Book Release: ‘Atlantis Edda & Bible’

Hermitage Helm Corpus & Germania Ahnenerbe are honored to announce the book release of the English translation of Hermann Wieland’s ATLANTIS, EDDA & BIBLE, expertly translated from the original German by Gregory Klanderud:

2016-04-07 18.39.22

 

For inquiries and details on purchasing please go to Hermitage Helm Corpus page (email: hermitage75@yahoo.com.au).

“The first ever English translation of Hermann Wieland’s epic retelling of the esoteric history of Atlantis and the truth about ancient Aryan religion. Banned and destroyed by the Allied forces following World War II, this cornerstone work of the ages has remained hidden to the Anglophone world until now. Going beyond the saga of Atlantis, Wieland goes further into the darkened depths of history to reveal how the true religion and heritage of the Aryan race has been falsified and stolen from us for thousands of years. Atlantis, Edda & Bible not only exposes the forces behind this concerted effort to destroy the Aryan peoples but also ultimately reveals the secret and hidden message of the Holy Bible itself.”

This book is released on the same day as another book, yet at different ends of the earth, a book that is complimentary and relevant to our current situation, therefore it is fitting that the release of the two books should coincide. The companion book I write of is the English translation of Philipp Stauff’s RUNENHAUSER by the 55 Club:

Runenhauser


MANU: “For The Man To Come” 2nd Edition Book Release

Hermitage Helm Corpus & The Brahmanic Order of Kristos-Lucifer-Wotan are honored to announce the book of the long awaited 2nd Edition of MANU: “For The Man To Come” by Miguel Serrano, English Translation, unabridged with Notes and Commentary, Glossary and Exhaustive Index. For purchasing details please email hermitage75@yahoo.com.au

This is the most important book release in the world for 2016! Surely only to be recognized by the Elite of the lost world of Gerda. Transmitted in Great Peril from the City of Asgard, from the Caesars of the South Pole sunk beneath the flat earth, from the continent of the Spirit, from the heart of the Astral Fires that burn in the centre of the fading Black Sun, from the vortex of Ultima Thule, and delivered by those who tend the Nordic Roses of Germany in their dying hearts – those who remained for a while longer then they should have, only to rescue those that are lost – the Ehreans, the Einherier of worlds without end. In the Name of the Fuhrer, Alas, too little too late, we give you a reflection, a meteoric, volcanic thunderbolt from beyond the stars. Those who are departed salute us and give us spirit, wisdom and recognition of all that we have lost. Heil the Man-God crucified on the Cosmic Cross of distant constellations. For The Man To Come! Sieg Heil!

 

ProjectManucover


British Hostility Toward Germany After Munich

Hitler’s Bid for British Friendship

Chapter 8-  The Forced War: When Peaceful Revision Failed, David L Hoggan

 

The Anglo German relationship was the most important European issue after the Munich conference. An Anglo-German understanding could mean peace, prosperity, and security for Europe. A new Anglo-German war would bring destruction, ruin, and despair. The former condition would offer nothing to the doctrine of Bolshevism, which thrived on human misery. The latter situation would present a unique opportunity for expansion to the Bolshevist leaders. It is not to be wondered that the Bolshevist leaders hated the Munich conference which had prevented an Anglo-German war. They feared that from its aftermath a permanent Anglo-German understanding would emerge. [1]

The British attitude toward Germany was the crux of the problem. The attitude of Hitler toward Great Britain was favourable from the standpoint of establishing the permanent peace between the two nations which had been envisaged in the Anglo-German friendship declaration of September 30, 1938. Hitler hoped to avoid what he considered to have been the failures of Hohenzollern Germany. He condemned the idea of a large German navy, which had been brilliantly advocated before 1914 by Admiral von Tirpitz. He was unenthusiastic about the acquisition of German colonies overseas, and he regarded Germany’s legal right to her former colonies as a mere bargaining counter. Hitler opposed trade rivalry between Germany and Great Britain. He wished the British to preserve their world commercial supremacy. [2]

The attitude of Hitler was familiar to the British leaders. The prominent Labour Party spokesman, George Lansbury, who had been the chief of the British Labour Party until 1935, had done what he could to inform the British Conservative leaders of Hitler’s ideas. Lansbury met with Hitler in Berlin on April 19, 1937. He was greatly impressed with the German leader, and he was convinced that he did not desire war. Lansbury discussed Hitler with Lord Halifax, and he rendered strong support to Chamberlain at the time of the Munich conference. He emphasized that no important section of the British population opposed Chamberlain’s trip to Munich. [3]

Arnold Toynbee, a leading English historian and an expert on international affairs, had visited Hitler in March 1936. He returned to England with a clear impression of Hitler’s ideas. He informed Conservative Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin that Adolf Hitler was a sincere advocate of peace and close friendship between Great Britain and Germany. [4]

Thomas Jones, the closest friend of Lloyd George and Stanley Baldwin, had excellent connections with British statesmen. He was with Hitler in Munich on May 17, 1936. Jones was on close terms with Ribbentrop, and he was fully informed about Hitler’s attitudes. Hitler had said that if an Anglo-German understanding was achieved, “my biggest life’s desire will be accomplished.” Jones promised Hitler in Munich that Great Britain hoped “to get alongside Germany,” and he praised Hitler’s decision to give the English language priority after German, in German schools, as a significant contribution to future contacts between the two nations. [5]

[1] G.A. Deborin, Vtoraya Mirovaya Voyna, Moscow, 1958, pp. 15-38

[2] Fritz Hesse, Das Spiel um Deutschland, 1953, pp. 14-15. An excellent reference to Hitler’s single-minded desire for friendship and collaboration with Great Britain is Walter Ansel, Hitler Confronts England, Durham N.C. 1960, pp. 10-13.

[3] Raymond Postage, The Life of George Lansbury, London, 1951, pp. 313-317

[4] Thomas Jones, A Diary with Letters, 1931-1950, London, 1954, pp. 180-181.

[5] Ibid., pp. 197-200.

 


Songs Of The Reich

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0987370588

2016-05-11 10.40.48

 


Hitler’s Peaceful Revision Policy in 1938

Hitler’s Peaceful Revision Policy in 1938.

Extract from David L Hoggan’s The Forced War – When Peaceful Revision Failed

The year 1938 retains a special place in the annals of Europe. It was the year of Adolf Hitler’s greatest triumphs in foreign policy. A.J.P. Taylor, in his epochal book, The Origins of the Second World War, has proved beyond dispute that Hitler’s principal moves in 1938 were nothing more than improvised responses to actions of others. Yet, in 1938, Hitler liberated ten million Germans who had been denied self-determination by the peacemakers of 1919. Hitler gained for the German people the same rights enjoyed by the peoples of Great Britain, France, Italy and Poland. He managed to achieve his victories without provoking an armed conflict. Nothing of the kind had happened in Europe before. There had been dynastic unions in which territories had been united without actual violence, but never had the leader of one nation triumphed over two hostile foreign governments without shedding blood. Hitler proved something which the League of Nations claimed that it would prove but never did. Peaceful territorial revision in Europe was possible. No one could have said this with any assurance before 1938, because empirical evidence was lacking. We now have the empirical evidence. The threat of force was used by Hitler to achieve these results, but the shedding of blood in senseless wars was avoided. A cursory examination of these triumphs will be vital in explaining why the major successes of Hitler in 1938 were not duplicated on a smaller scale in September 1939.

Perhaps no statesman has been more violently criticized than Hitler by his compatriots and by foreigners throughout the world. This is not surprising when one considers that Hitler failed to carry out his program after 1939, and that his failure was total because of the savagery of his opponents. Some critics condemn Hitler from the hour of his birth. At the other extreme are those who perhaps regard themselves as friendly or sympathetic toward him, but that Hitler did not know how to wait, or did not know when to stop. It is customary to condemn failure and to worship success. This tendency is part of the fundamental desire of mankind to simplify the world in which we live and to find a natural order and purpose in things. Nietzsche had this in mind when he wrote that a good war justifies every cause. No one can be immune from this desire, because it is “human all too human”, but momentary detachment, within the context of past events, is and should be possible. It will be evident later that the Munich conference was not the final solution to Germany’s problems, and that the adoption by Hitler of a passive wait-and-see policy at that stage would have been merely a simple and dangerous panacea. Hitler had no idea of what was in store when 1938 opened. There had been no sequal to the November 5, 1937, conference with Foreign Minister Neurath and the military men. He had no specific plans and no timetable for the accomplishment of territorial revision. When he looked out of the Berghof windows at Berchtesgaden into the mountains of Austria, he did not know that within a few weeks he would return to his Austrian homeland for the first time in more than quater of a century. The achievements of Hitler in 1938 were not the result of careful foresight and planning in the style of Bismarck, but of the rapid exploitation of fortuitous circumstances in the style of Frederick the Great, during the early years of his reign.

Theforcedwar


The Song Of Don Ramon

The Song Of Don Ramon

By D.H. Lawrence

What is God, we shall never know!

But the Sons of God come and go.

They come from beyond  the Morning Star;

And thither they return from the land of men.

Mary and Jesus have left you and gone to the place of renewal.

And Quetzalcoatl  has come. He is here.

He is your Lord.

Those that follow me, must cross the mountains of the sky,

And shall pass the houses of the stars by night.

They shall find me only in the Morning Star.

But those that will not follow, must not peep.

Peeping, they will lose their sight, and lingering, they will fall very

lame.

Chile & Argentina 260


Templi Unam anniversary speech


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 73 other followers