected society – but a nation at peace.

Yet by May 1940, Britain was again at war and Churchill was Prime Minister. Rejecting German peace overtures, he immediately committed the British Empire to a ‘no holds barred’ fight-to-the-death: total war with the Axis powers. Eventually, after forging alliances with the USA and Soviet Union, Churchill led an exhausted, bankrupt nation to ‘victory’ five years later.

Winston Churchill suffered decisive electoral defeat in the 1945 post-war general election, then returned to power in 1951 for an undistinguished finale as Prime Minister.

While they pontificate about Iran, China, Russia – anywhere, really, except their own backyard – the pro-censorship manipulators of the western world edge forwards stealthily.

It’s become increasingly apparent to observant independent observers around the world – those of us who aren’t bought and paid for, that is – that there’s a widening gulf between current affairs and modern history information available via the Internet and the mainstream media’s dominant narrative.

It's been a while since the German people last had to hack down a Wall

The situation isn’t stable. As things stand, given Internet access to alternative narratives about history and current affairs, popular demand for genuinely free media will eventually become a deafening roar.

A few years ago, in a society such as Australia, disparaging comments about a distorted mass media narrative were relatively unusual; it’s my observation they have become significantly more common.

The key fission line in this Internet-era battle between freedom and censorship has been – and continues to be – Zionism.

Zionist ‘opinion formers’ – in cahoots with a compliant, corrupted mainstream mass media – stand to lose most from an untamed Internet. That’s because they’ve been successful in getting their preferred narrative of history and politics ‘enforced’ through the principle channels of information in the western world. It’s their very dominance of the MSM that’s the reason for the disparity between mass media ‘consensual’ verities and internet-facilitated questions that don’t receive serious answers. The result is a growing mass media ‘credibility gap’. Zionists are necessarily the focus of blame for this; it is they who have used media dominance in a duplicitous and self-serving way, not only in recent years but going back over several generations.

Professor Alan Wolfe

Alan Wolfe has been a busy man for a long time.

He’s an American academic with many books to his name and maintains connections with several east coast universities.

His Boston College bio says:

Alan Wolfe is Professor of Political Science and Director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College. His most recent books include Does American Democracy Still Work? (Yale University Press, 2006) Return to Greatness: How America Lost Its Sense of Purpose and What it Needs to Do to Recover It (Princeton University Press, 2005), The Transformation of American Religion: How We actually Live our Faith (Free Press, 2003), and An Intellectual in Public ( University of Michigan Press, 2003). He is the author or editor of more than ten other books including Marginalized in the Middle (1997), One Nation, After All (1998), Moral Freedom: The Search for Virtue in a World of Choice (2001) and School Choice: The Moral Debate (editor, 2002). Both One Nation, After All and Moral Freedom were selected as New York Times Notable Books of the Year.

His achievements go on and on:

In the fall of 2004, Professor Wolfe was the George H. W. Bush Fellow at the American Academy in Berlin.

Last week was most eventful for Wikileaks, the international anti-censorship website.

Springtime in Germany

It published a list that purported to be Australia’s ‘blacklist’ of sites as prepared by ACMA – twice. Wikileaks also lobbed a legal threat at Australian Communications Minister Senator Conroy, all the way from Sweden where Wikileaks is based. Throughout this period, the Wikileaks.org website suffered a remarkable amount of downtime.

Wikileaks legal grenade was in retaliation against Senator Conroy’s threat to ‘hunt down’ the list leaker – a threat which seemed to contradict Conroy’s insistence that the lists weren’t genuine. As the week progressed, the Minister fulminated, blustered, banned and threatened. What a performance! No wonder he never seems to get any real work done (such as the long-promised rollout of new high-speed communications infrastructure).

Today Wikileaks reports that police in Germany raided the Dresden and Jena houses of Theodor Reppe, who holds the domain registration for ‘wikileaks.de’. News Corp has just picked up the story.

As I pointed out in an earlier article, the German regime may have a keen interest in Australia’s experiment with foisting Internet censorship on an unwilling populace; it recently announced similar plans itself.

Should we score this round to Senator Conroy? It’s not clear. He may well deny that he had anything to do with the raid of an individual whom, it appears, has no operational involvement in the Wikileaks project.

Allied Bombing of Northern Germany, World War Two

“It may be Inconvenient History but England rather than Germany initiated the murderous slaughter of bombing civilians thus bringing about retaliation. Chamberlain conceded that it was “absolutely contrary to International law.” It began in 1940 and Churchill believed it held the secret of victory. He was convinced that raids of sufficient intensity could destroy Germany’s morale, and so his War Cabinet planned a campaign that abandoned the accepted practice of attacking the enemy’s armed forces and, instead made civilians the primary target. Night after night, RAF bombers in ever increasing numbers struck throughout Germany, usually at working class housing, because it was more densely packed.”

- from The Peoples’ War by Angus Calder; London, Jonathan Cape 1969.

_____________________________

An interesting article by Christopher Howse about Britain’s bombing of Germany entitled Bomber Command’s bombing of Second World War civilians was wilful murder was published in the British Daily Telegraph last December.

Howse mentions that Churchill had very occasional pangs of conscience – and even ordered a review of the murderous bombing campaign a month before Germany surrendered! He also had a civil service – proficient then as ever – in mopping up distasteful language. Here’s an extract:

“Tonight at Chequers, in the course of a film showing the bombing of German towns,” wrote a guest, on June 27, 1943, “Churchill suddenly sat bolt upright and said to me, ‘Are we beasts? Are we taking this too far?’ ”

Australian Communications Minister Stephen Conroy: trying to sell Australians Internet Censorship, calls it 'filtering'

Ever since governments in Australia first showed signs of having caught an irrational, hysterical, politically-suicidal mania for ‘filtering’ (censoring) this nation’s Internet at ISP-level, I’ve believed this is really about political censorship.

Concerns over pornography and child abuse have been used to ’sell’ this policy to a sceptical public, especially by the inept Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy. But it’s just window dressing.

I’d like to be wrong about this. I hope so – but fear not.

Support for my suspicions came last week from the other side of the world.

Germany recently announced plans to ‘filter’ the internet at ISP-level. This is the very same policy the Rudd Government has been pushing here in Australia, with little success to date except to upset almost every nerd in the land. What’s more, Ministerial explanations from both Canberra and Berlin might been torn from the same song-book.

On 23rd January 2009 OpenNet Initiative ran a report entitled Internet Censorship in Germany (emphases added in all the following extracts):

According to German news publication Der Spiegel, German officials are calling for ISP censorship of offensive cites in order to quell the spread of child pornography, CNET and The Inquisitr report.

With implementation slated for March, Germany’s proposed censorship scheme will follow a model similar to Norway’s to block access to child pornography. In such a model, the government issues a list of sites to be blocked by ISPs.