Psychological Support Systems of Two Chosen People
As anyone who travels in historical circles can testify, the English
are once again dragging their historical fables of the World War One era
out of the closet. Once again, they are promoting the fable of German
aggression and brutality while ignoring the record of the British
Empire. A researcher recently concluded that there were only twenty
nations on earth that had not been the victims of English invasions over
the centuries. That was English invasions, not German invasions. Yet these are the English who accuse the Germans of being uniquely horrible.
A Professor Sheffield is arguing nonsense such as the absurd
contention that the Somme was a harbinger of victory and a paradigm of
successful warfare. No one at the time so regarded it. Sheffield also
claims that Douglas Haig, far from being a butcher, was a commander who
gained great insights from the war. These “insights” were remarkably
illustrated in Haig’s post-war comment that “the horse shall remain the
queen of the battlefield”. If Haig learned anything, it certainly was
not how to pull his head out of his horse’s ass. Professor Sheffield
further amuses by claiming the English had won the war before the
American Expeditionary Force arrived. He bases this on a few English
victories at the end of the war and the fact that the German offensive
had stalled. But Professor Sheffield ignores that had it not been for
the possibility of getting America in, the English would have had to sue
for peace in 1916 – after those devastatingly costly so-called
“victories” at Paaschendale and the Somme.
Professor Sheffield knows perfectly that the English lied through
their teeth about handless Belgian babies, human soap factories,
crucified Canadian soldiers and the like. Yet he would have the reader
believe that the same English told the truth about the origins of the
war. As to brutality, Professor Sheffield is no doubt aware that it was
the inhumane English who imposed a merciless starvation blockade on
Europe, starving hundreds of thousands of civilians to death. It was
precisely what one would expect from the criminal empire that murdered
25,000 Dutch children and 4000 women of disease and starvation in the
Boer war. That was the innovation of the English Heinrich Himmler, Lord
Herbert Kitchener, who was the role model for the German Nazis envious
of his methods.
As to the origins of the war, Professor Sheffield knows, Fritz
Fischer to the contrary that the Germans, and Kaiser Wilhelm in
particular, had virtually nothing to do with it. The war was caused by
Russian Pan-Slavic ambitions in the Balkans and the joint Franco-Russian
mobilization. That left the Germans little choice but to strike in
self-defense. No argument that England was acting to protect “poor,
innocent” Belgium can be tolerated. Belgium was anything but innocent.
The Belgian government had been secretly collaborating with the English
in preparation for an upcoming war with Germany. Internal English
documents show that England was prepared to invade Belgium herself
without any provocation from Germany.
Professor Sheffield also knows that it was Kaiser Wilhelm who pleaded
desperately with his cousin, Nicholas of Russia, to stop the onrush of
war that would devastate western civilization beyond repair. The
cold-blooded English imperialists, motivated solely by a desire to
destroy a political and commercial rival, entertained no such
humanitarian motivations. Professor Sheffield is no doubt aware of the
highly inconvenient revisionists of the 1920’s who punctured the
official lies of the Entente governments, particularly the British
government. He would rather forget the works of Barnes, Fay, Montgelas
and others and pretend that such works have been superseded by more
“authoritative” (read: updated English lies) works.
Professor Sheffield is a contemptible charlatan. In this he is no
different from any other English historian, past or present. The English
will no more let go of their World War One holy lies than the Jews will
let go of their “gas chamber” hoax. Both are a central part of their
national identity. Both are psychological support systems of two “chosen
peoples” the world can do without.
No comments:
Post a Comment