Active alteration of demography of North is the need of the hour!
Posted on May 29th, 2013

Asada M Erpini

“The government is trying to alter the demography of the North”. This accusation seems to have reached a crescendo since the reconstruction phase of the government of Sri Lanka had commenced following the liberation of the North from the grips of the LTTE terrorists. The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) is in the forefront among the accusers, with the bankrupt politicians of Tamil Nadu vying to outdo one another as the latter has discovered that shedding buckets of tears on behalf of Sri Lanka Tamils is a convenient and low-cost strategy to steal the limelight.

TNA was the mouthpiece of the LTTE when the latter held sway over vast swathes of land that it had illegally occupied. One cannot expect the TNA leader and its parliamentarians to even hint that they have abandoned the separatist ideology of the LTTE, as they would then become non-entities and pass into oblivion.

The Minister of Economic Development had announced just a few days back that 85% of the aid that Sri Lanka receives and the loans it has obtained is being spent on rebuilding and developing the infrastructure in the North.  Whatever basic infrastructure facilities that existed in the North were destroyed by the LTTE: two classic examples are the water supply tower in Kilinochchi that the terrorists blasted when they opted to speed towards Nandikadal lagoons for their doom as hoards of lemmings committing suicide, and the removal of the sleepers of the Northern railway track to build bunkers and to reinforce their hideouts.

When the government spends a vast and disproportionate amount of borrowings, aid and tax revenue on developing roads, water supply schemes, hospitals, factories, etc. in the North, it cannot afford to restrict the benefits to a mere 4% of the Sri Lanka population that the TNA probably can claim to represent. The fruits of the exercise should be enjoyed by all Sri Lankans irrespective of their ethnic or religious affiliations.

It is time that the government commences a vigourous colonisation scheme of the North by non-terrorist Tamils, Sinhalese and Moors who live in provinces outside the North, just as past governments did with the Gal Oya, Kandalama, Padaviya, Elahera and other such projects. People who are ready to move north should be given land and financial incentives to encourage them to do so. The Sinhalese would naturally be the largest ethnic group among them as they constitute 75% of the population of the country. But more importantly, it is the Sinhalese that sacrificed in the highest numbers “”…” giving the lives of their sons, daughters, fathers and mothers “”…” to liberate the country from the terrorist plague.

While the government-sponsored colonisation is in progress, there should also be an increase in the presence of the armed forces in the North. It is only then that it would be possible to nip in the bud any resurgence or resurrection of the LTTE armed challenge. There are reports that the UK is considering the encouragement of citizens to spy on their neighbours, following the death of a single soldier at the hands of a fanatic who was chanting religious invocations. If peace-loving Sri Lankans who love their country of birth reside in the North, they may even be ready to help the armed forces and their intelligence wings by giving information about suspicious characters engaged in not-so-legal activities.

One should not forget the days, a few decades back, when “Kotiyas are coming” was almost a joke. Kotiyas (Tigers) ceased to be a funny story when the LTTE started massacring innocent civilians, blasting economic and communication nerve centres and temples, and took on the armed forces of the legally constituted government of the country. No one wants a repetition of those events.

12 Responses to “Active alteration of demography of North is the need of the hour!”

  1. Senevirath Says:

    WE HAVE TO CHANE THE PRESNT DEMOGRAPY OF THE NORTH TO ERADICATE EALAMISTS. THERE SHOULD BE 75% sinhalese in the noth to protect that part from tamil nadu and other terrorists

  2. Lorenzo Says:

    At last someone understood the problem and the SOLUTION CORRECTLY!

    All other “solutions” are just BS.

    We did this in the east, we can DO IT in the north.

  3. Marco Says:

    Our Minister of Economic Development, Mr Basil Rajapakse should be congratulated for his sterling efforts in using the balance of the 15% Aid to fund other Infrastructure projects in the rest of the country like Hambantota Port, redevelopment of the Colombo Port, Southern Expressway, Mattala Airport, to name just a few.

  4. Nalliah Thayabharan Says:

    “Tamil Exclusiveness” concept is one of the main causes for ethnic tension in our motherland. This is likes omeone saying that “Tamils are Tamilizing Sinhala areas of Wellawatta”. Mono ethnic enclaves should not be encouraged. That’s the reason to non-tolerance of other cultures. Everyone should have a common Sri Lankan identity. Sri lanka is for every son and daughter of the soil, whether speaking in English, Tamil or Sinhala. Equality,liberty and freedom to exercise one’s religion, language and culture is all that matters.

    Time has come to stop all this nonsense of being Tamil and Sinhalese. We are all Sri Lankans and Sri Lanka belongs to all its children. Every Sri Lankan citizen has to be treated equally, should be allowed to move around freely without any restrictions and when they do so they should be encouraged to procure these assets at market prices. If the Tamils can live other parts of Sri Lanka, then why Sinhalese don’t have the same right. Please do not create mono ethnic enclaves. There are no ethnic homelands in Sri Lanka… only Sri Lankans and Sri Lanka.

    Sri Lanka is a free country; Anybody from Dondra Point should be able to live in Point Pedro and vice versa as well. Co-inhabitant is the best solution to national integrity and makes different ethnic groups to understand each other.

    Do people call Kandy, Nuwaraeliya or Milagiriya Sinhala Towns? Why this ethnically designated towns only in the North? Who ‘colonized’ Wellawatte and Milagiriya?

    Given that millions of Tamils are living in the South and South is too cramped with people so we must say it is okay to allow new settlements (no matter what race are they) in the North and East.While population of the rest of the country increased rapidly, with some once small towns like Galle and Matara becoming mega cities with population bursting at the seams, the population in the North has dropped by more than half.
    Tamils know that Sinhalese are great neighbours and even better than German, French, Italian or British. Tamils are living in harmony with Sinhalese in the South. In Sri Lanka there are many LAWS in the books. Kandyan Law, Mukkuwa Law, Islamic Law, Roman-Dutch Law, Low Country Sinhala Law and Thesawalamai.

    Why we have Islamic Law but no Buddhist or Hindu Law?

    “Thesawalamai” is not practiced much in Jaffna. If that is practiced people from Pungudutivu or any low castes cannot buy lands in Jaffna!

    Now that the Tamils are relocating to Canada, UK, Australia, France, Swiss, Norway, Denmark, etc etc Sinhalese should relocate to the vacant areas left by the Tamils.

    In Singapore EIP – Ethnic Integration Policy – is enforced to balance ethnic composition. Any Sri lankan should be able to live where ever they want, as long as the law of the country is respected and follwed. When racists use “Tamil Areas” it implies that there are some areas exclusive for Tamils.

    According to the Tamil Dictionary published by University of Madras, Eelam is a Pali word – not a Dravidian word!!! Eelam has the same meaning as Hela and Sinhala!!!!

    Until the 9th century AD, with the exception of the megalithic remains of Pomparippu and the possible exception of those of Kathiraveli, there is no definite evidence regarding and Dravidian settlement in our country. It is possible that there were some Tamil settlers in the Batticaloa district from the 13 century AD onwards.

    Several writers on the history of Jaffna, basing their studies on the traditional legends found in the late Tamil chronicles, have put forward certain theories claiming the establishment of Tamil settlements in Jaffna in the period of the Anuradhapura rulers. These theories are not accepted by serious students of history as they are not based on trustworthy data. Many of these have been convincingly dismissed by scholars in recent years.

    According to the Pali chronicle the port of Jambukola (Camputturai), on the eastern cost of the peninsula, was the main port of embarkation to Tamralipti in Eastern India from at least the time of King Devanampriya Tissa (250-210 BC). The two embassies from the island to the court of Ashoka embarked on their voyage from Jambukola. Sangamitta arrived with the Bo-sapling at this port.

    The Samudda-panna-sala, commemorating the arrival of the Bo sapling, and the Jambukola Vihara were built there by Devanampriya Tissa. The northern most part of the island was under the suzerainty of the Anuradhapura king in the 3rd century BC and that Buddhism had begun to spread by that time in that part of the island as in the other parts.

    The language of the gold plate inscription from Vallipuram, the earliest epigraphic record discovered in the Jaffna peninsula, is the early form of Sinhalese, in which inscriptions of the time in other parts of the island were written. Sinhalese were settled in the Jaffna peninsula, or in some parts at least, in the second century AD. There were Tamil speaking traders in the port of Jambukola but there is no evidence that points to Tamil settlements in the peninsul a at that time

    The gold plate from Vallipuram reveals that there were Buddhists in that part of the peninsula in the 2nd century AD. At the site of this inscription the foundations are in the premises of a modern Vishnu temple. There is little doubt that the Vishnu temple was the original Buddhist monument converted in to a Vaishnava establishment at a later date when Tamils settled in the area.

    Such conversion of Buddhist establishments into Saiva and Vaishnava temples was a common phenomenon in the Jaffna peninsula after it was settled by Dravidians.

    In the premised of another Vishnu temple at Moolai in Vaddukoddai were discovered some ‘vestiges of ancient remains of walls’ and a broken sedent Buddha image. Again in a Saiva temple at Mahiyapitti a Buddha image was found under a stone step in the temple tank. A lime-stone Buddha image and the remains of an ancient dagaba were unearthed at Nilavarai, in Navakiri.

    Among the debris were two sculptured fragments of shaped coral stones with a stone railing design. The dagaba can be dated at least to the 10th century AD. Near these ruins are the foundations of an ancient building and in the middle of thesis a modern Shiva temple. The old foundations are those of the vihara attached to the ancient dagaba.

    Buddha images have also been discovered in Uduvil, Kantharodai and Jaffna town. Kantharodai has yielded very important Buddhist establishment in the region in early times. Such artifacts as the glazed tiles and the circular discs discovered here have helped to connect the finds with those of Anuradhapura.

    The Sinhala Nampota, dated in its present form to the 14th or 15th century, preserved the names of some of the placed of Buddhist worship in the Jaffna peninsula, Kantarodai is mentioned among these places. The others are Nagakovila (Nakarkovil), Telipola (Tellippalai), Mallagama (Mallakam), Minuwangomu Viharaya (Vimankaram). Tanjidivayina (Tana-tivu or Kayts), Nagadivayina (Nakativu or Nayinatovu). Puvangudivayina (Punkutu-tivu) and Kradivayina (Karaitivu). Of the Buddhist establishments in these places only the vihara and Dagabo at Nakativu have survived to this day. It is justifiable to assume that the Nampotalist dates back time when the Buddhist establishments of these places were well known centres of worship. This was probably before the 13th century, for after this date the people of the Jaffna peninsula were mainly Saivas.

    In the Anuradhapura period, and possibly till about the 12th century AD, there were Buddhists in the Jaffna peninsula.

    Although it may appear reasonable to presume that these Buddhists were Sinhalese like those in other parts of the island, some have tried to argue that they were Tamils. While it is true that there were Tamil Buddhists in South India and Ceylon before the 12th century AD and possibly even later, there is evidence to show that the Buddhists who occupied the Jaffna peninsula in the Anuradhapura period were Sinhalese.

    The toponymic evidence unmistakably points to the presence of Sinhala settlers in the peninsula before Tamils settled there. In an area of less tha 2,500 sq km covered by Jaffna peninsula, there occur over a thousand Sinhalese place names which have survived in a Tamil garb. The Yalppana-vaipava-malai, the Tamil chronicle of Jaffna, confirms this when it states that there were Sinhalese people in Jaffna at the time of the first Tamil colonisation of the area.

    The survival of Sinhalese elements on the local nomenclature indicates a slow and peaceful penetration of Tamils in the area rather than violent occupation. This is in contrast with the evidence of the place names of the North Central Province, where Sinhalese names have been largely replaced by Tamil names. The large percentage of Sinhalese element and the occurrence of Sinhala and Tamil compounds in the place names of Jaffna point to a long survival of the Sinhala population and an intimate intercourse between them and the Tamils.

    This is also, borne out by the retention of some territorial names, like Valikamam (Sinhala- Waligama) and Maratchi (Marachchi-rata), which points to the retention of the old territorial divisions and tell strongly against wholesale extermination or displacement of the Sinhalese population.

    In the 9th and 10th centuries some villages in Rajaratta accommodated Tamil settlers but these were by no means numerous. There were many Tamil settlers in the Jaffna peninsula or in any part of the island other that the major ports and the capital city before the 10th century. The earliest evidence regarding the presence of Tamils in the Jaffna peninsula is from the Tamil inscription of Parakramabahu I (1153 – 1186) from Nainativu. Evidences also point to minor settlements of Tamils in important ports as Mahatitha (Mannar) and Gokanna(Trincomalee) as well as in Anuradhapura There were Tamil traders in the ports of Jambukola and Uratota, in the Jaffna peninsula.
    The Sanskrit inscription from Trincomalee, discovered among the ruins of the Koneswaram temple, refers to a personage names Cadaganga (Kulakkottan) who went to Ceylon in 1223. The inscription is fragmentary and is engraved on a part of a stone door jamb. Among the decipherable words is the name Gokarna, the ancient name of Trincomalee and the root from which the name of the temple is derived (Gokarnesvara).

    In the Tamil Vanni districts only a few Dravidian style Saiva temples of the 13th century have been found. Among these the temples at Thirukkovil, Kapuralla, and Nallathanni-irakkam and the Saiva remains at Uruththirapuram and Kurunthanaru notable. These certainly indicate the existence or Tamil settlements in those places in the 13th century.

    Materials from Buddhist structures were used in the building of Saiva and Vaishnava temples. Monumental remains of a different type attest to the destruction wrought by the invaders and the conversion of Buddhist institutions in to places of Saiva worship, effected by the new settlers. The many scattered ruins of Buddhist monasteries and temples all over the Vanni region preserve the memory of the Sinhalese Buddhist settlements that once covered these parts.
    Several of the pilima-ges (image houses) attached to the monasteries in places like Kovilkadu, Malikai, Omanthai, Kanakarayan-kulam, Irasenthiran-kulam, Chinnappuvarasan-kulam and Madukanda were converted into Saiva tempels, often dedicated to Ganesha.
    Buddha images or inscribed slabs from the Buddhist structures were used to make the Ganesha statues.
    A number of small Saiva shrines have been found in association with Buddhist remains. The destruction of several of the Buddhist edifices and the conversion of pilima-ges into Saiva temples may have begun at the time of Magha.
    In the North Central Province on Minneriya Road, close to Polonnaruwa, were discovered a few Saiva edifies which were build of materials from Buddhist structures.
    A door jamb from one of the Saiva shrines there was found to bear part of an inscription of Parakramabahu 1.
    A broken pillar shaft with Sinhalese writing of the tenth century was recovered from the enclosing wall of another shrine.
    In one of the Vishnu temples of Polonnaruwa, fragments of Nissankamalla’s stone inscriptions were found. In the same place, two fragments of a broken pillar with Sinhalese writing about the 10 century AD served as steps of one of the Vaishnava shrines.
    A pillar in the mandapa of Shiva Devale # 5 at Polonnaruwa was discovered with a Sinhala inscription of the 11th century AD on it. In Shiva Devale # 7 a square stone asana with an inscription of Nissankamalla was used as a base for a “Lingam”.
    Another of the Saiva shrines unearthed at Polonnaruwa yielded a pillar with a Sinhalese inscription of Jayabahu 1.

    The invasion of Kalinga Magha with the help of Kerala and Tamil mercenaries was far more violent than the earlier invasions. Its chief importance lies in the fact that it led to the permanent dislodgement of Sinhalese power from northern Ceylon, the confiscation by Tamils and Keralas of lands and properties belonging to the Sinhalese and the consequent migration of the official class and many of the common people to the south western regions.

  5. A. Sooriarachi Says:

    The LTTE endorsed TNA is talking and acting as if the North and East are exclusive Tamil homelands. Anyone who is conversant with the post colonial history of the nation, would know that the European colonial powers who first ruled maritime provinces in SriLanka and eventually the entire nation, acted brutaly to evict the native Sinhalese from various regions by massacring them with their live-stocks and then, burning to ground their homes and farms left behind. As Sinhalese were for ever struggling to regain their lost lands, the colonial powers had to import cheap labour from overseas to colonise these lands cleared of Sinhalese and to work on newly established tobacco, coffee and tea plantations. Though the Africans were forcefully taken to America and other regions to work as slaves, the Tamils were taken voluntarily to foreign countries to work for a pittance, as these Tamils in any cae desired to getaway from the extreme form of caste discrimination prevalent in Tamil Hindu South India. This is the case even today. Sri Lanka today is an independent nation and it is high time the Government rectified the crimes committed against the Sinhalese by the foreign powers, at least by removing discriminatory laws like the Thesavalam introduced by colonial powers and allow the Sinhalese the right to live in any part of their country, just like the minority Tamils already enjoy.
    The TNA should be ashamed even to think of continuing the colonial mentality to demand that the Sinhalese should be prevented from re-settling in the North and East, which are parts of their original homeland.
    How could one promote reconciliation if the TNA and other separatists try to carve out the North and East for themselves. If they do need a separate Tamil state, then it is already there in Tamilnadu but not in SriLanka.

  6. Nalliah Thayabharan Says:

    On February 4th, 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia:

    “In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that’s the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell ‘discrimination’. We better learn from the suicides of America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation. The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of most minorities. When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the national interest first, observing that the minorities are not Russians.

    The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation.

  7. Lorenzo Says:

    Wow! Hats off to Putin.

    WHEN will our marsupial politicians do this?

    “In Sri Lanka live Sri Lankans. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Sri Lanka, to work and eat in Sri Lanka, should speak Sinhala, and should respect the Sri Lankan laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that’s the state law. Sri Lanka does not need minorities. Minorities need Sri Lanka, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell ‘discrimination’. We better learn from the suicides of Endia, America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation. The Sri Lankan customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of most minorities. When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the national interest first, observing that the minorities are sometimes not Sri Lankans.”

  8. Voice123 Says:

    The TNA must come out openly with their policy. Do they support an apartheid style separate homeland/s for Tamils or equal rights under the law to live any part of the country. They cant continue to be two faced ie promote the latter in the West and talk equality in Sri Lanka. What sort of stupid/ racist people vote for this party I wonder?

  9. cassandra Says:

    So, ‘the politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation’! Now, wasn’t there also a fellow named Adolf Hitler who used to be cheered for much longer periods?.

  10. Lorenzo Says:

    (S)Hitler was cheered for DIFFERENT reasons (war and violence).
    Obama was cheered for DIFFERENT reasons (We got him!!!)
    Bush was cheered for DIFFERENT reasons (declaring victory in Iraq!!!)

    Putin’s statement has NOTHING to do any WAR or VIOLENCE.

    Putin gives a FAIR and PEACEFUL deal for those who disagree. BUT (S)Hitler, Obama and Bush (collectively S.O.B.) DON’T!! They KILL their opponents WHEREVER they are!!!

    That is the difference.

  11. Nalliah Thayabharan Says:

    Germany was hopelessly broke when Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933 . The Treaty of Versailles (le Traité de Versailles) had imposed crushing reparations on the German people, demanding that Germans repay every nation’s costs of the war. These costs totaled three times the value of all the property in Germany.
    Private currency speculators caused the German currency to plummet, precipitating one of the worst runaway inflation in modern times. A wheelbarrow full of 100 billion-mark banknotes could not buy a loaf of bread. The national treasury was empty. Countless homes and farms were lost to speculators and to private Zionist controlled banks. Germans lived in hovels. They were starving.
    Nothing like this had ever happened before – the total destruction of the national currency – German mark, plus the wiping out of German’s savings and businesses. On top of this came a global depression. Germany had no choice but to succumb to debt slavery under international bankers until 1933, when the National Socialists came to power. At that point the German government thwarted the international bankers by issuing its own money. International bankers responded by declaring a global boycott against Germany.
    Adolf Hitler began a national credit program by devising a plan of public works that included flood control, repair of public buildings and private residences, and construction of new roads, bridges, canals, and port facilities. All these were paid for with money that no longer came from the private international bankers.
    The projected cost of these various programs was fixed at one billion units of the national currency. To pay for this, the German government (not the international bankers) issued bills of exchange, called Labor Treasury Certificates. In this way the National Socialists put millions of people to work, and paid them with Treasury Certificates.
    Under the National Socialists, Germany’s money wasn’t backed by gold which was owned by the international bankers. It was essentially a receipt for labor and materials delivered to the government. Adolf Hitler said, “For every mark issued, we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done, or goods produced.” The government paid workers in Certificates. Workers spent those Certificates on other goods and services, thus creating more jobs for more people. In this way the German people climbed out of the crushing debt imposed on them by the international bankers.
    Within two years, the unemployment problem in Germany had been solved, and Germany was back on its feet. It had a solid, stable currency, with no debt, and no inflation, at a time when millions of people in the United States and other Western countries controlled by international bankers were still out of work. Within five years, Germany went from the poorest nation in Europe to the richest.
    Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, despite the international bankers’ denial of foreign credit to Germany, and despite the global boycott. Germany succeeded in this by exchanging equipment and commodities directly with other countries, using a barter system that cut the private bankers out of the picture. Germany flourished, since barter eliminates national debt and trade deficits.

  12. Nalliah Thayabharan Says:

    Cassandra !
    Just consider the following unexpected views of four key diplomats who were close to WW2
    Joseph P. Kennedy, U.S. Ambassador to Britain during the years immediately preceding WW2 was the father of the famous American Kennedy dynasty. James Forrestal the first US Secretary of Defense (1947-1949) quotes him as saying “Chamberlain (the British Prime Minister) stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war”. (The Forrestal Diaries ed. Millis, Cassell 1952 p129).
    Count Jerzy Potocki, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, in a report to the Polish Foreign Office in January 1939, is quoted approvingly by the highly respected British military historian Major-General JFC Fuller. Concerning public opinion in America he says “Above all, propaganda here is entirely in Jewish hands…when bearing public ignorance in mind, their propaganda is so effective that people have no real knowledge of the true state of affairs in Europe… It is interesting to observe that in this carefully thought-out campaign… no reference at all is made to Soviet Russia. If that country is mentioned, it is referred to in a friendly manner and people are given the impression that Soviet Russia is part of the democratic group of countries… Jewry was able not only to establish a dangerous centre in the New World for the dissemination of hatred and enmity, but it also succeeded in dividing the world into two warlike camps…President Roosevelt has been given the power.. to create huge reserves in armaments for a future war which the Jews are deliberately heading for.” (Fuller, JFC: The Decisive Battles of the Western World vol 3 pp 372-374.)
    Hugh Wilson, the American Ambassador in Berlin until 1938, the year before the war broke out, found anti-Semitism in Germany ‘understandable’. This was because before the advent of the Nazis, “the stage, the press, medicine and law were crowded with Jews…among the few with money to splurge, a high proportion were Jews…the leaders of the Bolshevist movement in Russia, a movement desperately feared in Germany, were Jews. One could feel the spreading resentment and hatred.” (Hugh Wilson: Diplomat between the Wars, Longmans 1941, quoted in Leonard Mosley, Lindbergh, Hodder 1976).
    Sir Nevile Henderson, British Ambassador in Berlin ‘said further that the hostile attitude in Great Britain was the work of Jews and enemies of the Nazis, which was what Hitler thought himself’ (Taylor, AJP: The Origins of the Second World War Penguin 1965, 1987 etc p 324).
    Is all of this merely attributable to antisemitism?
    The economic background to the war is necessary for a fuller understanding, before casting judgement on the originators of these viewpoints.
    At the end of the First World War, Germany was essentially tricked see Paul Johnson A History of the Modern World (1983) p24 and H Nicholson Peacemaking 1919 (1933) pp13-16 into paying massive reparations to France and other economic competitors and former belligerent countries in terms of the so-called Treaty of Versailles, thanks to the liberal American President Woodrow Wilson. Germany was declared to be solely responsible for the war, in spite of the fact that ‘Germany did not plot a European war, did not want one, and made genuine efforts, though too belated, to avert one.’ (Professor Sydney B Fay The Origins of the World War (vol. 2 p 552)).
    As a result of these massive enforced financial reparations, by 1923 the situation in Germany became desperate and inflation on an astronomical scale became the only way out for the government. Printing presses were engaged to print money around the clock. In 1921 the exchange rate was 75 marks to the dollar. By 1924 this had become about 5 trillion marks to the dollar. This virtually destroyed the German middle class (Koestler The God that Failed p 28), reducing any bank savings to a virtual zero.
    According to Sir Arthur Bryant the British historian (Unfinished Victory (1940 pp. 136-144):
    ‘It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities.. They did so with such effect that, even in November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real property in the Reich. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation.. But to those who had lost their all this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice. After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions.. The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned professions (in spite of constituting) less than one percent of the population.. The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large part of the press – all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized country is formed.. The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was a Jewish monopoly.. Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep a foothold in any privileged occupation.. At this time it was not the ‘Aryans’ who exercised racial discrimination. It was a discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a majority. There was no persecution, only elimination.. It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed – and lavishly displayed – by aliens of cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle.’
    Strangely enough, a book unexpectedly published by Princeton University Press in 1984, Sarah Gordon (Hitler, Germans and the “Jewish Question”) essentially confirms what Bryant says. According to her, ‘Jews were never a large percentage of the total German population; at no time did they exceed 1% of the population during the years 1871-1933.’ But she adds ‘Jews were over-represented in business, commerce, and public and private service.. They were especially visible in private banking in Berlin, which in 1923 had 150 private Jewish banks, as opposed to only 11 private non-Jewish banks.. They owned 41% of iron and scrap iron firms and 57% of other metal businesses.. Jews were very active in the stock market, particularly in Berlin, where in 1928 they comprised 80% of the leading members of the stock exchange. By 1933, when the Nazis began eliminating Jews from prominent positions, 85% of the brokers on the Berlin Stock exchange were dismissed because of their “race”.. At least a quarter of full professors and instructors (at German universities) had Jewish origins.. In 1905-6 Jewish students comprised 25% of the law and medical students.. In 1931, 50% of the 234 theatre directors in Germany were Jewish, and in Berlin the number was 80%.. In 1929 it was estimated that the per capita income of Jews in Berlin was twice that of other Berlin residents..’ etc etc.
    Arthur Koestler confirms the Jewish over-involvement in German publishing. ‘Ullstein’s was a kind of super-trust; the largest organization of its kind in Europe, and probably In the world. They published four daily papers in Berlin alone, among these the venerable Vossische Zeitung, founded in the eighteenth century, and the B.Z. am Mittag, an evening paper.. Apart from these, Ullstein’s published more than a dozen weekly and monthly periodicals, ran their own news service, their own travel agency, etc., and were one of the leading book publishers. The firm was owned by the brothers Ullstein – they were five, like the original Rothschild brothers, and like them also, they were Jews.’ (The God that Failed (1950) ed. RHS Crossman, p 31).
    Edgar Mowrer, Berlin correspondent for the Chicago Daily News, wrote an anti-German tract called Germany Puts the Clock Back (published as a Penguin Special and reprinted five times between December 1937 and April 1938). He nevertheless notes ‘In the all-important administration of Prussia, any number of strategic positions came into the hands of Hebrews.. A telephone conversation between three Jews in Ministerial offices could result in the suspension of any periodical or newspaper in the state.. The Jews came in Germany to play in politics and administration that same considerable part that they had previously won by open competition in business, trade, banking, the Press, the arts, the sciences and the intellectual and cultural life of the country. And thereby the impression was strengthened that Germany, a country with a mission of its own, had fallen into the hands of foreigners.’
    Mowrer says ‘No one who lived through the period from 1919 to 1926 is likely to forget the sexual promiscuity that prevailed.. Throughout a town like Berlin, hotels and pensions made vast fortunes by letting rooms by the hour or day to baggageless, unregistered guests. Hundreds of cabarets, pleasure resorts and the like served for purposes of getting acquainted and acquiring the proper mood..’ (pp. 153-4). Bryant describes throngs of child prostitutes outside the doors of the great Berlin hotels and restaurants. He adds ‘Most of them (the night clubs and vice-resorts) were owned and managed by Jews. And it was the Jews.. among the promoters of this trade who were remembered in after years.’ (pp. 144-5).
    Douglas Reed, Chief Central European correspondent before WWII for the London Times, was profoundly anti-German and anti-Hitler. But nevertheless he reported: ‘I watched the Brown Shirts going from shop to shop with paint pots and daubing on the window panes the word “Jew”, in dripping red letters. The Kurfürstendamm was to me a revelation. I knew that Jews were prominent in business life, but I did not know that they almost monopolized important branches of it. Germany had one Jew to one hundred gentiles, said the statistics; but the fashionable Kurfürstendamm, according to the dripping red legends, had about one gentile shop to ninety-nine Jewish ones.’ (Reed Insanity Fair (1938) p. 152-3). In Reed’s book Disgrace Abounding of the following year he notes ‘In the Berlin (of pre-Hitler years) most of the theatres were Jewish-owned or Jewish-leased, most of the leading film and stage actors were Jews, the plays performed were often by German, Austrian or Hungarian Jews and were staged by Jewish film producers, applauded by Jewish dramatic critics in Jewish newspapers.. The Jews are not cleverer than the Gentiles, if by clever you mean good at their jobs. They ruthlessly exploit the common feeling of Jews, first to get a foothold in a particular trade or calling, then to squeeze the non-Jews out of it.. It is not true that Jews are better journalists than Gentiles. They held all the posts on those Berlin papers because the proprietors and editors were Jewish’ (pp238-9).
    The Jewish writer Edwin Black notes ‘For example, in Berlin alone, about 75% of the attorneys and nearly as many of the doctors were Jewish.’ (Black, The Transfer Agreement (1984) p58.
    To cap it all, Jews were perceived as dangerous enemies of Germany after Samuel Untermeyer, the leader of the World Jewish Economic Federation, declared war on Germany on August 6 1933. (Edwin Black The Transfer Agreement: the Untold Story of the Secret Pact between the Third Reich and Palestine (1984) pp272-277) According to Black, ‘The one man who most embodied the potential death blow to Germany was Samuel Untermeyer.’ (p 369). This was the culmination of a worldwide boycott of German goods led by international Jewish organizations. The London Daily Express on March 24, 1933 carried the headline Judea Declares War on Germany. The boycott was particularly motivated by the German imposition of the Nuremberg Laws, which ironically were similar in intent and content to the Jewish cultural exclusivism practiced so visibly in present-day Israel (Hannah Arendt Eichmann in Jerusalem p 7).
    Hitler saw the tremendous danger posed to Germany by Communism. He appreciated the desperate need to eliminate this threat, a fact that earned him the immense hatred and animosity of the Jewish organisations and the media and politicians of the west which they could influence. After all, according to the Jewish writer Chaim Bermant, although Jews formed less than five percent of Russia’s population, they formed more than fifty percent of its revolutionaries. According to the Jewish writer Chaim Bermant in his book The Jews (1977, chapter 8):
    ‘It must be added that most of the leading revolutionaries who convulsed Europe in the final decades of the last century and the first decades of this one, stemmed from prosperous Jewish families.. They were perhaps typified by the father of revolution, Karl Marx.. Thus when, after the chaos of World War I, revolutions broke out all over Europe, Jews were everywhere at the helm; Trotsky, Sverdlov, Kamenev and Zinoviev in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Kurt Eisner in Bavaria, and, most improbable of all, Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin.
    ‘To many outside observers, the Russian revolution looked like a Jewish conspiracy, especially when it was followed by Jewish-led revolutionary outbreaks in much of central Europe. The leadership of the Bolshevik Party had a preponderance of Jews.. Of the seven members of the Politburo, the inner cabinet of the country, four, Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinoviev (Radomsky), Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Sverdlov, were Jews.’ Other authors agree with this:
    “There has been a tendency to circumvent or simply ignore the significant role of Jewish intellectuals in the German Communist Party, and thereby seriously neglect one of the genuine and objective reasons for increased anti-Semitism during and after World War 1.. The prominence of Jews in the revolution and early Weimar Republic is indisputable, and this was a very serious contributing cause for increased anti-Semitism in post-war years.. It is clear then that the stereotype of Jews as socialists and communists.. led many Germans to distrust the Jewish minority as a whole and to brand Jews as enemies of the German nation.” (Sarah Gordon Hitler, Germans and the ‘Jewish Question’ Princeton University Press (1984) p 23).
    “The second paroxysm of strong anti-Semitism came after the critical role of Jews in International Communism and the Russian Revolution and during the economic crises of the 1920s and 30s… Anti-Semitism intensified throughout Europe and North America following the perceived and actual centrality of Jews in the Russian Revolution.. Such feelings were not restricted to Germany, or to vulgar extremists like the Nazis. All over Northern Europe and North America, anti-Semitism became the norm in ‘nice society’, and ‘nice society’ included the universities.” (Martin Bernal, Black Athena vol. 1 pp. 367, 387).
    “The major role Jewish leaders played in the November (Russian) revolution was probably more important than any other factor in confirming (Hitler’s) anti-Semitic beliefs.” (J&S Pool, Who Financed Hitler, p.164).
    Hitler came to power in Germany with two main aims, the rectification of the unjust provisions of the Versailles Treaty, and the destruction of the Soviet/ Communist threat to Germany. Strangely enough, contrary to the mythology created by those who had an opposing ethnic agenda, he had no plans or desire for a larger war of conquest. Professor AJP Taylor showed this in his book The Origins of the Second World War, to the disappointment of the professional western political establishment. Taylor says, “The state of German armament in 1939 gives the decisive proof that Hitler was not contemplating general war, and probably not intending war at all” (p.267), and “Even in 1939 the German army was not equipped for a prolonged war; and in 1940 the German land forces were inferior to the French in everything except leadership” (p104-5). What occurred in Europe in 1939-41 was the result of unforeseen weaknesses and a tipping of the balance of power, and Hitler was an opportunist ‘who took advantages whenever they offered themselves’ (Taylor). Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Hitler wanted peace with Britain, as the German generals admitted (Basil Liddell Hart, The Other Side of the Hill 1948, Pan Books 1983) with regard to the so-called Halt Order at Dunkirk, where Hitler had the opportunity to capture the entire British Army, but chose not to. Liddell Hart, one of Britain’s most respected military historians, quotes the German General von Blumentritt with regard to this Halt Order:
    “He (Hitler) then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence, and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world. He remarked, with a shrug of the shoulders, that the creation of its Empire had been achieved by means that were often harsh, but ‘where there is planing, there are shavings flying’. He compared the British Empire with the catholic Church – saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in difficulties anywhere..” (p 200).
    According to Liddell Hart, “At the time we believed that the repulse of the Luftwaffe in the ‘Battle over Britain’ had saved her. That is only part of the explanation, the last part of it. The original cause, which goes much deeper, is that Hitler did not want to conquer England. He took little interest in the invasion preparations, and for weeks did nothing tospur them on; then, after a brief impulse to invade, he veered around again and suspended the preparations. He was preparing, instead, to invade Russia” (p140).
    David Irving in the foreword to his book The Warpath (1978) refers to “the discovery.. that at no time did this man (Hitler) pose or intend a real threat to Britain or the Empire.”
    This gives a completely different complexion, not only to the war, but to the successful suppression of this information during the war and afterwards. Historians today know only too well where the boundaries lie within which they can paint their pictures of the war and its aftermath, and the consequences of venturing beyond those boundaries, irrespective of the evidence. Unfortunately, only too few of them have been prepared to have the courage to break out of this dreadful straitjacket of official and unofficial censorship.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2019 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress