The more I read about people like Robin Cook the more I am convinced that perhaps those Jehovahs Witnesses people on my doorstep are right and there is such a thing as the power of evil in this world and we must try and speak out against it wherever it raises its vicious and argumentatively envious head.Tragically it will take a tragedy for the traduced British public to see through such as his self-defeating argument.

"The more I read about people like Robin Cook the more I am convinced that perhaps those Jehovahs Witnesses people on my doorstep are right"

The measure of the man can be taken from the episode when he visited with Arafat and hand-in-hand gambolled happily with this corrupt arch-terrorist, unashamedly in full view of the world's cameras.

Ehud Barak spoke at that time of his "arrogance and flawed judgement." Barak might have been wrong about a lot of things, but he surely hit the nail on the head about Cook.

Is Cook unbalanced ? It is quite clear Hitler had a valid point of view about the Sudeten Germans; there were c 3 million of them in Bohemia which as a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was clearly German; as Karlsbad was a German spa town.

Hitler could NOT seize Czechoslovakia by military force....it was too well defended with fortresses, a bigger army than Germany, and defence treaties with France and the USSR; with President Benes very close to Stalin. The ONLY way Hitler could get Czechoslovakia was by negotiation with the major powers of the League of Nations....Britain and France.

It was a negotiated settlement well-regarded at the time in Britain, France, and the USA....look at the Gallup Polls. Who was Time Magazine Man of the Year 1938?

Adolf Hitler

So, Cookie is right. Negotiation gets tyrants things war could not. The Labour Party was most gratified at the agreement and rebuked Chamberlain for introducing the draft.

The Sudentenland was never a part of Germany despite the majority of its population being German. Cook is a representative of a long line of Foreign Secretary types: Ernest Bevin, Alec Douglas-Home, even Jack Straw who are reflexively appeasement oriented.

"The Sudentenland was never a part of Germany despite the majority of its population being German. Cook is a representative of a long line of Foreign Secretary types: Ernest Bevin, Alec Douglas-Home, even Jack Straw who are reflexively appeasement oriented"

Sudentenland was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire under the Hapsburg Monarchy; known as the Gross-Deutschland design....which is why when Anschluss took place with Austria, the plan to bring all Germans within the Reich became paramount. They were only placed outside The Reich by the Treaty of Versailles.

You may not like Ernest Bevin - I do - but he was no appeaser of Communists, Fascists, or Jews.

The Austro-Hungarian empire was not Germany. Hungary was a part of the Austro-Hungarian empire, yet Hitler did not annex Hungary. The Sudentenland was never a part of Germany or of the provinces of Austria itself (i.e Tyrol). It was part of Bohemia-Moravia.

As for Ernest Bevin:
"Various of his colleagues privately noted what Ian Mikardo called ‘the pejorative and often vulgar language of many of Bevin’s references to Jews’. Christopher Mayhew, Bevin’s Parliamentary Under Secretary, wrote in his diary in May 1948 that he “must make a note about Ernest’s anti-Semitism… there is no doubt in my mind that Ernest detests Jews."

A follow up to my previous post. The quotation I gave regarding Ernest Bevin can be found at http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0103/0103bfo.htm "The hateful Legacy of the BRitish Foreign Office." January 13, 2003

Hitler did take over Hungary.

Travis what is Germany ?

Are you a Hohenzollern or a Hapsburg ? Do you know much about the Grossdeutschland vs Kleindeutschland debates ? What nationality was Adolf Hitler ?

What area did the Holy Roman Empire cover ?

When did the Holy Roman Empire collapse ?

When was the Holy Roman Empire created ?

Who was Karl der Grosse ?

Some of those questions if answered will show you just how far off track you are, and why you do not understand European History

Dear Professor Williamson:

I am neither a Hohenzollern or Habsburg (there was a Spanish and Austrian House of Habsburg thanks to Maxilimilan in the late 15th/early 16th century and Ferdinand of Aragon - The Emperor Charles V who was Charles I of Spain whose son Philip II married your Queen Mary I aka Bloody Mary.)

The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, Roman, or an Empire it was German (and some of the low countries).

I believe that Charlemagne (Karl der Grosse) or his father Pepin was the first HR Emperor. Charlemagne was coronated in Aachen n 800.

Adolf Hitler was Austrian, born in Braunau on April 20, 1889.

The last Emperor was Joseph who abdicated in 1918.

What was the purpose of this?

Next week I will give you a quick quiz in American History. Brush up on your American Civil War.

Hitler occupied Hungary in March 1944 for two reasons

1. to keep Hungary in the Axis
2. to get at the 750,000 Jews in Hungary

He never annexed Hungary to the Reich.

Does anyone have any information or links for anti-war protests here in 1939? I heard that there were some sizeable marches reported in the Times, but can find nothing as yet.

Jonathan - the 'peace' campaigners of the thirties preferred rallies and petitions to marches.

If you read Vera Brittain's 30s diaries there's a great passage where she bemoans Hitler's occupation of Czecho in March 39, saying it'll ruin her Albert Hall peace rally. She criticises the left papers for their sudden militant anti-fascism, 'as if no leader had ever broken his word before'.

The main peace organisation was the Peace Pledge Union - still going today although this history page

http://www.ppu.org.uk/ppu/ppu_histx.html

doesn't do justice to their influence in helping appeasement (see Churchill and Baldwin on the Fulham by-election) and in helping to prevent rearmament until it was almost too late - and certainly too late for the Jews of Europe.

Well Travis, he annexed Lodz in Poland, but not Warsaw that was General Gouvernement and western POland was annexed, as was Alsace and the Ardennes........but do you suggest that Hungary and Ukraine were not under German control ?

Just what major difference does incorporation into the Reich make compared to occupation ? He only recreated the Germany of 1914 in the sense, but the Ardennes were not part of The Reich yet it was a Sperrgebiet with Organisation Todt.

As for your piece about Bevin it is a very loaded article. Christopher Mayhew is highly suspect as a source, having been in the propaganda units IRD

"Christopher Mayhew gives a fascinating account of his early life at Oxford and the attraction of communism--so common among many of his contemporaries--and of his visit to the Soviet Union which was followed by disillusionment "

Actually Mayhew and Bevin must have been like chalk and cheese; although he was much more trustworthy than Ian Mikardo; who was part of the "Keep Left" group and v opposed to Bevin on the Right.

Actually most of this attack on Bevin originates from 1946-47 when he had a policy on Palestine that Jewish groups disagreed with. Frankly he had bigger problems - trying to create NATO, deal with Commuinists in Greece, getting rid of India, dealing with Stalin............no British Foreign Secretary has been quite so busy as he was.

If Hitler was Austrian he would believe in Greater Germany, which is why he wanted to bring everyone into the Reich. Bismarck had pushed Austria-Hungary out of The Prussian Second Reich at Sadowa in 1866; Hitler as an Austrian rought it back inside a German Third Reich.

It is I suppose analogous to those who speak of Eretz Israel recovering the ancient kingdoms versus those who favour a state within defined borders. Remember after Versailles Germany refused to agree an eastern border, and only the Western frontier of Germany was set at Locarno......the eastern frontier was not defined, and indeed remained undefined until 1990 when Germany finally accepted Oder-Neisse.

Correction - Charles Martel who defeated the Jihadists at Tours in 732(I think that was the year) was the father of Charlemagne. Pepin the Short I believe was the son of Charlemagne. Anyway there were countries that were allied to Germany in WWII but were not part of the Reich: Hungary, Rumania, Slovakia, Bulgaria.

Anyway here is a quiz for you since you gve me one:
1. Which Union General commanded The Army of
the Potomac at Fredericksburg?
2. Which was the first state to secede from the Union?
3. Who was Secretary of War under Lincoln?
4. What incident almost brought the US and Great Britain to war in 1861?
5. Which Confederate Secreatary of State fled to England and had a distinguished legal career there (hint he was Jewish)?
6. What was the greatest Confederate victory in the Western theater?
7. What was referred to as "the Gibraltar on the Mississippi River?"
8. Near what town was the two Battles of Bull Run fought?
9. Which President came after Lincoln?
10. In what battle would you find these places:
the Peach Orchard, Little Round Top, the Devils Den, Culps Hill, the Angle?
11. In what battle was "Stonewall" jackson mortally owunded by his own men?

Fascinating quiz, but wholly irrelevant to the question of Germany's claim to revise the Versailles Treaty. Why did Woodrow Wilson provide guarantees to states at Versailles and the US COngress refuse to uphold them ?

After all the USA and Great Britain were guarantors of the French borders at Versailles; but since the US would not ratify the Treaty the British House of Commons could not pass it.

The reason was (in a short) the isolationism which waa traditional in American society. A big mistake in my opinion.

I guess I aced your quiz and you failed mine.

Your's seem so irrelevant to the situation in Central Europe. Adolf Hitler wanted a revision of Versailles; Bruening had called for this before Hitler; Britain agreed....so did Roosevelt, at least Eleanor sent a telegram congratulating A H when he reoccupied the Rhineland.

Actually it had much to do with Wilson's arrogance in not taking Republicans to Versailles, bipartisanship would have been a good idea, but Wilson was not a politician but a Princeton dean.

Surely the argument about not giving in to appeasement WRT Iraq would only make sense if it was found that Saddam had been involved in 9/11 (or actually had WMDs which seems even more unlikely).

Without friends no one would choose to live, though he had all other goods.

Interesting site, is all true ?

Hello, have fun with easy blogging!

Good work.
Keep working on this blog.