Spingola Speaks – Radio Interview with Hans Krampe 07.16.2013

Deanna SpingolaOn July 16th, 2013, Deanna Spingola featured a conversation with author and commentator Hans Krampe, who discussed his latest article:

Historical Revisionism Under Attack in Russia – The Russian Bear Covering Up it’s own Bloody Tracks

As well as, a variety of related topics, including former FRG Chancellors Helmut Kohl, Willie Brandt and current  Chancellor Angela Merkel,  issues concerning concerning Mikail Gorbachev, Vladimir Putin, and current events, etc. with questions from listeners.

Listen (streaming audio)

Free Download mp3 (commercial free)

Hans Krampe was a contributor to a great book which we highly recommend:

Warwolves of the Iron Cross: The Union Jackal

Warwolves of the Iron Cross:  The Union Jackal

by Wilfried Heink, Dr. Arnold Springborn, edited by V.K. Clark.

The sequel to “The Hyenas of High Finance” and

a prequel to “Albion & Zion United“.

Copyright (c) 2011 Vera Icona Publishers.

http://astore.amazon.ca/justforgerm-20/detail/1466427027

READER REVIEW:

“WOW! The scope and intensity of this book was AMAZING. I am definitely educated to the fact that most of the ‘history’ available to us on these subjects is ‘directed’, to say the least. But even though I am already aware and conscious of the fact that many things aren’t as they seem and we sometimes have to work to squeeze the truth out of the words of contemporary history, I WAS NOT PREPARED for this.

This book was an all out assault … not only upon the murkiness of some topics which I am deeply interested in, but have such trouble finding relevant material beyond that so obvious and readily available … but also upon some of the deepest convictions that my countrymen and even myself possess.  Astounding. This was one of the most amazing things I have ever read, and honestly, it went beyond what I had even ever conceived of in a manner that I cannot explain, but must digress; “read this book!”

Never have I had a single work so worthy of shaking my world view to its very foundations, and allowing me to truly see through the eyes of the “other” side. Many pay lip service to such a concept, but fall short on following through. Well I try not to be one of those people, and do my best to put my money where my mouth is, but I can say that I was wholly unprepared. In the future this may well end up being one of the most decisive and significant books ever written on the subject of WW2.

I was left reeling from the sheer impact and could not put it down, even for a weekend music festival, which was pretty much ruined, as I spent the whole time reading, day and night, by sunlight, headlight, and flashlight, in my tent, while walking, talking, eating, driving, and even while at the concerts themselves. This book is the literary and historical equivalent steamroller AND a Tiger tank (battalion). The thoroughness of the authors’ treatment of the subjects, the scholarliness, and the unassailable logic of their convictions and conclusions was mind boggling. INTENSE!

So many things that I have questioned and pondered were brought to light, or blasted from the historical world stage entirely, that I was truly amazed. I have never had a single book that threatened to upend my entire world-view, while I stood by in sheer amazement, almost as a third party.

I think that is enough, and the only thing left to say is that I want to thank, wholeheartedly, the authors, for one of the most powerful and amazing works I have ever read and that has probably ever been written on the subject. Holy crap, you changed everything! I have never been so powerfully impacted by a single tome in my entire life, and I have hundreds, if not thousands, of books and am the literary equivalent of a crack-fiend. What more?

Thanks again!”

Helmut Kohl - traitor

This entry was posted in Bolshevism, Communism, Germany, Interviews, Policies, Soviet Union, War Crimes, World War II and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Spingola Speaks – Radio Interview with Hans Krampe 07.16.2013

  1. Gary says:

    Deanna Spingola is one of the most learned and best commentators on internet radio, bar none. Listening to Hans and Werner was an enlightening pleasure as well. What collective voices of wisdom and truth.

  2. Markus says:

    When confronted with the claim that all socialism is equally bad, refer to Christian Socialism. Christian Socialism is not the same as National Socialism, but there are similarities, especially that both serve the community and adhere to a greater spiritual cause and reject usury.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism

    Socialism, as it is understood and applied in America, socializes the debt of the central bank and redistributes the wealth of the working class to the unproductive. In National Socialism and Christian Socialism, he who does not work, does not eat. Welfare is solely for the elderly and single moms whose husbands fell in the war. It does not create a nanny state.

    International Socialism is Communism and the term Socialism has been hijacked by the Marxists, for its appealing qualities. Attacking and disapproving of Socialism thereby is like disapproving of “Hollywood Nazism”. Who would agree and approve with the picture of Hitler they put out in movies and bias history books? Nobody! It’s a strawman.

    I personally only refer to socialism in the context of National Socialism and call “Socialism” what it is = Communism. “We shall take Socialism back from the Socialists” as Hitler said. The Communists call National Socialists always Fascists to own the term Socialism. Just as they claim to be Ashkenazi, while Ashkenazi means German in Hebrew and King Ashkenaz was the first Führer of Greater Germania and not a Jew.

    • Markus says:

      This link is even better, as it refers to corporation in a Christian fascist context, as well.

      “…Urging, among other measures, that cooperation replace competition, they joined forces with the cooperativist movement and financed several small cooperative societies that favoured copartnership and profit sharing in industry. They created the Council for Promoting Working Men’s Associations, and in 1854 they founded the Working Men’s College in London. The movement as such dissolved in the late 1850s. Some members of the movement continued working for cooperativism, however, and numerous Christian Socialist organizations were formed in the 1880s and ’90s in England….”

      http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/115206/Christian-Socialism

      • Markus says:

        I just have to add another link to finalize my point that National “Socialism”, as well as Fascism (Corporatism as some call it), are totally falsely understood, even by intelligent people, although wiki offers an answer right away.

        http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

        — Christian corporatism is traced to the New Testament of the Bible in I Corinthians 12:12-31 where Paul of Tarsus discusses an organic form of politics and society where all people and components are united functionally, like the human body.[12]

    • Hans says:

      In every family you have Socialism. In every tribe and in every healthy people.

      This is the most normal order of the world. And a Christian value, just read New Testament.

      I don´ t know where this aversion against Socialism comes from. Maybe from TV propaganda during times of cold war where the bankers played East against West.

      I am talking about genuine Socialism, not that trap which has been set up by bankers.

      Capitalism is like the game musical chairs. With every round (year) you have more and more loosers. It is predictable that the screwed masses one day will rise up so this phony Communism was created by bankers. It was a ruse to forestall the uprising of the masses.

      This phoney International Communism has of course nothing to do with National Socialism.

  3. Hans says:

    One caller during the radio show asked why Hitler did attack so many countries. I think this is a crucial question.
    He attacked so many countries because he was forced to. It was Churchill who tried to expand the war. Poland was attacked because of border disputes and bad treatment of ethnic Germans in Poland. England and France then declared war on Germany – not the other way round.
    After Poland was defeated Hitler offered peace, after France was defeated he offered again peace. And during the whole war tried Hitler behind the scenes to arrange a peaceful settlement with England. Norway was occupied to forestall a British occupation. The German iron ore supply came from Sweden and was shipped over the ice free harbor Narvick in Norway. England planned a blockade and even to occupy Norway (Operartion Wilfred and Plan R 4). Hitler learned too late of this plans but bad weather spoiled the British efforts and by the skin of a teeth the Brits could be chased off.
    After Norway was France – who has declared war on Germany – attacked. Not directly because the Maginot defence line was insurmountable. So Wehrmacht circumvented the line via neutral Belgium and the Netherlands.
    France also was staging troops near the Belgian border. They had the same idea and didn´t want to attack the German defence line directly (Siegfried line).
    From the Italian King who was somehow related with the Belgian monarchy had Hitler the information that Belgium will let pass French troops.
    Next target for Churchill to draw into war was Balkan. Hitler tried to stay out from Balkan and let the people there sort out their problems. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia (i.e.Serbia) joined the Tripartite Pact and became an ally. Two days later the government was with help of Britain toppled and the German embassy torched. This led to the Balkan campaign. Furthermore allowed Greece – who needed help against Italy – Britain to bring troops to Greece. This was a danger to the crude oil supply from Romania, another reason which made it inevitable to occupy Balkan.
    After Balkan campaign the Germans tried to invade Britain but put the plan on hold as it became clear that Stalin tried to stab Germany in the back during the invasion of Britain. So Hitler ordered a preemptive strike on Soviet Union.
    Hitler never intended a war and made more than enough peace offers or disarmament proposals. So Hitler was not an agent of the high finance. Himmler took advantage of the whole situation and expanded his power more and more. He had plans for a Germanic empire and tried to make SS to a state within the state. He put many bugs in Hitlers head like the destruction of Warsaw and other things and it can not be precluded that the occupied territories would have been permanently occupied if Germany had won the war.

    Maybe one final note: Hitler blamed the emperor of beeing too passiv and weak. The German Empire had been encircled prior to WW1. France started to build armaments, made a 3 year proscription and the emperor did nothing. The military suggested prior to WW1 a preemptive strike against Serbia and France but the emperor refused this for the sake of peace. (Wilhelm the second was under the influence of a pacifistic lobby group called Liebenberger Kreis headed by Philipp Eulenburg who talked him out of waging preemptive strikes.)
    If France had been disarmed in time there would have had been no WW 1.

    This is where Hitlers obsession came from always to be the first to strike if it becomes clear that the enemy wants war. He didn t wanted to repeat the same mistakes which the emperor made.

    • Markus says:

      Thanks for your stance on Socialism. I am not alone with this opinion, at last! 🙂

      You are also spot on on the invasion of all the countries by Germany in WW2. It was a run for Europe, only that Britain and the Soviet Union and later the US get no blame whatsover for doing the same thing. Britain occupied Danish-Faroe, the US occupied Danish-Greenland and Danish-Iceland. The US also had bases in the Portuguese Azores and Britain occupies Gibraltar and parts of Cypress to this day from before WW2.

      Belgium and Holland violated their neutrality toward Germany by letting British planes cross their airspace.

      In general, all the neutral countries were only expected to be neutral toward the Allies, while at least cooperation against the evil Nazis was expected.

      Furthermore, Germany is in the center of Europe and needs to expand its sphere of influence when at war with the overpowering rest of the world when they all unite. It did not reach up to China like Russia or had a world empire like Britain and France, where alternative attacks from Canada or Northern Africa could be launched.

      Belgium was only created after the 30 Years’ War for Britain to have a stepping stone onto the Continent. It and Holland and Switzerland used to be an integral part of Germany up to that point.

      It’s all the out of context blame game that both the West and Russia still perpetuates .

Comments are closed.