The Irish Minister Who Wished Ireland had Fought Germany (Preparing for Iran?)

Alan Shatter TD, Minister for Justice & Equality

As I mentioned the other day, it was recently Holocaust Memorial Day, and there was the usual smattering of WW2 propaganda dressed up as sob-stories to pull at one's heart strings in the media (though thankfully less than previous years). I believe one newspaper even gave out a free onion which readers could peel in a pocket if they were insufficiently moved; not incidentally by stories of the gulags, of firestorms, of Cossacks or Caucasus communities wiped out en masse... no the suffering seems limited to just a few - really, just one - group of people.

And the stoopidest story? Well we've all heard of the real fairy tales of different coloured smoke for different nationalities being incinerated and other miracles (read Michael Hoffman's revisionist cartoon book for some of the best - I think it was called Tales of the Holocaust). But for this year the worst statement has to come from Alan Shatter (how apt!), the Irish Justice Minister, who said:

"in the context of the holocaust, Irish neutrality was a principle of moral bankruptcy."

I wonder how well that went down in Ireland! He's trying to link the Irish with the Swiss (and Spaniards and Portuguese, and Swedish) in that by our modern misconceptions and after 60 plus years of WW2 war propaganda no nation should have stayed out of WW2! It was everyones' duty, according to him and the "wisdom" of this (Zionist) media age in the shadow of umpteen Hollywood films, to join the war and fight Nazi Germany!

And here we have the dichotomy of nationalism, especially for those who haven't moved on from the last century. Many British nationalists think WW2 was wonderful, historically speaking. The 'patriots' of groups like UKIP (and to a lesser extent the BNP, English Democrats, EDL and suchlike) still talk in terms of Germany taking-over Europe. Then we have the National Socialists in groups like the British Movement to whom Hitler could do no wrong (even when he backed anti-British Indians and the IRA), and it was the duty of all racial patriots to fight for Germany, especially against Soviet Russia. I suppose you might say the difference is like that between former blackshirts AK Chesterton who joined the British Army, and William Joyce who went to Berlin and broadcast for Hitler's Germany.

And in the middle are the nationalists who aren't NS, but aren't worshippers of the Westminster State either, who to one degree or another think that "No More Brothers Wars" is the ideal, and that the war was ultimately fought for bankers. Some may think that Hitler played into their hands. Others may think he was their victim.

Wherever you fall in this sliding scale of State/Racial Nationalism (and I know it's oversimplified, but how else may one express it rather than going into a 10,000 word essay?) you would have to be some kind of uber-moron to call on all neutral nations to enter a war which was primarily between France/Britain and Germany; America and Russia not joining the Allies until 1941 - the former from official neutrality (albeit the US State was backing Britain, though charging interest), the latter from a hitherto pro-German standpoint (ordering its acolytes in Britain to all but sabotage the war effort in factories and suchlike).

Given that Ireland had fairly recent memories of not only a war against Britain, but also a fratricidal Civil War in which many Irish families even fought against each other, it is highly dubious and a gross rewriting of history to suggest Ireland should have fought Germany in WW2. Like most neutral nations there is evidence of Ireland leaning one way or another. Many UKIPers and the like point to their telegram to Germany in 1945 to commiserate on the death of their Fuhrer. Yet historians have shown how Ireland helped the Allies by marking points on the Atlantic coast as navigation aids for the Allies. Just as neutral Argentina tended to lean towards Germany (at least in the first half of the war), so neutral Ireland leaned towards the British, e.g. handing over downed German pilots.

Yet according to Mr Shatter (no, I really haven't made that up) Ireland should have sent hundreds of thousands of its men to die in a war started to protect Poland from a power that invaded it in September 1939, which ended by handing over the entirety of Poland (and other European nations) to a power that... er... invaded it in September 1939.


What a waste.

Of course the difference is "the holocaust." As Mr, Shatter dribbled (no doubt busy peeling his free onion) it was "in the context of the holocaust." That is why, 60 odd years on we still have holocaust propaganda; because without it, WW2 would be just like WW1 for most people -- a colossal waste of lives, of money, of time. It is only "the holocaust" that differentiates WW2, and makes it some sort of "holy war" to free Europe's Jews, and deliver them to freedom (by letting them occupy Palestine).

It is all one long trick, a con trick to justify a war that did not give Poland her freedom, that levelled European cities only to deliver Poland to 50 odd years of Communist slavery and tyranny. e.g. we never hear of the amount of Poles who died in WW2, or the number of Poles incarcerated in German concentration camps, or in Soviet gulags - never mind atrocities such as Katyn. When Poles went to Auschwitz in 1998 to erect crosses in memory of all the Poles who were kept in the work camps (and those who died in them) it was Zionist Jews who poured urine over the Poles, said the crosses must be removed, and engaged in a huge campaign to evict nuns who had set-up at Auschwitz (which the Church shamefully capitulated to).

Even if they accept the fictitious "six million" you see, there is no way the Polish people can be allowed to distract people from the holocaust story. The Poles aren't allowed to show that Polish Christians suffered, that the Polish nation was ripped apart, that Poles were displaced and killed, and that (most tellingly of all!) 6 years of war, launched on the pretext of freeing Poland, delivered Poland into 5 decades of gulags, murder, torture, suffering and totalitarian repression.

As Brits looking back we are told that we must remember the liberation of Auschwitz and Dachau. We cannot be allowed to remember the liberation of Poland, because despite being the central war aim -- and especially as it never happened despite being the pretext of war in 1939!

If I were an Irishman, I would slap Mr Shatter in the face with an old kipper. No, Ireland should not have entered WW2. It had no duty to do so. Not one Irishman was threatened, Ireland's sovereignty was not threatened. Tens of thousands of Irish lives were saved by Ireland's decision not to enter WW2 and there is no evidence that one single Jewish death (e.g. from typhus due to Allied mass bombing of German infrastructure in 1945) could have been averted. If the holohoax is to be used (or according to those like Prof Norman Finkelstein, abused), then Ireland's decision was justified, and if Poland's freedom is to be used, then Ireland's decision was justified too.

Some UKIPers and Freemasons may mislabel the Irish as traitors (to whom?). Some Zionists may like to think all neutral nations should not have been neutral ("in the context of the holocaust").

But what does this matter today? Well, those nations who say no to Zionist controlled America (Israel's mouthpiece) when it comes to highly questionable wars, whether old ones (like Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya) or new ones (like Syria and Iran) are often called cowards, traitors etc. The misquoted, out of context words of Iran's Ahmadinajad (about "wiping Israel off the map") are used as if to apply the same holocaustianity-lined pressure on neutral countries who question the legality of wars against sovereign nations on highly questionable, flimsy or put-up ("sexed up" if you will) evidence.

Historically neutral or non-Zionist countries (like Ireland) should be free to question the geo-political events as they unfurl, not least events such as the Israeli commando assault on the charity flotilla heading for Palestine, which had a lot of support in Ireland.

Sadly the words of Mr Shatter increase the myth of the holocaust, increase it's "Holy" nature, its position as the centre of a new religion (a kind of gentile Phariseeism whose aim is the total protection of Israel) and that is why Mr Shatter's words are not about a war in the middle of the last century; rather they reflect on the geo-political events of today.

How long before politicians, in Ireland and elsewhere, are telling us all that another war is necessary lest "another holocaust" happens? A line already used, incidentally, by the likes of Melanie Philips, David Aaronovitch and the other paid mouthpieces of Israel in our controlled media; and so undoubtedly the line of attack in Western countries by Israel itself.

Mr Shatter's "in the context of the holocaust, Irish neutrality was a principle of moral bankruptcy" is already being translated into the British politicians' "in the context of the holocaust, British neutrality on the matters of Syria and Iran is a principle of moral bankruptcy."

===



P.S. I do not expect trolls, Zionists and Reds to believe me; but on searching for an image of Mr Alan Shatter, Irish Minister for Justice & Equality, I found out from Wikipedia: "Shatter was born in Dublin to a Jewish family... He supports Tottenham Hotspur Football Club,^[2] and is the only Jewish member of Dáil Éireann."

I had no idea when I wrote the above piece that Mr. Shatter is Jewish (or stereotypically a Spurs supporter) - merely that his comments were extraordinarily twisted and working to an agenda. This supports my thesis that Mr Shatter's comments aren't so much/only about rewriting Irish history, but of pushing an agenda for accepting future wars that are in Israel's interests and those of extreme Zionists, Neo Con warmongers and those who seek to profit from needless war (and not the Irish, British or any other disinterested peoples).