Years of Research with current issues and finding so much that we are told and taught to be just blatant historical lies.
New York historical archive. Since 1930 "court-historian" scum have ridiculed and condemned Adolf Hitler's claim that the reason he ordered the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 was because Churchill was plotting to bring Stalin into the war against Germany.
Now who would ever believe such a ridiculous warmongering pretext as that?
Well, as it turns out, back when Europe was still at peace, on May 11th of 1939, the Sulzberger-Ochs Family's NY Slime-buckets ran front page stories.a
The story how Churchill's "Conservative" Party was heavily pressuring Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to bring Stalin's Soviet Union into a Franco-British-Polish anti-German alliance.
The front page also confirms that (brace yourself) the Vatican and Germany wanted to sit down and hold peace talks with the Allies, but the Zionist Jew warmongers of the UK flatly refused.
What a find! Thank you New York Slime- buckets!
I love hanging these putrid propagandists with their own rope
Adolf Hitler and His Holiness were willing to hold peace talks with all interested parties. But Churchill and the Zionist Jew Bankers wanted none of it!
On April 20, 1939, Archbishop Orsenigo celebrates Hitler's birthday. The celebrations, which had been initiated by Cardinal Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) became an annual tradition.
Cardinal Pacelli was named Pope Pius XII two months before this New York Times story ran.
Hitler and Pius XII wanted peace. For this, Pius has been tagged by propaganda historians as "Hitler's Pope".
The blurred page image below is accompanied by an abridged reproduction of the stunning articles, with added analysis by your intrepid reporter highlighted in yellow.
RUSSIA IS ASSURED SHE NEED NOT FIGHT UNTIL BRITAIN DOES
The New York Times May 11,1939
Chamberlain Says French and the British Would Act First in War Covered by Pact
STILL SHUNS AN ALLIANCE
But Public Demand for Soviet Accord Is More Insistent - Closure Voted by Commons
With the Anglo-Russian negotiations still pending, Prime Minister Chamberlain gave public assurance to the Soviet yesterday that it would not be expected to enter any war until the French and British were already in the field. In another statement before the House of Commons the Prime Minister urged speed on the secret mobilization bills, and in response the House voted to limit debate so as to pass the measures next week.
Russia meanwhile began to repair her relations with Poland when Vice Commissar Potemkin had a two-hour talk with Polish Foreign Minister Beck. Some kind of Russo-Polish agreement is not ruled out.
In Berlin, where the press continued to charge abuse of Germans in Poland, (a charge which was true!) there was a hint that Germany was not looking forward to an agreement with the Soviet.
British Assurance Given
By Robert P. Post
Wireless to THE NEW YORK TIMES
LONDON, May 10. - Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain gave public assurances to Russia today that she was not expected to fight for any of the smaller European States unless Britain and France fought, too. (Chamberlain was actually a reluctant warrior who was under intense pressure to wage war against Germany)
The Prime Minister gave this assurance, which already had been transmitted through diplomatic channels, in the House of Commons in reply to the Soviet statement last night that stressed the fact that the British and French proposals for enrolling Russia in the list of anti-Axis states did not give any guarantees against a situation whereby Russia alone might have to intervene against aggression.
"If the Soviet government wished to make their own intervention contingent upon that of Great Britain and France," Mr. Chamberlain added, "His majesty's government for their part would have no objection."
... Later Mr. Chamberlain referred to the "more comprehensive and more rigid" Soviet scheme by which he meant the Soviet desire for a triple military alliance, with staff talks.
... The position as it stands now is ....that Russia has been assured that she is not being maneuvered into a position to fight alone and the British are awaiting her reply and any demands she may make to assure that her conditions will be fulfilled.
Optimistic Outlook Continues
The note of cautious optimism continued here about the Russian negotiations, the belief being that the two countries are not so far apart as they first appeared to be. The British are now expected to make certain concessions to the Russian idea of an alliance.
The negotiations with Russia are having repercussions on the British reaction to the Pope's conference proposal. At the present stage the British are reluctant to take part in any such conference with Russia eliminated, yet they do not see how Russia could be represented at a conference called by the Vatican. (Hitler, Mussolini and Pope Pius want to hold talks; Britain, not wanting to offend the delicate sensibilities of the mass murdering Atheist-Communist Stalin, is saying no.)
Demand for Soviet Pact Rises
By Sir Arthur Willert
Noted British Journalist
LONDON, May 10. - The general British reaction on the feasibility of an international conference to smooth out the troubles of Europe is somewhat lukewarm. This applies to reports that the Vatican has put out feelers regarding the possibility of international action for the settlement of the German-Polish problems.
The predominant opinion here is that if a conference were held at this juncture, the Rome-Berlin Axis powers would try to vitiate it by the same intolerable pressure of fear and menace that Chancellor Adolf Hitler so successfully brought to bear on the Munich meeting. (More excuses for not sitting down and at least hearing what the Pope and Hitler are proposing.)
... This view accounts for the constant sniping at Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, from his own supporters in Parliament, as well as from the Opposition parties (Churchill's gang of warmongers), on the ground that he is not pushing ahead effectively with the Russian negotiations. It is feared that he may be hanging back partly for fear of giving Herr Hitler another excuse for saying that Germany is being encircled (Germany WAS being encircled) and partly because he has not properly shaken off that exaggerated distrust of "the Reds" that made British policy go so disastrously wrong over Spain. (Exaggerated distrust of Stalin? Who could possibly distrust a nice guy like him? Silly Neville! And notice how "the Reds" appears in quotations, as if to say that people who feared Bolshevism were idiots.)
Nothing is more likely to precipitate a dangerous crisis than failure to reach an adequate agreement with Russia or another spasm of appeasement in high quarters in London. (Ah yes, the old "appeasement" cliche) So strongly does the rank and file of Conservatives feel about this that there would be a real possibility of a revolt against Mr. Chamberlain if the Russian negotiations were to fail and if the failure could plausibly be laid at his door. (Churchill is threatening to take down Chamberlain if he doesn't make a military alliance with Stalin!)
In point of fact, less is heard about placating the dictators than was heard a short time ago. ("Placating dictators?" What do you call Stalin and Marshal Smigly-Rydz of Poland? Libertarians?) The Russian negotiations are busily progressing and it is believed here that an agreement will ultimately be reached. (True, but not until Stalin is ready; in 1941. That's when Hitler beat him to the punch!)