Striking examples from The Fatherland that support the One War thesis

Published by carolyn on Sat, 2019-03-02 14:39

This example of below-the-belt, literal demonization of Germans that circulated in Britain was responsible for the distorted views that the public actually adopted as true. The belief that Germans were out to murder babies, children and women was encouraged in both World Wars.

 By Carolyn Yeager

I WENT THROUGH THE EARLIER ISSUES once again to find what I remembered seeing about Russian barbarism on the WWI eastern front. In doing so, I came upon some other interesting reports on “English barbarism” like the one just below, and other stories that confirm that the issues at play in WWII were very much in play in WWI first – supporting my contention that WWI and II were the same war, separated by a failed peace attempt of 20 years duration.

From the Dec. 2, 1914 issue of THE FATHERLAND, I begin with two excerpts that describe the extreme hatred generated against German immigrants living in Anglo countries at the outbreak of war.

The question arises: Did Jews copy their 'Never Again' slogan from the English? It can't be the other way around, since the following was written in 1914, not 1941! “Never Again” is obviously not original with the Jews. And also note the words I have underlined which became so full of 'meaning' when spoken by the National Socialists some years later.

Vol. 1 no. 17 Dec. 2, 1914 page 6

Excerpts from:


by Hans F. Kammeyer


“As a general statement it is no exaggeration to say that since the outbreak of the war, the German has come to be considered a pariah by the great majority of the British. No means has been found bad enough to eliminate him as a factor in the universal, or at least in the English life, yea, if possible to extirpate him—which in itself is regarded as an act pleasing in the eyes of God for the greater glory of the supreme British Civilization!

“All circles, statesmen, most of them notorious demogogic type, savants, authors, business men, laborers, all united in an organized campaign to preach, with only a few dissenting voices, the gospel of fury against everything German.

“What amounted to nothing less than a fierce, savage cry for a Holy War was raised all over the country: 'NEVER AGAIN' was their noble, inspiriting slogan. 'NEVER AGAIN' will we shake hands with a German! 'NEVER AGAIN' will we buy, use, employ, 'NEVER AGAIN' hear, read, sing or think of anything German! True—they argued—it is the Kaiser, the Junkers, the Prussian Militarism that caused this war; but the German people suffered them to exist and to wage war. [Hmm, never mind it was the British king and his ministers who wanted and instigated a war with the Kaiser -cy] And what a war, with all these shocking atrocities, according to the newspapers, at any rate! Therefore: 'Swat the Teuton.' Not only Kaiser, Junkers and Army must be annihilated and the German navy be 'handed over to England,' so that Britain may continue to rule the waves, to more and more effective exclusion of all the others, but every German unit, every German individual must be made to feel the wrath of the God of Britain! And why not start right here at home, in London, in England, Scotland, Ireland, where we have nearly 30,000 of these 'bestial Huns,' most of them spies anyhow, at our mercy? This is how this program, more worthy of their swarthy, yellow and 'boomerang' confederates, was carried out."

*   *   *

“The first and simplest step towards eradication of the hated foe was to deprive the Germans in their power of all chance to earn a livelihood. Dismiss the German clerk, the maid, the housekeeper! Don't frequent a hotel where German waiters serve you! Don't patronize German butchers, shopkeepers, mechanics, electricians, and their goods! Force out the German Manager and Director on the boards of your Companies. Even dismiss German children from the schools, seminaries and Pensions, and close the German convents! In short, starve the Germans out of existence. Let them perish—what of them! Every child that dies in the arms of a German mother is one 'Alien Enemy' less!"


Funny, the words used—extirpate, eradicate—are the same words used by Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler. But when they used them toward Jews they were words of crimes against humanity, proving genocide; when used and practiced by Britons against Germans, they don't mean a thing.

There is more in this terrible article—much more. Read it for yourself here if you can stand it. The only point I'm wanting to make now is the uncanny similarity between the language the British used toward the Germans in WWI, and that used by the Jews in WWII. This essay was written in 1914, long before the “Nazis.” And we can be sure the Germans living in Britain when war was declared were never the threat to the British that the Jews were to the Germans.

Germans weren't treated any better in Canada. My own great uncle immigrated to Canada with his wife and two children prior to WWI with the intention of farming in Saskachewan, which he did and his numerous children/grandchildren still do. I have no knowledge of what difficulties he faced, if any, during the war.

Page 9


letter from Arthur von Briesen

New York, Nov. 13, 1914

To the Honorable Secretary of State, Washington, D.C.

Sir: It appears from letters received by me from Canada that there are a large number of German and Austrian subjects in that country who are at the present time looked upon as public enemies, and that many of them are now in great need and are suffering from lack of food and also from lack of employment, as it is regarded as treasonable to employ any one belonging to those nationalities.

During the preceding years Canada has sought German immigrants mainly for her agricultural development. Many came in good faith and obtained satisfactory employment, some even acquiring little farms and other property. Now their position is very difficult and to an extent, I believe, fraught with danger. […]

I therefore respectfully suggest that measure be taken in some proper and apt manner to extend protection to Germans and Austrians in Canada, and, if need be, also to help where help is found necessary. If they were permitted to come to the United States they might find work and sustenance in our midst. […]


And here is one more excerpt from another report that spells out just how much hatred England not only felt but openly expressed against their German enemy, which certainly rivals anything Roosevelt's Henry Morgenthau came up with 20 years later.

Vol. 2 no 7 March 24, 1915 Page 12-13


By Louis Viereck, Berlin Correspondent


The Engineer, a well-known English technical paper, has an article on “Competition With the German Iron Trade.” We extract the following passage which throws a light on British ambitions:

“We can attain our object by ruthless but simple means. All we have to do is systematically and thoroughly to destroy every German industrial establishment, especially their iron and steel works. Our military occupation of Germany must go hand in hand with the destruction of her industrial establishments as soon as our troops can get possession of them. England and France have to get thoroughly familiar with the idea of such systematic destruction. The ruin of German industries would draft tremendous masses of capital to our home works which would reap immense profits from that procedure. By the manner in which the Germans have treated Belgian and French towns and villages [British-French-Belgian propaganda lies -cy], they have already set public opinion against them, and have partly prepared the ground for the universal approval of such an industrial war as a just reprisal. Personally, we do not wish to fall in with the proposal too readily. Many of us approve of it, but it needs careful consideration before it can be carried out.”

These are the deadly intentions of the noble Britons with regard to their German competitors. As a counterpart, we subjoin the “Dream of the Ultro Rossija,” a Russian paper:

“I dreamt—I confess it was a Chauvinistic dream—that Wasko Kucyi in his ragged clothes, and all the Waskoes, smelling and filthy like savages, with dirty boots, entered that cultured city where the beer palaces are more richly adorned with gold than our princely palaces. I dreamt all that stinking clan were invading the apartments of civilized Berlin. I dreamt that the whole cursed moloch-culture of the degenerate city lay prostrate before Wasko Kucyi, who, with his muddy boots, crushed their d----- skulls.”

Let the gentle reader decide for himself on which “bloom of allied culture” he should bestow the prize. The noble suggestions, more particularly of the Engineer and Ultro Rossija deserve to be made known over the wide, wide world.


And then the staggering cost of all this 'dreaming':

Page 15

The present European war places everything in the shade that ever occurred in history. […] It is said that there are not less than 20,000,000 men under arms in the European theatre of war, including the reserves not yet sent to the field and those who are being trained. Accordingly, the Russian losses alone were twice already—at Tannenberg as well as at Lodz—150,000 men, roundly speaking. The total losses of the Allies, up to the middle of December, are estimated at about 3 million men, i.e., about three times as many as those of the Germans and Austrians.


Finally, we go to falsifying photographs, a common practice in both wars

v. 2 no. 5   March 10, 1915   Page 12


Falsification of War Pictures

IN the Daily Mail of December 12 and also in the London Daily Mirror [both Viscount Northcliffe papers -cy] a picture was published with the following caption: “The fate of the plunderer.” This picture was taken at the front and represents a German soldier who was caught plundering a French palace. He was tried by a court-martial and condemned to be shot. His hands were tied behind his back; with his eyes blindfolded he was placed against a tree and shot by seven French soldiers.

Aside from the cold-bloodedness of a photograph of such an event, the picture shows all the signs of a scene set up entirely with an eye for the effect. At the left are the seven soldiers in two rows with leveled rifles. A few steps in front of them stands the officer pointing dramatically with his sword to the victim, whom a closer observation shows to be very strangely clad. First of all, this supposed German soldier wears an article of apparel which has at least some resemblance to a German military coat. Below this, however, long trousers are visible which fall over the boots, so that only a small piece of these can be seen. It is scarcely necessary to state how little this conforms with the uniform of the German field soldier and his top-boots. The most remarkable part of the uniform is, however, the helmet. It is, to be sure, a Prussian helmet, but without the field-gray covering. This is in itself suspicious, but the way in which the chin-strap of the helmet is placed around the chin of the soldier shows the picture up as nothing but a very clumsy forgery.

Aside from the improbability that a soldier would at such a moment put on his helmet, to say nothing of taking down the chin-strap, the way in which it is fastened clearly recalls former pictorial falsifications, in which the chin-strap was down like the English helmet-strap, which is worn around the chin. An example of this was the widely circulated picture in The War Illustrated in which German soldiers represented in the act of shooting from a Red Cross wagon are pictured with this helmet-strap fastened in the English fashion. In the same way the bungling work of the falsifier is laid bare in the Daily Mail. The entire masquerade is revealed when one considers that that part of the face which is not covered by the bandage has the small mustache and the typically French features of the officer and soldiers at the left of the picture. Such products of a morbid imagination would be ridiculous if it were not for their criminal intention and probable effect of arousing the evil instincts and passions of entire nations and poisoning public opinion.


And lastly, a short mention of the terrible practice of using Dum-Dum bullets (also called expanding bullets), which the English also used against the Germans. There was a longer report about it earlier, in the Dec. 23, 1914 issue, with gruesome pictures of the wounds created by such. Go there if you want to see it.

Page 13


Statement of Prominent Romanian Regarding Their Use in Russian Army

A CIRCULAR letter was addressed, according to the Neue Freie Presse, by a prominent Romanian personality to the editors of various Romanian papers reading as follows:

“Three days ago I had a conversation with Lieutenant Alexander Aldea of the Austrian cavalry. He is an Austro-Romanian and took part in the fights against the Russian forces in Bukowina, when he was dangerously wounded by a rifle-bullet. According to incontestable and corroborating statements of several medical doctors of Bucharest, the wound was caused by a 'Dum-Dum' projectile.

“The said officer also showed me the revolver of a Russian officer, still loaded with Dum-Dum cartridges, and a packet of Dum-Dum cartridges which had not been tampered with in any way and still bore the Russian seal.”


IHR republished in 1991 a book from 1928 by Arthur Ponsonsby. a Member of Parliament, titled "Falshood in Wartime" where he debunked the British anti-German propaganda from WW1. Subsequently, the Brits officially apologized to Germany for it. 
In WW2 the propaganda was too outrageous and Germany was totally knocked out - like, nobody to apologize to. Besides, the "Allies" had committed some very real crimes in Germany, so their lies had to become history in order to overshadow any possible German grievances. Also, the Holocaust was used to create Israel and it became its founding myth. All very important reasons not to reverse the propaganda, almost no matter how incredible and weird (except small details like soap factory).   

The sad fact after part two of the WW is that after the Nuremberg Tribunal laid down its laws the government that formed in Germany wouldn't accept an apology if one were offered! They can't; they are complicit with the victors in destroying any independent-minded German state; anything remotely nationalistic. They share the consensus that Hitler's Third Reich needed to be destroyed - the more thoroughly the better.

Yes and no. The post-WW2 and current German discourse does indeed reject National Socialist ideology and Hitler but many people are very aware of "Allied" crimes, the expulsion from the East etc. German psyche is an insane asylum and psychiatrist Hans-Joachim Maaz calls it "normopatie" - for German speakers there is a good vid with him:  
And WW has not yet ended. Perhaps it never will. Depends on definition. 

What I'm trying to get across with the above post is that England is not Germany's friend, does not wish Germany well, never did and still doesn't. It can't be blamed on the Jews either. England's former desire for control over all Europe, and of course the world-wide seas, pre-dates the emancipation of the Jews.

It is my (radical?) position that England did more to destroy Europe than the Jews ever did or could do, especially with the instigation and continuation of the Great War (First World War), and determination to bring the US into it in order to crush Germany altogether, which is genocide. In the Second WW they managed to pin that label on the Germans, with the help of the Jews. The English news media keep up the attack with no intention of ever relenting because they represent the commercial interests of London and England. At this point the media may be dominated by the Jews, but that was not always the case.

Germans, however, always wanted England's friendship and were/are too obsequious ... until they weren't. But even when they weren't, they were, due to German idealism and lack of ruthlessness in their own interests. Two different breeds here, which are not on a level playing field.

My bottom line: The first World War did more to weaken Europe than anything else before or since, including giving the Jews the entrance to power they wanted. It was a complete disaster.

The Germans have been more inward looking compared to the English. Germany never had a big colonial empire compared to Britain. The Germans were pretty much the opposite to what the British propaganda made them out to be.

Germany never initiated military aggression against Britain without British provocation first. The true aggressor is the side that forces the other side to act - This pretty much describes the relationship between Britain and Germany for the past 100 years (WW 1 and 2).

Your position is one that I've come to hold over the past few years.  Many are super quick to jump over the Jews today - often rightly so, but it was, IMHO, England's medival "Balance of Power" practices that led to their empowerment today.
There's a great article over at CODOH, entitled "The Non-Jewish Stake in the Holocaust Mythology" - while it seems at first glance that Jews are the primary beneficiary of the endless extortion racket, the simple fact is all the English-speaking western powers are heavily invested in it as well (perhaps even more so for Russia.)
Which brings me to this point ... What value is there in the concept of "White Nationalism" if only side is offering the hand of friendship and the other side is offering nothing else but ridicule and scorn?
We can perhaps differentiate between individuals and their leadership class, but I've also had some bitter (online) arguments over Germany's culpability in the two world wars and the (obvious, to me) subsequent situation we face today.
The W.N. Anglos are often insufferable in this regard.  They will not admit fault, and see no reason to change position.  They will sooner try to cut a deal with Jewry (aka Spencer's "White Zionism") than reverse their evil lies.
They are more interested in being charge - even now, at 5 minutes to midnight, than to do what's right, honest or honourable.  More of the same then.
So I think the impact to the ego is too much to take.  Germany, Germans and what ever friends it might have will have to go it alone - somehow.  I put no faith in W.N. whatsoever.

Dear P-K, If you live in a nice neighborhood and bands of brown ppl. start rampaging it, you'll have a beautiful White solidarity.

...But what if they don't rampage?
I live in a nice neighbourhood, which has become (over time) at least half Chinese and Indian.  They never rampage.  In fact, I might even say they are better behaved than a good percentage of whites!
Still, every year the Anglos trot out the war vetrans and commemorate how they fought for "our freedoms."  Ah-huh.
The fact is, the majority of "Whites" I know simply don't have a problem with the way society is structured right now.  In fact, many profit handsomely from it.  Meanwhile I know that in Europe, you're starting to see even life-long "left" voters say "ok, it's enough now!" to the gates-open approach to migration.
So I ask again, is W.N. a rational rallying point for the problems Europeans face?  IMHO, at best it was a migration policy that allowed "integration" of Europeans into Anglo lands.  As we know, that then morphed into the full-blown multi-ethnic society we have today (with the help of you-know-who...)
So yeah, still waiting for this "White solidarity" to show up in the real world.  As far as I can see it doesn't exist outside the confines of the Internet.  But I do see ethnic nationalism making strong head ways.  The people have spoken?

I am not sure, P-K if you agree with me, but the White race, or more precisely, the Germanic race, is remarkably non-ethnocentric, as opposed to all other races. Without rampage - no ethnocentrism, in my opinion.
Btw. I forgot the Indians and EastAsians in your neigborhood. In mine - there are only Whites and I live in northern Eu.

My experience must be very different to yours of course, based on where we live.  If your Northern EU neighbourhood is essentially still only whites (more precisely, Germanics?) - I live somewhere that couldn't be more different - a former Anglo colony that went full Multi-Kulti.  But it wasn't always this way.  It only changed in the last 20 years or so.  Before than it was 99% "White."
In my opinion, we are still ethnocentric, as much as anyone else.  It's just supressed.  We can't openly complain or do anything about the situation - that would be "hate speech."  Then there's the cradle to grave "education" and media we are all subjected to that shapes our opinions.  But natural tendancies are still there.
For example, I often see the people who preach the most about diversity are the biggest hypocrits (they live in some lily-white neighbourhood, etc.)  It's just a lot of virtue signalling.  When their neighbourhoods become over-run, they are then the first to flee (white flight, etc.)  But they talk a lot about how tolerant they are, at least until it affects them personally.
Another observation.  Multi-Kulti doesn't mean everyone mixes together perfectly.  Instead we just create parallel societies with lots of little ethnic enclaves.  Before the 3rd world invasion, my country had a "whites only" policy, but guess what?  There still was prejudice.  If it wasn't against the Italians or Greeks, the Jews certainly got a serving.  They are all nominally "White", are they not?
The upshot is, I still mostly see Chinese with Chinese, English with English, Indians with Indians.  Yeah, there is some mixing, but not as much as you might think, despite everyone mashed together in the same land and the non-stop propaganda.  Growing up, even my own family mostly socialised with other Germans, back when it was essentially 100% "white."  We tried inviting some "English speakers" over a few times, and we never quite clicked.  Go figure.
Ultimately this is why I think "White Nationalism" is a bit like a toothless tiger.  It would be like an Asian advocating for "Asian Nationalism" trying to lump Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and all the other sub-groups into the one bucket.  I don't think it works.  Just because we (or they) may look somewhat alike, doesn't mean we're the same or have the same interests.  Race isn't enough for other groups, why would it be for us?
Maybe it's more of an American thing, I mean, for the Americans that don't have much connection to their European roots anymore?  I don't know.  But what I do know is that Nationalism only seems to work (or have "appeal") when there is a specific country attached to it.  IMHO of course.

See below for my comment/response

An article in TELEPOLIS on 21 December 2017 has the following headline "UK and Poland conclude new defence pact"
British Prime Minister Theresa May has described this defence pact as a "powerful symbol of our continued close cooperation" and as a "strategic partnership" based on a "shared history" of both countries. It referred to a promise made by the British government on 31 March 1939.

This was not a helpful comment with no links, etc. After a bit of looking, I found this:

Is your heading facetious or sarcastic, Klaus? You really should say so since we cannot read your mind. Also, it's very difficult to impossible to tell which comment you're responding to, but I think it may be mine of 3-3-19, headed "What I'm trying to get across". It's always good to put the writer's name or something that indicates who/what you're replying to.

So, should we read into this the opposite of your heading? Or maybe not?

Sorry Carrolyn, I should have referred to your comment. Of course, the headline was meant to be ironic. My opinion is that the British elite has always been, and still is, anti-German. Unfortunately, very few Germans realize this historical experience. I have to thank you for bringing such a large amount of material to the history of my country.

And very glad you're appreciating THE FATHERLAND series. It will continue and the truth about WWI will continue to come out. So important!

The link to the Fatherland is very interesting, even if difficult to read.

It's not difficult when you know how to operate their format. You get rid of the sidebars and then there is plenty of room to enlarge the size a lot and still see the whole width of the column. The page moves up, down and sideways very easily, using the cursor. You can also make it full screen.

I too find this writing from back then really interesting ... I'm sort of addicted to it. Thanks for saying so. 

Now who is encouraging and enabling the mass third-world immigration into the UK? Jews I think. It appears that the Jews are turning against their so-called British friends.

Dear CY, This night i had an even better dream. We, who'd taken D.C. in a daring operation, marched and sang, banging our heavy boots in the pavement of Pennsylvania Ave. Hitler smiled and waved to us. But this time, by his side was one Donald Drumpf, already dressed in his new SS uniform. He smiled too and, seemingly, those two told each other jokes as we were passing. 
On the other side of the avenue, surrounded by guards, was a crowd of Tribesmen: bankers, lawyers, journalists, all in striped prison uniforms and shackles. We knew that they were about to be sent to cotton plantations in the South and we waved to them. They didn't wave back (shackles).  
Such a beautiful day today. 

Do you really have dreams like this? If so, you're lucky ... or amazingly positive. Sounds more like a day-dream most of us would have, if we even allowed that!

Yes, but not often. I think this one was provoked by our email exchange about Trump's speech and the speech itself. The marching on Pennsylvania Ave. singing a German soldier song was my dream for a long time. Eeeerica!

Thanks for your interesting response/comment. I think it is really impossible to objectively assess ethnocentrism without the tools of sociometry. All we do is to extrapolate and rationalize our own private experiences and prejudices. My experience with Denmark where I've been living most of my life - which is pretty long (I am a 50/50 German/Polish mix) - is that Danes are extremely open to foreigners but at the same time fiercely proud of their country (with good reason). A very beautiful tribe rather than a nation, where everybody seems connected to everybody else. I have found an article trying to objectify ethnocentrism in Eu countries. Denmark and other Scandinavian countries were found the least ethnocentric, and places like Poland, Hungary and Greece, the most, Germany and Austria being in the middle. See p.8 at
The question is: why such differences? My hypothesis is that in the thinly populated cold North, anybody you meet is more often your cousin than an enemy.

(Apologies for long reply)
...You feel that White Nationalism's apparently lack of success is due to our inherient lack of ethnocentricism?  Something in-grained then?
Kevin MacDonald subscribes to the same idea as you do (the North, the cold, etc), on why we appear to be more individualistic.  I'm not sure I agree.
The paper is interesting.  I've only had a chance to skim through it briefly, but I picked up a few things that already raised an eyebrow.  The first is the statement in the Abstract that "ethnic diversity’s negative effects on social capital might have been drawn too early" - ah-huh.  Where does this idea come from?
I suspect these people may be motivated by Robert Putnam's work ("Diversity means less trust."
 What do you make of this?
The other thing that pops out is that generalised trust is lowest in the formerly communist countries - well, many of them are very cold and isolated environments too.  What's the difference then?  They got real Marxism, while we only got the cultural variety, I think that is a decisive point.
They also excluded data on Israel.  Gosh, why?  That made me laugh!
All told, I am somewhat skeptical of science like this.  I say this, because at the end of the day, such research is based on data that comes from face to face interviews (see the section on Methodology.)  It's not from strict observation and testing like a real science.
Now I haven't scratched further as to the exact questions postulated, but if someone in the "West" askes you openly "how much you do like foreigners?" - are you going to be honest?  What's the fall out from answering incorrectly?  (NB: We know, people lose jobs, lives are destroyed.)  How much do you trust the interviewer?
But even if we accept the data 100% (I'm sure most answered honestly), there is a wonderful clue in this report as what's really going on here with this statement: "With respect to the only two macro variables, the strong relation of gross domestic product with generalized trust is confirmed: the wealthier the nation, the higher the levels of trust of its citizens."
We are all in golden cages.  This confirms what I wrote above: People are more often than not just hypocrites. They are "accepting" (of all peoples and the dogma) because they can afford to scurry away to a neighbourhood that isn't "diverse."  You don't see ordinary French people trying to move into the "suburbs" of Paris voluntarily.  Watch them complain when the "migrants" move into their neighbourhood.  Slums/Ghettos/Ethnic enclaves exist in every "White" country.
This is one thing the authorities learnt since the 1930's - a well fed, fat and happy society is one that isn't revolting.  Hence all the social welfare programs, and trillions of government debt that can never be addressed.
 It's also at least one reason why Greece or Portugal are what they are.  They have enough trouble supporting themselves as it is.  If they were abundantly wealthy, would/could the situation change?  Possibly.
Which brings me to this: You write that Denmark is a fiercely proud country, but is open to foreigners - at least for now.  Were't they paying migrants to leave a few years ago?  Does this not confirm what I write above (my critique of WN) as well?  Ethnicity is a component of a country/nation, not visa-versa as WN would have it?
Although I present only anecdotal evidence, I maintain that we have natural inclinations towards our own kind.  Our own kind, being somewhat more specific that just a broad "White Race" group.  It doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue friendship/partnerships with our European brothers, but this idea is altogether different than what W.N. proposes.
I've rambled enough now!  Regards, P-K
 P.S. May I ask, do you feel that you are Danish now, having lived there you whole life?

I have attempted to respond to your point below. Last but not least, when General Hunger comes, everybody becomes the same: mad. A little more or a little less ethnocentrism. Does it really matter? And chronic hunger has  been a constant companion of humanity. Have a great Sunday both of you!

You have illumined something that I have developed definite opinions on. I consider this a sensitive issue, however, which I approach with trepidation as I have been strongly attacked on it in the past.

Still, I think it's important to air one's ideas and I commend those brave enough to do so, which includes myself.

I am more in alignment with P-K and greatly appreciate his comments, particularly the last one. Then, Hasso's equally honest response really clarifies my own experience. It is that Europeans of single ethnicity tend to strongly identify with that single ethnicity, while Europeans of mixed ethnicity are more likely to go along with 'White,' European or American as their stated identity. Thus P-K and myself prefer to identify as German (in my case German-American) while Hasso, not able to choose one side over the other between Polish and German, is more comfortable living in a very open society like Denmark.

A good example of this "theory" is the White Nationalist blogger Tanstaafl, someone with whom I had an intense personal 2-year encounter. Tanstaafl has proffered that he consists of 5 European nationalities from 4 grandparents. So he's evenly mixed and therefore cannot feel one much more strongly than another. He therefore identifies mainly as an American, and is most comfortable with the designation White, which he uses almost exclusively. He also faults those who don't do likewise as "harmful" to White Unity, such as my preference for Germans over Poles. There are many White Nationalists who have a similar reaction to any preference for one white ethnicity over others. I hasten to say that Hasso, who I've known for several years and whose friendship I really appreciate, does NOT react that way at all.

Like P-K, I grew up with Germans, within the general American context, and I know them well as the nicest, most decent, honest, responsible, family-loving folk whom have not had the easiest time of it, which is probably why it was not at all difficult for me throw off the "evil nazi" image embedded in history. I also find that when a German learns that I am German and vice versa, there's an immediate friendly acceptance and sense of recognition. I like that very much. That's something that Tanstaafl will never know, nor others like him.

We can't do anything about the inter-European mixing that is far advanced now, but I think it should be recognized as a phenomenon that is not necessarily strengthening for our race, as some want to believe. We need to allow everyone's sincerely held feelings on ethnicity.

Finally, I don't readily agree with Hasso's hypothesis that in the European North anyone you meet is more likely to be blood-related than in the South as the reason for less ethnocentrism. I think it's a different mentality that the people have in living amongst each other. There is more openness because they are a more solitary people and more lightly populated. The harsher Northern climate would have something to do with that.

Hi Carolyn,
Since you wrote about your experience with Tanstaafl, I thought I'd write about my own experiences and how I came to my own set of conclusions.
Before I begin - with the name "Tanstaafl" - I think there is already a strong hint as to the sort of personality you encountered.  "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch" - I'm not sure if you know, but this is an expression used in Robert Heinlein's fictional books and his adoring fans are nearly always rabid individualists/libertarians.  I find that if these sort of folks do make the cross-over to White Nationalism they are generally not at all attracted to a "National Socialism" style ideology as a solution.  Although a few are interested in exposing the Holocaust mythology.
My own sort of "divorce" from White Nationalism went along a similar path.  I had encountered a chap called "Hipster Racist" at his blog Aryan Skynet.  He writes very well, and covers a broad range of topics on his blog - often a bit obsecure or seldom known - educational from time to time.  Our beef started when it became clear I was inclined towards National Socialism, and felt that the lies associated with the aftermath of WW2 (from the Holyhoax extortion racket, to Germany's sole culpability in the war and so on) was not compatible with his own world view.  He felt the outcome of WW2 had nothing at all to do with today's "anti-White environment", and that continually bringing up "Nazis" and the "Holocaust" was the work of Jews in order to discredit W.N. as a movement (and there is definitely some proof that they do this.)
For the longest time, I couldn't comprehend what he was saying.  In the end - a few things became clear.  He was American, White American and only that.  He had no inclination at all towards other White sub-groups.  In his own words, America - the land and it's ways (all of it) was his home and "there is nowhere else for me to go."  Then later, he figured out I was German (I still identify as such) and then almost together at the same time, the penny dropped.  We really do have different interests.
I maintain that had Germany "won the war" and/or avoided it (either by America not entering it, or by some other theoretical means) then Europe would have remained "White" - but more over, the many other sins of the modern world would likely have been kept at bay (debt-interest-slavery, outright degeneracy/indecency, endless military adventurism, etc.)  I also maintain that the lies associated with Germany's loss, particularly the Holyhoax is not only an incredible burden on Germany, it's people and it's future - but that of all Western Countries and beyond (thinking of the all the turmoil in the Middle-East caused by the total support for Israel, and so on.)  Therefore it can be said that I espouse a World-View that goes beyond just "White Interests" then.  I'm advocating a total upheaveal of the prevailing "system."
I've encounterd many other people, from many varied backgrounds that support this view, from Americans, Australians, Scandenavians, Spaniards, Yugoslavians to even Arabs and Chinese.  A lot of different people "get it."
However, this line of thinking was not of interest to him.  For him, he just wishes that the disruptive Jews would go to Israel (which I do not agree with) and believes that American's did not fight WW2 for Jews - but solely for their own interests.  For him, there is enough "White History" in America for White Nationalism to survive on it's own without referencing a regime from 70+ years ago.  It's almost entirely the Greg Johnson/Kevin MacDonald school of thought - except super aggressive and confrontational.  The same individual has no problem bringing up topics which attempt to disprove the Revisionist point of view (such as the semi-Revisionst positions held by Michael Hoffmann), as to further distance himself and his cause from National Socialism.
His goal is to make White Nationalism "mainstream" and I think (although this is never clearly expressed) to bring about this change through the voting booth.  He sees very little wrong with modern day America, except with the fact that it is supposedly "anti-White."  He is a strong advocate of Bob Whittaker memes as a way of reaching "White people."  Good luck with that approach, I say.
Either way, at the end of the day, I had to agree with him.  We're talking about different things and have different goals, although there is some cross-over.  He now calls me anti-White (!)  I don't frequent his blog anymore, but I did visit a year or so later and noticed he still writes about the encounter.  He now expresses the desire to "re-tool" his website and admits that naming his website with anything "Aryan" related was a mistake.
Re: Meeting German people.  I have very much the same experience!  Although I am not living in Germany, whenever I do meet a German (be it on Holiday or what have you) - there is nearly always an instant connection and another level of friendliness/comradery that I don't get from other White folks.  What more can I say?
So I better leave it at there now... I've spent far too much time replying to messages today!  I do enjoy your blog/website Carolyn, thank you and keep up the good work.
Regards, P-K

I think its great when we are willing to express our own personal beliefs and experiences, rather than just repeat memes and observations. Tanstaafl has written that he indeed took his acronym from Robert Heinlein, of whom he was one of the army of fans for many years. He patted himself on the back for such cleverness in coming up with that pseudonym for himself. As I have written, he guards his personal identity very closely, and I have no doubt that he tried to discredit me partially because I had his personal information which he feared I might disclose. As I have written elsewhere, his wish for privacy borders on full-fledged paranoia. He thinks it gives him the right to get nasty—down and dirty—which is also second-nature to him. After all, he grew up in New York City, around Jews who were friends at the time.

Yes, he was a libertarian and, imo, still is and always will be. “You can take Tanstaafl out of Libertarianism but you can't take libertarian thinking out of Tanstaafl.”

I also maintain that the lies associated with Germany's loss, particularly the Holyhoax is not only an incredible burden on Germany, it's people and it's future - but that of all Western Countries and beyond […]

This burden on Germany is accepted by White Nationalists even projected into the future. The Holocaust remains intact in their view. As I've put it, Germans are thrown under the bus in the larger interests of some notion of White Unity. As an ethnic German, this is something I will never accept. The particular countries most holding this in place are Poland, the United Kingdom and the USA, ostensibly White nations, along with Israel. The Paul Grubach article you mentioned at CODOH is excellent and should be read by every white person. Written in 2010, it's still authoritative.

These White Nationalists look at today's captive Germany and see the enemy. They see the three nations mentioned above as struggling for freedom and in need of saving. They have things all backward. That's why they're losing—we're losing. I blame them for their blindness. Selfishness?

His [Hipster Racist's] goal is to make White Nationalism "mainstream" and I think (although this is never clearly expressed) to bring about this change through the voting booth.

I myself think we have to use the voting booth. The legitimacy of support from the people is a necessity. Hitler determined that and campaigned tirelessly many years to accomplish it. He only became Chancellor because of his electoral success. In this, as in so many other ways, Donald Trump (Drumpf) is following a similar path. Only trouble is, he's already so old and has no lieutenant in the wings. Donald Trump, Jr.? Maybe Junior would be better able to dump daughter Ivanka and family.

Note: 'They' are out to destroy Donald Jr. just as they destroyed John Kennedy, Jr. I think his wife knew that and that may be why she wanted to separate herself and their kids from his everyday life.

Hi Carolyn,
Sorry for the late reply.  I won't keep the thread going for much longer, I promise!  Thank you for publishing my comments.  They are a bit on the long side - I got started and I just kept going!  Only a couple of things I will comment on:
The first is that the chap I was debating with was also from New York and also freely admitting to having Jewish friends and girlfriends in the past.  Interesting coincidence, no?
The second is the term you used to describe behaviour of WN towards Germany and Holyhoax.  "Thrown under the bus" is *exactly* what I wrote!  Curious that we felt the same way about the situation.
I think we see an interesting trend then, that sort of goes along with the Kevin MacDonald school of thought.  He admires Jews, thinks of them highly, would like to build a future with them and has no problem distancing himself from our just cause in order to ... well, I'm not sure what he thinks he can achieve this way.
You know, with ethnic Germans making up such a large portion of America's white population and having contributed so much to it's wealth and well being, I find this a really interesting choice of ally.  It makes me feel a bit ill, really.
I do hope we can rally the people at some point.  I cannot comment on America authoritively, only as an outside observer.  But I think my homeland (if you haven't guessed, it's Australia) is toast.  There's no going back at this point, IMHO.  My family has made long term plans to move back to Europe.  I think there will be a better chance of change there.

I did guess you were in Australia! Not right away, though. I think it would be hard to be a German there, but I guess there is quite a community. I commend you for deciding to move back to Germany.

John Derbyshire is one British-American immigrant who speaks very badly against Germans, and especially "nazis" of course. He expressed that he would favor an Anglo-American economic/trade association (like the EU) that included all the "dominions" like Canada, Australia, NZ, etc. This would make the US a partner of the UK and in competition with Europe. Isn't that taking this country back to before the Revolutionary War?!  Kevin MacDonald is half German but doesn't have any feeling for that people. Germany lacks enough people to stand up for it; the indoctrination following WW2 has made Germans unable to praise their own people.

Don't forget Five Eyes either!  The intricate spy network which shares all information among those nations you mentioned.  These bonds go deep.
Life in Australia has been good and bad.  Good because it is a very wealthy country - living standards are very high.  The Anglos do know how to make a first rate civilisation, no doubt.
The Bad - I experienced anti-German prejudice before I even made it to High School.  From a teacher, no less!  This was completely incomprehensible to me at the time, as you can imagine - but my mother understood it very clearly.  Consequently, my German (mother tongue) is quite rough as I didn't want to speak it openly.  I did learn "Hochdeutsch" and I still pronounce things quite well, but the grammar is taxing for me.  I'm sure I'd pick it up again no trouble in the right environment.
The really bad - prejudice at work.  I didn't drink myself under the table every week like so many Australians, I was well presented, I was punctual and orderly - and did good work (that cannot be denied.)  This rubbed many of them  the wrong way, who seemed to do more to avoid work than anything else.  My life was not easy for a long time, but I'm doing well now.
Ironically, perhaps, because Australia in 2019 is so "multi-cultural", I now pass under the radar.  Every now and then some of the old guard still make some jibe against the Germans in front of me (not necessarily knowing I'm German background) and I just grin and bear it.
But with that said, I would like to "belong" not just co-exist.  And this is the growing face of Australian nationalism:
(From the four minute mark on, it gets very interesting...)
It will be some time yet before we make the move, because of family ties - but the day is approaching.  I have full support from my spouse (who is not native Australian either) on this decision.

Thanks again for your input, P-K,  Many good points again. And to Carolyn for your good words. I appreciate your friendship very much too. 
True, I have never promoted WN at the expense of nationalism of the several European peoples. On the contrary. I feel great attachment and love for Danes, Germans and Poles, each in a different way, and I want them to remain themselves, separate in their beauty, mentalities, cultures, histories etc.  
Yes, I know Kevin MacDonald's work but I have never met him. I think there can be some inborn or genetic basis for ethnocentrism, as well as many other characteristics like IQ, general activity, mood etc.  But there is, of course, the influence of culture and history. Whether trust has a genetic basis, I have no idea. I know two societies on both ends of the distribution: Denmark and Poland. Danes are extremely genetic homogenous: it's a tribe. And their history, at least the last 150 years was peace, economic success, education and wealth for all classes. They were smart not to take part in neither WW1 or 2, so their best and brightest avoided being killed. Homogeneity, peace and prosperity without too much luxury.
Poland on the other hand is, ethnically pretty heterogenous , at least visually. There are typical Nordic types as well as some almost Turkic and Tartar ones, while most are unspecified European types. And its history was very turbulent, to put it mildly. I guess 45 years of communist rule was perhaps not entirely trust-enhancing either. Foreign invasion and occupation/domination probably promotes ethnocentrism.  Notice that East Germans are much more ethnocentric and, dare i say it, patriotic than the Wessies.
This is all speculations but the fact is that Germanic and Slavic peoples had different histories and pre-histories, and are distinct, incl. morphologically. You could ask: why are the Eskimos not world leaders in trust and lack of ethnocentrism? Or maybe they are? I don't know and probably nobody knows.
You have so many good questions and there is so little room here. Yes, Danes are proud and they are open but they are much less politically correct and brainwashed than Germans and others. Denmark has more free discourse than most other western countries. So despite the openness, the anti-immigrant parties have had significant influence here for a long time.
I have lived in Denmark most of my life but I am not part of the tribe and never will. But my children are, 100%. It does not hurt at all that they are high and blond, but this is not a condition sine qua non here. 
I love and respect this people and country, and try to protect it the best I can. Together with my Danish patriotic friends, we set forth an initiative to consider promotion of immigration into Denmark as treason and to criminalize it. And it is now on the official website of the national parliament, gathering signatures. We know this has not a chance to be adopted to the criminal code - we just need PR for such thoughts, and the liberal side is taking notice. They even seem a little uneasy, some of them.
Perhaps you are right in saying that WN is a chimera. I like the idea, probably also due to my own background, as Carolyn points out. Under right conditions (or rather sufficiently bad ones) WN may still rear its ugly head :)    If not WN so perhaps Germanic nationalism, Panslavism? After all, Germans, Danes, Dutch understand each other quite easily, emotionally and intellectually.
Best regards,

Hi Hasso,
Thanks for your reply.  I apologise for taking so long to get back to you, I have a young family and quite demanding work, so I try to squeeze everything in where I can.
I appreciate your commentary on the ethnic make-up of Denmark and Poland.  Very interesting and actually educational for me.
We may have have slightly gone off track here, probably in part to my comments on the article you linked.  In truth, I was mostly responding to Carolyn's suggestion that England is not really Germany's friend, may never be and has probably done more to harm Europe than Jews ever could.  Based on my own research, I agree with this assessment - just not many people want to hear it.  This then prompted me to wonder where this leaves WN as an ideology (yes, I already had a conclusion in mind.)
Putting aside the issue of trust and ethnocetricism (whether or not it's genetics and/or environment), I really meant to highlight something else - I simply think that the idea of unity among all "whites" may simply be too abstract a concept for most people.  As I pointed out, there's no complete unity of other races (Blacks, Asians, etc) either so why would it be for us?
Back to the English for a moment.  Think about their patriots - they probably have no interest in being "closer" to Germany and certainly not just on the basis of our apparent "Whiteness."  See for example, the recent comments from Nigel Farage on WW1.  I mean, London is basically drowning in foreigners and still he clings to the thinking that paints "evil Germany defeated by heroic Britain."
Actually (and ironically), it's more of the neo-"English" people that are talking the most about the culpability of England in that war.  Wrap your mind around that one for a moment.  Karma?
 (Despite all of what I've written above about the English, I actually get along with them really well on a personal basis - go figure!)
Anyway, like you, I never promoted the idea of WN at expense of individual European nationalism (or anyone elses) - I always thought of it as friendship and cooperation among the European peoples, but as you may see in my comments above to Carolyn, I've been educated otherwise.  It has an entirely different meaning to some of them, particularly those in the (former) Anglo colonies.  Not all of them, but especially the "serious" ones with academic overtones.  They then blame (at least partially) their apparent lack of success on people like me (who think historical revisionism is important tool in understanding why we are in the situation we're in today).  I'm labelled "anti-White" as a consequence.  But I suspect the real reason for lack of appeal is something else, as Carolyn has alluded to.
Either way, I now "own" the accusation.  I am German first, with a general attitude of friendship to other nations, particularly other Europeans.  National Socialism then.
BTW - I'm certainly not entirely against the concept of pan-Germanicism, but if you ever venture over to Skadi, even that proves to not be so easy at times!
Must run now, take-care.  Regards,
P.S.  Wouldn't it be great to have a English-speaking "Volksdeutsch" forum to better discuss topics like this?

I found what I think is the interview with Nigel Farage - Yikes! Everybody should watch it:

I will never be able to take Nigel seriously again. He probably believes what he is saying (maybe); if so, he's an ignorant fool about the war.  I understand he has to be pro-British but not to that extent!

After that experience, I am invigorated to continue with these posts from The Fatherland (the name will change in time) all the way to the end. I can't think of a more worthy project and I also like doing it. WW1 seems to be more misunderstood, or lied about, than WW2.

I agree it would be great if English-speaking Volksdeutsch had a place to talk and share ideas. I invite all such to use this comment area. Since I will be continually posting new material, we can pick up where we left off for lack of width to the new thread, or make other adjustments. Hasso qualifies since he is fully 1/2 German descent.

My response to your comments is below. Thank you both. 

That is indeed the video I was talking about.
 As is often the case, the comments section is even more painful than the content of the Video itself.  Nothing has changed, nothing at all!  Only a few dissenters object to Nigel's reasoning.
With that in mind, I've often remarked Brexit isn't what it necessarily appears to be.  IMHO: It's the English pulling up the draw bridge and retreating into the castle because they can't get it all their way.  If it were 70 years earlier they'd be dropping bombs already, but fortunately they are not what they used to be.  Germany is already too strong again for their liking.  Reading English tabloids one gets the impression that the "Fourth Reich" is taking over Europe.  Even when Germany obeys their rules they still can't please them!
Am I too harsh?  I'm not sure.  I reminded of this English comedy sketch:
 One chap in the comments writes: "I don't know why people were laughing. The secretary's explanation is literally the foreign policy of the United Kingdom and has been for 500 years."
And another: "The bedrock of UK foreign policy since the 1700 was to ensure that France, Russia and Germany were never on the same side."
I look forward to more "The Fatherland" posts.  Regards, P-K.

Yes, it's shocking to find out what people are thinking. The worst thing Nigel said, for me, is that England "joined in" against Germany-Aus.Hung. but should have stayed out of it. He doesn't admit, or maybe doesn't know, that the British Foreign Office instigated a major war against Ger. since at least 1910, and couldn't keep it going if it stayed out of it herself. Joined in, my eye! And his characterization of the Kaiser was incredibly insulting and wrong. But that's how the Brits are programed.

I was appalled last year when I watched a House of Lords debate on whether US Pres. Trump should be allowed to come to London on a state visit. The hypocrisy and the misplaced importance of Britain "honor" was downright ridiculous! Nigel Farage displayed the same hypocrisy. You know, Adolf Hitler hated that hypocrisy in the British Prime Minister Chamberlain and said something very funny about him.

I have British friends too, and I like them also, but we must fight these lies for the dignity of Germans.

About now I'm reminded of the comments by Goebbels on the English:  "They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous" and of course his article about "Children With Their Hands Chopped Off" (referencing WW1 lies) which I still like to read from time to time.  Would seem to be a timely reminder.  Not much has changed.
It does not surprise me that Trump would be shunned in such a manner - there is a lot of "signalling" going on here...  But I must admit, I do not keep up always with all the political happenings.  I read an article by a Swiss researcher Rolf Dobelli, about avoiding the day-to-day news a year ago - took much of his advice and I've largely felt better for it.  I know the "gist" of what's happening and with the time freed up, I'm able to dedicate myself a bit more to other research.
I will never give up fighting for truth and justice for Germany.  It pains me every time I come across these things.  Regards, P-K

Thank you P-K for the link to the Farage tirade. He speaks absolute rubbish about things which he knows nothing about with such a supreme confidence and aplomb that it will be really hard to take him seriously going forward. On the other hand, we all have our false beliefs, our huge blinkers and our uncounted prejudices. Nigel adjusted and incorporated his understanding of WW1 into his struggle against EU/Germany and uses it, also in his own head, for purposes of propaganda and self-propaganda. 
Thank you Carolyn for incorporating me into the club. Perhaps it might help my credentials to say that my better half is a 100% German Mädel. So, yes, Carolyn and P-K: I know this extra attraction to own ethnicity if not culture, first hand. There is so much where we understand each other without words. 
Dear P-K! Can we agree on that under certain circumstances, there will be White people unencumbered by memories of wars, who will instinctively stick together because they resemble each other physically and psychologically, as Germans and Brits do, for example? To me this seems probable, although the remarkable lack of ethnocentrism may be a problem. 
Are there not Engl. language fora for Germans? I don't know but on the internet everything seems to already exist. 

Re: Nigel, yes, quote off-putting wasn't it?  Old habits die hard.
But, it's a good question - when the living memories of these wars fade even further, will Europeans begin to pull together in some sense?
 I hope so.  It's difficult to see far ahead, suffice to say things will get interesting as the non-white populations begin to grow and push us out of cities.
Not sure if this is 100% accurate, but interesting none the less:
You're probably right about forums.  I'm struggling for time anyway.  Take care!
Regards, P-K

Just so you know, P-K, that AffirmativeRight is the blog of a couple of German haters, Andy Nowicki and Colin Liddell. Here's an example of work by Liddell, who is probably the worst of the two.

It's everywhere, isn't it.

Oh my, thank you for that link.
It seems like a lot of the hard work done in the past couple of decades to get this information out on the Internet is attempted to be undone.  And why?  Because of a "toxic brand" ?  To keep "nationalism on it's knees" ???  I think there is something else going on here.
A few minutes of reading that was enough for me.  From the accusation that the Germans pioneered bombing of cities to the slur of "Knee-jerk hatred of Jews" (because they are just *always* innocent, right?) ... Nauseating.  Then came the comments section.  Take note how he bans people who post information contrary to his thinking.  This proves he's not about tackling a so-called "toxic brand", but rather more interested in the preservation of ego.
Frankly, I wash my hands of these people.  I want nothing to do with them.
It might all just a coincidence, but I think we might be looking at organised divide and conquer tactics.  We know that the internet is filled with shills and paid agitators.  In my opinion there are enough signs that there is a concentrated effort to once again destroy the truth on WW2 matters - just as it was starting to leak out and make an impact - possibly in order to pave the way for a brand of Jew friendly W.N.
I understand what the Jews get out of it, but just what do the Anglos hope to achieve doing this?  Just to be able to wash their consciousness of the guilt that *their* forebears were to blame for today's mess?  That's quite the faustian bargain.

Driving home, I had another thought on this as the topic is quite bothersome to me.  I wonder if Colin realises that his position on Dresden is essentially identical to that of the Antifa?  Strange bedfellows ... or maybe not.

I don't get the feeling that what he's doing is staged. The picture of him that he himself chose to put on his own blog looks like a mean bully. And his replies to those who express disagreement with him in the comments are way nastier than they need to be. He IS a British bully. And that explains him, afaic

So more of the same then.  Just who is this meant to appeal to?  One chap in the comments writes: "You're a sad joke, dude." - Maybe I'm wrong to be so pessimestic at times, they really took him to task for using Facebook comments (!) as sources.

I left a reply to "John Engleman" and when I just now went back there he had already answered me. Even dumber comment that his original one. No knowledge of history whatsoever. Liddell admitted to Nick Dean that he knew nothing about the holocaust supposed history, but he still uses it to beat up Germany. 

And when someone points out his deficiencies as that chap you mentioned did, he BANS them right then and there!! That way he keeps away all but those who agree with him. He is a joke.

I know of John Engleman from my disqus days.  He is the master of censorship over at Amren.  He's certainly not interested in real history or open discussion in my experience.

That's him! AffirmativeRight uses disqus.

To the Administrator!

My name is Eric and unlike a lot of emails you might get, I wanted to instead provide you with a word of encouragement – Congratulations

What for?

Part of my job is to check out websites and the work you’ve done with definitely stands out.

It’s clear you took building a website seriously and made a real investment of time and resources into making it top quality.

There is, however, a catch… more accurately, a question…

So when someone like me happens to find your site – maybe at the top of the search results (nice job BTW) or just through a random link, how do you know?

More importantly, how do you make a connection with that person?

Studies show that 7 out of 10 visitors don’t stick around – they’re there one second and then gone with the wind.

Here’s a way to create INSTANT engagement that you may not have known about…

Web Visitors Into Leads is a software widget that’s works on your site, ready to capture any visitor’s Name, Email address and Phone Number. It lets you know INSTANTLY that they’re interested – so that you can talk to that lead while they’re literally checking out

CLICK HERE to try out a Live Demo with Web Visitors Into Leads now to see exactly how it works.

It could be a game-changer for your business – and it gets even better… once you’ve captured their phone number, with our new SMS Text With Lead feature, you can automatically start a text (SMS) conversation – immediately (and there’s literally a 100X difference between contacting someone within 5 minutes versus 30 minutes.)

Plus then, even if you don’t close a deal right away, you can connect later on with text messages for new offers, content links, even just follow up notes to build a relationship.

Everything I’ve just described is simple, easy, and effective.

CLICK HERE to discover what Web Visitors Into Leads can do for your business.

You could be converting up to 100X more leads today!

PS: Web Visitors Into Leads offers a FREE 14 days trial – and it even includes International Long Distance Calling.
You have customers waiting to talk with you right now… don’t keep them waiting.
CLICK HERE to try Web Visitors Into Leads now.

If you'd like to unsubscribe click here