It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nazis planned a Fourth Reich the EU (Red House Report)

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 12:46 PM
In 2009 author Adam LeBor released his first novel, ‘The Budapest Protocol’, a political thriller and an all round great piece of fiction.


Nazi-occupied Budapest, winter 1944: the Russians are smashing through the German lines. Miklos Farkas breaks out of the Jewish ghetto to find food - at the Nazi headquarters. There he is handed a stolen copy of The Budapest Protocol, detailing the Nazis post-war plans. Miklos knows it must stay hidden forever if he is to stay alive. Present day Budapest: as the European Union launches an election campaign for the first President of Europe, Miklos Farkas is brutally murdered. His grandson Alex, a journalist, buries his grief to track down the killers. He soon unravels a chilling conspiracy rooted in the dying days of the Third Reich, one that will ensure Nazi economic domination of Europe, and a plan for a new Gypsy Holocaust. The hunt is on for The Budapest Protocol. Alex is drawn deeper into a deadly web of intrigue and power play, a game played for the highest stakes: the future of Europe. Powerful, controversial and thought-provoking, The Budapest Protocol is a journey into Europe's hidden heart of darkness...(Amazon)

However, this seems to be another case where fact is stranger than fiction because LeBor’s novel was based upon a real Nazi documented – The Red House Report – a fascinating report that outlines the new Nazi strategy to establish a Fourth Reich.

The paper is aged and fragile, the typewritten letters slowly fading. But US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128 is as chilling now as the day it was written in November 1944.

The document, also known as the Red House Report, is a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany's post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis' return to power and work for a 'strong German empire'.

The industrialists gathered at the Maison Rouge Hotel waited expectantly as SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid began the meeting. Scheid held one of the highest ranks in the SS, equivalent to Lieutenant General. He cut an imposing figure in his tailored grey-green uniform and high, peaked cap with silver braiding. Guards were posted outside and the room had been searched for microphones.

There was a sharp intake of breath as he began to speak. German industry must realise that the war cannot be won, he declared. 'It must take steps in preparation for a post-war commercial campaign.' Such defeatist talk was treasonous - enough to earn a visit to the Gestapo's cellars, followed by a one-way trip to a concentration camp.

But Scheid had been given special licence to speak the truth – the future of the Reich was at stake. He ordered the industrialists to 'make contacts and alliances with foreign firms, but this must be done individually and without attracting any suspicion'.

The industrialists were to borrow substantial sums from foreign countries after the war.

They were especially to exploit the finances of those German firms that had already been used as fronts for economic penetration abroad, said Scheid, citing the American partners of the steel giant Krupp as well as Zeiss, Leica and the Hamburg-America Line shipping company.

Plotters: SS chief Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with Nazi-backed company I. G. Farben and one of the industrialists to benefit under the Nazis

Soon enough the meeting was least for some. As the industrialists left a handful of them were ushered into another room for another meeting, one that only the elite of the elite would take part in.

In this seperate meeting a three-stage plan was laid out that they believed would see the establishment of the Fourth Reich.

In stage one, the industrialists were to 'prepare themselves to finance the Nazi Party, which would be forced to go underground as a Maquis', using the term for the French resistance.

Stage two would see the government allocating large sums to German industrialists to establish a 'secure post-war foundation in foreign countries', while 'existing financial reserves must be placed at the disposal of the party so that a strong German empire can be created after the defeat'.

In stage three, German businesses would set up a 'sleeper' network of agents abroad through front companies, which were to be covers for military research and intelligence, until the Nazis returned to power.


US Military Intelligence Report EW-Pa 128

The single most prominent player in all of this was Hermann Joseph Abs - post-war Germany's most powerful banker and once described by David Rockafella as 'the greatest banker of the 20th century.'

From; Martin Bormann, Nazi in Exile, by Paul Manning, Lyle Stuart, (1981) -

'Baron Kurt von Schroeder, a well-known banker … and economic advisor to Bormann’s economic committee, commented that Dr. Herman Josef Abs, chairman of Deutsche Bank, was particularly important to the government of the Third Reich.His influence was mainly with the Reichsbank and with the Ministry of Economics. Abs proved very valuable to the party and to the government by using his bank to assist the government in doing business in the occupied countries and other foreign countries. Abs enjoyed excellent relations with Walther Funk, who was both president of the Reichsbank and head of the Ministry of Economics...

… Branch managers of Deutsche Bank were to a man members of the party …'

This is the same Hermann Abs who was chosen by Pope John Paul II to oversee the reorganization of the Vatican Bank when it was caught red-handed laundering counterfeit securities and heroin profits for the Gambino crime family.

'In October 1978 the Marshall Foundation was utilized as a platform for Dr. Herman J. Abs, now honorary president of Deutsche Bank A.G. as he addressed a meeting of businessmen and Bankers and members of the Foreign Policy Association in New York City on the ‘Problems and Prospects of American-German Economic Co-operation.’ This luncheon was chaired by his old friend, John J. McCloy, Wall Street banker and lawyer, who had worked closely with Dr. Abs when McCloy served as U.S. High Commissioner for Germany during those postwar reconstruction years. At that time, Hermann Abs, as chief executive of Deutsche Bank was also directing the spending of America’s Marshall Plan money in West Germany as the chairman of the Reconstruction Loan Corporation of the Federal Republic of Germany.'

John J. McCloy, mentioned in the above extract, was the American High Commissioner for Germany who issued an amnesty for industrialists convicted of war crimes. He also served on the Warren Commision.

Thanks to McCloy pardoning these prominant industrialists they were able to carry out the plan they had concocted just a few years earlier...

'For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler,' says historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky.

'The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.'

Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda chief, once said: 'In 50 years' time nobody will think of nation states.'

For now, the nation state endures. But these three typewritten pages are a reminder that today's drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military imperium.

Original Article
Brilliant summary.
Additional source

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 01:07 PM
Nice post. I generally agree with everything. That is why I oppose NAFTA, and other economic unions. We must keep our identities as individual countries at all costs.

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 02:05 PM
It was never the intention to have Germany win the war. There were many occasions where Germany was doing better than anticipated and had to be pulled back. Best example is the battle of Britain. People think that we kicked Hitler's arse, but we did not. granted the British pilots were incredible shooting down many times more planes than we lost, but Germany had huge numbers of 109's to our pathic number of Hurricanes and Spitfire's.

Right at the end of the battle the Germans suddenly stopped the attack, why? because they were about to defeat England within a matter of days. Over a short period (several days) Britain lost a lot of aircraft for one reason or another and Germany made big advances in bombing airfields. This meant that another week or 10 days at most and the Germans would have had England too.

So what happened? for an unknown reason Hitler ordered the Luftwaffe to cease all attacks on England and to only send small groups of fighters into UK airspace. Imagine the consequence of Germany taking England back then. NO land for an invasion fleet, no land for a continued rebellion it would have won the war, but Hitler ordered a stand down with literally only days required to win the WAR!

The second world war was as much a staged (false flag) event as the attack on the south Korean ship, the staged event that the CIA used to start Vietnam, the false reports of WMD in Iraq, the CIA grown, run and financed terrorists responsible for 9/11, Afghanistan, attacks on Israel etc. Oh and the soon to appear nuclear attacks on the USA or London by terrorists of course (not the CIA,Mossad or MI6 - they don't do that sort of thing).

This is a game that has been playing out for over a century and may well take another 50 years to complete. It will be completed one way or another, even if they have to nuke the planet (they wont use nukes, but it sure as hell will look like they did) and kill off 6 billion people.

The Fourth Reich is here has been for 50 years they are just taking their time so we don't resist as much. The people will complain but they will go along with it for fear of the unknown, and as long as the government always seems to be on the peoples side there will be no major backlash.

Only problem is they have placed too much hope in Obama, the people of the US will revolt when they finally get their heads out of their ass.

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 02:41 PM
reply to post by theregonnakillme

The true reason for Hitler's decision to halt the German armour is a matter of debate. One theory is that Von Rundstedt and Hitler agreed to conserve the armour for Fall Rot, an operation to the south.

Another theory, which has recently been disputed, was that Hitler was still trying to establish diplomatic peace with Britain before Operation Barbarossa. Brian Bond stated:

Few historians now accept the view that Hitler's behaviour was influenced by the desire to let the British off lightly in hope that they would then accept a compromise peace. True, in his political testament dated 26 February 1945 Hitler lamented that Churchill was "quite unable to appreciate the sporting spirit" in which he had refrained from annihilating the BEF at Dunkirk, but this hardly squares with the contemporary record. Directive No. 13, issued by the Supreme Headquarters on 24 May called specifically for the annihilation of the French, English and Belgian forces in the pocket, while the Luftwaffe was ordered to prevent the escape of the English forces across the channel.

Whatever the reasons for Hitler's decision, he did not rescind it until the evening of 26 May. The three days thus gained gave a vital breathing space to the Royal Navy to arrange to evacuate the British and Allied troops. Although the majority of the 338,000 men saved in about eleven days were British, 123,000 were French—of whom 102,250 escaped in British ships. -

Hitlers decision to halt the attack upon British and French troops at Dunkirk was another enigma of WW2.

As for the battle of Britain - I don't think Hitler ever had a specific plan for invasion, he seemed incapable of formulating a plan for an amphipious assault against an island nation.

Hitler instead relied upon the assurances of Goering that the Luftwaffe could destroy Britain from the air thus not needing to pysically invade. Had it not been for the secret development of primitive radar in Britain, which allowed the Royal Air Force nearly 20 minutes warning every time the Luftewaffe launched an attack, Britain probably would have fallen due to the heavy aerial bombardment.

[edit on 22/6/10 by LiveForever8]

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 02:45 PM
Every major power in the world has had a longing to unite Europe..

Which usually resulted in War until the continent was burned out and defense against a common enemy (USSR) with the help of the US was the only way to create a feeling of unity.

I don't see how the NAZI's plan would have been any different..

And if it was and I was now living in a superstate based on the ideas of dead NAZI's.. So what?

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:13 PM

Originally posted by theregonnakillme
So what happened? for an unknown reason Hitler ordered the Luftwaffe to cease all attacks on England and to only send small groups of fighters into UK airspace. Imagine the consequence of Germany taking England back then. NO land for an invasion fleet, no land for a continued rebellion it would have won the war, but Hitler ordered a stand down with literally only days required to win the WAR!


Bombers heading for one of the fighter fields near to London (RAF Kenley) accidentally mistook Croydon Airfield for their target, and bombed it.

In response, the RAF Bombed Berlin, and in response to that Hitler ordered a switch from military targets to London and other cities, against the advice of the Luftwaffe.

The resulting switch allowed British Fighter production to pick up, and relieved pressure on the airfields and pilots, allowing the RAF to regroup. The rest, as they say, is real history.

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by TheComte

I understand completely.

The EU started out as the innocently sounding 'European Coal and Steel Community' -

The ECSC was first proposed by French foreign minister Robert Schuman on 9 May 1950 as a way to prevent further war between France and Germany. Monnett declared his aim was to 'make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible.'

During its existence, the ECSC had succeeded in creating a common market but could not prevent the decline of the coal and steel industries. It did however set the ground for the future European Union. -

So, nothing to do with the coal and steel industry and everything to do with centralisation of power and influence.

Just as NAFTA has started out as a trade agreement I wonder what it will evolve into...

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:06 PM
Has anyone here ever read Dr. Joseph P. Farrell's line of books on Nazi post-war survival?

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:08 PM
reply to post by Dermo

Because the actual people don't mean as much as the survival of their ideology, i.e. the ends justify the means.

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:17 PM

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:26 PM
Hate to tell you.. But the 4th Reich is alive and well.. Its the u.s

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:10 PM
reply to post by Expat888

I disagree.

I don't think any one country can be singled out as being the 'Fourth Reich', if there is one.

These people don't 'do' countries. They don't 'do' nationality, race or religion. Money talks and it appears to be the only language they speak.

Reminds me very much of the Network clip - 'There is no democracy!'

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:36 PM
reply to post by LiveForever8

i have all his books, minus Secrets of the Unified Field, and Nazi International

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 05:44 AM

Originally posted by bigbomb456
Because the actual people don't mean as much as the survival of their ideology, i.e. the ends justify the means.

Who's ideology? The EU? The ones who forced upon us such heinous things as the European bill of human rights?

My point is, if the NAZI's wanted the EU and the EU is not based on any of the bad NAZI ideologies, then whats the problem?

My other point is, people have wanted European Unity since the time of the Roman empire.. What makes the NAZI idea any different?

Its not.

[edit on 23/6/10 by Dermo]

posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 04:26 PM
An interesting thread and topic OP! s&f for ya.
I have read the report afew times and when you look at the EU's formation it sounds like the plan.

posted on Jul, 15 2010 @ 02:41 PM
The fourth reich could easily consume america. One speech could get a few hundred followers one that complained about How this is realy chang what is different has anything actually got better? weve gotten h1n1. we have a magor oil leak. And a medicare plan no one likes. a rovultion could start within a few months.

posted on Jul, 15 2010 @ 03:52 PM
reply to post by Dermo

A united Europe with Germany as its powerhouse. I suggest you purchase Joseph P. Farrell's Nazi International to understand.

posted on Jul, 15 2010 @ 07:38 PM
reply to post by bigbomb456

You might enjoy this thread:

posted on Oct, 4 2010 @ 02:18 AM
has anyone got an actual link to the real report?..not the typed one thats on cuttingthroughthematrix..


edit on 4-10-2010 by alienesque because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 4 2010 @ 02:23 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

great post and i really want to check out that book you referenced. the only problem i have with the theory is, if i was an industrialist, even after benefiting from the nazi's in some way, and they generally bullied me into agreeing to this post-war secret protocol, i'd sure as hell sign on. but after hitler was dead and it became my job to shepard them back into the lime light....hahahahahahaha, jokes on you nazis' i'm gonna live my life.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in