|

|
Werzit
Intel
- Regions
Europe - Western
Germany
|
"In
God we trust.
All others we monitor."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bismark, while
Chancellor had been the genius who kept two foolish nephews of the Prince
of Wales, the Russian Czar and German Kaiser, from entangling themselves
with the depraved Habsburg Kaiser, in a war in which all three of the
latter would destroy their monarchies. Once Bismark had been ousted, World
War I was inevitable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The German Konrad
Adenauer had spent much of the war in a Nazi prison because he was
suspected accurately of (anti-Hitler) sentiments. When he became the
first chancellor of the new West Germany, he felt acutely Germany's need
to express and demonstrate its remorse for what the nation had done to
its European neighbors. (The United States of Europe, p. 37) |
|
|
|
|
|
A group of German church
leaders, led by the Reverend Martin Niemoller, drew up a formal
"Declaration of Guilt" in late 1945; posted and read to the congregation
at churches throughout the Axis nations, it promoted the notion that
Germany and Italy must now seek reconciliation and common ground with
the countries they had attacked in the war. (The United States of
Europe, p. 33) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phillipp Jenninger,
once the president of the Parliament in the former West German Republic.
Jenninger was forced to resign in November of 1988, following a speech he gave
at a special parliamentary session marking the fiftieth anniversary of
Kristallnacht. In that speech he rendered an account of events leading up to the
infamous "Night of the Broken Glass" in 1938, when German Jews were set upon,
their property destroyed and their lives taken--a night which many historians
mark as the beginning of the Holocaust. An uproar was created by the fact that
many in his audience construed Jenninger's brutally frank account of prevailing
attitudes among Germans in the 1930s as a disguised defense of National
Socialism. Paradoxically, all agreed that Jenninger had for many years been an
opponent of totalitarianism of all stripes, a fierce anti-Nazi, and an arch
supporter of Israel. Thus, he was a unlikely defender of Nazism. No one accused
him of being anti-Semitic. However, even before his speech had ended there were
demonstrations of anger from some in the audience who, finding his words
profoundly offensive, rushed ashen-faced from the chamber. Yet, virtually all
reviewers who examined the speech concluded that he had said nothing untrue,
malicious or defamatory; he simply said things that some people did not want to
hear in a manner that they were unwilling to accept. The context of his remarks,
and perhaps more importantly the voice he employed during a part of the speech,
made his utterances impossible for many Germans to accept. According to one
analyst, his mistake was that he had such confidence in his reputation as a
friend of Jews and of Israel that he believed he did not need to use the
subjunctive mood, or some other grammatical distancing device, when making what
would otherwise be perceived as noxious statements.