The Austrian Government Declares That It Wants To “Concentrate” Refugees Into One Spot

By Theodore Shoebat

The Austrian government is now talking about wanting to “concentrate” refugees into one spot, causing a lot of outrage in the country. As we read in one report from the Independent:

Austria’s new far-right interior minister has sparked outrage by saying his government wants to “concentrate” migrants in one place – which critics have interpreted as an allusion to Nazi death camps.

Herbert Kickl used the phrase at a news conference last week, arguing that he wanted “basic services centres, suitable infrastructure that enables us to concentrate people in the asylum process in one place”.

The Nazis ran a concentration camp in Austria between 1938 and 1945 at Mauthausen-Gusen, where tens of thousands of people were murdered as part of the wider Holocaust, which killed millions.

Mr Kickl has since backpedalled on the comments, saying he “did not intend to provoke anyone”. He became interior minister – the equivalent of home secretary – after the far-right Freedom Party of Austrua (FPO) formed a coalition government with the conservative Austrian People’s Party following elections in October. The FPO has pledged to adopt a “very, very strict asylum policy”.

The FPO was created by former Nazi officers in the 1950s. Its inclusion in Austria’s governing coalition has sparked protests, while representatives of the country’s Jewish community have refused to have any contact with it.

The chancellor of Austria, Sebastian Kurz, has declared that the European Union should send its militaries into the Middle East and Africa to prevent refugees from entering Europe. Kurz proposed that the EU establish “safe zones” for refugees in the Middle East and Africa, and back it militarily, stating:

“If (redistributing refugees) isn’t possible, then they should be helped in safe areas on their own continent … The EU should support that, perhaps even organize it, and back it militarily.”

Here is my first thought on this: these European politicians do not care about refugees. So then, what is their motive? As we have been saying here on Shoebat.com for the last past two years, the elite bloc in Europe has been using the so-called refugee crises as a pretext for militarism and military expansionism. As we wrote in July of last year, the Germans want to expand into the Middle East, and they are using the migrant crises as a justification, and an evidence to this is the German Marshall Fund, a think tank ran by big time pro-German elites, which is now promoting German militarism and expansionism. What is the reason it gives for this? The refugee crises. Just this year, the German Marshall Fund produced  a report, written by Harold James, entitled, Can Germany Make Globalization? 

The paper is about why Germany should increase its military capacity, because, as it says, with a stronger military it could enter North Africa in order to block the refugee routes. In one part of the plan, it says that Germany must adapt to American and British military innovation and buildup, if it is to be a dominate force for globalization:

“In general, defense spillovers created a powerful motor for economic growth. So historically low European defense expenditure may have been an economic drag, rather than a cause of greater European prosperity. The discomfort of high ranking academic and research institutions in the United States and the U.K. in the aftermath of the Trump election and the Brexit vote, and their implications for immigration policy, offer the EU a chance to establish Europe as a global eader. … Military security, cyber security, energy security: these are areas where Europe should take an example from the great era of American success in the late 20th century. They all require coordination, and private-public partnerships.”

In another part it reads: “The more Europe is aware of its insecurity, the greater the chance is that it takes up the challenge.” What is the greatest drive for militarism? A threat. The migration crises brought in terrorism, a terror threat that the German government was well aware of, and allowed it to happen. The threat of terrorism creates the incentive to increase government power, military spending, and arms manufacturing. Terrorism makes politicians into saviors, and the crime of genocide into an act of gleeful justice.

The German Marshall Fund is pointing out that because Europe is “aware of its insecurity,” now it has “the greater chance”, or the incentive, to boost up its military, and to conduct actions that have not been done since the Third Reich.

For example, in 2016 NBC published an article that was headlined with the words: “Germany Debates Putting Troops on Streets to Protect Against ISIS”. Think about this: German soldiers have not been on street patrols in Germany since the fall of the Third Reich. But, now it wants to put soldiers on the streets, to protect itself against, when every government including the Vatican knew that ISIS terrorists were going to be amongst the migrants?

The Germans brought in a problem, knowing full well the consequences. What was the reason? It had nothing to do with compassion, and it had everything to do with an agenda. It is obvious what that agenda is: changing the political climate to favor the strength of the State. One Australian report says: “Germany is to deploy troops on the streets for the first time since the Second World War”. Troops will be on the streets, and few will be complaining, because terrorism desensitizes us to government agendas. Just look at 9/11, and how it stirred the nationalist emotions to believe all the lies spewed out by the US government to justify the destabilization of Iraq.      

The German Marshall Fund in fact admits that mass migration will alter the political climate of a nation. On its official website it says:

“Migration is a hotly debated topic on both sides of the Atlantic and impacts elections, policymaking and public opinion on the local, national and European level.”

The statement shows that a major American think tank, one which has ties to the CIA plan to destabilize Syria, knows full well the geopolitical changes that mass migration brings. That the German Marshall Fund understands that a migration crises can be made to justify military expansionism, is shown in its 2017 report where it reads:

“Germany — again in partnership with EU members — needs to secure a stable development of North Africa and the Middle East, but also of countries beyond that immediate region whose weak economic and demographic profile means that they are the source of uncontrolled migration flows.”

The Germans have been wanting to seize North Africa since Medieval times, and it looks like they will be using the migrant crises to yet again start a military advancement on that region.

Because both of the parties that dominated the Austrian general election, the Austrian People’s Party and the Freedom Party, are rooted in Nazism. And both parties are working for the rise of Germanic militarism. Lets remember that it was Austria, and not Germany, that spawned Hitler. This should be of great concern to humanity.

And if one thinks that Nazism is simply history, the party that took first place was the Austrian People’s Party, the same party was once led by Kurt Waldheim, a major SS Nazi officer who served the Third Reich, who led a successful presidential campaign in the 1980s, and who served as Secretary General of the United Nations from 1972 to 1982.

Eli M. Rosenbaum, the principal deputy director of the Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations, which prosecuted suspected Nazi war criminals, obtained documents that revealed the Nazi past of Waldheim. The documents showed that Waldheim served the “Prince Eugen” division of the Waffen-SS, “perhaps the most notorious of all of Hitler’s Waffen-SS units.” This same Waffen-SS had numerous Muslim divisions as well. 

In 1986, when Waldheim was running for president in Austria, John Tagliabue, a foreign correspondent for The New York Times, wrote an article exposing the Nazi activities of Waldheim. The story made it on the front page and was distributed all over the Austrian press. But, the Austrians did not care, and even voted Waldheim into office. If Austrians then were willing to vote in a leader of the SS, then today is no different, and still they are willing to vote in politicians whose parties are rooted in Nazi ideology. Many Austrians even got upset with the World Jewish Congress, an organization that led the investigation on Waldheim, even condemning the group and accusing them of an international conspiracy against their president.

For example, when it came out that Waldheim served as an SS officer in Croatia, the Austrian newspaper, Wochenpresse, played the fact down by saying that his medals were not that significant and that he was merely given a position in an intelligence branch. Rosenbaum responded by writing:

“Waldheim was not merely ‘assigned’ to the Intelligence/Counterintelligence Branch; one could properly infer that he was the primary aide to the chief of intelligence for all of Army Group E, a force of more than 400,000 troops having dominion over nearly the entire Balkans.”

Waldheim sentenced entire villages to destruction. In Christian Orthodox Crete he chose two villages, Iraklion and Karpenission, as worthy of destruction. Waldheim was also behind the mass deportation of thousands of Greek Jews to Auschwitz, where most were exterminated. Waldheim himself ordered a group of British commandos to be executed. 

That Austrians are voting for a party a past leader of whom was a Nazi mass murderer, should tell us that the beast of Nazism never died, but it only masqueraded itself under the guise of modern politics, and its rising back up.

Pope Pius XII, in 1943, predicted that after World War Two there would be talk of peace in a new world order, but that such would not last, and what took place in the Second World War would happen again:

“But perhaps it is time to turn our eyes to the future, instead of the past; what lies before us? Those who hold the fate of kingdoms in their hands assure us that, once the bloodthirsty discords of the present moment have been laid aside, they will introduce a new order of things, based on a foundation of justice and economic settlement. But is it really to be different, is it really to be (what is more important) a better and happier age? At the end of this war there will be fresh pacts, fresh arrangement of international relations. They will be conceived in a spirit of justice and fairness all round, in a spirit of reconstruction and peace, or will they disastrously repeat our old and our recent failures? Experience shews it is but an empty dream to expect a real settlement to emerge at the moment when the conflagration of war has died down.” (Pope Pius XII, Darkness over the Earth, ch. v)

Pius XII was accurate to a tee. For one, he said that the postwar world will “introduce a new order of things”. This is reminiscent to what President Bush Sr. did when he introduced his “new world order” of peace:

Pius XII also foresaw that there will be peace through “economic settlement”, and we see this in the project of unifying Europe under the Euro with the hopes of maintaining peace and preventing conflict. But, the EU and its Euro project is destabilizing, and this will bring in an occasion for conflict. Yanis Varofakis, the former financial minister of Greece, warned that if the Euro fragments, it will cause a hostile division between the Germanic northern Europe and the more Mediterranean Southern Europe:

“Do you know what will happen if the Euro fragments? We’re going to end up with a new Berlin wall, only this time it’ll be running down the Rhine and the Alps. There will be a division of Europe, between a Germanic part, east of the Rhine and north of the Alps.”

What happened in Austria’s general election is not an anomaly, but rather a result of an entire culture. Like a devil waiting for the moment to attack, this violent nationalism lingers about, waiting for the opportunity for its existence to be justified.

Money is not power, belief is power. Money is simply the means by which elites establish outlets of influence, belief is the fuel that leads their mobs, their masses and eventually, their armies. By allowing the migration crises to happen, it sparked a deep reinvigoration of nationalism. While the immigration problem can be controlled, what cannot be contained is the even worse reaction to it. 

What is interesting is how Sebastian Kurz is working with a Turkish intellectual, Ednan Aslan, a professor at the University of Vienna, to further push the anti-migration craze in Austria. Aslan uses jargon that is no different that what one would hear coming out of the Counter-jihad movement. For example, Aslan says that Islam is “out of touch with the present” in the way it is currently taught, and that:

“We want to reshape the face of Islam. It is important that Islam is given a new face in order to be able to remain viable.”

Ednan Aslan, like the Young Turks in the first half of the twentieth century, wants a Europeanized Islam, saying:

“Currently, Islam is unfortunately a religion of isolation. A religion of migration. A religion of Turkey, of Saudi Arabia. But no religion of Europe, which advocates pluralism or prepares children accordingly for a plural society.”

This is the same type of mentality as the Young Turks who ruled Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: create a modern Islam to adapt to the West. This is why the Young Turks did not mind believing in Darwinism, while at the same time promoting an Islamic society, even though Ataturk (a Young Turk himself) got rid of the caliphate and conditioned Turkey to European ways.

The Wahhabi form of Islam is not that deceptive; it explicitly states its desires. But the Young Turk type of Islam, or the one produced by the learned Ottomans, is much more appealing to Western minds: it embellishes the religion of Muhammad with mystical axioms and poetry, and fills its texts with Buddhist and gnostic sounding verses.

Europeanized Islam (an Islam whose followers will even openly criticize Islam) is attractive to the Western elitist mentality, not that it will necessarily gain converts, but that it will gain allies. This is maruna at its best.

The proponents of this ideology will advocate their imperialism, by dressing the Islamic calls of conquests under beautifully designed edifices and sophisticated literature, and its barbarities are mixed with Darwinism (the genocidal religion of the West), so as to make their desire to exterminate those they deem inferior as good science in the eyes of Europeans. This is the plan of Ednan Aslan, hence why he wants to create a “European brand of Islam”.

This is the reason as to why Aslan is working with the right-wing, for by appealing to their Counter-jihad movement, the Turkish intellectual elite can then foster a coalition with Western nazis, thus continuing what has been taking place for centuries: the Germanic-Turkish alliance. German Protestants worked with the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century; when Germany became an official nation in 1871, it forged an alliance with the Ottoman Empire and fought as allies with the Turks during the First World War. Old patterns live on, and nations do not do things out of nowhere, but out of centuries of conditioning.

Earlier this year, Sebastian Kurz, as Austria’s Foreign Minister, commissioned Ednan Aslan to create a study on Islamic kindergartens and how they were radicalizing Muslim children. The Austrian magazine, Falter, found documents that supposedly showed that Aslan and Kurz collaborated to deliberately manipulate the data to make the situation appear worse than what was found. Aslan stated that he backs the report “to the last period.” When the press began to talk about this story, Aslan defended Kurz by saying: ″Some people want to knock Sebastian Kurz off his pedestal″.

What Falter found was that, according to one German publication,

civil servants in the Ministry of Integration changed – with his knowledge – the content of the kindergarten study to suit Sebastian Kurz, minister for foreign affairs and integration.

Whether or not what their study said was true is not the point. The point is that here we have the right-wing anti-Muslim immigration elites working with a member of the Turkish intelligentsia on fueling anti-migrant sentiment, and thus bolstering the position of the eugenists and nazis who are using the migration crises as a way to strengthen their position.

Turkey actually mistreats Muslim migrants terribly, putting them in camps where they are raped and pimped, and even shooting them as they try to cross the border into Turkey. So, Turkey hates the migrants just as much as the right-wing does. So it is not surprising that they are working together. Turkey and Germany are simply using them to generate a political shift in favor of militarism, which is what we are seeing now with Germany increasing its military spending and forging a pan-European army in the name of national security.

Anyone who would disagree at this point must then answer a Jesus-Style question: Was it not Turkey who worked with Germany in bringing in the Islamic migrants? It was all done to cause societal manipulation and a political shift.

The destabilization of the Middle East, alongside the migrant crises, provided the perfect conditions to reinvigorate Germanic militarism, and it will be the Germanic militarists who will work with the revived Ottoman empire in the future. We saw an example of this in the recent German general election debate between politicians. In the debate, the German politician, Andreas Nick (whose party, the Christian Democrats, took the majority of the vote in Germany’s most recent general election) said that Germany must increase its military capacity and spend — instead of two percent — three percent of Germany’s GDP on the German military. But guess what he used to justify this: Terrorism from the Middle East and North Africa (where much of the migrants are coming from):

“I think what we should agree on is that in a world that has increasing security challenges where we are required to take more responsibility for our security, where we have to take more responsibility for stability in our immediate neighborhood in the Middle East, in Northern Africa, that we should provide our military with the means necessary so that they can do these missions with the best equipment possible. Wether that ultimately ends up to 2% is a statistical issue. I would like to broaden that perspective. We are talking about a 3% objective, including what we need to spend on development aid, on diplomacy, on other aspects of our integrated foreign policy. But in this regards, more responsibility in the security environment is an important factor.”

   

Of course, Andreas Nick is weaseling his way into supporting German militarism, by bringing up the usual diplomatic talk about “aid” and “integrated foreign policy.” This deceptive talk clouds up what Mr. Nick is trying to say: Germany wants to control North Africa, and its using the migrant crises as a way to bolster its objective. This tricky language of Andreas Nick did not work with the debate’s moderator, Tim Sebastian, who immediately asked the German politician:

“So you want a bigger army, and that you think that helps you talk with a louder voice?”

Nick responded by saying that Germany needs to “improve European cooperation. As the chancellor [Angela Merkel] said … ‘We need to take more responsibility for our own destiny.’”

Andreas Nick is referencing a statement that Merkel made back in May, in which she said:

“the times in which we can fully count on others are somewhat over, as I have experienced in the past few days. …We Europeans must really take our destiny into our own hands.” 

All of this type of language is no different than what you hear coming out of the Alt-right and the Identitarian movement, with its push for nationalism and pan-Europeanism. “Take back our future” is a popular type of saying within the Alt-right or Identitarian circles. And yet here we have major German politicians saying the same thing, only this time they have the political leverage to actually carry out military enterprises.

The Alt-right ideology, to put it plainly, is the simpler version of the same thing being pushed by major elites within European governments. The elites in the higher echelons of government advance their agenda with diplomatic language, whereas the Alt-right fanatics are more explicit. But, at the end of the day, they are the same. The Alt-right and the identitarians are simply the street activists for those principalities in high places; militarists and eugenists in the higher echelons of power, little demons doing the work for the bigger devils in the satanic hierarchy, for the cause of the greater conspiracy of genocide. The Alt-right and the Identitarians will likely just get absorbed by the elite establishment, but nonetheless, the evil objective will remain the same. Its like with the Islamic extremists groups, they eventually will get absorbed by the wealthier, more sophisticated (‘moderate’) and more powerful Islamic principalities, such as Turkey.  

There is something that goes beyond the pan-Europeanism that these people — both elite and regular activists — are promoting, and that is the ideology for an idea beyond Europe, for Eurasia, or the merging of Europe and Asia.

Why is all of this important? Because it ties into the greater plan of a Germanic-Turkic alliance. Austria wants to become a key military power, as does Germany, and both of these countries want to create alliances with Turkic and Asian countries as part of their envisioning of Eurasia, or the idea of making Europe and Asia a singular continent, at least in the ideological sense. Its pan-Asianism and pan-Europeanism combined (so much for ” nationalism”). 

There is a religious component to all this, one very ancient: Germanic paganism, and it is something warned about in the Bible, by Joel and Ezekiel who warn about a northern army, coming from Turkey and Northern Europe.

The patriarch of the Germanic peoples, Odin (or Wotan), who would be later mythologized, was a tribal leader who, according to the Scandinavian text, the Prose Edda, came from a region called Turkland, or Turkey. Odin, as the text reads, had “second sight,” or prophetic powers, and believed that he was being called to migrate from Turkey to Northern Europe. The Prose Edda says:

Odin had second sight, and his wife also; and from their foreknowledge he found that his name should be exalted in the northern part of the world and glorified above the fame of all other kings. Therefore, he made ready to journey out of Turkland, and was accompanied by a great multitude of people, young folk and old, men and women; and they had with them much goods of great price. And wherever they went over the lands of the earth, many glorious things were spoken of them, so that they were held more like gods than men. They made no end to their journeying till they were come north into the land that is now called Saxland [Germany]; there Odin tarried for a long space, and took the land into his own hand, far and wide.

The text goes on to recount on how Odin travelled all the way to Sweden. The native people of that land, and their king, Gylfi, saw that Odin and his tribe were coming, and that they were a people from Asia called the Æsir or the “lords” or divine ones:

“After that he went northward, where the land is called Sweden; the king there was named Gylfi. When the king learned of the coming of those men of Asia, who were called Æsir, he went to meet them, and made offer to them that Odin should have such power in his realm as he himself wielded.”

The text states that Odin governed “according to the customs of the Turks.” That the text refers to Odin and his people as Asians from Turkey, and as being Æsir or masters, establishes a link between the Asians of Turkey and the Germanic peoples. It also shows how the Germanians saw themselves as a master race from Asia. The word Æsir actually is rooted in Asia, in Persia specifically, in the ancient Aryan detiy, Ahura Maza, in that it is rooted in the word Ahura, which means “godhood.” So, the ancient Germanians considered themselves to be a divine race, just as the Nazis held themselves to be the master race.

St. Bede tells us that when the Saxons came from Germany to invade what is now called England, the first commanders to lead this invasion were Hengist and Horsa. These two, Bede says, “were the sons of Victgilsus, whose father was Vecta, son of Woden [Odin]; from whose stock the royal race of many provinces deduce their original.” St. Bede explains that the pagans Saxons’ “intentions were to enslave” the Britons, who were Catholics. The pagan Saxons were cruel and genocidal, and anytime the Germanians return to their pagan way, they will be on the warpath.

When the Germans elected the Nazis, it was at a time when paganism resurged. But it was not just Germanic paganism, but an interconnecting of Germanic paganism with the pagan religions of that continent from where Odin sojourned: Asia. Nazism was not just about pan-Europeanism, but pan-Eurasianism, or the merging of Europe and Asia, both historically and spiritually. Hence why, the symbol of the Nazis was the Swastika, a pagan image found throughout Asia, because the Nazis saw Germans as Indo-Aryans.

Alfred Rosenberg, the head ideologue for the Nazis, said that the Germanians were Atlanteans, and that these people settled throughout Europe, North Africa and Asia, and that their religions were the Aryan beliefs found in Hinduism and Zoroastrianism. In his most famous work, The Myth of the Twentieth Century, Rosenberg writes:

These currents of Atlantic men moved by water in their swan and dragon ships into the Mediterranean and to Africa; by land over central Asia to Kucha, perhaps even to China; over north Africa to the south of our own continent.

Ahura Mazda says to Zoroaster: ‘Only once in the year does one see the rising and setting of stars and sun and moon; and the inhabitants hold to be a day, what is a year.’ This must be for the Persian god of light a distant memory of the Nordic homeland, for only in the far north do day and night each last six months. The Mahabharata reports of the Indian hero, Arjuna, that during his visit to the mountain of Meru, the sun and moon daily passed around from left to right. Such an idea could never have originated in the tropical south, for only in the far north does the sun disc roll along the horizon.

…

Together with these primeval Aryan Atlantic memories appear those cult allegories, costumes, carvings which are understandable only in terms of Nordic origin. In predynastic Egypt, we find the Nordic boat with its swan neck and trefoil. But the rowers are the later ruling Amorites, already recognised by Sayce as fair skinned and blue eyed. They once traversed north Africa as strictly homogeneous hunter clans which gradually subdued the entire land.

Rosenberg exhorted the German people to fight for both Odin and the Persian god, Ahura Mazda, writing:

“Ahura Mazda, the eternal god of light, became a cosmic idea—the divine protector of Aryans everywhere. He had no special abode or temple like the gods of the orient and even of later Rome. He was simply the holy whiteness of perfection. His enemy is the dark Ahriman who is locked in struggle with him for world domination. This is a truly Nordic Aryan concept of Zoroaster. In this struggle, we must fight on the side of Ahura Mazda (just as the Einheriar in Valhalla [the heaven of the Vikings] would fight for Odin against the Fenris Wolf and the Midgard Serpent).”

As the Germans looked to Asia for their diabolical thirst for pagan religion, and as they allied with the Sufi Islamic Ottomans in World War One, and the Shinto Buddhists of Japan in World War Two, so in the future the Germans will work with Turkey and the pagans of the land of the rising sun.

The prophet John writes of the coming of “the kings from the rising of the sun.” (Revelations 16:12, Douay-Rheims) This is speaking of Asia, as far as Japan, the nation that sees the sun rise first. After Japan defeated Russia in 1905, the Ottoman world looked to Japan in awe. One Ottoman publication spoke of the “rise of the East,” or an “awakening in Asia” that had been commenced and sparked by “the rising Sun [Japan].”  

There is even today some signs of interest in connecting Germanic paganism with Hinduism by the German government.

In 2014, the Max Planck Institute, the scientific wing of the German government, came out with a book entitled, Melammu: The Ancient World in an Age of Globalization. The work was written by Jürgen Renn, the director of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, as well as other Max Planck Institute scholars.

The book compares Germanic mythology with Hindu texts, and speaks of “Parallels in Germanic, related not only typologically but also genealogically to the Indian ones,” and then goes on to quote a Norse pagan verse: “Phol and Wodan were riding to the woods, when Balder’s foal sprained his foot.” The book then compares this with the Hindu Atharva Veda: “What of thee is torn, what of thee is broken, (or what) of thee crushed— let Dhātar (put) it auspiciously put that together again, joint with joint.”  The book then describes this Hindu text as “the best preserved parallel to the Germanic formula”.

The Max Planck Institute (as we showed before) is a Nazi eugenist institute which was directed by actual Nazi scientists after the war, and is conducting horrific experiments on children murdered in the human slaughterhouses that we call abortion clinics. Not only is the institute heavily involved in promoting eugenics, but paganism as well. The institute is not funded by some private entity, but by the German government itself. Why is the German state investing an interest in paganism? Because it is at war against God Himself. Remember what the Apostle teaches:

^“For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.” (Ephesians 6:12)

What the elites are teaching in conferences and in academic papers and books, the Alt-right, Identitarian and Counter-jihad outlets are teaching in much simpler ways. The intelligentsia teaches eugenics and paganism under the guise of science, but nationalists will say: ‘we need eugenics and paganism to fight the Islamization of the West.’ This is why its so important to understand this strategy of propaganda, because it is extremely deceptive. It takes a threat that is real (Islamic terrorism) and uses it to justify another evil. All heresy is the attacking on one evil to justify another evil.

This is why the Bible warns of these times in which such principalities will deceive the very elect (Matthew 24:24). This will be the times in which the savage masses will be carried by the tides of this world, even including the ones who think they are doing God a service.

The Alt-right neo-pagan, Stephen McNallen, says that the “Islamization” of Germany will usher in a return of Odin (or Wotan), and that this return will be manifested in a very violent reaction by the German people who will then return to the warpath. He describes the deity as the “Wotan archetype” that lives within the “volk” and “is the driving psychic dominant of Europe.” He says:

“the present day invasion of Germany by Middle Eastern immigrants, will only make Wotan’s return all the more dramatic.”

This type of talk, using Islam as a way to justify paganism, was used by the Nazi thinker, Alfred Rosenberg, who wrote:

Odin as the eternal mirrored image of the primal spiritual powers of Nordic man lives today just as he did over 5,000 years ago.

While Rosenberg admires the Muslims of the Persian world, and praises the Young Turks for “the abolition of the Caliphate”, he nonetheless expresses himself in ways akin to today’s Counter-jihad movement, describing how the Al Akbar University in Egypt “trains a fanatical youth”, and how:

Everywhere that racial mixings take place in European colonies, Islam finds enthusiastic adherents among the mixed elements.   … I say to you Europeans: be on your guard! … Before this coming purified hatred of the Black races and bastards, led by the fanatical spirit of Mohammed, the white races have more than ever all cause to be on their guard.

This really reveals that the view on Islam that the Nazis had was not so black and white. The Nazis admired really Turkish Islam, and praised the Young Turks for their genocide of the Armenians, while at the same time they had very negative views on the non-European Muslims, and as was the case with Rosenberg, a hatred for fundamentalist Islam itself.

The words of Rosenberg would today tickle the ears of the Counter-jihad. But it was used for the cause of eugenics, just as the Counter-jihad movement today is using Islam to promote paganism, eugenics and homosexuality. We see this in the Alternative for Deutschland Party (AfD), the spawn of the Counter-jihad movement that took ninety-five seats in the German parliament in the most recent German general election. A leader of the AfD, Alice Weidel, made a victory speech after the election in which she boasted about how she is a lesbian and how ‘homophobia’ amongst migrants must end. Watch this lesbian go full Hitler over the fact that numerous migrants hate sodomites:

The reverence of Sodom, and the desire to destroy all those who go against Sodom, this is the new Nazism. It is no wonder why God calls the realm of the antichrist, Sodom and Egypt (Revelation 11:8) For in Egypt, paganism abounded, and the neo-pagan movement links its religion to Egypt; and in Sodom, homosexuality abounded, and the entire armies against the Church uphold homosexuality.

The Nazis in the past, nonetheless, still turned to Asia to find their allies (in their case, Japan), and in our time we are seeing the beginning stages of the Germanic nations looking to Asia to find their allies.

In 2003, the Austrian general, Raimund Schittenhelm, gave a presentation in the State Defense Academy Heidelberg on the significance of Asia in Austrian geopolitics and globalization, in which he said:

“It is to be expected that the world policy in this century will be strongly influenced by developments in Asia. The anthology should help to awaken awareness of developments in Asia and to understand the patterns of action and thought structures of Asian actors.”

Present in the event was Erich Reiter, an Austrian military specialist who is also a strong promoter of Eurasiansm, and he is a member of the far-right Freedom Party (which took second place in Austria’s general election). In the meeting, Reiter said this on the importance of Asia in geopolitics:

“The great changes of the present are taking place in Asia, because the geopolitics, which are often declared dead, are currently gaining in importance again”

Another person at the event was Peter Hazdra, a member of the research institute of the National Defense Academy of the Austrian Armed Forces.

In 2003, both Erich Reiter and Peter Hazdra edited a volume on European geopolitics, consisting of numerous essays on this subject, entitled, The Impact of Asian Powers on Global Developments. One of the essays presented is written by Rahul Peter Das, a professor at Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, and its entitled, Europe in Eurasian Strategic Considerations: Introductory Remarks.

Das writes that Europe is becoming more and more irrelevant, while the focus on Asia is becoming greater. The United States, Das observes, is focusing more on Asia than it is on Europe, and that Asia is becoming more important politically and militarily. Das writes:

“Asia, particularly, is rapidly gaining importance in both the international political and military realms. Developments in this region will increasingly affect events at the global level, and thus also developments bearing on Europe. … Furthermore, the United States of America is intensifying its activities in Asia, and this nearly inevitably results in a weakening of its commitment to Europe. Europe, therefore, will more and more be left to its own resources in terms of its potential and its means of influencing global events. If Europe is not able to confront these challenges with effective measures, then it will be faced with the danger of marginalization in the sphere of political power.”

This was written in 2003, when the Iraq War first erupted. This writing, and those like it, really show how the Europeans were planning, as far back as the Iraq conflict, how they were going to make themselves supreme in globalization. Notice what Das writes: that America is more and more ignoring Europe, and that Europe is going to have to make itself dominant. Is this not what we are seeing now, with Donald Trump and his administration arguing that Europe should be left to spend on its own defense without America’s help? This is exactly what is taking place, and the Germans are not sad about this, rather they are gleeful that they can rise up again, without America preventing them from doing this.

Das advocates for a pan-European military foreign policy, writing that “there should also be a European foreign, security and defense policy.” Das focuses on Austria as central in this pan-European plan, writing that: “in 2001 Austria formulated a security and defense doctrine that proceeds from a common European security situation and regarded as a paradigm change within the country.”

That Das describes Austria’s military plan as a “paradigm change” indicates a shift in the political climate of the Germanic nations in Europe. While the masses have a warped and shortsighted view that Germanic militarism will never return, the shift in favor of militarism in the Germanic powers of Germany and Austria already began decades ago, and were still strongly lodged in the soul of Germany after the Second World War.

In 1997, Erich Reiter, the Austrian military specialist and a member of the Freedom Party, stated that the idea of Austrian military neutrality is a myth perpetuated by “the political class,” and it goes against the national identity of the Austrian people. The reason that Austria has not been able to present itself as a major military power, Reiter wrote, is not because of some vague principle of neutrality, but simply that Austria was not in the position to build up a formidable force. As Reiter wrote:

“While the political class of Austria started to internalize neutrality, thereby contributing to the fiction that this is an integral part of the national identity of the Austrians in general, from a perspective of political realism the country was not in a position to build up a credible military component of neutrality, as in the case of Switzerland.”

Reiter argues that the whole idea of Austrian neutrality only served Soviet interests, and thus Austria needs to build up a military to combat Russia. Its history repeating itself, with the Germanic-Russian conflict rising up again. 

In 1996, Jorg Haider, one of the most popular and influential former leaders of the Freedom Party, pushed the idea of Austria joining NATO. Haider used the very common anti-Russia paranoia that was quite intense to justify this idea, and stated that Austria was under “the sword of Damocles of a nuclear Holocaust”. Haider argued that now that the Soviet Union had died, Austria could be the bridge between Western Europe and former Soviet nations. Haider argued that for Austria to remain militarily neutral would be:

“a hinderance for the further stabilization of our east and middle European sphere. Whomever wants to live securely cannot assign himself the role of a marginal position at the eastern border of a European security strategy.”

What is behind this idea of Austria being a bridge between east and west? Its about Eurasianism, and ultimately, really, its about domination. In the First World War, Austria was the head of an empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, over which the Austrians jointly ruled with the Magyars, a Turkic race of people who governed Hungary. Hungarians are Magyars; a people of both Slavic and Turkic origins. Thus, the idea of Austria wanting to be a bridge between Eastern and Western Europe is really part of a Eurasian conspiracy to revive the Austro-Hungarian empire. Hungary is considered not just European, but Eurasian, on account of its European and Asian roots. The aspiration of creating Eurasia would thus involve Hungary playing a central role on account of its position as being both Asiatic and European.

Within the pan-Europeanist establishment, there is a push for a united Europe, or a complete Europe which would include countries that would be considered parts of Eurasia, such as the Ural mountains which encompasses northern, southern and western Russia, the coast of the Arctic Ocean all the way to the Ural River and northwestern Kazakstan. 

Andreas Molzer, a pan-German and leading member of Austria’s Freedom Party, and also a former member of the European parliament, alluded to this desire when he said that the recreation of Europe “from the Atlantic to the Urals would be desirable but is not possible at the moment”. Marine Le Pen also reflected this aspiration, stating:

“We are wrongly accused of being anti-Europe, but we are for (a Europe) that stretches from the Atlantic to the Urals, not from Washington to Brussels”

In one essay, entitled, New Global Politics, Erich Reiter writes of the idea that whoever controls Eurasia, controls the future of the world, thus revealing the objective of global domination in the plan of Eurasia:

“These are theories, and Nicholas Spykman, for instance, who carried MacKinder’s analysis further, formulated that whoever controls the Eurasian rimland rules Eurasia, and whoever rules Eurasia controls the destiny of the world.”

Reiter affirms the geopolitical significance of controlling Central Asia, stating:

“Control over Center Asia is still of geopolitical importance, although the need for continued Western emphasis on the Eurasian heartland has decreased because of the regained independence of many countries in the heartland. In the longer run, the geopolitical importance of this area could increase because the Eurasian rimland still abounds in potential threats to world order. Thus, Central Asia cannot be disregarded with respect to current geopolitical situations.”

The aspiration of Eurasia, or a pan-European and pan-Asian coalition, will bring mankind into another world war. How is this? Eurasianism was made possible on account of the fall of the Soviet Union. Before this took place, Europe and Central Asia were dominated by two powers: the United States and the Soviet Union. With the fall of the Soviet Union, and with the United States withdrawing from West Germany and facilitating the fall of the Berlin Wall, Europe and Central Asia became ruled by multiple states. With numerous countries being sovereign, and with the absence of the Soviet Union and the lack of more American control, it opened the door for past tensions to be pushed. 

We believe that we need to adjust our previous interpretations on prophecy. These nations of Central Asia and southern Russia, alongside the Germanic hoards, are what the prophet Ezekiel, under inspired pen warned about when he prophesied on: “Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Mosoch and Thubal” and “Gomer, and all his bands, the house of Thogorma, the northern parts and all his strength, and many peoples with thee.” (Ezekiel 38:2,6) The “northern parts” encompass much more. This is why St. Ambrose of Milan interpreted Gog to be the Goths.

In the future, it will be remembered that one of the events that brought humanity to another world war, was the fall of the Berlin wall, which marked the fall of the Soviet Union, which only led to the independence of Islamic Central Asian countries and the reunification of Germany; such nations in the end will join the Ottoman empire in a coalition of evil. 

The reputable political scientist, John Mearsheimer, made a very interesting observation back in 1990, on how the fall of the Soviet Union will precipitate another war in Europe. Mearsheimer writes that before the end of the Cold War, Europe was ruled by the US and Russia, and since each of these superpowers had nuclear weapons, the threat of nuclear war prevented war between the two. With the fall of the Soviet Union came the independence of the nations that it ruled over. Thus Europe was no longer under the control of these duel powers, but now under multiple powers, and with a multiplicity of independent countries, comes nationalism, and with nationalism, comes war. As Mearsheimer writes:

“Most importantly, hyper-nationalism helped cause the two world wars, and the decline of nationalism in Europe since 1945 has contributed to the peacefulness of the postwar world.”

Mearsheimer is correct. Even Jesus warns about wars between nations (Matthew 24:7). 

With the rise of the nation-state and the inevitable subsequent rise of nationalism, conflict is most definitely expected. The world saw this in the 1990s with the break down of Yugoslavia and the independence of the nations that was under it. Mearsheimer made an emphatic prediction that the fall of the Soviet Union will open the door for conflict in Europe:

“I argue that the prospects for major crises and war in Europe are likely to increase markedly if the Cold War ends and this scenario unfolds.” (Mearsheimer, Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War)

Andreas Molzer of the Freedom Party wants to revive the German Reich, stating: “this world needs states (Staatlichkeit) that have a sacred legitimation — which is the Reich”. And yes, by Reich, he is speaking of reviving the German Empire, stating that he wants to bring “Berlin and Vienna back into the centre of the New Europe”. Molzer wants to include in this new pan-German empire: the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Croatia and Poland.

That this political party in Austria, the Freedom Party, is now the second largest party in the Austrian parliament, and that they want to establish a Germanic hegemony under which Catholic Poland would be subjugated, should grab our attention. The Germans have been wanting to exterminate the Poles for a long time, and did indeed butcher millions of Catholic Poles during the Holocaust.

Near the end of the First World War, the German general, Erich Ludendorff, envisioned the Social-Darwinistic removal of two million Poles from Polish territory that Germany wanted to annex for the cause of pan-Germanism (see Tooze, The Deluge, ch. 6, p. 135). During the Nazi Holocaust, the Germans, erupting in their anti-Catholic hatred after centuries of being conditioned to the antichrist heresy of Luther, carried out the extermination of millions of Poles. So horrendous was this genocide, that it moved Pope Pius XII to write:

“The blood of so many who have been cruelly slaughtered, though they bore no military rank, cries to heaven especially from the well-loved country of Poland. Poland, imperishably crowned in the pages of history by the long record of her loyalty to the Church and her services to Christian civilization, should claim from all eyes a brotherly, a human tear. She puts her trust in that Virgin Mother of God who is the help of Christians, and waits for the day when she will be allowed at last to emerge, unharmed, from the waves that have engulfed her.” (Pope Pius XII, Darkness Over the Earth, ch. viii)

Notice how Pius XII refers to the Poles as a people who revere the Virgin Mary. Read the words of St. John, how he saw that “the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Revelation 12:17) The woman that he speaks of is the one who brought forth a man child (Revelation 12:5), that is, Mary the Mother of God, Jesus Christ, the one to whom the angel declared: “Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” (Luke 1:42)

Thus, the dragon attacks the sons of Mary, that is, the ones who revere her, the ones of whom the Virgin Mary prophesied: “behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.” (Luke 1:48) These are the ones who follow Elizabeth who, in the presence of the Virgin Mary, declared: “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43) For, in reverence of the Virgin Mary, they declare her to be the Mother of God, that is, the mother of our Lord. 

In hatred of those who revere the Virgin Mary, the dragon — that is, those of the antichrist spirit — attacks the sons of Mary. Germany, overtaken by the heresies of Luther, severing itself from the Church, and a nation that fanatically absorbed Darwinism, being a nation of the antichrist, exterminated Catholic Poles by the millions, and thus were these martyrs amongst the seed of the woman. For when the prophet speaks of “enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed” (Genesis 3:15), it foretold of the great and dark war between Satan and his followers, and Christ and those who follow Christ and His mother. St. Ambrose, referring to the Germanic hoard, who converted to the Aryan heresy and sacked Rome and tore Western Christendom apart, wrote:

“John, likewise, saith that heretics are Antichrists, plainly marking out the Arians. For this [Arian] heresy began to be after all other heresies, and hath gathered the poisons of all. As it is written of the Antichrist, that ‘he opened his mouth to blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His Name, and to make war with His saints,’ so do they also dishonour the Son of God, and His martyrs have they not spared.”

Islam destroyed the Eastern half of the Roman empire; Germanic Protestantism destroyed the Western half of Christendom in the Thirty Years War. The two will return, to war against the sons of Mary and to destroy the Church Militant.

The anti-Catholic spirit remained, possessing the soul of Germany in modern times. Catholic Poles were described as untermenschen, or subhuman, inferior to the ubermensch, or the superman of Frederich Nietzsche. “The sub-human is a biological creature, crafted by nature,” said Heinrich Himmler, “which has hands, legs, eyes, and mouth, even the semblance of a brain. Nevertheless, this terrible creature is only a partial human being.” (See Jacobsen, Operation Paperclip, ch. 7, p. 122)

One example of how the Germans treated the Poles was what they did to Janina Iwanska, a Catholic Polish girl who was a survivor of human experiments that were done to a large number of Catholic Polish women in the death camps. Iwanska was dissected alive at the Ravensbruck concentration camp, by the Waffen-SS scientist, Karl Gebhardt. First, they broke Iwanska’s legs, and then Gebhardt removed pieces of her shinbone and deliberately infected her wounds with bacteria to give her gangrene. Iwanska recounted this horror:

“I had an operation done on my legs by Gebhart …. During the first dressing after the operations I spoke to him. I asked Dr. Gebhart why they did the operation and they gave answer, ‘We can do the experiment because you are condemned to die.’ … Five died 48 hours after the operation, and six were shot after the operation.” (See Jacobsen, Operation Paperclip, ch. 18, pp. 349, 355-356, ellipses mine)

The New York Post wrote a story about the experiments and described them as such:

“a group of 72 Polish Catholic female prisoners subjected to a series of inhumane medical experiments by Nazi doctors at Ravensbrück, the only all-female Nazi concentration camp during World War II. The women were called rabbits because they were treated like lab animals — and because the cruel experiments performed on them often left them with injuries and deformities that made them hop when they walked.”

On April 30th, 1945, the US Army lieutenant and physician, Dr. Marcus J. Smith, walked into the Dachau death camp in Poland. He later described with horror:

“On one of these walks I enter a one-story building that contains laboratory counters and storage shelves … almost everything in it has been smashed: I step over broken benches and drawers, twisted instruments and shattered glassware. In the debris, I am surprised to find a few specimen jars and bottles intact, filled with preserved human and insect tissue.” (See Jacobsen, Operation Paperclip, ch. 4, p. 63)

These evils were done at a time when people believed that they had reached a great peak of technological advancement. Men, worshipping innovation, advance themselves to destruction. As Pope Pius XII would write in and of that time period: “What seemed to be orderly progress was in reality nothing better than general confusion of mind which affected even the principles of morality.” (Pope Pius XII, Darkness over the Earth, ch. 5, p. 30) This was an era of much darkness, and yet people were blind to this evil, seeing light where there was none, praising as enlightenment what was in reality doctrines against humanity.

We talk about the Armenian Genocide, and how Turkey will do it again, and this is true. But, why can’t we view Germany with the same assiduousness as we do with Turkey? You may argue that Germany has acknowledged its Holocaust, while Turkey has not, and you would be correct.

But, once you realize that 77% of Germany’s post-World War Two justice ministry were actual Nazis, covering up the crimes of Nazi criminals, it should make us reconsider our conventional views of postwar Germany’s spiritual state, and that vacuous view that Germany will never enter the warpath again, or that a world war will never reoccur. “For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom” (Matthew 24:7).

When Dr. Marcus J. Smith saw the laboratories of the Nazis, and saw the human flesh used in experiments, he was so disturbed by what he saw, he wrote:

“I cannot believe this is possible in this enlightened age”

And such is the error of modern man: to think that the devil and all his influences are somehow gone, and the evils that the prince of darkness brings about, will never happen again. We think ourselves to be in an enlightened age, when the very sinister ideologies of the Nazis never died.