Hildesheim — “Werner’s House,” one of the beautiful houses totally rebuilt 40 years after the war, in the 1980s, by hard-working, beauty-adoring Germans at their own vast expense.

Wiki:  The city [of Hildesheim in northern Germany] was heavily damaged by air raids in 1945, especially on 22 March. Although it had little military significance, two months before the end of the war in Europe the historic city was bombed as part of the Area Bombing Directive in order to undermine the morale of the German people.

[This is exactly the definition of terrorism!!! And so we Reich Germans, in our newspapers and radio reports, called it what it was, “Terrorismus”! Terrorize unarmed civilians, seeking to smash their will to resist a vicious, jewish enemy conquest.]

28.5% of the houses were completely destroyed and 44.7% damaged. 26.8% of the houses remained undamaged. The centre, which had retained its medieval character until then, was almost levelled. The city as a whole was destroyed by 20 – 30%.^[9] As in many cities, priority was given to rapid building of badly needed housing, and concrete structures took the place of the destroyed buildings.

Hildesheim, 1945

.

AIR TERRORISM OF THE “GOOD GUYS”

from Joaquin Bochaca’s The Crimes of the Good Guys, translated by Margaret Huffstickler

Margi, seen here resting with her kitty, “Princess,” despite her painful cancer translated articles and books, gardened, and cooked delicious meals for me right to the end, and lived every second for the ultimate rebirth of our race.  I met her on April 20, 2005 at the offices of The Barnes Review in Washington DC.

.

One of the historical truths the media have sought most zealously to conceal is that the Crusaders for Democracy were the inventors and almost exclusive promoters of aerial bombardment against civilian populations. Much has been said about the Luftwaffe air raids on London and Coventry in England. The bombardments of Coventry, especially, were very intensive, but they were directed against the industries of the city, and not against the Coventry Cathedral, the Cathedral of Saint Michael, as British propaganda claimed.

Saint Michael was hit by several bombs, true, but the fact remains that it was was hit in a night bombing, and also in Coventry the factories were located right in the city itself, and not in the suburbs. Coventry was bombed by the Germans because it had factories that made aircraft engines, locomotives, telecommunication equipment, all kinds of power tools and military equipment. [443] As for London, besides its industries and its government headquarters, it had a huge port and dockyards. Therefore London and Coventry, as well as Birmingham, Manchester, Bristol, Leeds and other cities which were also bombed, were undoubtedly justified military targets.

But we had better address the issue from the beginning.

Long before the war started, on February 18, 1932, that is, a year before Hitler came to power, Germany presented to the Conference on Disarmament, which was meeting in Geneva, a proposal aimed at the suppression of combat aviation. The British delegate pledged to “study the issue.” While it was being “studied,” Stanley Baldwin, the Prime Minister, declared on November 10, 1932, in the House of Commons:

“…. I have said that every city within reach of an airport may be bombed. The only defense is offense, that is, we have to kill more women and children than the enemy kills of ours, if we want to protect ourselves. “

Finally, on March 16, 1933, England presented a proposal to the Conference on Disarmament: the MacDonaId Plan, whose Article 34 said: “The high contracting parties accept the total abolition of bombing from the air [except for law enforcement needs in certain remote regions].” The parenthesis, as we will see, was prophetic. The German Delegation (note that Hitler was now in power) proposed the following amendment to the British proposal: “The words in parentheses from “except” to “regions” should be crossed out and the following words added: … “And the prohibition of all preparation for such bombardment.”

The Spanish representative, the noted liberal Salvador de Madariaga, said, “The British proposal dealing with air combat is highly inadequate.” Anthony Eden, the British representative, defended the British position, saying: “It does not take a Jules Verne to imagine a terrible war in which the front-line trenches will be the least exposed positions, and the houses of civilians the most exposed.”

For two years the German government made significant efforts to reach an agreement with other states to exclude air warfare as an offensive tactic against open cities and civilians. Adolf Hitler, in the Reichstag session of May 21, 1935, even proposed the abolition of air weapons altogether. The proposal was presented at the Conference of Disarmament and was rejected by the English and French representatives. A new proposal was made by the German government directly to the English government on March 31, 1936, aiming at the humanization of war. Article 13 specifically called for:

1. – Prohibition of the release of gas bombs, chemical weapons and incendiaries.

2. – Prohibition of dropping bombs of all kinds on open populations that shall be found outside the range of the heavy artillery of the battle fronts.

3. – Prohibition of firing with long-range guns on cities more than 20 kilometers outside a combat zone.

4. – Prohibition and abolition of extra-heavy artillery.

The German government also declared itself ready to accede to any regulation of this kind, as long as it was internationally accepted. The British government did not reply directly to this German Memorandum, but on February 14, 1938, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain told the House of Commons that “His Majesty’s Government is not willing to limit the activity of its air force. “

While the delegation of the Netherlands in Paris urged the French government to accept all or part of the German memorandum of March 31, 1936, and put pressure on the British government to do the same, the Dutch suggestion was not taken into consideration.

The very day that war broke out with Poland, Hitler said in his speech to the Reichstag:

“… I do not want to wage war against women and children. I have ordered our air force to limit their attacks to military objectives.”

And at the Polish Embassy in Berlin, as passports were being given to members of the Polish consular corps who were returning to their country armed with diplomatic immunity, they were given a note that stated:

“The air combat forces have been ordered to confine their operations in Poland to military objectives. The continuance of this order naturally assumes that Polish Air Forces abide by the same rule. If this were not to occur, the Germans would immediately employ the most forceful reprisals.”

On September 6 the British Secretary of State, Butler, said in the House of Commons: “It seems clear that the Germans, in their air strikes, are generally hitting military objectives and are not directing their attacks against the civilian population.” This was confirmed by General Armengaud, French military attaché in Poland, who, in a report to his government, wrote:

“The Luftwaffe has not attacked civilians. I must stress that the German Air Force has acted in accordance with the laws of war [444], has attacked only military targets, and if there have occasionally been deaths and injuries among the civilian population, it has been because they were in the vicinity of these military objectives. It is important that this be known in France and England in order to avoid retaliatory strikes where there is no reason for retaliation, and in order not to trigger a total air war on our part.”

On October 6, 1939, Hitler delivered a speech in the Reichstag in which he advocated that the war should be conducted in the most humane way possible.Among other things, he said in this regard:

Just as the Geneva Convention succeeded, at least as far as civilized countries are concerned, in prohibiting the killing of the wounded, mistreatment of prisoners and the waging of war against non-participants in the conflict, and just as it was possible for this prohibition to be generally respected in the course of time, it should be possible to regulate the use of air weaponry, the employment of gas, submarines, etc., so that war would lose its terrible character of a combat against women and children, and in general against those outside itself. The institution of certain procedures would lead to the elimination of weapons that would then, in turn, become superfluous.

But these words by the Führer were ignored …..

The first bombing of World War II was carried out by English fighter planes that dropped bombs on Wilhelmshaven and Cuxhaven on September 5, 1939.

During September and October 1939 the RAF flew over Belgian, Dutch and Danish territory numerous times to carry out observation flights over Germany, but without dropping bombs. Neither did the Luftwaffe bomb English or French territory. On November 27, at the session of the Supreme War Council in London, Chamberlain proposed bombing, without further ado, the Ruhr region. But French prime minister Daladier objected, arguing that it would be impossible to bomb factories without hitting workers, ie, non-combatants.

However, England decided to ignore the objections of France, and commenced its war by aerial bombing. The bombings were directed against the towns of Wilhelmshaven, Vechta, Heligoland, Sylt, Bokum, Juist and Amrum … that is, ports in northern Germany. In contrast to this attitude, the Supreme Command of the Wehrmacht announced on January 25, 1940, the limitation of the air war to military targets and areas of combat (for France) and air strikes against ground targets in London, including various ports in England.

On January 30, 1940, Hitler said in his speech at the “Sportpalast” in Berlin:

The nation to which England gave its guarantee [Poland] has been wiped off the map in eighteen days, without the Anglo-French guarantee to Poland having been honored. With this, the first phase of this conflict has ended.

Now begins the second. Mr. Churchill [445] already burns with impatience for the second phase. Through his agents, and also personally, he has expressed his hopes that a war of bombs will finally begin. And he says that, naturally, this war will not stop at women and children. When has England EVER protected women and children?

All blockades are nothing but a war of starvation against civilian women and civilian children.

The war against the Boers (1899-1902) was already nothing but an open war on women and children.

Let us note: Churchill had obviously not said he would make a war against women and children. At least, he had not said so explicitly. But what he had done was to advocate the extension of the air war and the naval blockade and even dropping incendiary bombs on farms, and this was, indirectly at least, making war on non-combatants, that is, women, children and elderly.

And the British air strikes continued. On April 14 the German cities of Haide and Wenningstedt were bombarded, despite the absence of any military objective there. After starting the air war, now the R.A.F. began its air terrorism.

It was at first a limited terrorism — a few planes dropping bombs on villages and small towns. All this, possibly, happened at the initiative of some subordinate commanders. It is known that Chamberlain opposed actions of the R.A.F. against non-military targets. But when Chamberlain fell–resigned or was dismissed—and Winston Churchill was installed in power, the real struggle to the death against the civilian population began. This is a fact that no massive worldwide propaganda can ever completely conceal, despite the tremendous efforts that have been made to that end. Churchill, in fact, was appointed Prime Minister on May 10, 1940, and on May 11, ONE DAY LATER, the R.A.F. was ordered to fly at high altitude over the battlefront—in the midst of an all-out German offensive in Belgium, Holland and France—and to drop their bombs on German cities completely devoid of strategic and military interest, and consequently with no anti-aircraft protection.

On that day, the city of Freiburg, far distant from the areas of military operations, and without a single industry remotely related to war, was bombed by the R.A.F. Fifty-three civilians, including twenty-five children who were playing in a public garden, were killed. Another 151 civilians were wounded. Mr. Edward Taylor, of the American Red Cross, reported this information in the New York Times [446].

The Secretary of the British Air Ministry, J. M. Spaight certified that it was England who initiating the bombing of civilians, and he was proud of it:

“We began to bomb the German cities before the enemy proceed to do the same to ours. This is a historical fact that must be publicly admitted.

But as we had doubts about possible psychological effects of the diversionary propaganda that it was we who had started the strategic bombing offensive, we refrained from giving the publicity it deserved to our great decision of May 11, 1940. Surely this was a mistake. It was a splendid decision.” [447].

Yes, to Mr. Spaight, who invented the word “strategic” to describe the air-terrorism of bombing civilian populations, it was a “splendid decision.“

 A British Lancaster bomber

He did a grave injustice to his countrymen in keeping the horrible secret that the R.A.F. was the initiator of this dirty form of combat, realizing that the British people y would abhor it, but he emphasized that, in any case, it was a “splendid decision.”

F.J.P. Veale, an English writer specializing in military issues writes:

“… that historic night the great British Whitley bombers, instead of attacking the German troops at the front, were deployed against the enemy’s home front. It was an epoch-making event, because it was the first deliberate breach of the fundamental rule of civilized war: that you should carry out hostilities only against the fighting forces of the enemy … Unbeknownst to the crew of the 18 bombers, they were turning a great page of history. Their flight marked the end of an era that had lasted two and a half centuries.“ [448]

J.F.C. Fuller, one of the best British military critics of this time, for his part, wrote:

“Churchill, despite being the supreme commander of British armed forces, could not act as a military dictator, but he overcame this difficulty by directing a private war with formations of RAF bombers, a kind of private army of his own.

On May 11, 1940 he ordered them to bomb the city of Freiburg. But Hitler did not strike back, although there could be no doubt that these attacks against Freiburg and other German cities would eventually force him in his turn to go on the attack “ [449].

The Germans, of course, protested against the terrorism from the air. After several months of continuous attacks on German cities that lacked even the slightest military importance, German military authorities threatened to carry out reprisals against the English. But the bombing did not stop and victims among the German civilian population began to be counted by thousands. There can be no reasonable doubt: the adoption of air terrorism by England had no other object than to provoke German reprisals, inflaming, by this means, the British people—still almost unanimously reluctant to put at risk the fate of the Empire for reasons as trivial and alien to their interests as “Danzig”, “Democracy,” “The western borders of Poland,” etc.

Therefore the Great Newspapers, controlled in England, as in the rest of the world, by International Finance, concealed the fact that it was the R.A.F. who had begun the terror bombing against civilians; and when Hitler, at last, after the bombing of a Berlin suburb, ordered the bombing reprisals against London on September 7, it can be said that Churchill had attained his objective.

The Big Press – which had maintained a deafening silence on the raids against German civilians – raised a tremendous uproar when commenting on the attack of the Luftwaffe against London, presenting it as a treacherous and unprovoked attack against the civilian population of England.

The British public, hitherto reluctant to take the war against Germany seriously, flew into a rage and vigorously supported their government. Churchill’s goal had been reached.

Sir Thomas Elmhurst, Air Vice-Marshal, later claimed that

“Hitler was furious at the first night bombing raid by the RAF against a suburb of Berlin on August 27, 1940 and ordered the Luftwaffe bombers to carry out reprisals against London. The bombing of the university town of Heidelberg [photo] was grounds for the attack on London on September 7.“[450]

Here is the testimony of JM Spaight, whom we have quoted previously:

“Hitler began to respond to the bombing of cities more than three months after the RAF had initiated them, and he was always ready, at any time, to suspend that kind of warfare. Of course, Hitler did not want to continue the mutual bombardment .“[451]

Sir Arthur Harris, Air Marshal and one of the godfathers of what was euphemístically termed “strategic bombing,”–which he considered modern, while he considered German air warfare system, limited to exclusively military targets, to be “outdated”—confirms that the Germans were virtually dragged into that kind of terrorist warfare by the RAF. [452]

Thus began what would be called “Battle of Britain”: the German response to British terrorist bombings, and their attack on British industry. The verb ”Coventrize” became fashionable, and in fact, as we have said, Coventry suffered tremendous bombing attacks, as did London and other British industrial cities, but the attacks were, in general, directed against military or para-military targets. There were, for example, no bombings of Oxford, Eton and Cambridge, but there were of Heidelberg and Halle by the RAF. 

Cambridge University

These are incontrovertible facts that no propaganda has ever been able to dodge. At any rate, in regard to the bombings in Germany, Churchill himself confessed all in his Memoirs, which were the object of exaggerated praise by the English press. Furthermore, the German attacks began only on September 7, 1940, that is, almost four months after the attacks by the R.A.F. terrorists against Freiburg.

The previously quoted English historian F.J.P. Veale commented:

“One of the biggest triumphs of modern emotional engineering is that, in spite of the obviousness of the facts, which could not be masked or twisted in any way, the British public, throughout the period of the Blitzkrieg of 1940 and 1941, remained convinced that the responsibility for the suffering they were experiencing, fell on the German leaders.“ [453]

And another prominent figure in British aviation, one of the co-authors of the so-called “strategic bombing,” J. M. Spaight, acknowledged that

“there is abundant evidence that Hitler was strongly opposed to air terrorism …” [454]

.

But there are still more testimonies from Anglo-Americans in this regard.

Anthony Eden said in the Conservative Party’s annual conference, held in London on May 20, 1943: “… We know what Germany needs: not night or day attacks, but attacks night and day, continuous, uninterrupted, hour after hour.”

General Arnold, Supreme Commander of the U.S. Air Forces during World War II, told a representative of the United Press on December 14, 1943: “Every city and every village in Germany will will be reached by our bombing. Germany can now anticipate that the number of homeless will increase steadily and that the supply of everything necessary for the lives of its population will become more difficult. “

Arnold added, on March 14, 1944: [455] “We can lay carpets of bombs in Germany! That’s the best way to break the morale of a people; it produces confusion in a community and contributes to the destruction of a city more than hitting a target…“

*** JdN: This was totally incorrect!

 I had a fine professor of German at Georgetown University in Washington DC,

Alfred Obernberger, PhD, an Austrian, and he told me that the terror bombing of German/Austrian civilians INCREASED support for Hitler and the NS government and bolstered support for the war.

He told me:

“Auch die Österreicher, die gegen Hitler waren, so wie meine Eltern, die es abgelehnt hatten, mich auf eine NAPOLA-Schule [für begabte Kinder mit NS-Gesinnung] schicken zu lassen, kamen nach diesen Leichbergen der Zivilisten, die durch die Terrorbomben ums Leben gekommen waren, zum Schluss, dass Hitler vielleicht doch recht gehabt hatte — der Krieg der Alliierten war eigentlich gegen das ganze deutsche Volk gerichtet, und nicht nur gegen das ‘Nazi’-Regime”. 

Translation:

“Even the Austrians who were against Hitler, like my parents, who had refused to let me be sent to a NAPOLA school [for gifted children with NS beliefs], came to the conclusion after these piles of corpses of civilians killed by the bombings that Hitler might have been right after all — the Allied war was actually directed against the entire German people, and not just against the ‘Nazi’ regime”.

General—later Marshal—Montgomery said: “I think one of the great things that really matters is to bomb Germany. I bomb a city each afternoon and am waiting to see how long they can hold out.“ [456]

General IC Eaker, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Air Forces in Europe, said in an interview published in 1942: “We have enough planes to destroy Germany. German workers need houses to live in. On the other hand, no one will want to work underground, knowing that in his absence his home could be destroyed and his family perish “[457].

Brendan Bracken, member of the English War Cabinet and head of the Conservative Party, said: “… our plans are: bomb Germany by all means at our disposal; exterminate by fire and mercilessly destroy the people responsible for the present war. I said, and I repeat: without mercy.“ [458]

The Mayor of London, Philip Cribbles, told Reuters: “Wasting time in conferences on the application of certain articles of international law, in which it is stated that children under sixteen and men and women over seventy should be protected from war, constitutes a criminal obtuseness.“[459]

Air Vice-Marshal Saundby, formerly an RAF pilot in World War 1, stated: “… In the German cities that have been attacked, nearly 25% of the built up areas have been devastated. The number of buildings destroyed runs into the millions. In the ruins of Hamburg, Dusseldorf, Cologne and other cities it is not possible to lead a civilized life, as we understand it.“[460]

As you can see, in these declarations by British notables and Americans there is an obvious self-complacency regarding the conduct of the Western democracies in their air war against the civilian populations of their adversaries: that is, first Germany, then Italy, and afterwards all of occupied Europe. Not only do they recognize that they themselves were the pioneers of this type of warfare against civilian populations, but they are even proud of it.

Walter Lippmann, aka Lipschitz, the Zionist Buddha of American journalists, a man with more real influence than many ministers and distinguished members of Roosevelt’s Brain Trust, wrote in one article:

“We should be ashamed of ourselves and our cause, if we could not look with a clear conscience on our moral responsibility in the destruction of German cities “[461].

And Hugh Baillie, Labour MP, hammered it home, saying: “One after another, the big German cities have been reduced to dust. The homes of workers, which are considered military objectives, have been converted into huge piles of rubble. The workers themselves thus become fugitives. Included in the calculations of the present air offensive is the fact that the German workers are thrown into the street as fugitives.” [462]

Here is what an editorial in one of the most read American newspapers said, in late 1943: “Nobody believes the claims of purely industrial damage by our air raids and those of the RAF over Germany. When our bombers take flight, our people shake their heads and hope it means the early termination of the war. After all, it is preferable that the killings are taking place in Germany. “[463]

Let us turn now to Newsweek, a top American weekly news magazine, referring to the terrorist attack on Berlin of November 22,1943: “… as in Hamburg, probably many shelters became furnaces. From one end of the city to the other, there lie in ruins the monuments in which so much German history was embodied.“ [464]

And we close this, we believe, definitive exhibit of testimony by the opposition with the opinion of Raymond Clapper, the dean of American war correspondents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Clapper), who was of Pennsylvania Dutch (  = German) descent but felt no compassion for his German kinfolk:

“The terror and brutality of the air war are one of its best aspects. We finally have the means to render cities uninhabitable, and sow–why not openly admit it?—destruction over neighborhoods full of living people.

We have reached the point now where war has become so awful for the civilian population, that perhaps someday its lack of sense will become apparent.” [465]

It is irrefutable history: Western democracies in the pre-war period were stubbornly opposed any concession, even theoretical, to aerial disarmament.

If they signed the Hague Convention on aerial warfare, which expressly prohibits the use of Douhet’s tactics [466], it is because they had no moral possibility of avoiding it. But then, in practice, they returned to that system of combat. However, it was and is not only unfair and criminal, breaking the barriers which for centuries had been maintained between combatants and citizens, but also inefficient from a purely military point of view, because at the height of the terror bombing of Germany, industrial and military production in the Reich reached its peak.

The air terrorism had initially no other aim than to provoke German reprisals–which did eventually occur, in fact, but at a hundred times lower virulence, as Churchill himself acknowledged—in order to motivate a reluctant public’s participation in a war utterly foreign to their real interests.

Subsequently other reasons were added to the first: specifically, the messianic revenge of Zionism against German National Socialism and ultimately against Germany. No less than Winston Churchill acknowledged in his Memoirs that Lord Cherwell was the instigator of the terror bombing against Germany.

Who was Lord Cherwell? He was a Professor Lindemann, a Jew who had emigrated from Germany in 1935. This noble lord was the president of the “Bomber Command”, and despite his civilian status he had authority over professionals such as Harris and Spaight, and ultimately was subordinate, officially, only to Churchill.

His private secretary, and co-religionist David Bensussa-Butt and Professor Solomon Zuckerman scientifically studied the effects the bombing on civilian populations. In the report of Lindemann, on which Bensussa and Zuckerman collaborated, a series of massive bombings was prescribed “for paralyzing the morale of the enemy, to be directed against working class areas of the 58 German cities whose populations exceed 100,000 inhabitants … Each bomber will release 40 tons of bombs. If they fall in inhabited areas they will result in the loss of some 4,000 dwellings, or 8,000 people.“ [467]

The immediate consequence of this dismal report was the directive of the Air General Staff, approved personally by the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, expressed thusly:

Reference: Directive on new bombings. I suppose it has become abundantly clear that the objectives should be built-up areas, and not, for example, docks or factories. This, if not sufficiently clear, must be clearly understood once and for all.“[468].

Noted author and scientist Charles Snow published in London in 1961, the book Science and Govemment, which states: “The Lindemann Plan was adopted under the combined pressure of the heads of British aviation and, of course, the half-Jews so powerful at that time in the government.”

Official recognition of the terrorist nature of Allied bombing took place in 1953, when “HM [Her Majesty’s] Stationery Service” published the first volume of a work entitled The RAF 1939-1945, a book presented as an official publication, read and approved by the Historical Section of the Air Ministry in the UK.

The author, Richard Dennis, says frankly that the destruction of industrial plants was no more than a secondary aim of the air strikes against Germany, attacks that began in May, 1940. The main purpose of these raids was to induce the Germans to carry out similar retaliatory raids against England. Such raids would provoke an intense indignation in England against Germany, and so create the war psychosis essential in modern warfare. Richard Dennis concludes bluntly:

“The air attacks against the Ruhr were only a disguised means of inducing the Germans to carry out the London bombing [which American newspapers called the “Blitz”]. “

In 1961, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office acknowledged for the second time the terrorist nature of aviation in World War II, in its publication, The Strategic Air Offensive.

We believe we need provide no more more arguments in favor of the super-proven theory that it was the English, later enthusiastically seconded by the Americans and Russians, who were the initiators and almost exclusive practitioners of air terrorism. Churchill’s hatred—or that of the powers that be who controlled the British Prime Minister—against Germany was so brutal that he did not hesitate to violate the most basic humanitarian feelings in the conduct of the war. It is Churchill himself who, with supreme casualness, wrote in his Memoirs: “I gave instructions to the War Cabinet that all German air ambulances were to be shot down or forced down by our fighters. “

***

The total number of deaths caused among the population of Germany by the Anglo-American terror bombing is difficult to assess. The figure of three million has been given. At any rate, the lower figure was produced by the Swiss newspaper Die Tat, in an article by Zurich demographer Dr. Adalbert Aigner, who states:

“The figure of 2,050,000 killed in the bombing of German cities seems to me closest to the truth “[469].

The English writer David Irving, believes the figure is close to two and a half million [470]. More than 15,000 Anglo-American crew members lost their lives in these bombings in which stupidity vied with the most satanic cruelty in endless combat. Meanwhile, German industry, infinitely less attacked than the civilian population, reached its highest war production in late 1944.

We must bear in mind the number of injured and maimed by bombings, which has been assessed at just over four million people, mostly, of course, women, children and the elderly. Likewise, we must bear in mind the chronically ill and those who subsequently died because of carbon monoxide poisoning. Professor Lindemann considered that the carbon monoxide released by the bombs would cause approximately 70 percent of the victims of the bombing. In summary, we believe personally that the total number of deaths due to Allied terror bombings must have been about 4 million, but we will give as our official evaluation, the lowest we have found: 2,050,000.

While every German city of any importance was heavily bombed, it is worth making special mention of the bombings of Berlin and, above all, of Hamburg, on July 25 and August 3, 1943. The attacks on the suburbs of the old Hanseatic city took place at night, and with a fury hitherto unequalled.

But all previous records of gratuitous violence were broken in the bombing of Dresden, conducted in the night of 13 to 14 February, 1945. That was the bloodiest act of war carried out, in the entire history of the world, against a civilian population. Dresden was then about 115 kilometers from the Germano-Russian front lines, and to her had come more than half a million refugees, women, children and elderly. Dresden was an open city. It had no barracks, no weapons factories and no military objectives of any kind. It did have, however, many hospitals, with huge red crosses painted on their roofs.

On the morning of February 13, 35 British planes flew reconnaissance over Dresden and took many photographs, without being disturbed by the Luftwaffe, which was occupied at the front, or by air defenses, which were non-existent in a residential city whose only industry was ceramics. At night, 800 RAF bombers dropped on the defenseless city, crowded with refugees, a torrent of explosive and incendiary bombs. At dawn the next day, a second wave of bombers released another avalanche of fire. And hours later, another 1,200 planes finished pounding the destroyed city, fueling the horrific pyre with oil cans. In total, 10,000 explosive bombs were dropped on Dresden and 650,000 incendiary bombs, in addition to 15,000 cans of oil, a hectolitre each. [471] The English writer F.J.P. Veale says: “Heightening the dramatic impression, amid the general horror the beasts of the Zoo, made frantic by the noise and by the glow of the explosions, escaped. It is said that these animals, as well as groups of refugees, were shot when they tried to escape through the Great Park by low-flying fighter aircraft… in the park were later found many bodies of men and animals riddled with bullets … To prevent epidemics caused by the putrefying bodies, huge pyres had to be built, each holding five thousand bodies or body parts. The gruesome task lasted for several weeks.“

Dresden — before

Dresden – after

Estimates of the total number of victims in that massive bombing vary greatly from one to another. Some put the figure as high as a quarter of a million. Personally we feel inclined to adhere to that number [472]. Irving dares not give figures, although he favors the figure of 235,000 dead, [473] and presumably the number of injured was at least double that amount. In short, the crime against the free city of Dresden cost more deaths than the two bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Here is what FJP Veale says about it:

“For the popular mind, perhaps the best that can be said of the launch of the first atomic bomb is that death literally fell from the blue sky over the doomed city. But what happened there may seem less disturbing than what happened a few months earlier in Dresden, where a huge mass of homeless women and children who had just arrived there had to run wildly through an unknown city seeking a safe place, amid bomb blasts, burning phosphorus and collapsing buildings.” [474]

Air Commodore Leslie MacLean, in a book [475] written after the war, censured the English Air Staff that

“turned away from its old traditions to the point of abandoning the last remnants of humanity and chivalry, and for nothing … because the aerial terror attacks were a failure militarily. Even though the nation suffered bombings on a scale never before imagined, it did not bow down under the terrible punishment.”

The Americans took over from the British after the bombing of Dresden. According to David Irving in his frequently quoted book:

“The day after the brutal attack, Americans attacked Chemnitz. This time there was no attempt to disguise the object of attack. Curiously, although Chemnitz had a tank factory, several textile factories that made uniforms for the army, and one of the largest locomotive repair centers in the Reich, the following orders were given to the American squadrons: “Tonight the objective will be Chemnitz. You are going there to attack the refugees who will arrive after the attack on Dresden last night. Your reason for going there is to finish off all refugees who may have escaped the fires of Dresden. You will carry the same cargo of bombs, and if tonight’s attack has the same success as last night’s, you won’t be returning to carry out raids behind the Russian front.”

And Irving adds: “The ferocity of the raid of the U.S. strategic aviation throughout the day of February 14 finally brought the civilians to their knees … But it was not bombs which finally demoralized the people, it was the Mustang fighter planes that, suddenly descending on the city, opened fire on everything that moved.”

It seems unnecessary to say, and yet it must be said, that none of those responsible for this macabre and useless crime was ever prosecuted for war crimes.

Although Germany took first prize for martyrdom in the matter of terror bombings against civilians, other European countries also suffered, although on a much smaller scale.

Rome, Milan and Venice had their residential areas bombed, and even Paris, Brussels, Antwerp, Sofia and Bucharest. Special mention should be made of the bombing of the port of Le Havre, carried out by the Americans one day before occupation by the Americans themselves, and after the Germans had fully evacuated the city.

One explanation for such a stupid and gratuitous act of destruction can be found in the fact that, in 1946, it was an American consortium that was responsible—with France, of course, footing the bill—for rebuilding the port.

In the Far East, the action of the U.S. Air Force against Japan did not at first feature such exceptional cruelty as that displayed in Germany. Nevertheless, we should mention the bombing of the city of Toyama, with about 125,000 inhabitants, in late 1944. According to historian Caidin, the buildings of the city were 98.6% destroyed. [476] #+

Tokyo suffered several bombings, the largest one in late May, 1945. In that attack, although several factories were attacked, the population center of the city was also bombed. It has been said that there were 500,000 victims in one day, the lowest figure given by the literature being 130,000. That is, more or less Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, although no official figures have been given that can be compared.

Indeed, and as the American Spanish language propaganda magazine En Guardia [No. 9, year 4] recognized, “so destructive was the campaign that the Japanese authorities were forced to relocate most of the population from Tokyo.”

The spiritual father of these bombings against Japan was General Curtis Emerson LeMay, a York Rite Freemason who had already made a name for himself in air attacks against German cities from 1942 to 1944.

It has been claimed that the attack on Tokyo was a mere bombing of a military objective. However, what could not in any way be considered attacks on military targets were the two atomic bombs released by the Americans on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It has been claimed that President Truman personally ordered the atomic attacks on both these cities in order to force Japan to sue for peace, thus preventing massive American bloodshed.

This argument would be valid in the absence of two facts that invalidate it completely:

a] In early 1945, the Mikado had put out peace feelers through the Soviet Union and Sweden, but Roosevelt refused them, demanding unconditional surrender [477].

b] In May 1945, just days after Germany’s surrender, Suzuki, the new President of the Council of Ministers of Japan, offered to withdraw Nipponese troops from all of Burma, China, Malaysia and the islands they still held in the Pacific. He asked only for the non-occupation of the capital city of Tokyo and that the imperial family be treated with respect. The offer was made through the Vatican diplomatic service, specifying that it was “a basis for negotiation,” that is to say that it was a minimum offer, and that other U.S. requirements could be discussed and consequently accepted.

But Truman followed in the footsteps of his predecessor, Roosevelt, and rejected the Japanese offer. [478] .

On August 6, 1945, a U.S. plane dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, a city devoid of military objectives and, therefore, of course, of air defenses: 70,000 people died on the spot.

Japan officially sued for peace. Washington carefully prepared its response to the Japanese request. Very laboriously, so that Stalin would have time to denounce the treaty with Tokyo, declare war on Japan and participate as a “belligerent” in the Peace Conference. It did so on the 8th of August. Twenty-four hours later a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. 55,000 deaths. The Empire of the Rising Sun sued for peace again — actually, for the fourth time.

This time, Truman magnanimously granted it–although, of course, unconditionally.

The fact is, however, that such “unconditionality” would be, in practice, much less harsh than that imposed on Germany. In fact, the Americans applied the conditions Japan had requested of Truman in May; but the practical difference was huge: if the Nipponese request of May 1945 had been accepted—which was equivalent for all practical purposes to an unconditional surrender—the USSR would not have had time to declare war on Japan (which was, amazingly, requested by Truman) and could not have meddled in the affairs of East Asia.

The rejection of President Suzuki’s request in May 1945 had the following consequence: at the end of the war in the Far East the Soviets, who had not fired a single shot against the Japanese, occupied the south of Sakhalin Island and Manchuria, which they claimed in the peace treaty.

On the other hand, all the countries that had actually fought against Japan emerged from their participation in the “victorious” war with territorial losses: the English and the Dutch lost their Asian empires, the Americans lost the Philippines, and the Chinese, who had fought against Japan since 1931, received as a reward the imposition of Communism, made possible by Washington.

All this as a result of the criminal delay in accepting Japan’s surrender. All this, in order to drop two atom bombs on two defenseless cities.

And we must not overlook the interesting observation by English Catholic writer, Arthur Kenneth Chesterton, who notes:

a) The largest Catholic community in Japan was precisely in Hiroshima.

b) The largest Protestant and second largest Christian community, after Hiroshima, was Nagasaki.

c) The order to launch those bombs was given personally by President Harry Truman.

We cannot close the “case” of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, without mentioning that since then, survivors of the horrific slaughter have been dying each year in consequence of the same. In June 1979, the press referred to the suicide of one of them who, after enduring for more than 30 years the ills caused by radiation, ended his days upon being diagnosed with cancer caused by it. The number of deaths caused by the effects of radiation from the day following the bombing up until today, exceeds 25,000, and the births of babies with deformities caused by it, is no less than 18,000.

***

Although for reasons of space, we have wanted to limit to a few pages the subject of air terrorism by the “good guys,” we do not wish to ignore the subject of two particular types of crimes worthy in their implementation of barbaric, ignorant and depraved beings: attacks against children and attacks against works of art.

On March 18, 1941, the Swedish press [480] published, terrified, the news that the British aviation had literally inundated several Italian populations with seemingly innocuous objects, such as pencil cases, fountain pens and toys which, when picked up, exploded, causing serious injuries to those who naively took them into their hands. The satanic experiment was repeated in Germany. In the graphic documentation that accompanied this article can be seen the effect on German and Italian children caused by the deadly toys. We must mention also that in the barbaric air raid against the city of Freiburg on May 10, 1940, British aviation in addition to dropping their bombs, swooped down and flew low to strafe a park where many children were playing, of whom 20 perished, riddled with bullets. We could enlarge on this unpleasant subject, but believe that as an indication these two sad examples will suffice.

The war against European art, carried out with singular violence by the British and American air forces, was, sadly, an outstanding success. The French writer Henry La Farge, in a book prefaced by the Spaniard Juan Estelrich-–and certainly neither one could be categorized as Nazis—cites the major destruction of artistic monuments caused by the war. Of the 410 main destructions mentioned in the book in question [481], at least 357 are attributable, without a shadow of a doubt, to the air forces of the Allied “good guys” and another 31, which show similar features, can be similarly attributed. The 22 which can be attributed to the “bad guys” occurred either because of bombardments on land in the course of battle (such as the Royal Palace and the Palace Staczic of Warsaw, or the Church of St. Lawrence in Rotterdam), or else in the bombing of military targets which, by mistake, caused damage to monuments such as the Cathedral of Coventry. To the retaliatory weapons, V-1 and V-2, can be attributed the irreparable damage caused to the Merchant Taylor’s Hall and Portland House, London, and the Church of St. Nicholas of Bristol.

As for the “good guys,” the patented inventors of air terrorism, we must recognize their “merit” for having destroyed such architectural treasures as the Gothic Quarter and the Cathedral of Ulm, the Castle of Karlsruhe, the Stuttgart Convent Church, the Church of St. Killian of Heilbronn, the “Marienkapelle” of Würzburg,

Würzburg

….all of the beautiful city of Hildesheim, considered to be the finest city in Europe, the Church of the Ladies in Nuremberg, Monbijou Castle in Berlin, the City of Brunswick (in German, Braunschweig), the aforementioned devastation of Dresden, the Monte di Pieta of Vicenza, the Salvadego Palace and the Church of Santa Maria dei Miracoli in Brescia, the Monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie and the Royal Palace in Milan, Palazzo Pallavicini in Genoa, the Farnese Theater in Parma, the Bologna Anatomical Museum, the Temple of Malatesta in Rimini, the Cemetery of Pisa with its incomparable frescoes by Benozzo Gozzoli, the Monastery of Santa Clara in Naples, Benevento Cathedral,  Mainz, and a thousand other jewels of our Europe, destroyed for nothing, for nothing … Why?

Cologne on the Rhine in 1945

Nordhausen in 1945

Mannheim — direct hit on an elementary school

Perhaps, as would be demonstrated later—as is demonstrated daily–it is because the Powers That Be who triggered that idiotic war, in fact hated all Europeans, without distinguishing between the Nazis and non-Nazis.

Isn’t it true that the Germans, while they were at war with France, never once bombed Paris, but the British did, in June 1941, causing damage in the poorest neighborhoods of the French capital, killing 1,500 people, mostly civilians?

Wasn’t that the RAF? What they hated was not only Germany, but all of Europe and its spirit, represented by its most consummate artistic treasures.

The Powers That Be set in motion their puppets in the Western democracies because they hated and feared Europe, present and future; and in order to kill this future they attacked, with diabolical logic, both the future generation, the children, and the glories of Europe’s past.

Lindemann, the father of air terrorism, was made a Lord by George VI. But the wretched executioner of Germany, Churchill, who merely carried out the dirty work for those who planned it, remained only “Sir.” For those who really commanded, it was “Lord”. For mere Gentile tools, for the uncircumcised footsoldiers, “Sir,” and “thanks, sucker.”

Endnotes:

443. Encyclopedia Britannica: Vol VI., Pg. 678.

444. In spite of the obstructionism English in this matter, the Hague Convention had banned the bombing of civilian populations. All powers of the first or second order ratified the Convention, the only exception being the USSR. [Author’s note]

445. Even though Chamberlain was still, temporarily, in power, Hitler was aware that the soul of the war clan in England was Churchill, and therefore referred to him. The facts prove the Führer was right. [Author’s note]

446. The New York Times, 5/13/1940.

447. J. M. Spaight Bombing Vindicated. [Internet edition: http://aaargh-international.org/fran/livres/livres4/Bombing.pdf]

448. F.J.P. Veale: The Crime of Nuremberg.

449. J.F.C. Fuller: The Conduct of War.

450. Thomas Elmhurst: The German Air Force.

451. J.M. Spaight Bombing Vindicated.

452 / Sir Arthur Harris Bomber Offensive.”

453 / F.J.P. Veale: The Crime of Nuremberg.

454 / J.M. Spaight: The Phantom of Douhet.

455 / Chicago Sun. 3/14/1944.

456 / Daily Mail, London, 12/28/1943.

457 / Daily Mail. London, 9/22/1942.

458 / Statement to the press of Quebec, 8/19/1943.

459 / Reuters, 9/11/1943.

460 / Exchange, London, 12/151943.

461 / Sunday Times, 1/2/1944.

462 / Daily Mirror, London, 12/25/1944.

463 / New Statesman and Nation, 12/4/1943.

464 / Newsweek, New York, 12/6/1943.

465 / New York World Telegram, 5/12/1943.

466 / Douhet was an Italian aviator who, before anyone, advocated the terrorist bombing of civilian populations to force the enemy to capitulate. [N. of A].

467 / David Irving: The Destruction of Dresden, pg .. 44.

468 / Ibid. ID op. pg. 45-46.

472 / F.J.P. Veale: The Crime of Nuremberg.

473 / David Iiving: Dresden.

474 / F.J.P. Veale: Ibid. ID op.

475 / Leslie MacLean: Bomber Offensive.

476 / Martin Caidin: A Torch to the Enemy.

477 / Georges Ollivier: Franklin Roosevelt L’homme Yalta.

478 / Robert E. Theobald: Last Secret of Peal Harbour.

479 / A.K. Chesterton: Candour, September 1963.

480 / Svenska Dagbladet, Stockholm, 3/18/1941.

481 / Henry La Farge, The Lost Treasures of Europe.

441 / Charles Lindbergh: Ibid. ID op, pg. 409.

.

.

.

….On Margaret Huffstickler

Margaret Huffstickler, who on September 12, 2022 passed on after a brave four-and-a-third-year struggle with cancer, contributed many articles for The Barnes Review 2005-2023,

….especially translations from French and Spanish, and an original article she wrote on “Cattle Kate,” the nickname of a Wyoming farm woman, originally from Canada, who was wrongly lynched, along with her husband, as supposed cattle rustlers by a ruthless cattle baron who wanted their land and water for his cattle.

.

Margi (with a hard “g” as in MarGAret) Huffstickler — whose German ancestor was the Pennsylvania Mennonite Jakob Hochstetter, which became “Huffstickler” — was born in Ft. Myers, Florida on November 3, 1948, and was raised in Arizona and North Carolina.

Her father Albert was an outstanding poet in Austin, Texas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Huffstickler).

Her mother Hazel (who, divorced, later married a fine man, John Robinson, and became Hazel Robinson) founded and directed a major Shakespeare festival in sophisticated, wealthy Asheville, North Carolina, the Montford Park Players.

.

Margi, with all her parental artistic genes, studied both music and acting, obtaining a master’s degree in music from Catholic University.

.

.

(Her advisor in the Catholic University music department, Dr.  Cordovana, a kindly and courtly gentleman who loved Margi, was framed for non-existent sexual harassment, and was forced into retirement — by the new department head — a jew whom Dr. Cordovana, all tolerant and naive about jewry, himself had pushed to be hired! Next thing, the music department at Catholic U. was doing Holocaust music!)

.

Margi at eighteen

.

Margi acted at the Stage Theater in Washington DC and sang opera at the John F. Kennedy Center and the Washington Opera Society. Her drama teacher in DC was John Bullock, the father of the major movie star Sandra Bullock, whom Margi briefly knew and liked.

Ironically, her first starring role at eighteen was as the jewess Anne Frank — LOL! But her opinion on jewry sure changed!

Basically apolitical, and into the arts, Margi became a victim twice of severe sexual violence in black-ruled Washington DC.

Nevertheless, her big reality wake-up call was the Israeli destruction of the Palestinian village of Jenin in 2002 by order of the obese Israeli prime minister and war criminal Ariel Sharon.

Margi then began reading everything online about the jews, the Holyhoax, Israel, Germany and Hitler.

I met her as a new hire, like myself, literally on Hitler’s birthday in 2005 at the offices of the revisionist bimonthly history magazine The Barnes Review. She had come to volunteer there, to work for free — but publisher Willis Carto hired her on the spot.

Margaret was a public speaker….translator, writer, and a loving mate.

She bravely underwent massive cancer treatments at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota in 2019 with my help.

.

Her throat was fire-red after 34 sessions of proton-beam radiation.

.

Her weight fell from 115 to 72.

She beat cancer the first time, but it came back in 2021.

I feel her love and caring now from the other side — her golden heart toward me, and her passion for our sacred and urgent cause. Onward and upward!

.

.

.

.

.