All through the summer of 1938, Britain & France believed that Adolf Hitler planned to strike at the Sudetenland - perhaps the whole of Czechoslovakia.

The Treaty of Versailles had left 3 million ethnic Germans residing in "Sudeten" - an economically valuable area, situated strategically amongst the Czech, German, and Austrian borders. Thus, Hitler sought to annex the land, where he would then control the area geographically centered in the middle of Europe.  

But first, Hitler would need a REASON to invade the Sudetenland.

Contrary to common belief, Adolf Hitler had no intention of starting a World War. The German mainstream population would never support it. In fact, many of Hitler's generals, having fought in the horrid trenches of World War I, were decidedly opposed to any type of military aggression unless Germany was first attacked.

Thus, Hitler cleverly determined brinksmanship would best serve his purpose: he would frighten the bordering countries into submission- using the German military as a last resort.

Now Josef Goebbels; Germany's famed propaganda minister, would step to the fore: He ordered the German press to commence a massive propaganda barrage against Czechoslovakia, preparing the German people for a possible invasion.

The German newspapers were filled with accounts of mass arrests of innocent Germans in the Sudetenland; there were the inevitable circumstantial stories by phantom German foreign correspondents.

Nonexistent people in nonexistent villages were being slaughtered. The Czech government attempted to refute the massive lies, but later gave up in abject despair.

Hitler had now been given his pretext for invasion:

 "The misery of the Sudeten Germans is without end," he declared. Hitler had promised that Germany would "take care of her own" and put an end to the continued oppression of 3 million Germans. "I hope that the foreign statesman will be convinced that these are not mere words," the Feuhrer added ominously.

Although his rhetorical tone was gravely threatening, Hitler cleverly gave NO EXAMPLES of Czech atrocities, letting one's imagination do his evil bidding.

Of course, we are aware of what happened next:

A frightened Neville Chamberlain (British Prime minister) sent off a terse telegram to Hitler..."Having regard to the increasingly critical situation, I propose to visit you immediately, in order to make an attempt to find a peaceful solution."

On September 29th, 1938 the Munich Conference was held. It was the sellout of Czechoslavakia to Adolf Hitler. Neville Chamberlain would go down as History's all time dupe, as he arrived back in England, blithely declaring... "Peace in our time!"

Hitler's victory was complete: the Sudetenland was his.

In March 1939, the Munich pact was nullified. The Germans invaded Czechoslovakia, and subsequently - believing the English and French had no will to fight - Hitler then invaded Poland on Sept.1, triggering the start of what would evolve into World War II.

But in the final analysis, historians have omitted the true origin of the war. It was not the infamous Munich Pact; it was not the Treaty of Versailles; and as previously mentioned, it was not Hitler's purposeful intention to initiate a world conflagration.

Without the righteous indignation of the German people - falsely led to believe that their Sudeten Aryan brothers were being beaten and murdered - Hitler knew his territorial ambitions would remain thwarted.

Indeed; what had started the whole conflict was the Nazi press; stirring up the German people with phony reasons to be angry; masterfully authored by propagandist-in-chief, Josef Goebbels.

But it would not be the first time that an evil despot had employed propaganda, and misled his people toward his own evil purposes - nor would it be the last. 

Which of course leads us to the present, and yet another intolerant despot, who would use the press to manipulate his own people, treating them condescendingly, as though no other belief - save his own- could exist.

EXAMPLE: Let's use Barack Obama's unofficial propaganda arm, the brown-nosers at the Associated Press, to depict the sophisticated - yet barely perceptive - line of baloney Obama uses to manipulate "the masses" about the "threat" of global warming.

NOTE: as we review the press release, we shall also stop to analyze:

(begin press release)

AP: President Barack Obama, in a speech Friday in Boston, said he believes "a consensus" is emerging in Congress on the climate issue. But he also accused some opponents of making "cynical claims that contradict the overwhelming scientific evidence" that the earth is becoming warmer in an attempt to derail legislation.'

Stop right there, being noteworthy of the two phrases, "the overwhelming scientific evidence"...and..."he accused some opponents of making cynical claims."

We, as Americans should be fearful of this demagogic liar: Is there overwhelming scientific evidence the climate has changed? Have you looked outside your window lately? Seen anything unusual?

Does Obama offer any examples of  this "overwhelming evidence"?

And what about Obama's accusations against opponents "making cynical claims"? Does that sound like proper rhetoric for an American president? Or is this not an exact PARALLEL to what Hitler did, in his takeover of the Sudetenland, without a shot being fired?

The similar methodologies of the two cannot be overlooked! Remove the goose-stepping militarism and Obama & Hitler seem virtual Siamese twins.

Just as Hitler gave no specific examples of Czech atrocities against dislocated Germans, Barack Obama offers no specific evidence of global warming. Just as Hitler let the tone of his rhetoric intimidate the British, Obama does exactly that, in his warning that any opposition is just "cynical claims to the contrary."

In retrospect, Hitler initiated a military conflict against his FOREIGN enemies. Barack Obama is fighting his own callous war against all DOMESTIC opposition - the comparison being that both dictators are (were) quite cunning in using the press as purveyors of their evil propaganda.

Face the stark reality America: Dictator Obama has now let it be known; he will tolerate no dissenters! Seig hiel!

But you're still not convinced? Let's proceed onward, using that same speech, as we pick up the second paragraph of the AP release:

(Quote)..."There are those who will suggest that moving toward clean energy will destroy our economy, when it's the system we currently have that endangers our prosperity, and prevents us from creating millions of new jobs," Obama told his audience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Again stop right there: Listen to this lunatic!

He not only seeks to intimidate all dissenting opinion, he is tacitly declaring war on our entire, conventional energy-based economy! Note how he cleverly adds the phrase..."prevents us from creating millions of new jobs."

Just as Hitler blamed the Jewish in the1930's for Germany's depression, Obama  scapegoats those who wish to maintain our economic (and energy) status quo; so WHERE is the difference?

Note how cleverly Obama ties it all into one brief speech:

He sets the premise that global warming is "scientific fact," then goes on to lend credence to the falsehood that if we don't immediately abandon fossil fuels, we imperil the great "green economy" that manipulator Obama declares is at hand.

Rejoice everyone! The great green energy revolution - and the jobs bonanza along with it - is on the way; and all we need do is begin building windmills, abandon coal and gasoline, and let those good times ROLL!

Is anyone stupid enough to believe this? Has there even been a more haughty, condescending radical in the Whitehouse? And worse, anyone who disagrees is to be marginalized as a cynic?

But you say you still don't believe that Obama is dangerous? Or that it's patently absurd that some dare compare him to Hitler? Well try on these brownshirts for size, and see if you're not convinced.

Herein folows an excerpt from Obama's campaign speech, on July 2, 2008, in Colorado Springs:

(QUOTE)..."We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Note: For those ignorant of World History, kindly google "brownshirts" and witness the stunning similarity in the objectives of Barack Obama vs. how Hitler rose to power in the mid 1930's.

But even the so-called "true reporters" of the news (Fox, and the big name conservative talkers) are remiss in calling a "spade a spade."  They also want not to be accused of "unfair comparisons" i.e. that Barack Obama in any way resembles Hitler

Barack Obama is the most intolerant president in U.S. history: he seeks to marginalize any who disagree, letting propangandist Rahm Emanuel go on Sunday morning political shows, to paint Fox as "not being a news organization."

Adolf Hitler did the same thing - but quicker...he would "liquidate" any who opposed him.

Barack Obama has stifled truth, intimidated his opponents, and sued his way to the Whitehouse; Hitler won an election in 1933, by the same basic path, with the focus being on INTIMIDATION.  

Barack Obama is the most secretive president in U.S. history: like Hitler once did, he works exclusively behind closed doors - clandestinely plotting his socialist takeover of America.

But the salient point is this: Hitler was a power-mad lunatic, who manipulated the press, used his militaristic National Socialism Party to take over Germany, but was then thwarted in his futile attempt to conquer the world.

Now - similar to an algebra problem- take out the above "militaristic" part, and "substitute" for Hitler. Does not the name of Barack Obama fit the equation rather nicely?

Obama may not be out to conquer the world, but complete government control of the U.S. economy isn't a bad place to start.