vendredi 28 juin 2013

The Battle of Britain and the uncertain strategy of Hitler: other intentional "mistakes"

June 1940. France and Britain have been defeated by Germany. The British army has lost a huge part of its heavy armament and equipment while embarking at Dunkirk. Hitler begins to think about invading England. But, instead of doing this, he attacks Britain only with the Luftwaffe (which is already quite bizarre).

In July, Hitler begins by attacking the boats. Then, seeing the small results of this strategy, he changes his mind and decides to destroy the royal air force (RAF) and military strategic points.

Between the beginning of August and the 7th of September, Things go quite well. The RAF is on the verge of being destroyed. But, suddenly, Hitler changes once again his strategy and begins to bomb the towns.

The explanation of this is that, on August 24, a German bomber sent erroneously its bombs on London while he thought he was bombing the Thameshaven refinery. The day after, the RAF sent bombers on Berlin in retaliation. Furious about this, the 7th of September, Hitler stopped attacking the RAF and military areas and began to bomb only towns. This lasted until October. Then, Hitler decided to not invade England. Thus, the military effort on England was strongly decreased. There were still some bombings (until spring 1941), but much less than during September.

Those strategies and changes of strategy seem already strange even when you believe in the official theory. Hitler knew that attacking boats would not lead to anything, since the boats would go in safe areas of course. So, why try to attack boats? Then, he began to do the right thing, that is, attack the RAF and strategic points. It was good. But the new change of strategy (bombing towns) was once again very strange. He was on the point of destroying the RAF in just one month, and suddenly, because of just one little bombing on Berlin, he was suddenly dominated by his nerves, and decided to abandon completely his winning strategy? Very strange indeed.

mercredi 26 juin 2013

Hitler doing masonic handshakes and signs

Here are some photos and paintings with Hitler doing masonic handshakes and signs.

A clear masonic sign with the left hand (the two middle fingers are stuck together while the others are separated from them, an unnatural position) 

This first image is in fact a painting from Heinrich Knirr (made in 1937). 

Of course, skeptics could think that maybe Knirr invented this masonic sign and Hitler never did it. But historians say Knirr made his paintings from Heinrich Hoffmann's photos. And he tried to just copy the photo the most faithfully possible. There is just one painting from life of Adolf Hitler: it's a portrait made by Knirr in 1935, at Berchtesgaden. All the other ones were made from photos. 

You could also make the hypothesis that maybe Knirr was a freemason himself and that he maliciously painted this masonic hand sign. But, if Hitler and the Nazi regime had been what they seemed to be, Knirr would never have dared to do that. As the portrait would be seen by everybody, he would have feared that some antimasonic Nazi would have been able to recognize the masonic sign. Then he would have been sent in prison or in a concentration camp, or even executed. He would have never taken such a risk just for the little pleasure of putting a masonic sign on a painting of Hitler. 

So, it's indeed Hitler who did this masonic sign.

samedi 22 juin 2013

The strange Greco-Italian war decided by Mussolini

I have already talked about Greece in the previous article. We are going to see more details about this affair.

So, the 28th of October 1940, Mussolini suddenly declared war on Greece. 560.000 Italians faced 300.000 Greeks. Then, not only Greeks weren't defeated, but they even counter-attacked. In December, they had been able to advance of nearly 50 km in the Albanian territory. The 9th of March, Mussolini launched a second offensive, which didn't work either. After one week and 12.000 soldiers killed, he decided to stop the offensive and to let Hitler resolve the problem. For days after, his army left Albania. Thus, Hitler was forced to intervene in order to avoid a serious defeat for his ally. Germany invaded Greece the 6th of April, and Greece lost the 28th of April.

There are several logical problems with this affair.
  1. It's not the strangest of all the discrepancies, but why did Mussolini attack Greece? The argument that Mussolini was jealous of Hitler is quite ridiculous. Maybe the one that he wanted to remake a Roman empire is a little bit believable. But the Greek government was a dictatorship. Metaxas was anticommunist. His ideas were close of those of Mussolini. He should have been an ally instead of an enemy. It's a little bit like if Mussolini had attacked Spain.
  2. Why did Mussolini attack at this moment (October 28 1940)? The timing of the attack was bizarre. At this very moment, things didn't go very well in North Africa: the 150.000 soldiers of the 10th army weren't able to attack the 36.000 British soldiers. Ok, the attack hadn't already taken place. But the Generals of Mussolini were warning him that the armies of North Africa weren't ready for an attack. And as Mussolini didn't know what would happen in North Africa, he should have been cautious and wait before attacking Greece. He should have waited until the battle of North Africa was finished, and attack Greece after that. Autumn and winter were also not especially the best seasons to make an attack. It is said that it's because the season was inappropriate for an attack that Hitler didn't attack Greece right away.
  3. How could they lose, and so quickly? They were vastly superior concerning the number of soldiers (there were 560.000 Italians against 300.000 Greeks, so, almost 2 against 1). And, as Italy was much bigger and richer than Greece (44 million people against 7), they were much better equipped than Greeks. According to Wikipedia, they had 163 tanks when Greece had only 20, 463 aircrafts (Greece 77). Thus, they shouldn't have lost so quickly.
  4. What did England do there? When they began to send troops (the sending was finally decided the 22nd of February, and the first troops were sent the 6th of March 1941), they knew Germany was on the verge of participating to the invasion (they invaded Greece the 6th of April 1941). So, they were absolutely sure to lose. And, at the same time, they were almost sure to win in North Africa. So, why mobilize 58.000 soldiers in Greece where they were sure of losing instead of sending them in North Africa, where they were sure to win? British also took troops of North Africa to send them in Greece. This is why the attack against Italians in North Africa was stopped the 7th of February 1941. Germany began sending troops in North Africa the 11th of February (via Tripoli). But there were enough of them only at the beginning of March. So, during one month, England could have obliterated the Italian forces and pushed until Tripoli (in 15 days, between the 22nd of January and the 7th of February, they had progressed 400 km). It is also said that sending British troops in Greece was not accepted by Greek government at the beginning because there was a high risk that it would lead Hitler to attack Greece. And indeed, the intervention of England in Greece was one of the reasons he did it.

When you understand that Hitler was a Jewish shill and that World War II was staged, all those discrepancies can be explained.

lundi 17 juin 2013

Why didn't Hitler attack British forces in North Africa in 1940?

Another discrepancy is about the Battle of North Africa. In August 1940, the Battle of France was over. England had lost a lot of his heavy armament. They were under the attack of the Luftwaffe. They were under the threat of being invaded. In this situation, they couldn't send troops to North Africa.

At this time, there were only 36.000 British soldiers in North Africa, with 250 airplanes.

So, Hitler had a free hand to be able to defeat them and to get the oil of the Middle East. And oil of the Middle East was very important for Hitler. Officially, this is why he attacked the Russians in the south in 1941, instead of attacking Moscow, and thus, lost the war against Russia.

Hitler knew that British wouldn't be able to send reinforcements. And during the following 10 months, his armies wouldn't do anything. So, in August 1940, the moment was perfect to send troops in North Africa and beat the British armies. He didn't have to send tons of soldiers; just 100.000 would have been enough.

But no, Hitler didn't do anything until the beginning of 1941 (of course, it was already almost too late). And he sent only few forces. Thus it wasn't enough to make the decision (he did something only because Italians had big problems against English forces).

Once again, if you think that Hitler was for real, you don't understand. Ok, there are the arguments that Hitler relied on Italian forces at the beginning, or that he was concentrated on invading England, and then on invading Russia.

But Italian Forces had proved to be inefficient. The battle against English forces of North Africa was constantly delayed.  And even for Italian generals themselves, it was obvious that this offensive was doomed to failure. They didn't have enough heavy tanks, enough anti-tank material, enough trucks to transport troops, etc... And Italians had proved to be quite inefficient during the Battle of France. So, Hitler had to know this, obviously. Thus, as the objective was very important, he should have wanted to help the Italians; for example by giving them material and some troops (let's say, at least 50.000 soldiers), in order to have a quick result.

Ok, he was concentrated on England, and after that, on Russia. But, not even one year before, he was not so concentrated on the Battle of France that he forgot to invade Denmark or Norway. Also, it didn't have to distract him very much. He just had to ask one of his generals to plan the attack. And it is said by historians that in fact, he didn't take the invasion of England too seriously. So, in August, Germans should have been able to plan and organize an attack in North Africa.

All those excuses sound clearly phony. But when you know that Hitler was a jew working for more powerful Jewish leaders, you can understand what happened. Hitler had no intention at all to vanquish British forces in North Africa. For Jewish leaders, it would have been very problematic.

vendredi 14 juin 2013

The strange alliance between Germany and Japan

The way of considering things presented in the previous article (about why the war between the USA and Germany was declared only in 1941) explains also the strange alliance between Germany and Japan.

As we have seen it before, to justify all those years of inaction from the USA, Jewish leaders had to give a quite good explanation. The one they found was that America was dominated by isolationists. In December 1941, it was then quite difficult to say that suddenly, they weren't isolationists anymore. Thus, because they were supposed to still be isolationists, the declaration of war of December 1941 couldn't come from them. It had to come from Germany.

This way, the USA could enter the war without creating a discrepancy. But, of course, Germany had everything to lose in a war with the USA, since it was already fighting Russia and England. There would have been no reason at all for Germany to suddenly declare war on the USA at the fall of 1941.

This is why the Japanese alliance was required. With it, Germany had a reason to declare war on the USA. Even if the reason seemed very phony, there was at least a reason. Once this reason created, Jewish Medias just had to sell the idea that Hitler was a man of honor and thus, felt obligated to declare war on the USA.

With Japan, Jewish leaders had a country totally independent from Europe; a country which then could declare war on the USA at any desired time, something very useful and convenient since the moment the war between Germany and the USA had to be declared was quite strange (if Japan hadn't been involved).

This is why there was this very strange alliance between Japan and Germany (September 27 1940). It had nothing to do with the official story; that is, Hitler had Japan in great esteem and thought Japanese were kind of Germanic Asians. It also had nothing to do with the hope that Japan would participate to the war against Russia.

Of course, it means that the Japanese government was already controlled by jews. Otherwise, Jewish leaders wouldn't have relied on it for this agenda which needed to be very precise.

PS: Indeed, this alliance was very strange. What did Hitler, who thought that German and Nordic races were the only ones which worthed something, do with Asians?

Officially, from the point of view of Germans, this alliance was concluded because of USSR. Hitler hoped that Japan would help him against Russia (that is, would declare war to Russia). The problem is: in September 1940, it was clear that Japan wouldn't help Germany against Russia. First, it was very dubious that they could do it, since they were already very busy with China, Southern Asia, India, etc… And they most probably didn't want it. Why would Japan attack Russia? They didn't have any profits to make in this affair. The only lands they could gain were of very low interest. And for those poor lands, they would have to make a war against a very powerful adversary. China, Southern Asia presented much more interests for them. It was obvious. So, Hitler didn't have any help against Russia to hope for. And he couldn't ignore it.

In fact, the alliance with Japan was extremely dangerous, since, in September 1940, it seemed more and more likely that they would finally make war against the USA; something which was totally against the interests of Germany.

So, why an alliance? Why not just a cordial relationship?

Ok, maybe why not an alliance? But, then, not a serious one. Just an alliance on paper. Not an alliance leading to declare war on the USA. But it was not a superficial alliance. It was a very serious one (at least in the mind of Hitler), since it leaded Germany to declare war on the USA.

So, this alliance was very strange. But when you understand that the war was staged, you understand why this alliance took place. It was concluded only to allow the USA to enter the war against Germany without having to do the first step.

Why was the war between the USA and Germany declared only in 1941?

When you study the Battle of France, Dunkirk, the Battle of North Africa, etc, with a revisionist eye (that is, knowing that Hitler was a Zionist jew), you quickly ask yourself why the USA didn't declared war on Germany in 1939 or 1940. And you also ask yourself why it was Germany which declared war against America and not the contrary. And as quickly, you understand why.

Indeed, the fact that America didn't declared war on Germany sooner is extremely fishy. As England, France and all European countries, the USA had been dominated by the jews since an long time. In 1939, the president was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a jew. Roosevelt is a derivative of the Jewish name Rosenfeld, and Delano is also a Jewish name.

The infamous banknote of one dollar, the one with the pyramid and the all seeing eye, has been created in 1933, after the election of Roosevelt. The Jewish leaders sent then an important signal toward Gentiles. It meant "we are now powerful enough to show you clearly that we are the masters and you are the cattle". So, things were clear regarding the nature of the government of the USA.

So, America should have been the one which would have declared war on Germany, not the contrary. And America would have declared it as soon as England and France had declared war on Germany, that is, in 1939. And long before that, America should have pushed other Jewish dominated states of Europe (France, England, etc…) to make war on Germany.

And if they hadn't done it in 1939, they would have done it in 1940, after Dunkirk; because they would have feared an invasion of England. So, by declaring war on Germany, they would have probably prevented an invasion of it. Hitler would have been too afraid of the immense power of America to try to invade England.

They should have declared it also not long after June 1941, because Germany was then fighting Russians. If Germany had won against Russia, it would have been a catastrophe for the USA and of course, for the Jewish power.

But, no, they never declared war on Germany. It's Germany which declared war on the USA in December 1941, after the declaration of war from Japan to America.

So, the Jewish power was severely challenged by a supposed Anti-Semite, and they did nothing? Absolutely incredible. Super fishy.

mardi 11 juin 2013

Hitler and Dunkirk: it was not a mistake

The case of Dunkirk is one of those which show the most clearly that Hitler was a jew working for Jewish leaders.

Even when I still believed Hitler was for real, I couldn't understand his reaction about Dunkirk. It was a big logical hole in the wwII story. And the official explanation about Hitler wanting to be friend with England didn't hold one second.

For those who don't know, France and England declared war to Germany the 3rd of September 1939, after the invasion of Poland by Hitler's armies. But the real war between France/England and Germany began only May 10 1940, when Hitler invaded France and Belgium.

At the end of May, the situation was the following:

In May 21, 230.000 British soldiers and around 180.000 French soldiers were separated from the rest of the Allied army (in the red zone of the map).  The 26, they began to retreat toward Dunkirk. The 28, the pocket of resistance was now only 37 km long (Dunkirk to Nieuport) and 9km large at best (Beaches to the space before Bergues). There were 800.000 German soldiers against the 410.000 Allied soldiers.

There were two moments in which the decisions of Hitler allowed Allied forces to flee: between the 24 and the 26, and between the 28 and the 4.