Thinking about Unity Mitford, who died 72 years ago yesterday, some aspects of her life struck me especially.
This, below, struck me: both re Adolf Hitler’s very open daily schedule…and the fact that Unity sat near him for 10 months before being invited to join him!
“She was obsessed with meeting Hitler, so she really set out to stalk him.
She set her mind on getting Hitler, and she discovered that Hitler’s movements could be ascertained. It’s one of the extraordinary things about Hitler’s daily life that he was so available to the public. You knew which café he’d be in, you knew which restaurant he’d be in, which hotel, and he would just go and meet people over sticky buns and cakes, and it was possible to meet him like that. And he was in the habit of eating in the Osteria Bavaria in Munich and she started sitting in the Osteria Bavaria every day. So he would have to come into the front part of the restaurant where there was this English girl.
“After ten months, Hitler finally invited her to his table, where they talked for over 30 minutes, with Hitler picking up her bill.” [from Channel 4 documentary, Hitler’s British Girl, published in Wikipedia]
We often see “documentaries” (incredibly biased and basically Jewish-Zionist propaganda), or lying “history” in the “Lugenpresse/Judenpresse“, to the effect that Hitler was always afraid of assassination, took huge security measures etc, but here, even in such a film (on Channel 4, no less), the producers are so keen to traduce Unity Mitford that they forget to lie about Hitler himself, for once!
True, and after a number of failed assassination attempts, Hitler’s security was improved from the mid-1930s, and more so during the Second World War itself, but he himself was a fatalist, who believed both in Fate (Schicksal) and in his own personal fate and destiny.
Unlike Stalin, Hitler was not afraid of the people that he ruled or, rather, in Hitler’s case, led.
That snippet about how Unity Mitford met Hitler does show her extreme persistence: to sit in a cafe-restaurant every or almost every day for nearly a year in order to be in close proximity to Hitler shows a devotion which is very telling.
The fact that Hitler was able to let his whereabouts be known in advance to the public (and the regularity of his attendances in favoured places) shows that not only was Hitler unafraid of the people who put him into office, but that there were few who wanted to attack him. Here was an assassin’s dream target, someone who lets his whereabouts be known in advance, and who often goes to the same places day after day, yet sits safely amid the German people.
The few assassination attempts of later years were perpetrated by Jews and/or Communists and/or persons of disordered mind, until the British Intelligence organizations tried their hand in 1939 and during the War itself. They failed, though (typically).
What also struck me is the synchronistic nature of it all: Unity Valkyrie were her names given at birth, a birth which took place in the small Canadian town of Swastika!
One must remember that that birth occurred in August 1914, long before the world knew of Hitler, the NSDAP, or the Third Reich. Hitler himself volunteered, in that same month, to enlist in the List Regiment of the Bavarian Army, the First World War having started about 5 weeks before.
The Swastika, in 1914, was an esoteric symbol in more ways than one. Most people in Europe would have been ignorant of its existence. As for the town of that name, its naming is lost in the mists of history.
Incredibly, the settlement of Swastika, Ontario, was not named by Unity’s father, who had an interest in one of the gold mines situated there (though not the nearby one which made Harry Oakes, much later murdered in the Bahamas, one of the richest men on Earth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Oakes
Unity’s father was David Freeman-Mitford; his father had been a Wagnerian, and personally acquainted with both Richard Wagner and Houston Stewart Chamberlain.
Unity Mitford descended through the spheres to incarnate at Swastika and to be named Unity Valkyrie. In fact, her other name, Unity, also seems to me to be significant, symbolizing the union or alliance which might have been, but sadly never was, between two great empires, the British Empire and the new German Reich.
Every human being has personal attributes, personal flaws, characteristics arising or becoming manifest through their worldly ancestry, and the society and culture into which they incarnate. We must look beyond this to see the bigger picture.
Tweets seen today
This one made me laugh!
Reminds me of the “shopping riots” in England a decade ago. The trigger there was the “unfortunate” death of a black gangster in a “taxi” (gangster transport) at the hands of the London police. Soon thousands of (mainly) blacks and half-castes were roaming all over London stealing anything not nailed down, and burning down buildings at random.
The msm were careful to say “bands of white and black youths” because a few deracinated and useless white (ish) chavscums were there, amid the black mobs. As for “youths”, some were 40 or 50 years old (the Windrush generation? Just after that time?).
It is true that some of the American police are very forceful, and some are also trigger-happy (perhaps unsurprising now that many are trained by and in the manner of the Israel occupation forces “police”), but at the same time, the USA is very very different from the UK, something even those who holiday there fail to see (I myself am still nominally an attorney of the NY Bar, and in the past I lived in the USA on and off as well as travelling there on legal business —NJ, NY, SC and FLA). Some of its criminals are very vicious.
I like the photograph and the sentiment. As for the exact words, well “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”, per Oscar Wilde, and Griffin did have the decency to use quotation marks…
I should say that, not only is Hitchens right, but that it is almost inevitable. The “British” population (in fact I would call only about 2/3 “British” anyway) have shown themselves to be serfs at heart. Also, a decade ago they accepted without question the perceived “need” (which we now see was no “need” at all) for the poor, disabled, and unemployed to be brutalized, upset, put into destitution and, in some cases, starved to death, and all because they were somehow responsible for the world banking crash…and how did the “British” people know that? Because a part-Jap Friends of Israel MP called Iain Dunce Duncan Smith, a fraudster, embezzler and freeloader, said so, backed up by two Friends of Israel part-Jews, David Cameron-Levita and George Osborne, who had both lied their way into the centre of government.
Hitchens right again. The faith that “the plebs” have in the Government is in a way touching, though also pathetic. The manufactured fear of “the virus” (that in fact kills only about 1 in 2,000 of the population…) has translated itself into that pathetic reliance on what “the authorities” say, whether the person in “authority” is Boris-idiot (posing, ludicrously, as Prime Minister), little Matt Hancock (former tea boy at the Bank of England, now posing as Health Secretary), or the local toytown police, cruising around telling people not to sunbathe, use parks, or even drive cars or ride motorcycles to enjoy a drive somewhere on the empty (emptied) roads .
Those so blind that they will not see! The city is burning for three days, yet CNN calls these ghastly black riots “protests in Minneapolis”!
The Protocols of Zion and the British aristocracy
The Protocols are often described (by Jew-Zionists or those working for them) as “a forgery”. It would be more accurate to describe them as “literary fantasy” based on a matrix of fact. For example:
“The aristocracy, who by right shared the labour of the working classes, were interested in the same being well-fed, healthy, and strong. We are interested in the opposite, i.e., in the degeneration of the Gentiles. Our strength lies in keeping the working man in perpetual want and impotence; because, by so doing, we retain him subject to our will and, in his own surroundings, he will never find either power or energy to stand up against us. Hunger will confer upon Capital more powerful rights over the labourer than ever the lawful power of the sovereign could confer upon the aristocracy.”
— Protocols; protocol 3.; Shanks’ translation
“Under our auspices the populace exterminated the aristocracy which had supported and guarded the people for its own benefit, which benefit is inseparable from the welfare of the populace. Nowadays, having destroyed the privileges of the aristocracy, the people fall under the yoke of cunning profiteers and upstarts.”
— Protocols; protocol 3.; Shanks’ translation
“It gave us the possibility among other things of playing the ace of trumps—namely, the abolition of privileges; in other words, the existence of the Gentile aristocracy, which was the only protection nations and countries had against ourselves. On the ruins of natural and hereditary aristocracy we built an aristocracy of our own on a plutocratic basis.”
— Protocols; protocol 1.; Shanks’ translation
Doesn’t that sound familiar? If it be said “but Britain (eg) still has an aristocracy“, my answer is “does it?“. What is called an aristocracy in the UK is in fact something fake, or 90% fake. Look at the “British aristocracy” and you find that most titles only go back to the first quarter of the 20th Century. Not to Richard the Lionheart. Not even Elizabeth I. Not even, the vast bulk of them, George III, nor even Victoria!
It is well-known that the majority of British hereditary titles date only from the 20th Century. Many were conferred as a result of bribery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maundy_Gregory#Selling_honours
Indeed, quite a few “aristocrats” in the UK today not only have a considerable admixture from the Americas, but even outright Jewish elements. One example is the family that own Highclere Castle, the place used in Downton Abbey. In fact, the old Lord Carnarvon, the 6th Earl, was rather proud of his part-Jew background (a quarter, but possibly half) and referred to it more than once in his amusing and sensationalist memoirs.
Even leaving that aside, we see that the title goes back only to 1793 (though the family had lesser or other titles since the 17th Century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_of_Carnarvon#Earls_of_Carnarvon,_first_creation_(1628) ); and that family is older than most…
Take another example, the Duke of Westminster. The present Duke, one of the richest men in Britain, is the 7th Duke. The dukedom only goes back to 1874! The family did have titles before that date, but the first was only granted in 1622 and was merely a (bought for cash) baronetcy.
There is a Jewish element there too:
“The [6th] Duke of Westminster married Natalia Ayesha Phillips, the daughter of Lt-Col. Harold Pedro Joseph Phillips and his wife Georgina Wernher, in 1978.” [Wikipedia]
Ironically, the 2nd Duke was obsessed with the Jewish infiltration into the aristocracy, a fact noted by his estranged Duchess in her autobiography:
“During the run-up to World War II, he supported various right-wing and anti-Semitic causes, including the Right Club. “His anti-Semitic rants were notorious,” according to a biographer of Coco Chanel. In her book The Light of the Common Day, Lady Diana Cooper reminisces back to 1 September 1939. She and her husband, the prominent Conservative Duff Cooper, were lunching at London’s Savoy Grill with the Duke of Westminster. She recalls: “when he [the Duke of Westminster] added that Hitler knew after all that we were his best friends, he set off the powder-magazine. “I hope,” Duff spat, “that by tomorrow he will know that we are his most implacable and remorseless enemies”. Next day “Bendor”, telephoning to a friend, said that if there was a war it would be entirely due to the Jews and Duff Cooper.”
“The Duke, known for his pro-German sympathies, was reportedly instrumental in influencing his former mistress, Coco Chanel, to use her association with Winston Churchill to broker a bilateral peace agreement between the British and the Nazis. It was in late 1943 or early 1944 that Chanel and her current lover, Nazi espionage agent Baron Hans Gunther von Dinklage, undertook such an assignment. Code named “Operation Modellhut”, it was an attempt through the British Embassy in Madrid, via Chanel, to influence Churchill, and thereby persuade the British to negotiate a separate peace with Germany. This mission as planned ultimately met with failure, as Churchill had no interest.” [Wikipedia]
It has died a death where I live, but then it never really got off the ground here anyway. What a stupid ritual…
Hitchens tweeting in support of the legal challenge to the probably unlawful “lockdown” toytown dictatorship. Glad to see that that fund has almost reached its goal (it’s about 80% attained), but the real challenge to the “lockdown” is already slowly happening, inasmuch as the English people (and Scottish and Welsh? the Scots seem a poor lot these days) are (as I predicted about 2 months ago) slowly simply ignoring the restrictions.
There is no mass march against the “lockdown” but public pressure, via gradual ignoring of the Boris-idiot “rules”, has now pressured the Government of idiots into giving way, though wanting to make it seem that Boris-idiot, his Cabinet of clowns and the toytown police are “really” still in charge.
That public pressure has come from more and more people waking up to the nonsense of “lockdown”, though the majority have still not thought through this: “hey, if only 1 person in every 2,000 dies from the virus, then I’m probably going to be OK even if I get infected“.
That of course is all the more true for anyone under 60. Small children have a —something like— 15 million to 1 chance of dying from it. Even people in their thirties have a tiny chance of dying from it. All the more so now that the virus has peaked (and may have peaked in early April!).
As a result of all this, people are not protesting, or marching, or even writing angry emails to “their” MPs. What they are doing is going out whenever they feel like it to wherever they want. The only problem is that hardly anything is open. If shops and cafes were open, millions would be flocking to them (until the money runs out, which for many may not be far away).
The Government (of idiots) is not in charge of anything. The whole thing is a gigantic con-trick.
“Britain’s policy on coronavirus has clearly been disastrous. The press might trumpet America’s 100,000 deaths. But America is a big country and, on the most sensible generalised measure of “excess deaths per million”, Britain’s rate is not just three times America’s but possibly the worst in the world, at 890 against American’s roughly 250. Even its deaths per million are higher than America’s.
“Johnson and Hancock remain in denial over the apparent reasons for this, that thousands of Britons appear to have died after being ejected or turned away from NHS hospitals, either dumped into care homes or having vital operations postponed. Thousands more may have died at home, through being terrified by Johnson into not seeking hospital care at all.”
“This saga is approaching its end and there must be a reckoning. Perhaps some lives have been saved by lockdown. If so, it is strange that countries that rejected it, from Sweden to Taiwan, have seen a lower death rate than Britain. Meanwhile the longer lockdown lasts, the faster its cost rises towards the staggering total of £200bn. How many lives might that have saved? “
“With budget deficit now predicted to reach 17% of GDP, Britain now faces a double humiliation: the world’s highest coronavirus death rate and the worst resulting economic collapse. Johnson likes blood-curdling “worst-case scenarios”. Mine is that this will prove to be Britain’s most catastrophic and costly policy failure in modern times.“
I agree with all of that. Boris-idiot and “financial genius and future PM” Rishi Sunak will now march the plebs —for whom they have nothing but contempt— into the valley of the shadow, “ably” assisted by little Matt Hancock (if he survives in Cabinet).
And the idiots, some of them, will probably still be standing outside their homes, clapping…
Still, this ludicrous misgovernment might just lead to a social-national upsurge by 2022 and, by Grace of God, victory in the end.
5 thoughts on “Diary Blog, 29 May 2020, including Thoughts About Unity Mitford”
Hello Ian: You observations about the British “aristocracy” are spot on. To begin with, there never was a real aristocracy in England or anywhere in Europe. By that, I mean “the rule of the best” as envisaged by Plato. According to the Greek philosopher, the children of the rulers would only follow their fathers’ steps after proving worthy of such honour. Therefore it was not a hereditary rule.
In Europe during the Middle Ages, we saw the birth of the nobility out of the warrior class of the Germanic peoples, but this soon become hereditary, that means that regardless of his ability (or lack of) the elder son would inherit the title. What should have been an aristocracy became an oligarchy. Over the centuries it produced lots of inbred, degenerate, useless parasites who led a life of privilege and splendour without doing anything to deserve it.
One good example of this kind of individuals was George Horatio Cholmondeley, 5th Earl of Cholmondeley who in 1913 married the Jewess Sybil Sasson. Another traitor to his race was Archibald Primrose, 5th Earl of Rosebery who in 1878 married Hannah de Rothschild. These degenerates were willing to do ANYTHING to preserve their privileges and social standing. That is why Hitler never liked them, neither trusted them.
For detailed information see:
Quite right. As you may know, hereditary titles are no longer created in the UK. The last one (and that exceptional, because Mrs Thatcher demanded it, the first for about 30 years) was the baronetcy (ie hereditary knighthood) for her husband, Denis.
Just look at the photo of that idiot (in the Wikipedia article). His war service? Started in a searchlight unit! Reminds me of a funny BBC radio play I once heard, something like “the 40th anniversary dinner of the 120th Kamikaze ground support unit”!
Mrs Thatcher did not really want the knighthood for her husband but for her son (hence the hereditary aspect). And look what a cretin he turned out to be! The last British baronet, a complete imbecile!
Wikipedia has left out quite a lot of information that I have heard privately over the years, btw.
In fact *his* son, an American who is about 30 or 31 now, will one day inherit the title. The holder of the last-created English baronetcy will be (who knows?) a realtor or businessman in Texas. Nice…
ps: I can hardly believe it but thanks to the wonder of the Internet I have found that play! I thought it hilarious in 1979. Now? I don’t know….
Thank you for the data. I have checked on Julius Wernher who, strangely enough, was the only Aryan among all the South-African millionaires or “randlords”. His wife was 50% Jewish, but through her father, her mother was (apparently) Aryan/English (Ada Susan Piggot), and we know that for the Jews what it matters is the mother’s ethnicity. Still, the influence/stain is there, although it is not conclusive; there have been countless full-blooded Aryans who were happy to betray their country and their race on behalf of the “chosen people”.
I read the article from THE GUARDIAN that claim British deaths are nearly three times higher than the US regarding the population, but I found it is wrong. The US population is 328.000.000, there have been 100.140 deaths in the US, which gives almost exactly 305 deaths per million. The UK population is 66.000.000, and there have been 38.160 deaths, that gives 578 per million. Obviously, the death rate of the UK is worse than the US, but not three times higher.
Thank you. As you say, Julius Wernher was German, but his wife was half-Jewish.
Their grand-daughter was Georgina Wernher. Her daughter is Natalia Ayesha Grosvenor (nee Phillips), and is still alive (in fact 2-3 years younger than me) and was the Duchess of the 6th Duke of Westminster. The Jewish element is very small or slight but is there.
As you also say, the Jews trace Jewish ancestry through matrilineal descent, but of course in the modern scientific era, we trace ancestry through both father and mother (and so on).