A Nazi Vision Realized
“We don’t understand German thoroughness. From the very start of World War ii, they have considered the possibility of losing this second round, as they did the first—and they have carefully, methodically planned, in such eventuality, the third round—World War iii!” (The World Tomorrow radio broadcast, May 9, 1945).
To foreign-policy bureaucrats and politicians in Britain and America, this statement, if it were made to them today, would be viewed as preposterous. But consider just how unbelievable this statement would have been to the foreign-policy gurus and politicians in 1945, when Herbert W. Armstrong broadcast it even while the newly forming United Nations organization was beginning to debate the peace terms upon the conclusion of World War ii.
In this same broadcast, Mr. Armstrong declared of those minds which had conceived and launched the greatest war in mankind’s history, “This round of war, in Europe, is over. And the Nazis have now gone underground.”
If you heard Mr. Armstrong’s frequent repetition of those words, if you read his writings where he expounded on these statements often, perhaps you doubted his farsighted vision at the time. Or if you are one who has heard of or read the blatant lies which have been spread by the very church which he founded, the Worldwide Church of God, since his death 15 years ago, you may well have doubted the following prognosis by Mr. Armstrong of what would happen following World War ii: “Now a Nazi underground is methodically planned. They plan to come back and to win on the third try.
“The Bible foretells that third round—and it spells doom for us, as God’s punishment, because we, as a nation, have forsaken Him and His ways! The third round is termed, in prophecy, an invasion by ‘Babylon’—a resurrected Roman empire—a European Union. I have been proclaiming that since 1927.”
Referring to this visionary insight of Herbert W. Armstrong as depicted in these statements which he broadcast even while Nazi Germany lay in the ashes of abject defeat, our editor in chief, Gerald Flurry, made this observation in the February 2000 issue of the Trumpet: “If you understand what is happening in Germany and Europe, you know that statement was an astounding prophecy!”
Mr. Flurry went on to refer to a paper which came to light in 1996 as a result the World Jewish Congress’s probings into the transfer of Jewish money and property looted by the Nazis during World War ii. This previously suppressed document recorded a meeting that took place in August 1944 between an SS general, a representative of the German Ministry in charge of armaments and German corporate moguls. The SS general instructed these bureaucrats and industrialists to prepare to finance the Nazi Party when it went underground following the war. They were also told that “existing financial reserves in foreign countries must be placed at the disposal of the [Nazi] Party so that a strong German empire can be created after the defeat,” according to the report. Up to now, that paper was the strongest evidence available from secular sources vindicating the consistent declarations of Herbert W. Armstrong on this fact of history.
But now a further damning document has surfaced in London that adds great credibility to Mr. Armstrong’s claims that the European Union would become the fulfillment of the Nazi dream, a political and military instrument to carry out their wishes in a third attempt by Germany to dominate the globe, not only economically, not just politically, but ultimately by force of arms!
The Nazi Plan for European Union
Here is what London’s Daily Telegraph had to say about this latest revelation of the fulfilling of the Nazis’ post-World War ii dream: “The idea of a pan-European economic and political union with its own defense force was conceived by SS officers, according to documents released today to the Public Record Office in Kew.
“Major Gen. Ellersiek and Brig. Mueller, Hitler’s chief of staff during the Battle of the Bulge, came up with the idea as a means of keeping Nazism alive following the expected Allied victory in the Second World War….
“By March 1946, Ellersiek was in charge of an underground political party called Organisation Suddeutschland. It believed in the establishment of a fully armed, united Europe” (Feb. 15).
Can we see why some of the clearer thinkers in Britain fear the current development of a Euroforce, controlled by the German-dominated EU, with a German general leading it?
The need to subjugate the national sovereignty of the EU nations into a federation of European communities was apparently also highlighted by these ex-SS officers: “‘What was important was that Britain should realize that if Europe was to survive, we should all think “as Europeans,”‘ the ex-SS man was quoted as saying. The party’s manifesto called for a ‘pan-Europe as a balance between Russia and the USA.’ Although the European nations would remain ‘independent,’ finance and defence matters would be decided centrally” (ibid.).
That is exactly what the Maastricht Treaty achieved in 1993, strengthened by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1996.
“‘The good which was in Nazism still lives in the German heart,’ Ellersiek said. His party offered ‘a new revolution for Germany which will set the pattern for Europe. This revolution is to be the work of the new elite, the German prototype of the future rulers of Europe… which has emerged purified from Nazism and the trials of war’” (ibid.).
These “new elite” are now on the scene; they recently bullied their partners in the EU during negotiations of the Treaty of Nice in December into giving Germany’s vote on EU matters more weight than that of any other EU member country! Names like Schröder, Fischer, Hombach, Verhuegen, Scharping and Schuwirth are all leading lights of, or influences within, both German and EU politics and are setting the pace for the current political, economic, social, military and religious revolution within a unified Germany.
Britain—the Junior Partner
But think—think! Look again at that statement: “the good which was in Nazism.” Can you conceive of minds that can envision good in Nazism? What is this “good” in Nazism, which “still lives in the German heart”? Well, perhaps one of the grand old architects of post-war German politics, Konrad Adenauer, touched on the answer when he declared, “National socialism could not have come to power in Germany if it had not found, in broad strata of the population, soil prepared for its sowing of poison. I stress, in broad strata of the population” (Trumpet, Feb. 2001).
The concern here is that what one German statesman labeled as poison in the minds of the German population, another—one of the founders of the post-war Nazi underground movement who worked to further Germanic plans for European economic, political and military union—saw as good! This concept of a new elite emerging in Germany—“purified from Nazism and the trials of war”—is exactly the declared philosophy of Germany’s current chancellor, Gerhard Schröder!
What ought to be of deepest concern to Britain, and to its chief ally, the United States, is the observation by the British spy who gained this information from SS General Ellersiek: “Germany must lead this New Europe with the cooperation of Britain…. It is evident she [Britain] is to be the junior partner” (ibid.). And the present prime minister of Britain, Tony Blair, has been sucked right into this role during the most vital phase of the German-inspired creation of the European Union’s own independent military force!
At the recent EU conference in Nice, France, Mr. Blair gave up Britain’s power of veto on matters of defense and security. He did this within the atmosphere of perhaps one of the most fractious meetings of the EU. The meeting concluded with Germany determined, with its lackey, France, to drive the 11 nations now bound within the European monetary union (through their acceptance of a common currency, the euro) to faster union ahead of the laggards who, though members of the EU, have not yet signed over their national sovereign rights through capitulating to monetary union. “The new system could also empower an inner core of EU states to decide how its new ‘European army’ is deployed, with Britain having no veto on military policy other than the right to withdraw its own troops” (Daily Telegraph, Nov. 12, 2000).
This leaves Britain as a second-rate EU member. As Romano Prodi told the Guardian in London during a visit to shore up Tony Blair’s pro-EU stance, “In practice, if you don’t fully participate in the family, your voice will be less heard. To be different makes you less important in the total decision-making process” (Feb. 16).
All along, since the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community, which has progressively evolved into the old Nazi dream of a European Union, France reasoned that by attaching itself closely to Germany in the process of the EU’s development it could control Germanic hegemony. That was crazy thinking. History alone should have proven that to France. But even worse, the present British government has reasoned that by coming out as an early and prolific supporter of the new Euroforce, it will have a controlling say in the army’s command and control functions. That’s perhaps even crazier thinking! Germany is destined to dominate, lead and control this new military force. As the Telegraph declared, the only power which the British have is the decision to withdraw their troops from the force.
Javier Solana, the EU’s High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, has indicated that a new EU military committee and the EU’s military staff will be in place by June. Watch to see how loaded these establishments will be with names of Germanic origin. In the meantime, the EU leadership will cleverly exploit nato, British and United Nations forces to suck them dry of equipment and infrastructure, playing for time while Germany, Italy and Spain in particular work together to develop the most high-tech, sophisticated armaments and military space technology industries in the world.
The German press sarcastically reported in February, “So Europeans are, as usual, having to explain their intentions to the Americans and to defuse any potential misunderstandings” (Frankfurter Allgemeine, Feb. 14). They will not be explaining their intentions to America for much longer. Already the U.S. has drifted behind the EU economically (see p. 14). The U.S. is now in second place to the EU. Soon it will be in second place militarily. For Europe, with its potential army of 2 million in uniform within its combined 16 member nations, all that remains to fuse this force together is a strong command and control structure. The Germans will see to that.
Concerns about independent infrastructure, such as the power to uplift, transport and deploy both troops and equipment, reflect little vision. “There are concerns that a number of leading contributors, particularly Germany, will not be prepared to pay the price of their promises. Sir Charles [Guthrie—Britain’s chief of defense staff] pointed out that while the 1.4 million American servicemen had 80 strategic lift aircraft to transport their equipment to any trouble-spot around the world, the 2 million European servicemen had none.
“Although Germany was never named, it has promised heavy lift aircraft but appeared not to have made any such provision in its defense budget” (Daily Telegraph, Feb. 9).
Within five days of this British general’s views appearing in the British press, the Telegraph followed up with an observation on the maneuverings of Javier Solana in the Ukraine: “The European Union is looking at the Ukraine’s arsenal, left over from the Soviet era, to allow its rapid reaction force to operate without American help…. The lack of airlift capability was the most glaring gap in the EU force’s structure to emerge last November when participants were asked what they could contribute…. By using Ukrainian equipment, the EU could bring forward the date of operations [of the rapid reaction force] without American help” (Feb. 14).
Both nato officials and the U.S. government applauded this idea!
Perhaps instead of chasing the shadows of so-called rogue nations, the U.S. should seek a housecleaning of its foreign-policy intelligentsia and replace those who bear a childish vision of America’s foreign relations with those few wise people who can see danger on the horizon in Europe.
As the recently released document in Britain reveals, the Nazi vision of an economically and militarily united Europe is right on track. Once again, Herbert Armstrong’s unparalleled vision is powerfully vindicated.