Aggregatore di feed

Germany’s Nazis Exclude Russians from May 8th Victory Day WW2 Celebration.

Lew Rockwell Institute - Lun, 05/05/2025 - 05:01

FDR’s lengthy fireside chat to the nation on 28 April 1942, said: “On the European front the most important development of the past year has been without question the crushing counteroffensive on the part of the great armies of Russia against the powerful German Army. These Russian forces have destroyed and are destroying more armed power of our enemies — troops, planes, tanks, and guns — than all the other United Nations put together.” (NOTE: He was already using the phrase “United Nations” with the objective in mind for all of the world’s nations to view themselves as having been saved by the U.N. that FDR was intending ultimately to replace all empires and to be the sole source of international laws.) Near the War’s end, on 19 September 1944, Churchill telegrammed to Stalin “that it is the Russian army that tore the guts out of the German military machine and is at the present moment holding by far the larger portion of the enemy on its front.” As the History Channel’s article “Operation Barbarossa” summed-up: “On 22 June 1941, German forces began their invasion of the Soviet Union, … the most powerful invasion force in history, … 80% of the German army … [plus] 30 divisions of Finnish and Romanian troops. [And nowadays yet again, Germany along with Romania and Finland are allied with what has been, ever since FDR died, America’s 80-year effort to conquer Russia.] … By the time Germany officially surrendered to the Allies on 8 May 1945, 80% of its casualties during WW2 had come on the Eastern Front [the Soviet Union].” Wikipedia’s “Operation Barbarossa” said “The failure of Operation Barbarossa reversed the fortunes of the Third Reich.”

Russia’s thanks nowadays for having saved America, UK, and Europe, from a Nazi victory, and saved the entire world from what would otherwise have been a Nazi victory if Russia had not won the crucial Battle of Kursk — the biggest military battle of all time — on 23 August 1943, has, by the explicit order of Germany’s present-day Government, been excluded from having any representative participating or even attending in Germany’s May 8th national celebration of Gemany’s defeat. The Governments of the United States and of the United Kingdom are not criticizing Germany for this nazistic abomination toward the country that had sacrificed more than any other and contributed the most to DEFEATING Hitler’s Nazis.

On April 4th, Germany’s Berliner Zeitung headlined (as translated into English) “Secret handout: Baerbock doesn’t want Russians at war commemoration: On the anniversary of the end of the war, the Foreign Office fears that Russians might attend the commemorative events.” Baerbock” is Annalena Baerbock, Germany’s Foreign Minister, who has repeatedly said that Germany is “at war with Russia,” supposedly because Russia might invade Germany next. She is like George W. Bush who actually did invade Iraq while claiming that Iraq otherwise might invade America or America’s allies — Bush was a neoconservative, and Baerbock is a German version, but both Bush and Baerbock are fascist-racist-supremacist-imperialists, or ideological nazis, like also Israel’s Netanyahu is. Unlike Hitler’s Nazi Party, which hated both Jews and “Slavs” (such as Russians and Belarussians, today’s fascist-racist-supremacist-imperialists hate ONLY Russians. Their article reported:

The hard line is justified by the “foreseeable” instrumentalization of the commemoration by official representatives of the Russian or Belarusian embassies. In its letter, the Foreign Ministry warns against “propaganda, disinformation, and revisionist historical distortion.” The Foreign Office writes: “At the same time, it is to be expected that Russia (together with Belarus) will instrumentalize the World War II commemoration and improperly link it to its war of aggression against Ukraine.” According to the Foreign Ministry in Berlin, Moscow and Minsk would appropriate the upcoming commemorations in Seelow, Altlandsberg, or Treptower Park. In the internal document, the Foreign Office refers only in one sentence to the need to appropriately honor the victims from Russia and Belarus.

The Foreign Office informed the Berliner Zeitung that the newspaper’s questions were being “reviewed.” No responses had been received by the time this issue went to press. …

However, the Chargé d’Affaires of the Belarusian Embassy in Berlin, Andrei Shuplyak, confirmed an explicit disinvitation to the Berliner Zeitung. At the end of March this year, the Minsk mission in Germany, located in the immediate vicinity of the Soviet Memorial in Treptower Park, received a letter from the Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation. According to the letter, the foundation’s director, Jens-Christian Wagner, made the decision that Belarusian representatives were not welcome at commemorative events in Thuringia in the coming weeks. The Belarusian Embassy had no knowledge of the information provided by the Foreign Office.

In Belarus, the exclusion has caused outrage. “We strongly condemn the refusal of the management of the German Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorial Foundation to allow Belarusian diplomats to participate in the commemorative events marking the 80th anniversary of the liberation of these concentration camps,” reads an X-post from the Belarusian Foreign Ministry.

“There is no justification for the German foundation’s cynical actions against a country where one in three people died in the war and where there is not a single family unaffected by the war. Unfortunately, such actions by the foundation are in line with the policies of certain political forces in the West that seek to change history and justify German National Socialism,” the Minsk Foreign Ministry said. “This decision is a continuation of the policy of dividing people based on their nationality.”

During World War II, Belarus (then the Byelorussian SSR) suffered the highest percentage of all Soviet republics under German occupation. An estimated 2.2 to 2.5 million Soviet Belarusians were killed by the Nazis and their collaborators. Belarus lost more of its population in percentage terms than any other European state—approximately 25 to 30 percent.

Meanwhile, behind the scenes, several Brandenburg district administrators are wondering why descendants of the Red Army, who liberated Germany from Nazi terror in 1945, are being punished. “On the one hand, we maintain hundreds of Soviet graves, but on the other hand, we are not allowed to invite the descendants of the dead,” one district administrator describes the grotesque situation. A mayor of a Brandenburg town, who wishes to remain anonymous, told the Berliner Zeitung that video conferences on the topic were held at the end of March. One of the key players is said to have been Michael Nowak, the current chargé d’affaires of the German Embassy in Minsk .

Last days of the war: Tens of thousands of Red Army soldiers died in Brandenburg

In the coming weeks, many places in Berlin and Brandenburg will commemorate the end of the Second World War 80 years ago. Decisive battles against Hitler’s Germany took place primarily outside Berlin’s gates. In an unprecedented sacrifice, tens of thousands of Red Army soldiers died on Brandenburg soil in the final weeks of the war alone – a fact often overlooked today. Among the Soviet victims were Russians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Georgians, Tatars, Kazakhs, Uzbeks, and a multitude of other ethnic groups and peoples of the Soviet Union. …

Even if district administrators or mayors maintain personal contacts with Russian or Belarusian diplomats, official invitations to municipal commemorative events are taboo according to the Federal Foreign Office’s guidelines.

The expected incoming new German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has announced that under him, Germany’s economy will go onto a war-footing, so as to repel a Russian invasion.

——

https://sonar21.com/the-fuhrer-of-germany-friedrich-merz-in-a-war-and-spending-frenzy-how-much-is-1-7-trillion/

https://archive.is/BLzea

“The Führer of Germany – Friedrich Merz – in a war and spending frenzy – how much is 1.7 trillion?”

21 March 2025 by Peter Haenseler 101 Comments

After more than 80 years, Germany once again has a Führer who is in no way inferior to the old one in terms of mendacity and megalomania while spending sums that are unimaginable for most people. We do the math while our optimism withers.

This has never happened before: a man who has not even been elected chancellor yet negotiates the biggest borrowing in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany with parties that lost the election, in a Bundestag that has long since been dissolved.

If you had described Friedrich Merz’s current behavior to a German 10 years ago, you would have been declared insane and put in a clinic without raising a fuss.

Friedrich Merz, who refuses to form a coalition with the AFD because he accuses them of right-wing extremism [though he is the actual racist(against Russians)-fascist-supremacist-imperialist, and the AfD Party is anti-imperialist not fascist, not supremacist, and not racist though the liberals say it is because AfD wants to end the Merkel-imposed open door to the many migrants from the U.S.-generated wars in the Middle East] is preparing Germany for war against Russia. The AFD wants peace with Russia, Russia seeks peace, the Americans want peace [Haenseler buys into Trump’s untustworthy promises about that] and Merz opposes all those who seek peace.

This week the Handelsblatt reported that up to 1.7 trillion [euros] could be spent. This article will prove that this plan is madness, simply by putting this astronomical figure into perspective for regular people. …

Germany’s current debt at federal level

As at June 30, Germany’s federal debt amounted to 1.621 trillion – or 1,621 billion euros. This corresponds to a national debt to gross domestic product ratio of 62.4%.

1.7 trillion is a hundred times more than all DAX companies together earned in 2023.

Friedrich Merz will double this debt. This would lead to a debt ratio of 125% – which would put the country in the neighborhood of Greece (158%).

Additional interest burden

The additional interest burden for the 1.7 trillion euros will amount to 47.6 billion euros per year if the current interest rate of the 10-year German government bond of 2.8% is used for the calculation. …

No chance of ever repaying this debt

In 2024, Germany collected income taxes amounting to 181.95 billion euros at federal level. This means that for nearly 10 years, 100% of total income taxes would have to be spent on the repayment of 1,700 billion euros.

Conclusion

Without even mentioning that Friedrich Merz’s actions are more than legally questionable, it is already clear from the figure of 1.7 trillion euros that he has lost his mind. This debt bonanza will drive the former world export champion and the former jewel of industry to the wall financially.

For many years, the German political elite has been railing against Russia, the country to which it owed the cheap energy that allowed Germany to become the industrial jewel of the world in the first place. Russia forgave the Germans, who had 27 million Russians [that being the number of Russians that Hitler’s forces killed] on their conscience; the Russians have not forgotten these atrocities, but the Germans, or rather the German leadership, have, because what the German people think, choose or want is once again a thing of the past in Germania. Germany then turned imperiously against China, the current industrial jewel that, unlike the Germans, has not slept through the major trends. Last but not least, the German leadership is salivating against the US, the colonial master of the Germans, which has made a political U-turn and is now seeking peace with Russia. It is therefore by no means inappropriate to describe Friedrich Merz’s behavior as megalomania.

Ms. Baerbock, who made Germany a laughing stock on the international stage during her time as foreign minister, is cuddling up to the new Syrian government, which is made up of terrorists [run by Syria’s al-Qaeda — thanks to the forces of U.S., Turkey, and Israel]. For about two weeks now, civilians have been slaughtered in Syria, women and children have had their heads cut off, obviously a necessity on the road to democracy. Ms. Baerbock seems to agree with this [slaughter]. Incidentally, I do not recommend our readers to watch videos of these goings-on, thousands of which are posted on social media; they are nightmares that will deprive you of sleep. Ms. Baerbock is transferring 300 million euros to these very gentlemen. Ms. Baerbock, who will soon no longer have a job, seems to have special talents. She is to become the new President of the UN General Assembly. …

This article was originally published on Eric’s Substack.

The post Germany’s Nazis Exclude Russians from May 8th Victory Day WW2 Celebration. appeared first on LewRockwell.

At last, Trump Takes Aim at the Public Broadcasting Monopoly

Lew Rockwell Institute - Lun, 05/05/2025 - 05:01

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE On Thursday, while most Americans slept, a decisive blow was struck in a battle long overdue. President Donald Trump, with the swift stroke of his pen, aimed the lance of executive power at the heart of America’s taxpayer-funded media establishment.

While claiming NPR and PBS produce “biased and partisan news coverage,” Trump’s executive order that defunded them represented not merely a budget decision, but a declaration of independence from a half-century of liberal monopoly over the public airwaves—signals that belong to the American people.

Moreover, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) was told to “cancel existing direct funding to the maximum extent allowed by law and … decline to provide future funding” to NPR and PBS. The mere existence of CPB—a publicly funded non-profit—presents a conflict of interest.

Since Congress funds CPB to the tune of half a billion dollars per year, its status as a “private” corporation, while true, is a bit rich, particularly since its top function is as the primary funding mechanism for both NPR and PBS.

Transparent federal support, distinct from CPB, accounts for about 15% of the annual revenue on the PBS ledger. Similar subsidies constitute about 1% of NPR’s annual budget.

Yet, for decades, those warning about the concentration of power in the hands of media elites were roundly dismissed as alarmists. As the years passed, the media concentrated its power even more. A large subset of the American people continued their hunger for an authority figure to guide them, though it would never arrive in a personage.

We got a host of ringers instead. The architects and ambassadors of liberal orthodoxy found a cozy home in America’s mainstream media. As such, its outsized influence over public opinion has no historical analogue.

While Americans passively allow their own abuse at the hands of the media, they have never cottoned to such cruelty when it comes to government power. What gives?

Perhaps a change is on the horizon.

This week, President Trump did what Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes failed to do. He confronted head-on the entrenched power of public broadcasting, which, for far too long, used the people’s money against the people’s interests.

Thursday’s order struck at the heart of a system that now serves as a mouthpiece for the progressive elite as it unjustly claims the mantle of “objectivity.”

The real significance of this moment, however? It addressed a fundamental paradox in American politics: Conservative votes produce liberal victories.

As Middle America reliably voted for conservative leadership, the cultural and media elite made their long march through our institutions—unopposed—with public broadcasting serving as their taxpayer-funded vanguard.

In 1969, Vice President Spiro T. Agnew delivered his famous “Television News Coverage” speech in Des Moines, where he warned of the “tiny and closed fraternity of privileged men” who controlled the media narrative. The establishment reacted with predictable outrage.

Agnew said this “little group of men … not only enjoy a right of instant rebuttal to every Presidential address, but, more importantly, wield a free hand in selecting, presenting, and interpreting the great issues in our nation.”

Their faces may have changed, but the agenda remains the same. Having been aged in the same fetid barrel for five and a half decades post-Agnew, today’s media may have the appearance of a more recent vintage, but the bottled product provides identical tasting notes: grudge, vitriol, and bitterness.

It comes as no surprise, then, that after the president took direct aim at its power and influence, the media reacted with full-throated hysteria.

Look at the response. PBS President Paula Kerger called Trump’s order “overtly illegal.” NPR promised legal challenges, declaring it represents “an affront to the First Amendment.”

Such indignation reveals a central truth—these organizations believe access to public money is their entitlement, not a privilege subject to the will of the people through their elected representatives. The same media elites spent the last several years denigrating President Trump, questioning his legitimacy, and undermining his agenda at every turn.

Is it any wonder The Donald finally said, “Enough?”

The president’s message told CPB to “cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my Administration’s policy to ensure that federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage.” Contra the caterwauling media, this was not an attack on free speech.

It is a defense of the taxpayer.

For generations, public broadcasting operated under the fiction of neutrality as it advanced positions antithetical to the values of everyday Americans. In the late-1960s, middle-class and blue-collar workers in suburban and rural areas of the North, Midwest, and West who had not previously taken an active part in politics began to be disaffected by the hegemony of the media. They showed it with their voting patterns and the Nixon administration noticed a new alliance forming, terming it the “Silent Majority.”

As voting patterns changed, traditional Republicans and the Silent Majority coalesced. This became known as the “New Majority.”

Eventually, “traditional” 20th century Republicans retreated into the arms of the progressives. That happened long ago. The latest defections came from those terminally afflicted by the contagion known as Trump Derangement Syndrome.

There is another piece to this puzzle, however: working-class Southerners. Neglected by the Republican establishment for a century and historically in the camp of the Democrats—well before the Republican Party’s first president waged war on their states—a solid bloc of Southerners has, over the course of the last several decades, found their home in the GOP.

One can’t be sure if it was fortune’s favor, his unique brand of political athleticism, or simply dumb luck, but Trump’s efforts to appeal to these blue-collar, working-class, and Southern voters worked. They became his new base, and they delivered.

Thrice.

Still, the media remains apoplectic, even swinging the Trump interregnum to an aged and feeble Joseph Biden, a man who ultimately proved in over his head when it came fulfilling duties as the nation’s chief executive. If one simply relied upon the media dispatches, however, the Biden administration routinely came out smelling like a rose.

Let us be clear about what public broadcasting is. While at times delivering valuable children’s programming and occasionally coming up with worthy cultural content, its offerings in the news and current affairs realm overwhelmingly reflect the worldview of the coastal elites who produce such regular balderdash.

Consider. How many conservatives sit behind the microphones at NPR? How many traditionalists produce programming for PBS?

The answer: Painfully few.

When conservatives appear on such outlets, they are typically presented as zoo specimens to study or gawk at, rather than as authentic voices deserving—at minimum—equal time. This isn’t journalism. It is ideological gatekeeping funded by the very people whose views are systematically excluded.

Americans are compelled, through taxation, to support a broadcasting system that holds in contempt their deeply held beliefs. Working-class citizens in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—key states in the former “blue wall” now at the heart of Trump’s New Majority—are forced to subsidize programming that regularly mocks their values, their faith, and their culture.

Reflect. Why are the principal adversaries to the social and political values, traditions, and customs of most Americans the selfsame people who now monopolize the communications sector?

Whatever the origin, it has been this way for decades. The people’s airwaves are used to advance an agenda at odds with the people themselves. PBS and NPR argue that they represent a tiny fraction of the federal budget. True, but irrelevant.

The issue is not the amount but the principle. Why should American taxpayers fund a media apparatus that holds their values in contempt? The American taxpayer foots the bill for a media edifice feigning impartiality while pushing propaganda.

As public broadcasting faces its long-awaited reckoning, we must not lose sight of the larger media landscape. The corporate media remains a powerful arbiter of our national conversation, but unlike NPR and PBS, they don’t directly tap the public treasury for their operations.

The alliance between corporate media and public broadcasting nevertheless forms a powerful echo chamber, with the prestige of PBS and the ubiquity of NPR lending legitimacy to the broader liberal media narrative. Breaking this alliance is essential to creating space for genuine diversity of thought in American media.

The CEO of NPR alleged Trump’s order “undermines the First Amendment rights of NPR and local stations across America.” One asks: Since when does the First Amendment guarantee government funding? Does free speech require taxpayer subsidy?

These questions answer themselves.

What Trump did this week was not radical. It was restorative.

If the president seeks to return control of public airwaves to the citizens—forsaking the unelected broadcasters who answer to no constituency beyond their own ideological peers—he is on the right track.

To wit, the task of political leaders is to redirect resources toward the constituents who brought them to power. Trump’s order represents this kind of redirection—away from elite institutions and toward the needs and interests of the forgotten Americans who elected him. Come the tweets from the MAGA crowd, “This is what I voted for.”

The president’s critics claim that by doing this, Trump attacked democracy. In truth, he now stands in defense of the institution, ensuring public resources are forbidden to advance partisan agendas under the guise of objectivity. The airwaves (and perhaps digital streaming packets), after all, do not belong to the media—corporate or “public” —they belong to the people.

This executive order, while significant, is merely one battle in a longer struggle. The CPB is already preparing legal challenges, and Democratic lawmakers will undoubtedly seek to restore funding at the first opportunity. The entrenched power of the media establishment will not surrender without a fight.

However, in the night skies high above the land of opportunity and behind closed doors on Air Force One, something changed. A president finally found the courage to say what millions of Americans have long believed—that public broadcasting, ages ago, betrayed its mandate when it turned into a mouthpiece for liberal orthodoxy instead of a true public forum.

The predictable cries of “censorship” from supporters of both NPR and PBS reveal a fundamental misunderstanding. No one is preventing these organizations from broadcasting whatever content they choose. The question is whether American taxpayers should be compelled to pay for it.

What we are witnessing is the long-delayed assertion of the New Majority’s cultural power. For too long, electoral victories by the right failed to translate into policy changes in our cultural institutions. In fact, they achieved the opposite effect.

Trump’s executive order represents a break with that pattern.

The battle over public broadcasting illustrates a larger truth about American politics: Winning elections is necessary but not sufficient.

Real change requires the courage to confront entrenched interests that have long operated beyond democratic accountability. It is perhaps ironic that President Trump is the first to demonstrate that pluck. For, in his prior career, he was one of them.

By taking on public broadcasting, Trump has not only challenged NPR and PBS, but the entire architecture of cultural power that defined American broadcast journalism for generations.

The American people deserve a media that reflects their values, not just those of a wicked cabal of the bi-coastal elites. Trump’s directive represented the public’s belated claim to the rightful ownership of their property.

If one believes in genuine diversity of thought and the idea that all Americans should see their values represented in the media they fund, then one must not accuse Trump of an attack on democracy. Rather, he affirmed the custom.

The “New Majority” —as forged by Nixon’s unique brand of populism and methodically built through pragmatism and cultural appeal into a coalition of once forgotten Americans—has found a renewed, if unexpected, champion in Donald Trump.

Though the president has reassembled, reconfigured, and reenergized this alliance, one must ask: Will the voice of today’s messenger also be silenced by his enemies in the media?

This article was originally published on The O’Leary Review.

The post At last, Trump Takes Aim at the Public Broadcasting Monopoly appeared first on LewRockwell.

Why Do We Get Sick?

Lew Rockwell Institute - Dom, 04/05/2025 - 20:48

Do we Catch diseases? OR do we Build Them Over Time?

How we answer these questions determines Which Path we choose to go through.

If we believe in viruses as contagious, disease-causing entities they become for us an existential threat.

This path of following virology’s pseudoscience is now used to control populations in every possible way by keeping us in a constant state of fear.

If, on the other hand, we look just a little bit further and see beyond the catching-a-virus-model, we need to ask: Well, then, Why Do We Get Sick?

In this short 7 minute video Dr Sam Bailey examines 40 different reasons why we may be getting sick – many of which you may not have considered.

If we choose to answer the question above that We Build Illnesses Over Time then we need to be aware – and vigilant – of MANY things that – together – can eventually make us sick.

The really good news is that learning more about this This Path leads to greater overall health and – significantly – living life without unnecessary fear.

I urge you to watch this short – and very profound – video, HERE, and – please – share it with all those you care about.

Highly Recommended

The post Why Do We Get Sick? appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Enemy Within Is No Longer Hiding

Lew Rockwell Institute - Dom, 04/05/2025 - 19:14

Thanks, Gail Appel.

See here.

The post The Enemy Within Is No Longer Hiding appeared first on LewRockwell.

‘May Day’ Celebrated Worldwide as Death Toll from Communism Approaches 100 Million

Lew Rockwell Institute - Dom, 04/05/2025 - 19:13

Thanks, John Frahm.

Breitbart

The post ‘May Day’ Celebrated Worldwide as Death Toll from Communism Approaches 100 Million appeared first on LewRockwell.

Belgium touted to become the first Islamic State in Europe

Lew Rockwell Institute - Dom, 04/05/2025 - 18:14

Gail Appel wrote:

Wow! I thought UK was the frontrunner, followed by France , Germany, Sweden , Netherlands, Ireland, Wales, Austria, Norway and Spain.

See here.

The post Belgium touted to become the first Islamic State in Europe appeared first on LewRockwell.

France secretly owns 14 countries

Lew Rockwell Institute - Dom, 04/05/2025 - 18:09

Gail Appel has wrote:

How to hide an empire-And each of France’s “ colonies” are war torn, impoverished Islamist failed states suffering human rights abuses and Christian genocide.

Just like France, who feigns still retaining its own culture by hiding behind the Eiffel Tower. And pretending the horrific Notre Dame blaze was caused by a careless worker’s lit cigarette.

The post France secretly owns 14 countries appeared first on LewRockwell.