The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Unz Archive
American Pravda: Post-War France and Post-War Germany
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
germany-must-perish

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Back in Junior High School I became an avid war-gamer, and was fascinated by the military history of the past, especially World War II, the most titanic conflict ever recorded. However, although I much enjoyed reading the detailed accounts of the battles of that war, especially on the Eastern Front that largely determined its outcome, I had much less interest in the accompanying political history, and simply relied upon the accounts in my standard textbooks, which I considered quite reliable.

Supporting that strong impression, these sources hardly seemed to hide some of the uglier aspects of the conflict and its aftermath, such as the notable brutalities visited upon pro-Nazi turncoats following the Liberation of France in 1944. Pierre Laval, head of the puppet Vichy government and quite a number of his fellow quislings were tried and executed for their treason, and even Marshal Petain, the renowned French World War I hero who in his dotage had sadly lent his name to the hated regime as its head of state, was condemned to death, though his life was eventually spared. Less prominent collaborators suffered as well, with my books often carrying photos of some of the hundreds or thousands of ordinary French women who for fear, love, or money had become intimate with German soldiers during the four years of occupation, and as a consequence had their heads shaved and were marched through the streets of their towns or cities in parades of shame.

Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control. For example, there was the notorious case of Oradour-sur-Glane, a village involved in Resistance activities, in which many hundreds of men, women, and children were herded into a church and other buildings and burned alive. Meanwhile, enormous numbers of Frenchmen and others had been deported to wartime Germany as slave-laborers, in total violation of every legal principle, producing an uncanny parallel to Stalin’s Gulag and underscoring the similarity of those two totalitarian regimes. This, at least, had always been my limited impression of that very unfortunate era.

Eventually, major cracks in this simple picture began appearing. I have previously written of my discovery of John T. Flynn, one of America’s most prominent liberal public intellectuals throughout the 1930s, who was then purged from the mainstream media and eventually forgotten for his discordant views on certain contentious issues. From the early 1940s onward, Flynn’s books only found a home at the Devin-Adair Company, a small Irish-American publishing house based in New York City. Somehow or other, perhaps six or seven years ago I became aware of another book released by that same press in 1953.

ORDER IT NOW

The author of Unconditional Hatred was Captain Russell Grenfell, a British naval officer who had served with distinction in the First World War, and later helped direct the Royal Navy Staff College, while publishing six highly-regarded books on naval strategy and serving as the Naval Correspondent of the Daily Telegraph. Grenfell recognized that great quantities of extreme propaganda almost inevitably accompany any major war, but with several years having passed since the close of hostilities, he was growing concerned that unless an antidote were soon widely applied, the lingering poison of such wartime exaggerations might threaten the future peace of Europe.

His considerable historical erudition and his reserved academic tone shine through in this fascinating volume, which focuses primarily upon the events of the two world wars, but often contains digressions into the Napoleonic conflicts or even earlier ones. One of the intriguing aspects of his discussion is that much of the anti-German propaganda he seeks to debunk would today be considered so absurd and ridiculous it has been almost entirely forgotten, while much of the extremely hostile picture we currently have of Hitler’s Germany receives almost no mention whatsoever, possibly because it had not yet been established or was then still considered too outlandish for anyone to take seriously. Among other matters, he reports with considerable disapproval that leading British newspapers had carried headlined articles about the horrific tortures that were being inflicted upon German prisoners at war crimes trials in order to coerce all sorts of dubious confessions out of them.

Some of Grenfell’s casual claims do raise doubts about various aspects of our conventional picture of German occupation policies. He notes numerous stories in the British press of former French “slave-laborers” who later organized friendly post-war reunions with their erstwhile German employers. He also states that in 1940 those same British papers had reported the absolutely exemplary behavior of German soldiers toward French civilians, though after terroristic attacks by Communist underground forces provoked reprisals, relations often grew much worse.

Most importantly, he points out that the huge Allied strategic bombing campaign against French cities and industry had killed huge numbers of civilians, probably far more than had ever died at German hands, and thereby provoked a great deal of hatred as an inevitable consequence. At Normandy he and other British officers had been warned to remain very cautious among any French civilians they encountered for fear they might be subject to deadly attacks.

Although Grenfell’s content and tone strike me as exceptionally even-handed and objective, others surely viewed his text in a very different light. The Devin-Adair jacket-flap notes that no British publisher was willing to accept the manuscript, and when the book appeared no major American reviewer recognized its existence. Even more ominously, Grenfell is described as having been hard at work on a sequel when he suddenly died in 1954 of unknown causes, and his lengthy obituary in the London Times gives his age as 62. With the copyright having long lapsed, I am pleased to include this important volume in my collection of HTML Books so that those interested can easily read it and decide for themselves.

 

ORDER IT NOW

On French matters, Grenfell provides several extended references to a 1952 book entitled France: The Tragic Years, 1939-1947 by Sisley Huddleston, an author totally unfamiliar to me, and this whet my curiosity. One helpful use of my content-archiving system is to easily provide the proper context for long-forgotten writers, and Huddleston’s scores of appearances in The Atlantic Monthly, The Nation, and The New Republic, plus his thirty well-regarded books on France, seem to confirm that he spent decades as one of the leading interpreters of France to educated American and British readers. Indeed, his exclusive interview with British Prime Minister Lloyd George at the Paris Peace Conference became an international scoop. As with so many other writers, after World War II his American publisher necessarily became Devin-Adair, which released a posthumous 1955 edition of his book. Given his eminent journalistic credentials, Huddleston’s work on the Vichy period was reviewed in American periodicals, although in rather cursory and dismissive fashion, and I ordered a copy and read it.

I cannot attest to the correctness of Huddleston’s 350 page account of France during the war years and immediately after, but as a very distinguished journalist and longtime observer who was an eyewitness to the events he describes, writing at a time when the official historical narrative had not yet hardened into concrete, I do think that his views should be taken quite seriously. Huddleston’s personal circle certainly extended quite high, with former U.S. Ambassador William Bullitt being one of his oldest friends. And without doubt Huddleston’s presentation is radically different from the conventional story I had always heard.

Judging the credibility of a source from such a distance in time is not easy, but sometimes a single telling detail provides an important clue. In revisiting Huddleston’s book, I noticed he casually mentioned that in Spring 1940 the French and British had been on the very verge of a military attack against Soviet Russia, which they regarded as Germany’s crucial ally, and planned an assault on Baku, intending to destroy Stalin’s great oil fields of the Caucasus by a strategic bombing campaign. I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked. But just a couple of weeks ago, I discovered a 2015 article in The National Interest confirming these exact facts, over seventy years after they had understandably been expunged from all of our mainstream historical narratives.

As Huddleston describes things, the French army collapsed in May of 1940, and the government desperately recalled Petain, then in his mid-80s and the country’s greatest war hero, from his posting as the Ambassador to Spain. Soon he was asked by the French President to form a new government and arrange an armistice with the victorious Germans, and this proposal received near-unanimous support from France’s National Assembly and Senate, including the backing of virtually all the leftist parliamentarians. Petain achieved this result, and another near-unanimous vote of the French parliament then authorized him to negotiate a full peace treaty with Germany, which certainly placed his political actions on the strongest possible legal basis. At that point, almost everyone in Europe believed that the war was essentially over, with Britain soon to make peace.

While Petain’s fully-legitimate French government was negotiating with Germany, a small number of diehards, including Col. Charles de Gaulle, deserted from the army and fled aboard, declaring that they intended to continue the war indefinitely, but they initially attracted minimal support or attention. One interesting aspect of the situation was that De Gaulle had long been one of Petain’s leading proteges, and once his political profile began rising a couple of years later, there were often quiet speculations that he and his old mentor had arranged a “division of labor,” with the one making an official peace with the Germans while the other left to become the center of overseas resistance in the uncertain event that different opportunities arose.

Although Petain’s new French government guaranteed that its powerful navy would never be used against the British, Churchill took no chances, and quickly launched an attack on the fleet of its erstwhile ally, whose ships were already disarmed and helplessly moored in port, sinking most of them, and killing up to 2,000 Frenchmen in the process. This incident was not entirely dissimilar to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor the following year, and rankled the French for many years to come.

Huddleston then spends much of the book discussing the complex French politics of the next few years, as the war unexpectedly continued, with Russia and America eventually joining the Allied cause, greatly raising the odds against a German victory. During this period, the French political and military leadership performed a difficult balancing act, resisting German demands on some points and acquiescing to them on others, while the internal Resistance movement gradually grew, attacking German soldiers and provoking harsh German reprisals. Given my lack of expertise, I cannot really judge the accuracy of his political narrative, but it seems quite realistic and plausible to me, though specialists might surely find fault.

However, the most remarkable claims in Huddleston’s book come towards the end, as he describes what eventually became known as “the Liberation of France” during 1944-45 when the retreating German forces abandoned the country and pulled back to their own borders. Among other things, he suggests that the number of Frenchmen claiming “Resistance” credentials grew as much as a hundred-fold once the Germans had left and there was no longer any risk in adopting that position.

And at that point, enormous bloodshed soon began, by far the worst wave of extra-judicial killings in all of French history. Most historians agree that around 20,000 lives were lost in the notorious “Reign of Terror” during the French Revolution and perhaps 18,000 died during the Paris Commune of 1870-71 and its brutal suppression. But according to Huddleston the American leaders estimated there were at least 80,000 “summary executions” in just the first few months after Liberation, while the Socialist Deputy who served as Interior Minister in March 1945 and would have been in the best position to know, informed De Gaulle’s representatives that 105,000 killings had taken place just from August 1944 to March 1945, a figure that was widely quoted in public circles at the time.

Since a large fraction of the entire French population had spent years behaving in ways that now suddenly might be considered “collaborationist,” enormous numbers of people were vulnerable, even at risk of death, and they sometimes sought to save their own lives by denouncing their acquaintances or neighbors. Underground Communists had long been a major element of the Resistance, and many of them eagerly retaliated against their hated “class enemies,” while numerous individuals took the opportunity to settle private scores. Another factor was that many of the Communists who had fought in the Spanish Civil War, including thousands of the members of the International Brigades, had fled to France after their military defeat in 1938, and now often took the lead in enacting vengeance against the same sort of conservative forces who had previously vanquished them in their own country.

Although Huddleston himself was an elderly, quite distinguished international journalist with very highly placed American friends, and he had performed some minor services on behalf of the Resistance leadership, he and his wife narrowly escaped summary execution during that period, and he provides a collection of the numerous stories he heard of less fortunate victims. But what appears to have been by far the worst sectarian bloodshed in French history has been soothingly rechristened “the Liberation” and almost entirely removed from our historical memory, except for the famously shaved heads of a few disgraced women. These days Wikipedia constitutes the congealed distillation of our Official Truth, and its entry on those events puts the death toll at barely one-tenth the figures quoted by Huddleston, but I find him a far more credible source.

 

Often knocking the first hole in a mighty wall is the most difficult. Once I became persuaded that my entire understanding of the post-war history of France was entirely wrong and to some extent backward, I naturally became much more open to further revelations. If France—a leading member of the victorious Allied coalition of World War II—had actually suffered an unprecedented orgy of revolutionary terror and killings, perhaps my standard history had also been less than totally candid in its description of defeated Germany’s fate. I had certainly read of the horrors inflicted by Russian troops, with perhaps two million German women and girls brutally raped, and there was also a sentence or two about the expulsion of many millions of ethnic Germans from the lands controlled by Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other Eastern European countries vengeful after their years under the terrible Nazi yoke. There was also some mention of the remarkably vindictive Morgenthau Plan, fortunately almost immediately abandoned, and a focus on the German economic rebirth under the generosity of America’s Marshall Plan. But I began to wonder if there was actually more to the story.

I soon came across references to some of the writings of Freda Utley, now largely forgotten, but once a fairly prominent author and journalist in the America of the 1940s and 1950s, with an interesting personal background. Born an Englishwoman in a family connected with George Bernard Shaw and the Fabians, she took up Communism and in 1928 married a Soviet Jew of a similar ideological persuasion, with the couple then moving to the Soviet Union to help build the Motherland of the Socialist Revolution. As was the case with so many foreign Communists, they grew increasingly disillusioned with their lives there until one day in 1936 her husband was arrested in a Stalinist purge, never to be seen again. She eventually fled the USSR with her infant son Jon, reaching our shores in 1939. Almost seventy years later, I became acquainted with Jon Utley through our mutual involvement in The American Conservative magazine.

Given Utley’s first-hand experiences from a decade in the USSR, her views on Soviet Communism were decidedly negative, very different from that of most of America’s intellectual and journalistic elite. As a consequence, she was quickly tagged as an “anti-Communist,” and her numerous subsequent books and articles over the next couple of decades were generally relegated to publishers of that orientation, viewed with disfavor by mainstream media outlets.

ORDER IT NOW

In 1948 she spent several months traveling around Occupied Germany, and the following year published her experiences in The High Cost of Vengeance, which I found eye-opening. Unlike the vast majority of other American journalists, who generally took brief, heavily-chaperoned visits, Utley actually spoke German and was quite familiar with the country, having frequently visited it during the Weimar Era. Whereas Grenfell’s discussion was highly restrained and almost academic in its tone, her own writing was considerably more strident and emotional, hardly surprising given her direct encounter with extremely distressing subject matter. Her eyewitness testimony seemed quite credible, and the factual information she provided, buttressed by numerous interviews and anecdotal observations, was gripping.

More than three years after the end of hostilities, Utley encountered a land still almost totally ruined, with large portions of the population forced to seek shelter in damaged basements or share tiny rooms in broken buildings. The population regarded itself as being “without rights,” often subject to arbitrary treatment by occupation troops or other privileged elements, who stood completely outside the legal jurisdiction of the regular local police. Germans in large numbers were regularly removed from their homes, which were used to billet American troops or others who found favor with them, a situation that had been noted with some outrage in Gen. George Patton’s posthumously published diaries. Even at this point, a foreign soldier might still sometimes seize anything he wanted from German civilians, with potentially dangerous consequences if they protested the theft. Utley tellingly quotes a former German soldier who had served occupation duties in France and remarked that he and his comrades had operated under strictest discipline and could never have imagined behaving toward French civilians in the manner that current Allied troops now treated German ones.

Some of Utley’s quoted claims are quite astonishing, but seem solidly based on reputable sources and fully confirmed elsewhere. Throughout the first three years of peacetime, the daily food ration allocated to Germany’s entire civilian population was roughly 1550 calories, approximately the same as that provided to the inmates of German concentration camps during the war recently ended, and it sometimes dropped far, far lower. During the difficult winter of 1946-47, the entire population of the Ruhr, Germany’s industrial heartland, had only received starvation rations of 700-800 calories per day, and even lower levels were sometimes reached.

Influenced by hostile official propaganda, the widespread attitude of Allied personnel towards ordinary Germans was certainly as bad as anything faced by the natives living under a European colonial regime. Time and again, Utley notes the remarkable parallels with the treatment and attitude she had previously seen Westerners take towards the native Chinese during most of the 1930s, or that the British had expressed to their Indian colonial subjects. Small German boys, shoeless, destitute, and hungry, eagerly retrieved balls at American sporting-clubs for a tiny pittance. Today it is sometimes disputed whether American cities during the late 19th century actually contained signs reading “No Irish Need Apply,” but Utley certainly saw signs reading “No Dogs or Germans Allowed” outside numerous establishments frequented by Allied personnel.

Based on my standard history textbooks, I had always believed that there existed a total night-and-day difference in the behavior toward local civilians between the German troops who occupied France from 1940-44 and the Allied troops who occupied Germany from 1945 onward. After reading the detailed accounts of Utley and other contemporaneous sources, I think my opinion was absolutely correct, but with the direction reversed.

 

Utley believed part of the reason for this utterly disastrous situation was deliberate American government policy. Although the Morgenthau Plan—aimed at eliminating half or so of Germany’s population—had been officially abandoned and replaced with the Marshall Plan promoting German revival, she found that many aspects of the former actually still held sway in practice. Even as late as 1948, huge portions of the German industrial base continued to be dismantled and shipped off to other countries while very tight restrictions on German production and exports remained in place. Indeed, the level of poverty, misery, and oppression she saw everywhere almost seemed deliberately calculated to turn ordinary Germans against America and its Western allies, perhaps opening the door to Communist sympathies. Such suspicions are certainly strengthened when we consider that this system had been devised by Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent.

She is especially scathing about the total perversion of any basic notions of human justice during the Nuremberg Tribunal and various other war crime trials, a subject to which she devotes two full chapters. These judicial proceedings exhibited the worst sort of legal double-standards, with leading Allied judges explicitly stating that their own countries were not at all bound by the same international legal conventions which they claimed to be enforcing against German defendants. Even more shocking were some of the measures used, with outraged American jurists and journalists revealing that horrific torture, threats, blackmail, and other entirely illegitimate means were regularly employed to obtain confessions or denunciations of others, a situation that strongly suggested a very considerable number of those condemned and hanged were entirely innocent.

Her book also gives substantial coverage to the organized expulsions of ethnic Germans from Silesia, the Sudatenland, East Prussia, and various other parts of Central and Eastern Europe where they had peacefully lived for many centuries, with the total number of such expellees generally estimated at 13 to 15 million. Families were sometimes given as little as ten minutes to leave the homes in which they had resided for a century or more, then forced to march off on foot, sometimes for hundreds of miles, towards a distant land they had never seen, with their only possessions being what they could carry in their own hands. In some cases, any surviving menfolk were separated out and shipped off to slave-labor camps, thereby producing an exodus consisting solely of women, children, and the very elderly. All estimates were that at least a couple million perished along the way, from hunger, illness, or exposure.

These days we endlessly read painful discussions of the notorious “Trail of Tears” suffered by the Cherokees in the distant past of the early 19th century, but this rather similar 20th Century event was nearly a thousand-fold larger in size. Despite this huge discrepancy in magnitude and far greater distance in time, I would guess that the former event may command a thousand times the public awareness among ordinary Americans. If so, this would demonstrate that overwhelming media control can easily shift perceived reality by a factor of a million or more.

The population movement certainly seems to have represented the largest ethnic-cleansing in the history of the world, and if the Germany had ever done anything even remotely similar during its years of European victories and conquests, the visually-gripping scenes of such an enormous flood of desperate, trudging refugees would surely have become a centerpiece of numerous World War II movies of the last seventy years. But since nothing like that ever happened, Hollywood screenwriters lost a tremendous opportunity.

 

ORDER IT NOW

Utley’s extremely grim portrayal is strongly corroborated by numerous other sources. In 1946, Victor Gollanz, a prominent British publisher from a Socialistic Jewish background, took an extended visit to Germany, and published In Darkest Germany the following year, recounting his enormous horror at the conditions he discovered there. His claims of the appalling malnutrition, illness, and total destitution were supported by over a hundred chilling photographs, and the introduction to the American edition was written by University of Chicago President Robert M. Hutchins, one of our most reputable public intellectuals of that era. But his slim volume seems to have attracted relatively little attention in the American mainstream media, although his somewhat similar book Our Threatened Values, published the previous year and based upon information from official sources had received a little more. Gruesome Harvest by Ralph Franklin Keeling, also published in 1947, helpfully gathers together a large number of official statements and reports from major media outlets, which generally support exactly this same picture of the first few years of Germany under Allied occupation.

ORDER IT NOW

During the 1970 and 1980s this distressing topic was taken up by Alfred M. de Zayas, who held a Harvard Law degree and doctorate in history, and served a long and illustrious career as a leading international human rights lawyer long affiliated with the United Nations. His books such as Nemesis at Potsdam, A Terrible Revenge, and The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1945 especially focused on the massive ethnic cleansing of the German minorities, and were based on great quantities of archival research. They received considerable scholarly praise and notice in major academic journals and sold hundreds of thousands of copies in Germany and other parts of Europe, but hardly seem to have penetrated the consciousness of America or the rest of the English-speaking world.

 

ORDER IT NOW

In the late 1980s this smoldering historical debate took a remarkable new turn. While visiting France during 1986 in preparation for an unrelated book, a Canadian writer named James Bacque stumbled upon clues suggesting that one of the most terrible secrets of post-war Germany had long remained completely hidden, and he soon embarked upon extensive research into the subject, finally publishing Other Losses in 1989. Based upon very considerable evidence, including government records, personal interviews, and recorded eyewitness testimony, he argued that after the end of the war, the Americans had starved to death as many as a million German POWs, seemingly as a deliberate act of policy, a war crime that would surely rank among the greatest in history.

For decades, Western propagandists had relentlessly barraged the Soviets with claims that they were keeping back a million or more “missing” German POWs as slave-laborers in their Gulag, while the Soviets had endlessly denied these accusations. According to Bacque, the Soviets had been telling the truth all along, and the missing soldiers had been among the enormous numbers who had fled westward near the end of the war, seeking what they assumed would be far better treatment at the hands of the advancing Anglo-American armies. But instead, they were denied all normal legal protections, and confined under horrible conditions where they rapidly perished of hunger, illness, and exposure.

Without attempting to summarize Bacque’s extensive accumulation of supporting material, a few of his factual elements are worth mentioning. At the close of hostilities, the American government employed circuitous legal reasoning to argue that the many millions of German troops that they had captured should not be considered “prisoners of war” and therefore were not covered by the provisions of the Geneva Convention. Soon afterward, attempts by the International Red Cross to provide food shipments to the enormous Allied prison camps were repeatedly rejected, and notices were posted throughout the nearby German towns and villages that any civilian who attempted to smuggle food to the desperate POWs might be shot on sight. These undeniable historical facts do seem to suggest certain dark possibilities.

Although initially released by an obscure publisher, Bacque’s book soon became a sensation and an international best-seller. He paints Gen. Dwight Eisenhower as the central culprit behind the tragedy, noting the far lower POW losses in areas outside his control, and suggests that as a highly ambitious “political general” of German-American ancestry, he may have been under intense pressure to demonstrate his “harshness” toward the defeated Wehrmacht foe.

ORDER IT NOW

Historian Stephen Ambrose, who had made a lucrative career by churning out numerous hagiographic volumes on Eisenhower and World War II aided by his widespread plagiarism, reacted in horror at Bacque’s claims, and quickly organized a symposium volume under the auspices of the Eisenhower Center, hoping to rebut the monstrous accusations that had been levied against his personal meal-ticket. But although I felt that he and the wide assortment of co-authors he conscripted into his project did raise some valid doubts about portions of Bacque’s evidence, they seemed unable to effectively challenge the bulk of it, except perhaps by arguing that something so enormous could not possibly have been kept hidden for so long. Moreover, Ambrose and his colleagues grudgingly admitted the official American statistics of POW mortality rates—which none of them had ever previously questioned—were impossibly low, but chose to resolve this difficulty by rather arbitrarily quadrupling those figures, which hardly raises great confidence in their methods.

Furthermore, once the Cold War ended and the Soviet Archives were open to scholars, their contents seem to have strongly validated Bacque’s thesis. He notes that although the archives do contain explicit evidence of such long-denied atrocities as Stalin’s Katyn Forest massacre of Poland’s officer corps, they show absolutely no signs of any million missing German POWs, who instead had very likely ended their lives in the starvation and illness of Eisenhower’s death camps. Bacque points out that the German government has issued severe legal threats against anyone seeking to investigate the likely sites of the mass graves that might hold the remains of those long-dead POWs, and in an updated edition, he also mentions Germany’s enactment of harsh new laws meting out heavy prison sentences to anyone who merely questions the official narrative of World War II.

Bacque ironically notes that the Soviet archival records of their own German POWs show a reasonably high but generally normal death rate across the years of captivity, with nothing like the huge losses that apparently occurred so quickly in the Western camps on German soil, and this was despite the far greater poverty of the post-war USSR. But we should really not regard this fact as so surprising. Stalin, a Georgian, reigned as the Soviet autarch, and in the past he had freely ordered the deaths of vast numbers of his own subjects, Russian or not, in order to enforce his rule. The Germans had opposed and fought him as well, and they had suffered greatly for it, but once their resistance was ended and they were now under his power, why would he feel especially punitive towards them? Friedrich von Paulus, the Field Marshal who had commanded at Stalingrad, later declared his loyalty to the Soviets and was given a post of honor in the new East Germany, so ordinary POWs who obeyed and worked productively would certainly be fed.

Although now quite elderly, a couple of years ago Bacque gave a lengthy interview to Red Ice Radio, and those interested may listen to it on YouTube, which also hosts various other video presentations on the same subject:

 

ORDER IT NOW

Bacque’s discussion of the new evidence of the Kremlin archives constitutes a relatively small portion of his 1997 sequel, Crimes and Mercies, which centered around an even more explosive analysis, and also became an international best-seller.

As described above, first-hand observers of post-war Germany in 1947 and 1948 such as Gollanz and Utley, had directly reported on the horrific conditions they discovered, and stated that for years official food rations for the entire population had been comparable to that of the inmates of Nazi concentration camps and sometimes far lower, leading to the widespread malnutrition and illness they witnessed all around them. They also noted the destruction of most of Germany’s pre-war housing stock and the severe overcrowding produced by the influx of so many millions of pitiful ethnic German refugees expelled from other parts of Central and Eastern Europe. But these visitors lacked any access to solid population statistics, and could only speculate upon the enormous human death toll that hunger and illness had already inflicted, and which would surely continue if policies were not quickly changed.

Years of archival research by Bacque attempt to answer this question, and the conclusion he provides is certainly not a pleasant one. Both the Allied military government and the later German civilian authorities seem to have made a concerted effort to hide or obscure the true scale of the calamity visited upon German civilians during the years 1945-1950, and the official mortality statistics found in government reports are simply too fantastical to possibly be correct, although they became the basis for the subsequent histories of that period. Bacque notes that these figures suggest that the death rate during the terrible conditions of 1947, long remembered as the “Hunger Year” (Hungerjahr) and vividly described in Gollancz’s account, was actually lower than that of the prosperous Germany of the late 1960s. Furthermore, private reports by American officials, mortality rates from individual localities, and other strong evidence demonstrate that these long-accepted aggregate numbers were essentially fictional.

Instead, Bacque attempts to provide more realistic estimates based upon an examination of the population totals of the various German censuses together with the recorded influx of the huge number of German refugees. Based upon this simple analysis, he makes a reasonably strong case that the excess German deaths during that period amounted to at least around 10 million, and possibly many millions more. Furthermore, he provides substantial evidence that the starvation was either deliberate or at least enormously worsened by American government resistance to overseas food relief efforts. Perhaps these numbers should not be so totally surprising given that the official Morgenthau Plan had envisioned the elimination of around 20 million Germans, and as Bacque demonstrates, top American leaders quietly agreed to continue that policy in practice even while they renounced it in theory.

Assuming these numbers are even remotely correct, the implications are quite remarkable. The toll of the human catastrophe experienced in post-war Germany would certainly rank among the greatest in modern peacetime history, far exceeding the deaths that occurred during the Ukrainian Famine of the early 1930s and possibly even approaching the wholly unintentional losses during Mao’s Great Leap Forward of 1959-61. Furthermore, the post-war German losses would vastly outrank either of these other unfortunate events in percentage terms and this would remain true even if the Bacque’s estimates are considerably reduced. Yet I doubt if even a small fraction of one percent of Americans are today aware of this enormous human calamity. Presumably memories are much stronger in Germany itself, but given the growing legal crackdown on discordant views in that unfortunate country, I suspect that anyone who discusses the topic too energetically risks immediate imprisonment.

To a considerable extent, this historical ignorance has been heavily fostered by our governments, often using underhanded or even nefarious means. Just like in the old decaying USSR, much of the current political legitimacy of today’s American government and its various European vassal-states is founded upon a particular narrative history of World War II, and challenging that narrative might produce dire political consequences. Bacque credibly relates some of the apparent efforts to dissuade any major newspaper or magazine from running articles discussing the startling findings of his first book, thereby imposing a “blackout” aimed at absolutely minimizing any media coverage. Such measures seem to have been quite effective, since until eight or nine years ago, I’m not sure I had ever heard a word of these shocking ideas, and I have certainly never seen them seriously discussed in any of the numerous newspapers or magazines that I have carefully read over the last three decades.

Even illegal means were employed to hinder the efforts of this solitary, determined scholar. At times, Bacque’s phone-lines were tapped, his mail intercepted, and his research materials surreptitiously copied, while his access to some official archives was blocked. Some of the elderly eyewitnesses who personally corroborated his analysis received threatening notes and had their property vandalized.

In his Foreword to this 1997 book, De Zayas, the eminent international human rights attorney, praised Bacque’s ground-breaking research, and hoped that it would soon lead to a major scholarly debate aimed at reassessing the true facts of these historical events that had taken place a half-century earlier. But in his update to the 2007 edition, he expressed some outrage that no such discussion ever occurred, and instead the German government merely passed a series of harsh laws mandating prison sentences for anyone who substantially disputed the settled narrative of World War II and its immediate aftermath, perhaps by overly focusing on the suffering of German civilians.

Although both of Bacque’s books became international best-sellers, the near-complete absence of any secondary media coverage ensured that they never entered public awareness with anything more than a pinprick. Another important factor is the tremendously disproportionate reach of print and electronic media. A best-seller may be read by many tens of thousands of people, but a successful film might reach tens of millions, and so long as Hollywood churns out endless movies denouncing Germany’s atrocities but not a single one on the other side, the true facts of that history are hardly likely to gain much traction. I strongly suspect that far more people today believe in the real-life existence of Batman and Spiderman than are even aware of the Bacque Hypothesis.

 

In assessing the political factors that apparently produced such an enormous and seemingly deliberate death toll among German civilians long after the fighting had ended, an important point should be made. Historians seeking to demonstrate Hitler’s enormous wickedness or to suggest his knowledge of various crimes committed during the course of the Second World War are regularly forced to sift tens of thousands of his printed words for a suggestive phrase here and there, and then interpret these vague allusions as absolutely conclusive declarative statements. Those who fail to stretch the words to fit, such as renowned historian David Irving, will sometimes see their careers destroyed as a consequence.

ORDER IT NOW

But as early as 1940, an American Jew named Theodore Kaufman became so enraged at what he regarded as Hitler’s mistreatment of German Jewry that he published a short book evocatively entitled Germany Must Perish!, in which he explicitly proposed the total extermination of the German people. And that book apparently received favorable if perhaps not entirely serious discussion in many of our most prestigious media outlets, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Time Magazine. If such sentiments were being freely expressed in certain quarters even before America’s actual entrance into the military conflict, then perhaps the long-hidden policies that Bacque seems to have uncovered should not be so totally shocking to us.

Cynics have sometimes noted that one ironic aspect of Hollywood fare both in television and film is the overwhelming anti-realism regularly displayed on topics carrying a strong ideological tinge. Action movies invariably show small females easily knocking around numerous large male antagonists with well-timed blows and kicks, while blacks are quite frequently portrayed as brilliant scientists and scholars but only very rarely as street criminals or hoodlums. So some three generations after V-E Day, perhaps the still continuing stream of World War II films portraying Germans in a particular light should be best understood in these terms.

Related Reading:

 
• Category: History • Tags: American Pravda, France, Germany, World War II 
The American Pravda Series
Hide 507 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. This short video of American GIs executing German POWs is of interest:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rod1963
    Quite true.

    My father(now deceased) was a WWII veteran(3ID, 3rd cavalry recce - provisional ) who saw action in North Africa, Sicily and Southern Italy He also served in the occupation of Germany after the war in the Constabulary. He saw the occupation first hand and could attest to much what Unz has written, plus a lot more. Oddly enough the Starts & Stripes for that era was never put on-line and there is a reason for it.

    Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar. Quartering of American troops - especially officers and NCO's in German homes was the norm.

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn't want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW's to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn't. They should have. No one would have missed them.

    Rules of war weren't really followed. At Monte Casino, allied commanders imported a contingent of Moroccan colonial troops who proceeded to rape and pillage the Italian countryside with the approval of French Army authorities. Sophia Loren even had a movie made about their crimes.

    BTW my old man was a big fan of Col. Hackworth, whom he admired.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. The lies and fabrications that led to WW1 are detailed here

    http://www.vlib.us/wwi/resources/archives/texts/t050824i/ponsonby.html

    and Stephen Gowans drew attention to it in 2002

    http://www3.sympatico.ca/sr.gowans/ponsonby.html

    to no avail, as we all know. Hope you have better luck Mr. Unz.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. ‘…I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked…’

    The Baku attack, while perhaps not given due emphasis, has never been covered up. I was certainly aware of the project, and there was even a published poem of the period that referred to it, called ‘the Map Game’ if I recall aright. Something about ‘bombs on Batum’, and a reference to Baku.

    It all came to naught, first, because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, and secondly, because to mount such a strike it would have been necessary to overfly Turkey, and Turkey wouldn’t give her permission.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WHAT
    With the penetration soviet intelligence enjoyed then, Stalin would have known not just the day, but hour. Nothing would come back.

    Besides, say they succeeded, now what? Hitler still would have access to oil through Hungary.
    , @jilles dykstra
    " because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, "

    Churchill did, his plan to occupy neutral Norway and the northern part of neutral Sweden
    , @David In TN
    The proposed Baku attack was mentioned by William L. Shirer in his 1969 book, "The Collapse of the Third Republic."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. ‘…Stalin, a Georgian, reigned as the Soviet autarch, and in the past he had freely ordered the deaths of vast numbers of his own subjects, Russian or not, in order to enforce his rule. The Germans had opposed and fought him as well, and they had suffered greatly for it, but once their resistance was ended and they were now under his power, why would he feel especially punitive towards them? ‘

    Meh. The thesis that few German P.O.W.’s died at Soviet hands and that therefore, they died in American hands, will need a better defence.

    I am, for example, aware that of the ninety thousand Germans who surrendered at Stalingrad, only five thousand survived to return from captivity. While of course these were in extremely poor condition when they were captured, and conditions for POW’s in wartime Russia may well have been much worse than those encountered by those who surrendered in 1945, such figures hardly argue for a high survival rate for German POW’s in general.

    Russian treatment of German civilians who fell into their hands was also appalling. I’ve read that one hundred thousand civilians were alive in Konigsberg when it surrendered, but only twenty five thousand lived to be deported to the West. Again, the numbers don’t suggest that we should take it on faith that military POW’s in Russia enjoyed a high survival rate.

    It’s perfectly possible a million German POW’s died while in Soviet hands. I’m open to the possibility of American misconduct, but we can’t simply blame all dead unaccounted for on the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Per/Norway
    you need to read more real history, i bet Iran is the biggest sponsor of terror in ur eyes to...
    i hope you study before you answer next time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. WHAT says:

    That is a lot of reading, thanks.

    On a tangential note, there is nothing uniquely ukrainian about soviet-made famine of 30′s, and it was never seen as such before 90′s, when now “independent” Ukraine attempted to create a brand, directly aping Holocaust brand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The Ukrainian famine was well known in the 1930s when it happened and has been well known ever since.

    Walter Duranty and other American communists journalists in Russia at the time covered up.

    Other American communist journalists in Russia at the time exposed the famine as soon as they left Russia.

    If you are interested read Assignment in Utopia and other books by Eugene Lyon about conditions in Russia and Ukraine during the genocidal famine.

    I’ve read plenty of pro communist books written about the famine blaming the evil capitalist Kulaks for trying to keep some food for themselves.
    , @my2cents
    There was NO Holomodor in the 30s. That was an invention by American publisher William Randolph Hearst. He is known to have said "Give me a picture and I write you a story, The photos were from the 1921 famine. It was pure fabrication.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. WHAT says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked...'

    The Baku attack, while perhaps not given due emphasis, has never been covered up. I was certainly aware of the project, and there was even a published poem of the period that referred to it, called 'the Map Game' if I recall aright. Something about 'bombs on Batum', and a reference to Baku.

    It all came to naught, first, because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, and secondly, because to mount such a strike it would have been necessary to overfly Turkey, and Turkey wouldn't give her permission.

    With the penetration soviet intelligence enjoyed then, Stalin would have known not just the day, but hour. Nothing would come back.

    Besides, say they succeeded, now what? Hitler still would have access to oil through Hungary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. ‘…Based upon this simple analysis, he makes a reasonably strong case that the excess German deaths during that period amounted to at least around 10 million, and possibly many millions more…’

    Again, meh. Just arbitrarily, what we have here is whitewash, followed by exaggerated revisionism.

    If there had been ten million deaths, we’d have pictures of mountains of corpses and grotesquely emaciated survivors.

    We don’t. I’ll leave aside deaths from Red Army atrocities in the East — those could come to several million, although we’ll never know. For actual excess deaths within occupied Germany within its post-Potsdam borders, I think ten million is improbable. Conditions could have been very horrific, and occupation policy incredibly brutal, and we might well have had a million — but not ten million — excess deaths.

    I’m vaguely reminded of the rather silly estimate of ten million (‘or more’) deaths attributed to King Leopold’s Congo Free State in King Leopold’s Ghost. Careful consideration usually makes it clear that while things were no doubt awful, the death toll just wasn’t as high as some are tempted to claim.

    At a guess, somewhere between the whitewash and the sensationalistic revision lies the less impressive but still quite grim truth. Five hundred thousand? Four million? Someone should look into it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I’ve always just assumed that the tales of King Leopold’s atrocities in Congo were just British propaganda aimed at Belgium because the British didn’t want to share Africa even with France, let alone intruders like Germany Italy and Belgium.

    Same with all British propaganda tales. I remember one of the Churchill hagiographies laid out a compete justification for his destruction of the French fleet and murder of the 2,000 French sailors.

    Actually. There was absolutely totally no reason to destroy the French fleet to
    “ prevent it from being used by the Germans to attack Britain”

    The French Admiralty made plans years before of what they would do if any hostile power conquered France. The Mediterranean fleet would sail west to the Atlantic and meet up with the Atlantic fleet around the Azores.

    The fleets would then sail off the coasts of French colonies in Africa. If the conquest and occupation continued the entire fleet would sail to S America and stay till the situation resolved itself.

    Arrangements had already been made with the Brazil and Argentina governments. Plenty of fuel food and supplies were stashed in the French African colonies.

    But war criminal Churchill destroyed the fleet and murdered the sailors. The number killed ranged from 1,7000 2,000 depending on the source.

    In the spring of 1940 before the French surrender Churchill crossed to France met with the president premier and the cabinet and proposed a union of France and Britain

    It never happened. Churchill always wanted to emulate his ancestor Jack Churchill Duke of Marlborough, a great hero of the John Bull British supremacist school of British history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. utu says:

    It is hard to anything about atrocities committed against Germany and Germans during the WWII when Germany and the majority of Germans do not want to deal with it.

    Before the reunification in the East German one could talk about war crimes and atrocities against Germans as long they were committed by the Western Allies and preferably by Americans. The bombings of German cities were referred to as terror bombings which was the term used in Soviet Block press for bombings of Vietnam during the Vietnam war.

    After the reunification one could bring Soviet crimes like the mass rapes of German women but the talk about bombing of civilians was muzzled. A joint groups of British and German historians began to work to reduce the tolls of the bombings and managed to achieve a spectacular successes like lowering Dresden toll 6-fold to 25,000. If the trend continues we will learn that Germans went through the war pain free.

    The problem is Germany and Germans. There are thoroughly defeated people. They prefer building Holocaust museums and memorials rather than talking about their own dead.

    Read More
    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    I've always appreciated your posts. What is your national/ethnic origin, just out of curiosity?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Wally says:

    Ron Unz said”
    “Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control. For example, there was the notorious case of Oradour-sur-Glane, a village involved in Resistance activities, in which many hundreds of men, women, and children were herded into a church and other buildings and burned alive. Meanwhile, enormous numbers of Frenchmen and others had been deported to wartime Germany as slave-laborers, in total violation of every legal principle, producing an uncanny parallel to Stalin’s Gulag and underscoring the similarity of those two totalitarian regimes. This, at least, had always been my limited impression of that very unfortunate era.”

    I call BS & propaganda right off the bat. Please give us proof of your “vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control.”

    Be specific and present proof.
    If Oradour-sur-Glane is your best shot, then you truly have nothing.

    The “Oradour-sur-Glane massacre”? Been there, debunked that, see:
    ‘ Persecution in France for “The Waffen-SS: Innocent at Oradour” ‘
    By Vincent Reynouard: https://codoh.com/library/document/631/?lang=en
    and:
    France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glane: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7603

    And lots, lots more here: https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relevance&q=oradour

    Of course there were the “enormous numbers” of Japanese-Americans “herded” into US concentration camps in total violation of every US legal principle before the SCOTUS insanely approved it upon FDR pressure, which Unz prefers to ignore.
    There were the “enormous numbers” of Christians & more “herded into brutal Soviet gulags which Unz prefers to ignore.

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cleburne
    I'm increasingly convinced you're a Hasbara/zionist troll, tasked with casting ordure on the revisionist movement by the arrogance, aggression and general obnoxiousness of your responses. You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar; that your every post inverts this standard principle indicates to me that your intentions are nefarious. It suggests at the least that anyone who braves "codoh.com will encounter not ad hominem-free, level playing field debate, but increasingly unhinged postings from people Who Got It All Figured Out, and so stay away.

    Which, when you think of it, is exactly WHAT THEY WANT.

    You're busted, Wally.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Wally says:

    Per Nuremberg, long, see ‘more’ below.

    - How the Film Evidence at Nuremberg was faked
    From the files of Justice Robert H Jackson, US chief prosecutor at Nuremberg.
    : http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/Nbg/DeanIMT161145.html

    - The Soviet communists presented a detailed study of steam chambers which was accepted a Nuremberg, no study for the now alleged pesticide using ‘gas chambers’ was ever presented at Nuremberg, or any other court

    - Documents from the U.S. National Archives reveal that the U.S. government helped cover up the Soviet 1940 massacre on some 20,000 Poles at Katyn and other places — not just during the war, but even afterwards. The Katyn Massacre by the Soviets was accepted by the Allies at Nuremberg as a German crime.

    - English translations of Russian translations of Polish copies of an alleged German original which cannot be found. That is typical of Nuremberg ‘documents’. Ask Carlos Porter about that, his website is filled with such ‘documents’
    Recall that at Nuremberg is was stated that ‘the court was not bound by technical rules of evidence.’

    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:” 23.1.49, Judge van Roden, The Sunday Pictorial, (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21. The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden

    - Judge van Roden’s statements of torture to gain “confessions” are confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49

    - U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
    The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history.
    Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49

    - “The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to [Bernard] Clarke the blows and screams were endless. Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: ‘Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.’”(12)
    12.R. Butler, Legions of Death, Hamlyn, (London, 1983), p.237

    - The admission of Bernard Clarke was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in ‘The Wrexham Leader’, October 17, 1986. Mr. Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid in Schleswig-Holstein.
    “They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activites during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks,” recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hoess in his cell to help break him down for interrogation.”
    “We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance,” said Mr. Jones.
    When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.

    Only Liars Want Censorship
    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    " After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities. "

    Read: told them what they wanted him to tell
    , @SunBakedSuburb
    I appreciate contrarians and consider myself to be one. Everything should be up for debate, whether it be African IQ or details regarding the motive for the European Holocaust. But to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Pétain and Laval tried to protect the French people, with a show of collaboration.
    Oradour sur Glane, a stupidity of the Gaulle’s Free French
    Robert Aron, ‘Histoire de Vichy 1940 1944’, Paris 1954
    René de Chambrun, ‘Pierre Laval devant l’histoire’, 1983, Paris
    Vincent Reynouard, ‘Die Wahrheit über Oradour, Rekonstruktion und Forschungsbericht eines Franzosen, Was geschah am 10. Juni 1944 wirklich ?’, Stegen am Ammersee, 2005 (Le Massacre d’Oradour, Antwerpen 1997)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. @Colin Wright
    '...I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked...'

    The Baku attack, while perhaps not given due emphasis, has never been covered up. I was certainly aware of the project, and there was even a published poem of the period that referred to it, called 'the Map Game' if I recall aright. Something about 'bombs on Batum', and a reference to Baku.

    It all came to naught, first, because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, and secondly, because to mount such a strike it would have been necessary to overfly Turkey, and Turkey wouldn't give her permission.

    ” because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, ”

    Churchill did, his plan to occupy neutral Norway and the northern part of neutral Sweden

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    Wrong. The Phony War is usually regarded as lasting from the end of the Poland campaign until the invasion of the Low Countries on May 10, 1940. Churchill's Scandinavian campaign is considered part of the Phony War period.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. David L. Hoggan, `Der unnötige Krieg, 1939- 1945, `Germany must perish“, 1976, Tübingen
    Unnötige Krieg: unnecessary war

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. Tyrion 2 says: • Website

    Germany is not “that unfortunate country”. It is the most powerful nation in Europe and one that imposes its will on the rest.

    Nor is Merkel’s government a foreign-imposed passing fad but instead it is the most successful in Germany’s history.

    I like to over-hype the AfD as much as anybody but the actual opposition to Merkel is the even more self-abegnatory SPD.

    Try talking to Germans other than the handful of Hitler fanatics that they disdain. I find them annoying and self-righteous in their ‘liberal’ internationalism but I can at least recognise that they predominate in that country.

    The AfD poll at just 15%. This is their best and most amazing ever, but that fluctuates at a similar level to the open borders Greens.

    The AfD would also most likely consider this book to be Hitler fanatic nonsense. The AfD are not a radical party at all. Their immigration policy is the same as Union’s was in the 00s and the SPD’s (centre left) was in the 90s. The roots of the current nonsenses really are from the 90s…

    Only 15% of Germans can bring themselves to vote for an immigration policy as restrictionist as the left of centre position was in the 90s.

    I reserve judgement about the book myself. I don’t know much about it but I won’t let Germany be portrayed as a passive victim of current events. Much of Europe’s worst policies have been rigidly imposed upon us by a German government whom keeps being returned in elections by the German people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Try talking to Germans other than the handful of Hitler fanatics that they disdain."

    What make's someone a "Hitler fanatic"?
    After all, it's now known that the '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are easily debunked lies. Please be specific.

    www.codoh.com
    , @Anonymous
    Did you grow up in Germany and pass through their school system?
    Did you notice the incessant TV presentations of Germany's crimes of that time? Every year and every year ad nauseum?
    How could you even lift up your head as a German. You are the scum of the earth.
    Calls came in to the Radio Station of BR2 in Bavaria in 2015. (Probably others too). People stated that now, finally, they could be proud of themselves again.
    Germans are a totally conditioned people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Rod1963 says:
    @Carlton Meyer
    This short video of American GIs executing German POWs is of interest:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD4bDHTHdpU

    Quite true.

    My father(now deceased) was a WWII veteran(3ID, 3rd cavalry recce – provisional ) who saw action in North Africa, Sicily and Southern Italy He also served in the occupation of Germany after the war in the Constabulary. He saw the occupation first hand and could attest to much what Unz has written, plus a lot more. Oddly enough the Starts & Stripes for that era was never put on-line and there is a reason for it.

    Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar. Quartering of American troops – especially officers and NCO’s in German homes was the norm.

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn’t want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW’s to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn’t. They should have. No one would have missed them.

    Rules of war weren’t really followed. At Monte Casino, allied commanders imported a contingent of Moroccan colonial troops who proceeded to rape and pillage the Italian countryside with the approval of French Army authorities. Sophia Loren even had a movie made about their crimes.

    BTW my old man was a big fan of Col. Hackworth, whom he admired.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    " Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar "
    Indeed, the kcal Germans got after the capitulation were less than the concentration camp rations.
    Estimated is that a million German civilians died of hunger and exposure from 1945 to say 1949.
    , @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    Hackworth was a great soldier!

    Anyway, even 'Band of Brothers' depicts the killing of German POWs, albeit in a rather circuitous way.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcZl32NnIrs

    , @Antiwar7
    My father, who was an Allied POW in Germany, and stayed there for 4 years after the war, broadly corroborated this, and told me about it as I grew up. He was treated well as a POW, and before the Allies conquered his area, he advised his German captors to desert, get rid of their uniforms, and hide out in the woods during the transfer. A number of them did, and thanked him afterwards.
    , @Anon
    Another movie, Roman spring of Mrs Stone has a few lines about the rapes of Italian women. But in the movie the rapes were committed by Americans implied White Americans not the French Arabs.
    , @Catiline

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn’t want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW’s to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn’t.
     
    Any info on the background and provenance of those Rangers and similar units?
    , @Ace
    Charles McDonald's book "Company Commander" casually tells of his ordering his men on two occasions to take German POWs to the rear. Both times the men executed the Germans on their own initiative, though McDonald did nothing. The German officer who ordered the Malmedy massacre was executed IIRC for over 100 deaths. McDonald's men were responsible for 10 or 20 deaths as I recall.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Thank you, Ron, for providing the possibility of reading these books. Being Danish I was indeed aware of some of these facts, but not the enormity, of the crime. As far back as 1978, through a girlfriend, whose grandmother had arrived in Denmark as a refugee, i learnt of some of it, a visit to Hamburg to her uncle and wife, provided even more of this horrific tale, his accounts of having been on the Eastern front 1939- 1945 and her tale of living in Hamburg as a young woman in the same period. Both were Social Democrats, and had been persecuted in the same period.
    But their telling took a rather ominous direction, when they told of the occupation forces, they were lucky, the Brits had authority in Hamburg. But they knew what happened in other parts of Germany.
    In this context it is important too, that it must not in any way, try to excuse/hide/diminish Hitler’s regime’s crimes and their sick ideology, which unfortunately often happens on the Internet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "In this context it is important too, that it must not in any way, try to excuse/hide/diminish Hitler’s regime’s crimes and their sick ideology, which unfortunately often happens on the Internet."

    So what was so "sick" about Hitler's ideology that was not in general use worldwide at the time? Please be specific.

    What crimes did Hitler's regime supposedly commit that were not also committed elsewhere at the time?

    “we’ve often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry. And then it dawned upon us, what would we do? We didn’t have the evidence.”

    - so called "holocaust historian" Raul Hilberg
     
    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control.

    …. and this is why all so called ‘in-depth’ articles regarding WW2 and Germany are extremely biased.

    “Nazi-crimes” don’t even begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of Allied – Soviet Union included.

    Even prominent Jews have arrogantly boasted, that the ‘concentration camps’ and the ‘killed’ German Jews perfectly served their purpose. 250.000 German Jews lived in Nazi-Germany, but the international Jewish community kept on increasing the number of ‘killed’ Jews in Germany up to 6 million.

    When people continue referring to Hitler’s “horrid deeds” – in order to justify their own deeds – they ‘forgive’ their own actions and act as if they never happened and they use the same old scapegoat: Germany and Hitler.

    Mannerheim was a man of honesty and integrity, “The Last European Knight” as the historians call him.

    President Mannerheim’s Letter to the Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler, Sept. 2, 1944

    [MORE]

    In this hour of hard decisions I am impelled to inform you, that I have arrived at the conviction, that the salvation of my nation makes it my duty to find a means of ending the war.

    The general development of total war, greatly restricts Germany’s ability to send us sufficient help at the right time and in the difficult situations, which can be expected.

    It is my sincere belief, however, that Germany wishes to offer us this assistance. But the dispatch of a single German division to Finland requires such a long time, that our resistance against the overwhelming superiority of the enemy might break down before its arrival. I also fully understand, that the situation does not permit a sufficient number of German divisions being kept permanently in readiness in Finland. The experiences of the past summer confirm this.

    The judgment of the war situation, which I have just given, is shared by a growing majority of the representatives of the Finnish people. Even should my opinion be other than it is, it would not be possible for me, having regard to our constitution, to ignore the plainly shown wishes of the majority of the nation.

    When Field-Marshal Keitel recently visited me, he insisted that the people of Greater Germany could doubtless continue the war for another ten years if necessary.

    I replied, that even if one might hope that this be true of a nation of ninety millions, it was equally true, that we Finns were physically incapable of continuing the war. The Russians’ great assaults in June exhausted our reserves. We cannot expose ourselves to another such blood-letting, without the whole future of the small Finnish nation being jeopardized.

    I wish especially to emphasize, that Germany will live on, even if fate should not crown your arms with victory.

    Nobody could give such an assurance regarding Finland. If that nation of barely four millions be militarily defeated, there can be little doubt, that it will be driven into exile or exterminated. I cannot expose my people to such a fate.

    Even though I can hardly hope, that my opinions and reasons will be accepted by you, I wish to send you these lines before the hour of decision.

    Our roads will probably soon part, but the memory of our German brothers-in-arms will live on.

    In Finland, the Germans have certainly not been the representatives of a foreign usurper, but helpers and brothers-in-arms, but even though that be the case, the position of foreigners is bound to be a very difficult one.

    I can assure you, that during the past years nothing whatever has happened, which could cause us to regard the German troops as oppressors or invaders.

    The conduct of the German Army in Northern Finland towards the local population and the local authorities will, I think, stand out in our history as an almost unique example of correct and friendly relations in similar conditions.

    I regard it as my duty to lead my people out of the war.

    The arms, which you have generously given us, I will never of my own accord turn against Germans.

    I cherish the hope that, even though you may take exception to my letter, you will share my wish and the wish of all Finns, that the change in our relations may not give rise to animosity.

    Source: The Memoirs of Marshal Mannerheim. Cassell & Co., London, 1953.

    https://histdoc.net/history/1941-1948/mannerheim1944-09-02.html

    ****

    When Germans retreated and took part in the ‘pretend-war’, i.e. Finns shot in the air and Germans pretendend to flee the Finnish troops, everything was fine.

    Until the Russian troops swooped in and massacred Finns and burned down villages in Northern Finland. Finns were forced to say, that it was the Germans who did it, although it wasn’t true.

    I’m sick and tired of sugar-coating and blurring facts, so that they fit in the official narrative.

    Finnish Jews fought beside Germans against Soviet troops. Not one incident of indecent behavior was reported. They got along and they were brothers-in-arms.

    Finnish Jews fought for Finland and they did it voluntarily.

    Finland didn’t have a “Jewish question” unlike Germany had. Had Hitler called them by their codename – Communists – things might have been different.

    During the Continuation War Finland was also forced to put up concentration camps, all Finnish communists were put there, because they allied with the aggressor, Soviet Union.

    When Hitler did the same, put Communists (mostly Jews) in concentration camps, so that they could not wage war against Germans and Germany, it enraged the international secret Communist system as well as the international Jewish community. And they turned the international community against Germany – and Finland also, since Finland did not have a Jewish (read: Communist) question.

    To be honest, I am extremely proud of the fact, that Finns shared the defeat of WW2 with Germans!

    Rather a war criminal together with Germany, than a victor together with the Allied. Our conscience is clear.

    But the rest of the countries, who either stood by as spectators or participated with the bullies, they should do some honest soul-searching – instead of continuning with the passé blaming game.

    When the whole world ganged up on tiny Finland, Germany was THE ONLY ONE, who took our side. Like in a school yard, where one big bully beats a small boy and others stand by – on the bully’s side – without lifting a finger for the small boy. Then one of the big bullies – Germany – goes to the small boy laying on the ground, promises to fight with him, and also gets beaten.

    I raised my son to ALWAYS go between a fight and ALWAYS take the weaker one’s side. NEVER stand by as a passive specator (aka enabler), but to take ACTION.

    All the nations are busy washing their bloody hands – with blood – instead of standing up and admitting their guilt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Druid
    Good on you!
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Irrelevant perhaps to your interesting expression of a Finnish perspective but where do you get the figure of 250,000 Jews in Nazi Germany - and do you regard the figure as of any importance? My understanding is that in 1933 the figure was close to 600,000 though, come to think of it, I am not sure whose criteria applied and I believe that intermarriage was at least 33 per cent.
    , @Heros

    "Finnish Jews fought for Finland and they did it voluntarily.

    Finland didn’t have a “Jewish question” unlike Germany had. Had Hitler called them by their codename – Communists – things might have been different.

    During the Continuation War Finland was also forced to put up concentration camps, all Finnish communists were put there, because they allied with the aggressor, Soviet Union.

    When Hitler did the same, put Communists (mostly Jews) in concentration camps, so that they could not wage war against Germans and Germany, it enraged the international secret Communist system as well as the international Jewish community."
     

    I think you have identified the problem but have it backwards. Communism is a jewish plot. Zionism is a jewish plot. Oligarchic jewish banksterism is a jewish plot. Feminism and globohomoism are now too, but they came later.

    Jews are perfectly willing to fight among themselves and sacrifice millions of goyim lives in order to achieve hegemony. However, when the Rabbi calls and says that some action is bad for the jews, then all the jews band together. This is illustrated by the degree of violence in jewish no-snitch retribution (Seth Rich). Or in jewish reaction to any accusations approaching blood libel, where an instantaneous jewish nuclear barrage is released on any goyim stupid enough to bring proof this age old, likely continuing, jewish trait into modern times.

    There is also another age old global secret society conspiring against the goyim, known as the craft, or masonry. Masons have sworn oaths to each other and higher powers, and Hitler famously banned them. So all these secret groups, the masons, the zionists, the communists, the jewish banking monopoly were talking to each other in secret for decades. These agreements were made at a level transcending communism or zionism, where all international jews were working for international jewery for the destruction of Christianity and the ethnic genocide of its followers.

    The communism/zionism/judaism confusion can be seen in this thread in the discussion of Hiss and White and the other spies. The narrative may dance around some of the "communists" being jews, but it will never discuss how a jewish run operation in the US developed the bomb using goy resources, then those jews traitorously transferred technology, material, plant, and likely complete war heads clandestinely to jewish scientists in Israel and the USSR. Stalin was receiving nuclear materials, technology, and plant stolen by jews in the US during lend lease long before the war was even over. This wasn't communists in the US passing war secrets to the USSR, it was jewish people screwing goyim. Trying to discuss the depth and depravity with vocabulary like "communist" while forbidding all mention of jew or Israel is the fruitless exercise that has been going on in the west since the end of the genocide being pawned off as a world war.

    So we have jews and masons and who knows else all communicating secretly and conspiring to fulfill century old agendas directly counter to the interests of the stupid goyim. Those families of the jewish persuasion causing this would love to have us all fighting whether the group we are fighting is Zionist, Masonic, Illuminati, Communist, Capitalist, Anarchist, Orthodox, or Feminist or something else.

    To me it is the jews. I can deal with a jew on a personal basis and judge him by myself alone based on his character, but as a group they will always be jews with the centuries of baggage that comes with it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. iffen says:

    I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked. But just a couple of weeks ago, I discovered a 2015 article in The National Interest confirming these exact facts, over seventy years after they had understandably been expunged from all of our mainstream historical narratives.

    I just completed Chris Bellamy’s Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means “your expungers” are not very good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @art guerrilla
    @ iffen-
    I really don't get this: an author makes a SELF-EVIDENT claim (ie baku is NOT mentioned in ANY contemporary his story class/book that 90-99% of the population is going to be exposed to), and a weally, weally much smarter person 'refutes' that SELF-EVIDENT claim by citing an obscure work(s) that 99.99% of the population will NEVER be exposed to...
    .
    um, HOW IS IT that specious claim in any way shape or form 'refutes' the central claim that the plan for baku is essentially unknown among the 90-99% who will NEVER see or seek out obscure his story books ? ??
    .
    guess it just 'proves' how 'smart' you are, I guess...
    *snort*
    , @Ron Unz

    I just completed Chris Bellamy’s Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means “your expungers” are not very good.
     
    Well, I haven't myself read that particular 2007 book, but out of curiosity, I just took it down from my shelf and consulted the index. There was no entry for "Baku" and when I checked all the references for the "Caucasus Oil-Fields" and "France", it was never mentioned. I'm not necessarily saying that you're lying. It's perfectly possible that there were a couple of sentences buried somewhere in the 800 pages of text, but the discussion was just too scanty to have been included in the 25 page index.

    By contrast, the article I linked at The National Interest treated the planned attack as a massive revelation, which surely would have changed the outcome of World War II, and it was considered so note-worthy that TNI republished it a couple of years later. I regard myself as someone reasonably knowledgeable about WWII, and I'd certainly never heard of it.

    Here's an analogy. In one of my recent JFK articles, I pointed out that LBJ was by far the most obvious suspect, and indeed the apparent conspirators identified in the Talbot and Douglass books had explicitly claimed that LBJ was part of the plot. Despite this, those authors only discuss the possible role of LBJ in a couple of paragraphs across 1,500(!) total pages, and treat it rather dismissively. However, it would be factually incorrect to claim that they "ignored" that theory:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-ii-who-did-it/

    Similarly, Rick Perlstein's three long books on the rise of what he considers America's somewhat "paranoid" conservative movement opens in the early 1950s, less than a decade after Soviet agents had come within a hairsbreadth of gaining control of the American government. However, he doesn't *totally* ignore that issue since he (rather dismissively) mentions Harry Dexter White in parts of two sentences across his 2,400 pages of text:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-deadly-world-of-post-war-politics/

    So nobody can honestly claim that Talbot, Douglass, and Perlstein failed to include mention of an overwhelmingly important issue, and you might very well be correct that Bellamy did the same.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Rod1963
    Quite true.

    My father(now deceased) was a WWII veteran(3ID, 3rd cavalry recce - provisional ) who saw action in North Africa, Sicily and Southern Italy He also served in the occupation of Germany after the war in the Constabulary. He saw the occupation first hand and could attest to much what Unz has written, plus a lot more. Oddly enough the Starts & Stripes for that era was never put on-line and there is a reason for it.

    Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar. Quartering of American troops - especially officers and NCO's in German homes was the norm.

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn't want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW's to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn't. They should have. No one would have missed them.

    Rules of war weren't really followed. At Monte Casino, allied commanders imported a contingent of Moroccan colonial troops who proceeded to rape and pillage the Italian countryside with the approval of French Army authorities. Sophia Loren even had a movie made about their crimes.

    BTW my old man was a big fan of Col. Hackworth, whom he admired.

    ” Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar ”
    Indeed, the kcal Germans got after the capitulation were less than the concentration camp rations.
    Estimated is that a million German civilians died of hunger and exposure from 1945 to say 1949.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Wally
    Per Nuremberg, long, see 'more' below.

    - How the Film Evidence at Nuremberg was faked
    From the files of Justice Robert H Jackson, US chief prosecutor at Nuremberg.
    : http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/Nbg/DeanIMT161145.html

    - The Soviet communists presented a detailed study of steam chambers which was accepted a Nuremberg, no study for the now alleged pesticide using 'gas chambers' was ever presented at Nuremberg, or any other court

    - Documents from the U.S. National Archives reveal that the U.S. government helped cover up the Soviet 1940 massacre on some 20,000 Poles at Katyn and other places — not just during the war, but even afterwards. The Katyn Massacre by the Soviets was accepted by the Allies at Nuremberg as a German crime.

    - English translations of Russian translations of Polish copies of an alleged German original which cannot be found. That is typical of Nuremberg 'documents'. Ask Carlos Porter about that, his website is filled with such 'documents'
    Recall that at Nuremberg is was stated that 'the court was not bound by technical rules of evidence.'

    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:" 23.1.49, Judge van Roden, The Sunday Pictorial, (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21. The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused's head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden

    - Judge van Roden's statements of torture to gain "confessions" are confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49

    - U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
    " The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history."
    Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49

    - "The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to [Bernard] Clarke the blows and screams were endless. Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: 'Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.'"(12)
    12.R. Butler, Legions of Death, Hamlyn, (London, 1983), p.237

    - The admission of Bernard Clarke was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in 'The Wrexham Leader', October 17, 1986. Mr. Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid in Schleswig-Holstein.
    "They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activites during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hoess in his cell to help break him down for interrogation."
    "We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance," said Mr. Jones.
    When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.

    Only Liars Want Censorship
    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    ” After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities. ”

    Read: told them what they wanted him to tell

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    Gee, you think maybe that's how and when the holohoax narrative was formed?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France (unlike Poland). I think it was moderately well known that the Americans didn’t behave very well in occupied Germany, though we have a rosy view of our own behaviour.

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France
     
    Yes, it is well known. It is seen an indictment of the bravery of the French.

    The politically correct line is to exaggerate the French resistance so as not to tar the French as "collaborationist surrender monkeys."

    Yet everyone knows that the French resistance was weak and ineffectual but it is a polite fiction to maintain otherwise.

    , @German_reader

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2.
     
    It's nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there's no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).
    It's unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified (but the kind of articles one reads here on Unz are rather counter-productive imo). But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I'll leave it at that.
    , @Ron Unz

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.
     
    Well, that's how Bacque discovered the story. He noticed all sorts of Thank You letters from various Germans to a local French official, and when he interviewed one of them, the man furtively explained that he had been taken out of one of a camps as a local worker, thereby saving his life. After Bacque published his book, he claims an enormous number of former POWs got in touch with him, saying how grateful they were that the true story was finally being revealed to the world.

    As I mentioned in my article, all historians admit that at least 2 million expelled German civilians died on their "Trail of Tears" (and perhaps the figure was much higher), which was certainly the greatest peacetime "ethnic cleansing" in the history of the world. But virtually no Americans are aware of it, since it has almost never gotten any media attention. And my impression is that Germans who talk about it too loudly these days may be arrested and thrown into prison.

    The central point of my entire American Pravda series is that our Media creates Reality, and I think this is a pretty good example of that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Tom Welsh says:

    “Although Petain’s new French government guaranteed that its powerful navy would never be used against the British, Churchill took no chances, and quickly launched an attack on the fleet of its erstwhile ally, whose ships were already disarmed and helplessly moored in port…”

    I don’t think this is entirely accurate. According to Wikipedia,

    “Churchill ordered the British ships to open fire against the French ships and the British commenced from 17,500 yd (9.9 mi; 16.0 km).[16] The third British salvo scored hits and caused a magazine explosion aboard Bretagne, which sank with 977 of her crew at 6:09 p.m. After thirty salvoes, the French ships stopped firing; the British force altered course to avoid return fire from the French coastal forts but Provence, Dunkerque and the destroyer Mogador were damaged and run aground by their crews.[17] Strasbourg and four destroyers managed to avoid the magnetic mines and escape to the open sea under attack from a flight of bomb-armed Swordfish from Ark Royal. The French ships responded with anti-aircraft fire and shot down two Swordfish, the crews being rescued by the destroyer HMS Wrestler”.

    The French ships were by no means disarmed, although they were bottled up in harbour and the British had mined the exits. Moreover the two new battlecruisers were docked with their main armament facing inland. However Wikipedia clearly states that they returned fire for 30 salvoes, and several ships – including one of the battlecruisers – escaped to sea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Why do you believe Wikipedia?

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com
    , @Anon
    Wikipedia???? Wikipedia ???? Really?

    I no more believe Wikipedia than I believe the Washington Post NYTimes and the rest of the lying press.

    Wikepedia is good for dates or if you can’t remember a name. That’s it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. I appreciate your work in presenting these books for our inspection. I don’t expect ever to reach conclusions about any historical events; they’re all too complicated for me. But I’d like to make a few little points: (1) Laval was widely regarded during the Occupation as very pro-German; he was dismissed by Petain at one point but reinstated at the Germans’ insistence. Nonetheless, formal communications between German officers and administrators during this period express frustration with what they saw as Laval’s reluctance and slowness in regard to measures like turning over Jews or supplying French laborers. (2) I have read detailed accounts of many of the principal trials of Vichy officials (Pucheu, Laval, Petain, Vallat) as well as of the writers Robert Brasillach and Charles Maurras. Almost all of them are fraught with obvious bias. The trial of Laval in particular has many egregious aspects, from the composition of the jury to the jury members’ open insults in court of him. (3) Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit. He is detested by many on the French right, but if you want to be taken seriously on this you can’t honestly avoid engaging with his arguments. (4) Petain was certainly very old (84) in 1940, but you are wrong to say that he was then in his “dotage”; he was very fit both physically and mentally when he became chief of state. (5) When you write that your “understanding of the post-war history of France was entirely wrong,” it seems to me that you are leaping far too quickly. Just because a few books contradict orthodoxy doesn’t mean the orthodoxy is largely wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit.
     
    I must reemphasize my complete lack of personal expertise in the post-war history of France, and I certainly haven't read the Paxton book you cite. However, here's my perspective...

    Unless you believe that Huddleston is flat-out lying, the Socialist Minister of the Interior in March 1945, who controlled France's national police force and had best access to the data, informed the De Gaulle people that there had been approximately 105,000 "summary executions" during the previous six months, and the American authorities had estimated 80,000 political killings during the first part of that period. These figures were widely circulated and accepted as correct at the time. Communists and other leftwing groups were apparently responsible for the overwhelming majority of these killings, which targeted conservatives and right-wingers.

    Then, thirty years later, Robert Paxton, apparently a somewhat fervent "anti-Fascist" historian based in the U.S., published a book claiming that there had actually only been 10,000 killings. Offhand, it's not clear to me how Paxton in 1972 would have such better information than France's own Interior Minister in 1945. It's certainly possible, but I think it far more likely that he merely rewrote history for ideological reasons, and Wikipedia and others just repeated it for the same sorts of reasons. This does occasionally happen you know...
    , @Anon
    The 10,000 killed figure comes from just one part of the war between the communists and Guallists. That was summer of 1944 souther France where the communist Franc Tieurs free shooters were very strong and planned , with the assistance of Russians of course to take over France after the war as the native communists and Russians took over Poland and the rest of E Europe after the war.

    These mini civil wars between communists and Catholic/Gaullists went on all over France 1944 45. 10,000 here, 12,000 there it could be 80,000. And the Gaullists won unlike E Europe where the native communists gave lists of non communist leaders to the Russian troops as they arrived.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Heros says:

    A tip of the hat to Ron Unz for posting this American Pravda series. I enjoy reading these book reviews and the comments, and I appreciate him making the text available on the internet.

    However, I do find reading these Pravda reviews very frustrating. There seems to be some intellectual or scholarly need to constantly defer to the accepted narrative, often missing the bullseye, even though these very authors of the narrative been proven to be liars time and again.

    Compare Adolf Hitler commanding the German Army to strictly follow the Geneva Conventions throughout the war, forbidding rape and looting in France even after Versailles in 1919 and Saar in 1939, letting England escape at Dunkirk, and finally desperately sending Hess to try to make peace and stave off war and communism to (((their))) narrative of histories biggest tyrant leading racial supremacist people on endless wars for world conquest. To most Unz readers it is becoming clear that Hitler was trying to defend Germany, not conquer the world.

    I must say, I look forward to Ron Unz delving deeper into Pravda style propaganda coming out of the jewish media in the 1930′s. An expose of the “shoa” would also be of historical significance.

    I would like to touch on Oradour-sur-Glane where Unz writes:

    “a village involved in Resistance activities, in which many hundreds of men, women, and children were herded into a church and other buildings and burned alive.”

    Unz appears to accepting the (((narrative))) here. I think Oradour-sur-Glane was a kind of French Katyn. The SS caught up with jewish communist terrorists, the “Maquis”, who had tortured and murdered an SS officer. The SS claim is that the Maquis had hidden dynamite and weapons in the steeple, or even rigged the church, and the end result was exactly what the perpetrators wanted. The SS were given victors justice, another case of jews recklessly wasting goyim lives in pursuit of their communist and zionist agendas is covered up, and once again Germans are portrayed as Huns bent on world conquest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @prusmc
    Is there an American Pravada extended posting on Gen. PATTON?
    , @Anon
    The communist so called resistance with Russian advisors did their best to take over France as they did E Europe after the war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Simon in London
    I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France (unlike Poland). I think it was moderately well known that the Americans didn't behave very well in occupied Germany, though we have a rosy view of our own behaviour.

    I'm shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.

    I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France

    Yes, it is well known. It is seen an indictment of the bravery of the French.

    The politically correct line is to exaggerate the French resistance so as not to tar the French as “collaborationist surrender monkeys.”

    Yet everyone knows that the French resistance was weak and ineffectual but it is a polite fiction to maintain otherwise.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simon in London
    Yes, until 1944 the Germans saw occupied France as friendly territory, very different from the Balkans and eastern Europe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Tyrion 2

    I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France
     
    Yes, it is well known. It is seen an indictment of the bravery of the French.

    The politically correct line is to exaggerate the French resistance so as not to tar the French as "collaborationist surrender monkeys."

    Yet everyone knows that the French resistance was weak and ineffectual but it is a polite fiction to maintain otherwise.

    Yes, until 1944 the Germans saw occupied France as friendly territory, very different from the Balkans and eastern Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    Apparently, the French were unaware of the requirement that they hate the Germans. Granted it was rude to invade France but it does seem to be true that the Germans behaved correctly. The documentary "The Sorrow and the Pity" highlighted this point. It was only late in the war that Germans retreated behind barbed wire.

    Mr. Unz's article is refreshing for highlighting aspects of the Allied effort that have disappeared behind a wall of white noise. Accounts I've read by German veterans of the Eastern Front have been illuminating as they show a side of German troops that almost seems like a caricature compared to the Hollywood version of oozing German malevolence.

    Marie Vassiltchikov's Berlin Diaries, 1940-1945 reveals a decency in German thinking where, for example, many were saddened by the sinking of HMS Hood. Too, Eric Newby's Love and War in the Apennines contains an anecdote where Newby, an escaped POW of the Italians, fell asleep alone in the mountains and woke up to find a German officer standing near him. The man had been, I think, a biology teacher as a civilian and he shared his lunch and a beer with Newby before leaving with the assurance to him that he would not be reported.

    Another individual account mentioned how in Russia he would chat and share rations with a Red Army fellow also at an observation post at night. He warned the Russian that he was leaving the next day and not to assume his replacement would be as congenial.

    These are only anecdotes but they are equally necessary to our understanding of the war. Anything to destroy the veil of ________ that has descended on our public life. The real Holocaust denial is the near total active denial of Bolshevik, CCP, Cuban, and Khmer Rouge crimes. The characterization of National Socialism as "right-wing" is pure malevolence and an integral part of the fanatic drive to conceal leftist totalitarianism as one of the main driving forces of anarchy, destruction, and death in the last century. If anyone doubts that this dynamic does not operate at full force even now, he can consider how the E.U. is billed as a solution to the "problem of nationalism," a patently ridiculous mischaracterization of leftist totalitarianism (and economic stupidity).

    The moronic anti-Russian obsession of the American political elite is another poisonous instance of some evil thing that "everybody knows" exists, on the basis of which knowledge we are supposed to saddle up and ride out to . . . what? Slay all dragons. Perfect. Current price tag for this and all other chimera chasing -- $32,000,000 per hour.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @iffen
    I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked. But just a couple of weeks ago, I discovered a 2015 article in The National Interest confirming these exact facts, over seventy years after they had understandably been expunged from all of our mainstream historical narratives.


    I just completed Chris Bellamy's Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means "your expungers" are not very good.

    @ iffen-
    I really don’t get this: an author makes a SELF-EVIDENT claim (ie baku is NOT mentioned in ANY contemporary his story class/book that 90-99% of the population is going to be exposed to), and a weally, weally much smarter person ‘refutes’ that SELF-EVIDENT claim by citing an obscure work(s) that 99.99% of the population will NEVER be exposed to…
    .
    um, HOW IS IT that specious claim in any way shape or form ‘refutes’ the central claim that the plan for baku is essentially unknown among the 90-99% who will NEVER see or seek out obscure his story books ? ??
    .
    guess it just ‘proves’ how ‘smart’ you are, I guess…
    *snort*

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen

    In Absolute War, acclaimed historian and journalist Chris Bellamy crafts the first full account since the fall of the Soviet Union of World War II’s battle on the Eastern Front, one of the deadliest conflicts in history.

    The conflict on the Eastern Front, fought between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany between 1941 and 1945, was the greatest, most costly, and most brutal conflict on land in human history. It was arguably the single most decisive factor of the war, and shaped the postwar world as we know it. In this magisterial work, Bellamy outlines the lead-up to the war, in which the fragile alliance between the two dictators was unceremoniously broken, and examines its far-reaching consequences, arguing that the cost of victory was ultimately too much for the Soviet Union to bear. With breadth of scope and a surfeit of new information, this is the definitive history of a conflict whose reverberations are still felt today.


    “Sobering. . . . A global view presented with remarkable clarity.”
    The Boston Globe
    “Probably the best account of the Eastern Front we shall see until President Putin relaxes his newly imposed restrictions on foreign access to the files. . . . Bellamy has made a tremendous contribution to the record of Russia’s struggle, for which future historians will owe a debt.”
    The Sunday Times (London)
    “Bellamy’s treatment is authoritative, his judgments thorough and exacting, and his prose robust.”
    The Daily Telegraph (London)

    Chris Bellamy is Professor of Military Science and Doctrine and Director of the Security Studies Institute at Cranfield University. Born in 1955, he was educated at the universities of Oxford, London, Westminster, and Edinburgh, where he earned his doctorate.
     

    The Globe, The Times, The Telegraph, strange little memory hole. Maybe some holes are holier than others.
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. utu says:

    Yet everyone knows that the French resistance was weak and ineffectual

    More resistance you had worse off you were. Resisting was strongly encouraged by both London and Moscow to conduct war by civilians of other nations. This only lead to reprisals and more reprisals and death of countless civilians which were avoidable if there was no resistance. But creating the reprisals was the chief goal of resistance. Neither Moscow nor London wanted the occupied populations to begin to like their occupiers too much. And some did particularly in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. That’s why the resistance got there the most intense which lead to the bloodbath in the Bloodlands (T. Snyder). The resistance itself in its so-called fight against Germans did not shorten the war by one day. They were mainly busy chasing real and invented collaborators and stealing from local population or fighting resistance of different ideological or ethnic orientations. In some areas local populations were very happy when German regiments were stationed near by so the resistance was kept away and in extreme cases villages organizing self-defence groups often armed by Germans to protect themselves from the so called resistance and partisans.

    By the way organizing resistance on occupied territories used to be a war crime. That’s why the reprisals by occupiers were justified and condoned by various conventions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    By the way organizing resistance on occupied territories used to be a war crime.
     
    Which is an inconvenient detail that rarely gets mentioned in the accepted narrative. The resistance fighters were in fact terrorists. Churchill was one of the most enthusiastic sponsors of terrorism in history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Thanks for another interesting article, Mr. Unz.

    Huddleston then spends much of the book discussing the complex French politics of the next few years, as the war unexpectedly continued, with Russia and America eventually joining the Allied cause, greatly raising the odds against a German victory. During this period, the French political and military leadership performed a difficult balancing act, resisting German demands on some points and acquiescing to them on others, while the internal Resistance movement gradually grew, attacking German soldiers and provoking harsh German reprisals. Given my lack of expertise, I cannot really judge the accuracy of his political narrative, but it seems quite realistic and plausible to me, though specialists might surely find fault.

    This narrative is essentially in conformity with what I read in Werner Rings’ book, ‘Life With the Enemy: Collaboration and Resistance in Hitler’s Europe, 1939-45′

    Rings’ book is probably the best one-volume overview of the subject in question.

    Rings was a dissenter from Nazism, and not at all a fringe source.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. @jilles dykstra
    " because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, "

    Churchill did, his plan to occupy neutral Norway and the northern part of neutral Sweden

    Wrong. The Phony War is usually regarded as lasting from the end of the Poland campaign until the invasion of the Low Countries on May 10, 1940. Churchill’s Scandinavian campaign is considered part of the Phony War period.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Consider whatever you want, Churchill's invasion plans of neutral countries made it quite clear to Hitler that Churchill did not want peace
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Rod1963
    Quite true.

    My father(now deceased) was a WWII veteran(3ID, 3rd cavalry recce - provisional ) who saw action in North Africa, Sicily and Southern Italy He also served in the occupation of Germany after the war in the Constabulary. He saw the occupation first hand and could attest to much what Unz has written, plus a lot more. Oddly enough the Starts & Stripes for that era was never put on-line and there is a reason for it.

    Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar. Quartering of American troops - especially officers and NCO's in German homes was the norm.

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn't want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW's to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn't. They should have. No one would have missed them.

    Rules of war weren't really followed. At Monte Casino, allied commanders imported a contingent of Moroccan colonial troops who proceeded to rape and pillage the Italian countryside with the approval of French Army authorities. Sophia Loren even had a movie made about their crimes.

    BTW my old man was a big fan of Col. Hackworth, whom he admired.

    Hackworth was a great soldier!

    Anyway, even ‘Band of Brothers’ depicts the killing of German POWs, albeit in a rather circuitous way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Thanks, Ron, for having the balls, intellectual integrity and nobility to look these unheralded, alternative historical narratives squarely in the face and for bringing them to light for consideration and assessment by other inquiring minds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @Colin Wright
    '...I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked...'

    The Baku attack, while perhaps not given due emphasis, has never been covered up. I was certainly aware of the project, and there was even a published poem of the period that referred to it, called 'the Map Game' if I recall aright. Something about 'bombs on Batum', and a reference to Baku.

    It all came to naught, first, because Germany decisively brought the phony war to an end, and secondly, because to mount such a strike it would have been necessary to overfly Turkey, and Turkey wouldn't give her permission.

    The proposed Baku attack was mentioned by William L. Shirer in his 1969 book, “The Collapse of the Third Republic.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    The proposed Baku attack was mentioned by William L. Shirer in his 1969 book, “The Collapse of the Third Republic.”

     

    Vs.


    I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories

     

    Using logic we can deduce that Unz did not read William L. Shirer's book.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. iffen says:
    @art guerrilla
    @ iffen-
    I really don't get this: an author makes a SELF-EVIDENT claim (ie baku is NOT mentioned in ANY contemporary his story class/book that 90-99% of the population is going to be exposed to), and a weally, weally much smarter person 'refutes' that SELF-EVIDENT claim by citing an obscure work(s) that 99.99% of the population will NEVER be exposed to...
    .
    um, HOW IS IT that specious claim in any way shape or form 'refutes' the central claim that the plan for baku is essentially unknown among the 90-99% who will NEVER see or seek out obscure his story books ? ??
    .
    guess it just 'proves' how 'smart' you are, I guess...
    *snort*

    In Absolute War, acclaimed historian and journalist Chris Bellamy crafts the first full account since the fall of the Soviet Union of World War II’s battle on the Eastern Front, one of the deadliest conflicts in history.

    The conflict on the Eastern Front, fought between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany between 1941 and 1945, was the greatest, most costly, and most brutal conflict on land in human history. It was arguably the single most decisive factor of the war, and shaped the postwar world as we know it. In this magisterial work, Bellamy outlines the lead-up to the war, in which the fragile alliance between the two dictators was unceremoniously broken, and examines its far-reaching consequences, arguing that the cost of victory was ultimately too much for the Soviet Union to bear. With breadth of scope and a surfeit of new information, this is the definitive history of a conflict whose reverberations are still felt today.

    “Sobering. . . . A global view presented with remarkable clarity.”
    The Boston Globe
    “Probably the best account of the Eastern Front we shall see until President Putin relaxes his newly imposed restrictions on foreign access to the files. . . . Bellamy has made a tremendous contribution to the record of Russia’s struggle, for which future historians will owe a debt.”
    The Sunday Times (London)
    “Bellamy’s treatment is authoritative, his judgments thorough and exacting, and his prose robust.”
    The Daily Telegraph (London)

    Chris Bellamy is Professor of Military Science and Doctrine and Director of the Security Studies Institute at Cranfield University. Born in 1955, he was educated at the universities of Oxford, London, Westminster, and Edinburgh, where he earned his doctorate.

    The Globe, The Times, The Telegraph, strange little memory hole. Maybe some holes are holier than others.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. People interested in WW2 should also read Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof’s 1939 – The War That Had Many Fathers: The Long Run-Up To The Second World War. It’s gotten great reviews at Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/1939-War-That-Many-Fathers/dp/144668623X ). The German edition is in its ninth printing: (https://www.amazon.de/1939-Krieg-Anlauf-Zweiten-Weltkrieg/dp/3789281174 ). I am its translator.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. Wally says:
    @Den Lille Abe
    Thank you, Ron, for providing the possibility of reading these books. Being Danish I was indeed aware of some of these facts, but not the enormity, of the crime. As far back as 1978, through a girlfriend, whose grandmother had arrived in Denmark as a refugee, i learnt of some of it, a visit to Hamburg to her uncle and wife, provided even more of this horrific tale, his accounts of having been on the Eastern front 1939- 1945 and her tale of living in Hamburg as a young woman in the same period. Both were Social Democrats, and had been persecuted in the same period.
    But their telling took a rather ominous direction, when they told of the occupation forces, they were lucky, the Brits had authority in Hamburg. But they knew what happened in other parts of Germany.
    In this context it is important too, that it must not in any way, try to excuse/hide/diminish Hitler's regime's crimes and their sick ideology, which unfortunately often happens on the Internet.

    said:
    “In this context it is important too, that it must not in any way, try to excuse/hide/diminish Hitler’s regime’s crimes and their sick ideology, which unfortunately often happens on the Internet.”

    So what was so “sick” about Hitler’s ideology that was not in general use worldwide at the time? Please be specific.

    What crimes did Hitler’s regime supposedly commit that were not also committed elsewhere at the time?

    “we’ve often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry. And then it dawned upon us, what would we do? We didn’t have the evidence.”

    - so called “holocaust historian” Raul Hilberg

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Svigor says:

    OT: I saw this:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/giving-up-hereditary-citizenship-whats-in-it-for-me-and-mine-seriously/#comment-2409093

    BTW It’s highly unlikely that Somin’s personal ancestors created the USSR. Most of the old Bolsheviks along with their families were killed off by Stalin.

    But apparently Steve thinks its okay to attribute some sort of ‘citizenship’ to Soviet Jews regardless of their own ancestry.

    And knew Steve was highly unlikely to allow my response to go through, so I figured I’d put it here:

    Jews should be expelled; that will end all of the trouble they have caused, and continue to cause. Don’t worry, Jews aren’t going to be expelled – it’s just a philosophical argument. Don’t get all upset if you don’t have a good counterargument…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. Wally says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Germany is not "that unfortunate country". It is the most powerful nation in Europe and one that imposes its will on the rest.

    Nor is Merkel's government a foreign-imposed passing fad but instead it is the most successful in Germany's history.

    I like to over-hype the AfD as much as anybody but the actual opposition to Merkel is the even more self-abegnatory SPD.

    Try talking to Germans other than the handful of Hitler fanatics that they disdain. I find them annoying and self-righteous in their 'liberal' internationalism but I can at least recognise that they predominate in that country.

    The AfD poll at just 15%. This is their best and most amazing ever, but that fluctuates at a similar level to the open borders Greens.

    The AfD would also most likely consider this book to be Hitler fanatic nonsense. The AfD are not a radical party at all. Their immigration policy is the same as Union's was in the 00s and the SPD's (centre left) was in the 90s. The roots of the current nonsenses really are from the 90s...

    Only 15% of Germans can bring themselves to vote for an immigration policy as restrictionist as the left of centre position was in the 90s.

    I reserve judgement about the book myself. I don't know much about it but I won't let Germany be portrayed as a passive victim of current events. Much of Europe's worst policies have been rigidly imposed upon us by a German government whom keeps being returned in elections by the German people.

    said:
    “Try talking to Germans other than the handful of Hitler fanatics that they disdain.”

    What make’s someone a “Hitler fanatic”?
    After all, it’s now known that the ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are easily debunked lies. Please be specific.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @art guerrilla
    @ iffen-
    I really don't get this: an author makes a SELF-EVIDENT claim (ie baku is NOT mentioned in ANY contemporary his story class/book that 90-99% of the population is going to be exposed to), and a weally, weally much smarter person 'refutes' that SELF-EVIDENT claim by citing an obscure work(s) that 99.99% of the population will NEVER be exposed to...
    .
    um, HOW IS IT that specious claim in any way shape or form 'refutes' the central claim that the plan for baku is essentially unknown among the 90-99% who will NEVER see or seek out obscure his story books ? ??
    .
    guess it just 'proves' how 'smart' you are, I guess...
    *snort*

    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn’t react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can’t do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think “Pravda” is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it’s their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else—they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a “Ministry of Truth” out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Yes, this piece would sit comfortably with companion pieces on the famine in India left uncontrolled by Churchill or the millions of black and brown soldiers who fought in both World Wars.

    The Guardian releases them every now and again and each one always says that it is hidden information that the white people in charge don't want you to know.

    At least, this is the case ever since it went full Teen Vogue.

    While decrying one of their writers as a racial huckster I was told by their friend that I was privileged to already know this stuff and that the huckster was writing for those with less of an education. They were essentially being generous, it was argued.

    "After all, look at the lack of black and brown people in WWII films like Dunkirk."

    They have a point about the films (if not Dunkirk specifically) but I can't help but sense that they're always trying to get something out of it. I suspect that others sense it too and that is why those others switch off. There's a limited time after a tragedy for it to be established as needing to be talked about and for its upbringing to seem authentic.
    , @OilcanFloyd
    "I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think “Pravda” is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it’s their ox getting gored..."

    It's hard to believe that the official version of WWII history isn't heavily made up on purpose and ruthlessly policed. The fact that lies such as human lampshades and soap were/are taught in schools, while major events such as Eisenhower's death camps are ignored says something. Hardly a day goes by where I don't hear or read something about the plight of the Jews, yet the plight of the Germans, or other victims of the allies, is never mentioned, anywhere outside of the alternative press. Even non-Jewish victims of the Germans are usually called "others," which seems awfully contrived. I'd also be surprised if I don't come across something about Hitler's supposed drug abuse, sexual perversions, bloods lust, or missing testicle soon. I encounter such claims frequently on sites like Yahoo.

    As for Buchanan, his career has been harmed by his views, and his books are never displayed in bookstores like books by writers of official history. Letting Buchanan tell the truth just discredits the truth to many, which is due to the constant media portrayal of his as a racist and an anti-semite. Nothing accidental there.

    I listen to lots of audio books while driving, and I have noticed that holocaust and Israel themes are often added to books where they don't belong, even when it makes for awkward plot twists. I don't believe that the shaping of fiction is any less accidental than the shaping of official reality.
    , @Ron Unz

    but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject.
     
    Actually, you've jogged my memory. I *do* think I probably read something about it in one of Buchanan's columns almost thirty years ago. But since it seemed so utterly shocking and I never saw it discussed anywhere else in the media, I guess I just half-assumed it was some sort of crazy "conspiracy theory" that had quickly been debunked and completely forgot about it after a few years.

    After all, not every single thing that PJB has ever written is absolutely 100% correct...
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject.

     

    Buchanan ... mainstream?

    Chris Wallace Defends MSNBC Firing Of Pat Buchanan

    Patrick Buchanan Quacks Like a Nazi Sympathizer [huffingtonpost.com]

    Jon Stewart Implies Pat Buchanan is a Nazi on The Daily Show

    Citing Neo-Nazi and Racist Sources, Buchanan Sounds the Alarm [splcenter.org]

    Pat Buchanan's Revisionist Fantasy [washingtonpost.com]

    Is Pat Buchanan Anti-Semitic? [newsweek.com]

    PAT BUCHANAN THE JEWISH QUESTION [washingtonpost.com]

    MSNBC's Pat Buchanan defends Hitler. Again. ... Pat Buchanan: Hitler apologist ... Pat Buchanan: Nazi Sympathizer*? ... Pat Buchanan: The neo-Nazi is out of the closet ... Pat Buchanan's Vile Defense of Hitler ... Pat Buchanan: hater of Israel, defender of old Nazis ... Pat Buchanan: Anti-Semite ... Pat Buchanan's Apologia for Hitler ... Pat Buchanan: Hitler’s Willing Prevaricator ... Pat Buchanan Is A Nazi Sympathizer ... Pat Buchanan: Hitler Was Right ... Pat Buchanan and his Neo-Nazi ties
    , @Anon
    Yours is a very good comment — daring enough to realistically look at human psychology.

    (And that's why when the media want something to register/be minded, they [have to] go on endlessly about it.
    Nothing devoid of glamour loudness and repetition would work.)
    , @renfro

    but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war.
     
    Regarding Eisenhower , he 'cooperated' in it but had to be 'pushed' to carry it out.
    Truman was deluged with complaints from Jews on the Jewish DP's situation ...so he sent several men to Germany to report on conditions...Earl Harrison and Joseph Schwartz among others.
    They reported to Truman that Eisenhower was not doing anything for the Jewish DPs so Truman pressured Eisenhower......in one letter to Eisenhower he orders him to step up the care of the Jews
    ....saying its been reported to him that the Jews are being treated by the US forces as bad as the nazis treated them.

    the letter....

    https://catalog.archives.gov/id/201125
    , @Almost Missouri

    "Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars."
     
    This would be more persuasive if all crimes and atrocities faded from public memory in an even and symmetric way from a point of high outcry at the actual event down to some regular inverse-exponent half-life today.

    But of course, that doesn't happen. Not only do certain deaths get outsize memorialization, but some even get magnified beyond the lamentation they caused at the time they happened. So clearly, thumbs are on scales.

    Furthermore, if--as is clearly the case--interested parties can raise their own gored oxen into sacred cows, likewise can interested parties suppress the gored oxen of others into throwaway sacrificial lambs.

    So yes, there has been a lot of venal and corrupt history writing. It does not follow that we should condemn mankind in general, particularly at a moment when someone is engaged in making a crooked path straight again.
    , @IBC
    You have some good points. But even if it's true, where is the "market" for history like this? That's probably why we don't hear more about it. Look at many of the comments. A lot of them are in the vein of Holocaust-denial or the Protocols of the Elders of Oxbridge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s.

    What was the postwar population of West Germany, East Germany, Austria, and the German cantons of Switzerland (I assume these were included by him)? Less Germany’s acknowledge war casualties (both military and civilian).

    “Greater Germany” of March 1939 contained 83 million Germans. It seems that West Germany, East Germany, and Austria combined contained 76 million people in 1950, and this includes the expellees.

    Total acknowledged deaths in the war are around 7 million. A number of 12 million expellees returning to Germany (arbitrary on my part) indicates postwar casualties of 12 million–though this ignores births and deaths of natural causes.

    Never forget the 12 million?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s."

    Citation please.

    www.codoh.com
    , @jilles dykstra
    Charmley estimates nine million German deaths in WWII.
    I add one million who died in the period 1945 1949, hunger and cold, and one million POW's killed by Eisenhower and De Gaulle
    , @Unzerker

    A number of 12 million expellees returning to Germany
     
    Most of those were from parts of "Greater Germany" that were no longer part of post war Germany.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Wally says:
    @Tom Welsh
    "Although Petain’s new French government guaranteed that its powerful navy would never be used against the British, Churchill took no chances, and quickly launched an attack on the fleet of its erstwhile ally, whose ships were already disarmed and helplessly moored in port..."

    I don't think this is entirely accurate. According to Wikipedia,

    "Churchill ordered the British ships to open fire against the French ships and the British commenced from 17,500 yd (9.9 mi; 16.0 km).[16] The third British salvo scored hits and caused a magazine explosion aboard Bretagne, which sank with 977 of her crew at 6:09 p.m. After thirty salvoes, the French ships stopped firing; the British force altered course to avoid return fire from the French coastal forts but Provence, Dunkerque and the destroyer Mogador were damaged and run aground by their crews.[17] Strasbourg and four destroyers managed to avoid the magnetic mines and escape to the open sea under attack from a flight of bomb-armed Swordfish from Ark Royal. The French ships responded with anti-aircraft fire and shot down two Swordfish, the crews being rescued by the destroyer HMS Wrestler".

    The French ships were by no means disarmed, although they were bottled up in harbour and the British had mined the exits. Moreover the two new battlecruisers were docked with their main armament facing inland. However Wikipedia clearly states that they returned fire for 30 salvoes, and several ships - including one of the battlecruisers - escaped to sea.

    Why do you believe Wikipedia?

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @denjae
    YO “WALLY"

    Do you have parents?, aunts?, uncles?, cousins?, friends?, friends of friends?, anybody?,

    who was actually THERE - (Germany, 1938 - 1945)

    Please, please, please, . . . be specific.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. prusmc says: • Website
    @Heros
    A tip of the hat to Ron Unz for posting this American Pravda series. I enjoy reading these book reviews and the comments, and I appreciate him making the text available on the internet.

    However, I do find reading these Pravda reviews very frustrating. There seems to be some intellectual or scholarly need to constantly defer to the accepted narrative, often missing the bullseye, even though these very authors of the narrative been proven to be liars time and again.

    Compare Adolf Hitler commanding the German Army to strictly follow the Geneva Conventions throughout the war, forbidding rape and looting in France even after Versailles in 1919 and Saar in 1939, letting England escape at Dunkirk, and finally desperately sending Hess to try to make peace and stave off war and communism to (((their))) narrative of histories biggest tyrant leading racial supremacist people on endless wars for world conquest. To most Unz readers it is becoming clear that Hitler was trying to defend Germany, not conquer the world.

    I must say, I look forward to Ron Unz delving deeper into Pravda style propaganda coming out of the jewish media in the 1930's. An expose of the "shoa" would also be of historical significance.

    I would like to touch on Oradour-sur-Glane where Unz writes:


    "a village involved in Resistance activities, in which many hundreds of men, women, and children were herded into a church and other buildings and burned alive."
     
    Unz appears to accepting the (((narrative))) here. I think Oradour-sur-Glane was a kind of French Katyn. The SS caught up with jewish communist terrorists, the "Maquis", who had tortured and murdered an SS officer. The SS claim is that the Maquis had hidden dynamite and weapons in the steeple, or even rigged the church, and the end result was exactly what the perpetrators wanted. The SS were given victors justice, another case of jews recklessly wasting goyim lives in pursuit of their communist and zionist agendas is covered up, and once again Germans are portrayed as Huns bent on world conquest.

    Is there an American Pravada extended posting on Gen. PATTON?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. The iniquitous volume Germany Must Perish lives on in Canada.

    Seeking to draw attention to the power of the Jewish lobby in this country and the hypocrisy of Canadian censorship laws Arthur Topham of Cottonwood BC rewrote Germany Must Perish into Israel Must Perish. He changed Germany in the original to Israel in his rewrite and German to Israeli.

    The authorities acted with the thuggery which could be expected of them and convicted Topham of hate.

    In the People’s Republic of Canada satire is illegal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. schrub says:

    I am surprised that no one has mentioned John Sack’s book “An Eye For An Eye: which details the savage retribution waged again post-war Germans by Jewish individuals and groups.

    https://www.amazon.com/Eye-John-Sack/dp/0465042147/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1531146949&sr=1-1&keywords=john+sack+an+eye+for+an+eye&dpID=51WowIcoQ1L&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

    (Read the comments.)

    Sack was savagely attacked for having written this book, something his Wikipedia entry fails to fully disclose.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Eye_for_an_Eye:_The_Untold_Story_of_Jewish_Revenge_Against_Germans_in_1945

    By the time of his very mysterious and premature death, John Sack had become a virtual “non-person”, totally ostracised by both the media and academia for having written it. The book’s publication ended up effectively destroying his ability to make any sort of living whatsoever as a writer. He had become totally (and I mean totally) blacklisted.

    I am surprised that Sack’s book is back in publication. It was unobtainable for many years. Get it while you can!

    Note: Probably the most savage of the Jews who were deliberately put in charge of a German prisoner of war camps was Salomon Morel. His eventual “punishment” for his misdeeds (which included personally killing as many as 1,500 German POWs, usually with a baseball bat) was dying in a warm bed in Israel at a very advanced age in a country which now lauds him a hero.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Morel

    Read More
    • Agree: TheBoom
    • Replies: @utu
    John Sack’s book “An Eye For An Eye"

    Yes, it is a very good book. I liked the parts about Jewish communist perpetrators of horrible crimes who enjoy living in NY, NJ and CA while complaining about anti-Semites in Poland and Russia.

    I always wondered what were the origins of the book, i.e., how John Sack got on the project? Did somebody sponsor him? I suspected that something bad was happening to him but I did not know that he became "non-person." Do you know more about him?

    There is pdf of the book somewhere on line. Perhaps also Ron Unz could make it available.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Wow, Mr. Unz! Just wow. Thanks for yet another eye-opening installment in your ‘American Pravda’ series. Tell me: where do you find the time to do all this reading and still be a software billionaire? :-D Me, I barely have time enough just to read Unz.com! But as long as the article stay as good as this, I’ll definitely make time for it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. Kirt says:

    This is a great summary of revisionist history concerning enemy civilians losses of WWII. I’ve read France: The Tragic Years and once triggered an outraged response from my college French teacher by referring to the Maquis as terrorists. She insisted they were patriots. Of course, it’s possible to be both. I would like to comment on the idea that there is a moral issue only if the killing is intentional. This is supported in the article by the phrase “the wholly unintentional losses of Mao’s Great Leap Forward”. I’ve heard people argue that deaths in concentration camps cannot be blamed on the camp custodians as long as they merely result from generally bad conditions in the camps rather than from deliberate execution. Not so. If you confiscate people’s food to use for foreign exchange to industrialize or to reward your loyalists or if you throw people into camps under conditions where they are sure to die in large numbers, you’re morally responsible. The truth is there were no good guys in WWII and its pretty hard to distinguish between the bad guys and the marginally worse guys. Same goes for the American Civil War and most other wars. I generally cut a little more slack to those defending their own turf; e.g. Southerners, Vietnamese, Syrians or Iraqis against the US, Chinese against Japan, Russians against Germany.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    Yes, this piece would sit comfortably with companion pieces on the famine in India left uncontrolled by Churchill or the millions of black and brown soldiers who fought in both World Wars.

    The Guardian releases them every now and again and each one always says that it is hidden information that the white people in charge don’t want you to know.

    At least, this is the case ever since it went full Teen Vogue.

    While decrying one of their writers as a racial huckster I was told by their friend that I was privileged to already know this stuff and that the huckster was writing for those with less of an education. They were essentially being generous, it was argued.

    “After all, look at the lack of black and brown people in WWII films like Dunkirk.”

    They have a point about the films (if not Dunkirk specifically) but I can’t help but sense that they’re always trying to get something out of it. I suspect that others sense it too and that is why those others switch off. There’s a limited time after a tragedy for it to be established as needing to be talked about and for its upbringing to seem authentic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    As far as I know, there were no Indian Arab or African troops sent by the British to fight in France and evacuated at Dunkirk. So why would be those troops featured in a movie about Dunkirk.

    The Indian troops were either in Egypt or on reserve in India until the D Day invasion. The French Arab and African troops stayed in the French colonies until shortly before D Day.

    American blacks weren’t in combat. They were support troops. As support troops they did participate in the Normandy invasion but they went in a rape and looting rampage as did the French Arab troops in Italy

    Black chauvinist historians deny this but it happened.

    How can one make an American movie about WW2 black combat troops when there weren’t any?

    The Indians were known as superb troops. There are sections of the cemeteries with Hindu Muslim type monuments filled with thousands of Indians.

    The raping looting black Americans and Arabs are best forgotten.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Fascinating Ron. Before I send it on to historian friends and an old IMF hand who was intrigued by revival of memories of Harry Dexter White stories I would like to ask a couple of tidy up questions.

    You said Russell Grenfell expressed objection to the headlined newspaper accounts of horrific tortures of German prisoners at war crimes trials to voerce confessions. But it is not clear whether he objected to the torture or the publicising of it. I infer thatypu think he believed it occurred.

    The other question concerns numbers of Germans who died above the expected number beteeen 1945 andv1950. Is the figure of 10 million credible? I suppose it might include ethnic Germans who wouldn’t have been counted in Germany’s 69.8 million in 1940 that I found here:

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/28/curt-schilling/schilling-throws-wild-pitch-nazi-stat/

    From that I found this heavyweight site that I suppose might give a comprehensive picture of German demographics over the last couple of centuries but decided to pass on the research:

    https://figshare.com/articles/German_Time_Series_Dataset_1834_2012/1450809

    I toss in a figure of 2 million German births in 1913 which can fairly be regarded as suggesting a much lower figure for Germany 1940 to 1950 snd then count the German official number of military deaths at 4.3 million and strategic bombing deaths of civilians at 350,000 to 500,000 all by 1945 and those POWs who can be counted as starved to death by Eisenhower OR the Soviets unless one wants to double count and I think I’m asking you to find some numbers which make the difference between 70 -4.3 – 0.35 – 5** and whatever seems a plausible figure for the number of Germans in 1950 (which has left me confused) amount to 10 million or whatever you may prefer as a figure.

    ** making the guess that births exceeded natural deaths from 1940 to 1950 by 5 million after a look at birth and death rates in the 1930s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. Anonymous[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Germany is not "that unfortunate country". It is the most powerful nation in Europe and one that imposes its will on the rest.

    Nor is Merkel's government a foreign-imposed passing fad but instead it is the most successful in Germany's history.

    I like to over-hype the AfD as much as anybody but the actual opposition to Merkel is the even more self-abegnatory SPD.

    Try talking to Germans other than the handful of Hitler fanatics that they disdain. I find them annoying and self-righteous in their 'liberal' internationalism but I can at least recognise that they predominate in that country.

    The AfD poll at just 15%. This is their best and most amazing ever, but that fluctuates at a similar level to the open borders Greens.

    The AfD would also most likely consider this book to be Hitler fanatic nonsense. The AfD are not a radical party at all. Their immigration policy is the same as Union's was in the 00s and the SPD's (centre left) was in the 90s. The roots of the current nonsenses really are from the 90s...

    Only 15% of Germans can bring themselves to vote for an immigration policy as restrictionist as the left of centre position was in the 90s.

    I reserve judgement about the book myself. I don't know much about it but I won't let Germany be portrayed as a passive victim of current events. Much of Europe's worst policies have been rigidly imposed upon us by a German government whom keeps being returned in elections by the German people.

    Did you grow up in Germany and pass through their school system?
    Did you notice the incessant TV presentations of Germany’s crimes of that time? Every year and every year ad nauseum?
    How could you even lift up your head as a German. You are the scum of the earth.
    Calls came in to the Radio Station of BR2 in Bavaria in 2015. (Probably others too). People stated that now, finally, they could be proud of themselves again.
    Germans are a totally conditioned people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Brainwashed with guilt over two world wars and the holocaust.
    The most interesting effect is the German confusion about Israeli crimes to Palestinians.
    On the one hand they clearly see these crimes, on the other, jews are eternal innocent victims.
    , @Tyrion 2
    But Germans are in charge of Germany and in charge of Europe...they're responsible for their own condition. I suspect even Hitler would have agreed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. JoeK says: • Website

    As usual, an excellent American Pravda! On the general theme of who is responsible for the start of World War II, have you read A.J.P. Taylor’s “The Origins of the Second World War? Mr. Taylor, a sound English historian, raises a number of interesting thoughts. While I read this book a number of years ago, I am currently carefully re-reading Mr. Taylor’s book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. The descriptions of the deprivation and cruelty visited upon the surviving German population by the Allied occupation brings to mind the absolute shame of war, as in, why do humans allow themselves to be herded into wars that ultimately serve the interests of corrupt elites? It’s embarrassing.

    Given human nature, pacifism is foolish and unrealistic: sometimes violence is necessary and certain people need to be killed. But participation in large-scale wars where fortunes can be made makes suckers out of the participants.

    Hey Mr. Unz! The following three books by author and investigative journalist Christopher Simpson may be good candidates for your HTML archive: Blowback (1983), which covers the American recruitment of Nazi scientists and psy-war experts in an operation known as ‘Paperclip’; Science of Coercion (1994) details how the media and advertising industry were used, in the post-war period, to further the aims of newly-birthed national security state; The Splendid Blond Beast (1993) tells of the response of the U.S. administrative state and its financial allies to the European Holocaust.

    Read More
    • Troll: utu
    • Replies: @Wally
    Wow! The US recruited German scientists, so what?
    Who didn't.

    Please tell us exactly what proof the book 'The Splendid Blond Beast' provides for the claimed, yet impossible 'holocaust' narrative.

    Specifics please.

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Wally says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s.

    What was the postwar population of West Germany, East Germany, Austria, and the German cantons of Switzerland (I assume these were included by him)? Less Germany's acknowledge war casualties (both military and civilian).

    "Greater Germany" of March 1939 contained 83 million Germans. It seems that West Germany, East Germany, and Austria combined contained 76 million people in 1950, and this includes the expellees.

    Total acknowledged deaths in the war are around 7 million. A number of 12 million expellees returning to Germany (arbitrary on my part) indicates postwar casualties of 12 million--though this ignores births and deaths of natural causes.

    Never forget the 12 million?

    said:
    “Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s.”

    Citation please.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    http://www.unz.com/book/david_irving__hitlers-war/#p_8_34


    There is only one nation on earth, living in the heart of Europe in great compactness, of uniform race and language, tightly concentrated: and that is the German nation, with 110 million Germans in Central Europe. This comparison gives us cause to hope. One day the entire world must and shall belong to this united block of Central Europe.
     
    However elsewhere he makes reference to 95 million Germans instead, which seems more accurate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Wally
    Per Nuremberg, long, see 'more' below.

    - How the Film Evidence at Nuremberg was faked
    From the files of Justice Robert H Jackson, US chief prosecutor at Nuremberg.
    : http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/Nbg/DeanIMT161145.html

    - The Soviet communists presented a detailed study of steam chambers which was accepted a Nuremberg, no study for the now alleged pesticide using 'gas chambers' was ever presented at Nuremberg, or any other court

    - Documents from the U.S. National Archives reveal that the U.S. government helped cover up the Soviet 1940 massacre on some 20,000 Poles at Katyn and other places — not just during the war, but even afterwards. The Katyn Massacre by the Soviets was accepted by the Allies at Nuremberg as a German crime.

    - English translations of Russian translations of Polish copies of an alleged German original which cannot be found. That is typical of Nuremberg 'documents'. Ask Carlos Porter about that, his website is filled with such 'documents'
    Recall that at Nuremberg is was stated that 'the court was not bound by technical rules of evidence.'

    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:" 23.1.49, Judge van Roden, The Sunday Pictorial, (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21. The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused's head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden

    - Judge van Roden's statements of torture to gain "confessions" are confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49

    - U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
    " The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history."
    Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49

    - "The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to [Bernard] Clarke the blows and screams were endless. Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: 'Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.'"(12)
    12.R. Butler, Legions of Death, Hamlyn, (London, 1983), p.237

    - The admission of Bernard Clarke was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in 'The Wrexham Leader', October 17, 1986. Mr. Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid in Schleswig-Holstein.
    "They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activites during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hoess in his cell to help break him down for interrogation."
    "We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance," said Mr. Jones.
    When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.

    Only Liars Want Censorship
    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    I appreciate contrarians and consider myself to be one. Everything should be up for debate, whether it be African IQ or details regarding the motive for the European Holocaust. But to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "But to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly."

    Oh Yawn.
    That's exactly the kind of limited thinking that the "Holocau$t Industry" demands from you and those like you. You have become an unthinking, propagandized lemming.

    I note that you don't even try to refute the information about Nuremberg that I posted. Then you posted a dodging, non-response. Please grow up.

    How about showing us the alleged millions of human remains that Jews claim still exist in known locations.

    How about telling us how the scientifically impossible 'gas chambers' worked.

    Try to refute these:

    The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies: http://codoh.com/library/document/865/?lang=en

    Chemistry of Auschwitz / Birkenau
    https://youtu.be/SUc6Y_E5zb0
    www.codoh.com

    , @Druid
    Quibble! The numbers are unbelievable and used as weapons, idiot. That's why they're important and Wally is right!
    , @Rurik

    to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly.
     
    Were the victims of Nazi crime's lives any more worthy of sympathy than the victims of Zionist crimes?

    because there are about 47 movies and TV shows made during the average month in Hollywood lamenting the singular evil of the German victims of "gas chambers"..

    while there are exactly zero Hollywood movies and TV shows lamenting the Jewish victims in Palestine- who are dying now, today, right in front of our eyes, who seem to seem to garner zero sympathy for their deaths by (((Hollywood))).

    Have you ever wondered why?

    Personally I consider it beyond ghoulish and ghastly that the people in Palestine are being slaughtered wholesale to the thunderous silence of the all those virtue-signaling, holier than thou, sanctimonious imbeciles who get their cues on which groups we should all feel sorry for from an open sewer of moral iniquity like Hollywood.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Wally
    said:
    "Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s."

    Citation please.

    www.codoh.com

    http://www.unz.com/book/david_irving__hitlers-war/#p_8_34

    There is only one nation on earth, living in the heart of Europe in great compactness, of uniform race and language, tightly concentrated: and that is the German nation, with 110 million Germans in Central Europe. This comparison gives us cause to hope. One day the entire world must and shall belong to this united block of Central Europe.

    However elsewhere he makes reference to 95 million Germans instead, which seems more accurate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Thanks.

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    Wrong. The Phony War is usually regarded as lasting from the end of the Poland campaign until the invasion of the Low Countries on May 10, 1940. Churchill's Scandinavian campaign is considered part of the Phony War period.

    Consider whatever you want, Churchill’s invasion plans of neutral countries made it quite clear to Hitler that Churchill did not want peace

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    fact:

    UK forces invaded & placed military forces in neutral Norway before the Germans arrived and threw them out.

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Simon in London
    I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France (unlike Poland). I think it was moderately well known that the Americans didn't behave very well in occupied Germany, though we have a rosy view of our own behaviour.

    I'm shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2.

    It’s nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there’s no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).
    It’s unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified (but the kind of articles one reads here on Unz are rather counter-productive imo). But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I’ll leave it at that.

    Read More
    • Agree: David In TN
    • Troll: L.K, Mike P
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    It’s nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there’s no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).

    It’s unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified
     
    Well, that's certainly possible---I wasn't there myself, and can't really say for sure. But I found Bacque's evidence and analysis quite persuasive, and the attempted rebuttal by Ambrose et. al. much less so.

    Based on the angry statements by the distinguished international human rights lawyer Alfred de Zayas, anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison, so I doubt it's subject to much ongoing historical discussion.
    , @utu
    That NPD people believe it is not an argument. That you do not believe it is not an argument. So basically what is your argument?
    , @Wally
    said:
    " But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I’ll leave it at that."

    One cannot deny what did not, could not have happen.
    I note that you have yet to refute any of the numerous 'holocaust' Revisionists at this site.
    I myself have posted numerous works by Revisionists which make mincemeat out of your fake '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' and you simply run away.

    If your head is in the sand, your ass is in the air.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/20180118_outrage.png?itok=RhdJTA4x

    www.codoh.com

    , @Hippopotamusdrome

    The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis)

     

    Godwined.
    , @TheJester
    Years ago I read a book written by a Canadian that documented that at least 50,000 German POWs lost their lives in POW camps immediately after the war. These were the days toward the end and immediately after the war in which the allies drew up thousands of German soldiers and barricaded them in open fields. They were left with nothing but their great coats to sustain them through the cruel German fall and winter.

    As the story goes, the allied troops guarding the Germans did not know what to feed them. A US Army dietitian allegedly pulled something out of a book and declared that they should be fed no more than 1,500 calories a day ... enough for a normal male in civilized society but not near enough for males exposed to the elements. Local Germans were forbidden to provide additional food.

    Every morning, US military details would go through the open air camps to pick up the dead.

    The point seems to be that, in at least this case, the deaths of 50,000 German soldiers in allied hands after WWII in allied hands were simply accidents of war. I'm skeptical. If the US Army officer was indeed a dietitian, he should have known better. Clearly, faced with the immense death toll, someone in authority would have known something was amiss.

    I couldn't find a reference to the book on the Internet. However, I did find this (another validation of what was in the book):

    https://rense.com/general19/camps.htm

    ----------

    My German grandmother had a different story to tell about German POWs in WWII. She lived in a German-American farming community in western Kansas. They were a German-speaking community that had migrated from Russia in the 1870s. German POWs were assigned to the farms to provide labor to replace the American boys at war. The young POWs were accepted as members of the family; they ate, lived, and slept together -- no guards ... nothing. (Where are you going to escape to when interned at a farm in western Kansas?)

    She said that many of the POWs did not want to go home after the war. They wanted to stay with their new families.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Anonymous
    Did you grow up in Germany and pass through their school system?
    Did you notice the incessant TV presentations of Germany's crimes of that time? Every year and every year ad nauseum?
    How could you even lift up your head as a German. You are the scum of the earth.
    Calls came in to the Radio Station of BR2 in Bavaria in 2015. (Probably others too). People stated that now, finally, they could be proud of themselves again.
    Germans are a totally conditioned people.

    Brainwashed with guilt over two world wars and the holocaust.
    The most interesting effect is the German confusion about Israeli crimes to Palestinians.
    On the one hand they clearly see these crimes, on the other, jews are eternal innocent victims.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    “I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think “Pravda” is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it’s their ox getting gored…”

    It’s hard to believe that the official version of WWII history isn’t heavily made up on purpose and ruthlessly policed. The fact that lies such as human lampshades and soap were/are taught in schools, while major events such as Eisenhower’s death camps are ignored says something. Hardly a day goes by where I don’t hear or read something about the plight of the Jews, yet the plight of the Germans, or other victims of the allies, is never mentioned, anywhere outside of the alternative press. Even non-Jewish victims of the Germans are usually called “others,” which seems awfully contrived. I’d also be surprised if I don’t come across something about Hitler’s supposed drug abuse, sexual perversions, bloods lust, or missing testicle soon. I encounter such claims frequently on sites like Yahoo.

    As for Buchanan, his career has been harmed by his views, and his books are never displayed in bookstores like books by writers of official history. Letting Buchanan tell the truth just discredits the truth to many, which is due to the constant media portrayal of his as a racist and an anti-semite. Nothing accidental there.

    I listen to lots of audio books while driving, and I have noticed that holocaust and Israel themes are often added to books where they don’t belong, even when it makes for awkward plot twists. I don’t believe that the shaping of fiction is any less accidental than the shaping of official reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Thorfinnsson
    Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s.

    What was the postwar population of West Germany, East Germany, Austria, and the German cantons of Switzerland (I assume these were included by him)? Less Germany's acknowledge war casualties (both military and civilian).

    "Greater Germany" of March 1939 contained 83 million Germans. It seems that West Germany, East Germany, and Austria combined contained 76 million people in 1950, and this includes the expellees.

    Total acknowledged deaths in the war are around 7 million. A number of 12 million expellees returning to Germany (arbitrary on my part) indicates postwar casualties of 12 million--though this ignores births and deaths of natural causes.

    Never forget the 12 million?

    Charmley estimates nine million German deaths in WWII.
    I add one million who died in the period 1945 1949, hunger and cold, and one million POW’s killed by Eisenhower and De Gaulle

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Ron Unz says:
    @iffen
    I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories, and until recently I would have dismissed the story as an absurd rumor of that era, long since debunked. But just a couple of weeks ago, I discovered a 2015 article in The National Interest confirming these exact facts, over seventy years after they had understandably been expunged from all of our mainstream historical narratives.


    I just completed Chris Bellamy's Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means "your expungers" are not very good.

    I just completed Chris Bellamy’s Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means “your expungers” are not very good.

    Well, I haven’t myself read that particular 2007 book, but out of curiosity, I just took it down from my shelf and consulted the index. There was no entry for “Baku” and when I checked all the references for the “Caucasus Oil-Fields” and “France”, it was never mentioned. I’m not necessarily saying that you’re lying. It’s perfectly possible that there were a couple of sentences buried somewhere in the 800 pages of text, but the discussion was just too scanty to have been included in the 25 page index.

    By contrast, the article I linked at The National Interest treated the planned attack as a massive revelation, which surely would have changed the outcome of World War II, and it was considered so note-worthy that TNI republished it a couple of years later. I regard myself as someone reasonably knowledgeable about WWII, and I’d certainly never heard of it.

    Here’s an analogy. In one of my recent JFK articles, I pointed out that LBJ was by far the most obvious suspect, and indeed the apparent conspirators identified in the Talbot and Douglass books had explicitly claimed that LBJ was part of the plot. Despite this, those authors only discuss the possible role of LBJ in a couple of paragraphs across 1,500(!) total pages, and treat it rather dismissively. However, it would be factually incorrect to claim that they “ignored” that theory:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-ii-who-did-it/

    Similarly, Rick Perlstein’s three long books on the rise of what he considers America’s somewhat “paranoid” conservative movement opens in the early 1950s, less than a decade after Soviet agents had come within a hairsbreadth of gaining control of the American government. However, he doesn’t *totally* ignore that issue since he (rather dismissively) mentions Harry Dexter White in parts of two sentences across his 2,400 pages of text:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-deadly-world-of-post-war-politics/

    So nobody can honestly claim that Talbot, Douglass, and Perlstein failed to include mention of an overwhelmingly important issue, and you might very well be correct that Bellamy did the same.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    Here's the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon "Look Inside" on "Baku" -- there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):

    p. 237: "Suspicion, distrust and manipulation were still in the air. But on 23 June the NKGB reported that the Chief of the British Air Staff, Sir Charles Portal, had suggested cabling the commands in India and the Middle East ordering them to stop planning to bomb the Baku oilfields, which it had been feared, might be used to supply the Germans."
    , @LSJohn
    The current "Pravda" article, along with your reply here, are good examples of the reasons you have become my favorite writer to read.

    Here's one detail I consider important to this general subject:

    The similarities between the Morgenthau Plan that was unofficially repudiated in public remarks, but not officially replaced until July 1947, the agreement reached between Roosevelt and British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden at the "Second" Quebec Conference of 1944, and the military document ordering the post-war "administration" of Germany, JCS 1067, all agreed in important aspects not favorable to Germany or its civilian population. All pointed to deindustrialization, envisioning a "new" pastoral Germany, with the disassembled industrial assets throughout the Ruhr and Saar shipped to "victims of Gemany's crimes" mostly, as it played out, the USSR.

    The Marshall Plan 's implementation did not begin until mid-'48.
    , @Anarcho-Supremacist

    I had certainly read of the horrors inflicted by Russian troops, with perhaps two million German women and girls brutally raped,
     
    When are you going to actually read the posts of your buddy @Anatoly Karlin ? That probably did not happen but even if for the sake of argument it did so what? After what they did to the Russian people that was being merciful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Antiwar7 says:
    @Rod1963
    Quite true.

    My father(now deceased) was a WWII veteran(3ID, 3rd cavalry recce - provisional ) who saw action in North Africa, Sicily and Southern Italy He also served in the occupation of Germany after the war in the Constabulary. He saw the occupation first hand and could attest to much what Unz has written, plus a lot more. Oddly enough the Starts & Stripes for that era was never put on-line and there is a reason for it.

    Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar. Quartering of American troops - especially officers and NCO's in German homes was the norm.

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn't want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW's to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn't. They should have. No one would have missed them.

    Rules of war weren't really followed. At Monte Casino, allied commanders imported a contingent of Moroccan colonial troops who proceeded to rape and pillage the Italian countryside with the approval of French Army authorities. Sophia Loren even had a movie made about their crimes.

    BTW my old man was a big fan of Col. Hackworth, whom he admired.

    My father, who was an Allied POW in Germany, and stayed there for 4 years after the war, broadly corroborated this, and told me about it as I grew up. He was treated well as a POW, and before the Allies conquered his area, he advised his German captors to desert, get rid of their uniforms, and hide out in the woods during the transfer. A number of them did, and thanked him afterwards.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Ron Unz says:
    @Simon in London
    I think it was/is well known in Britain that the Germans behaved very well in occupied France (unlike Poland). I think it was moderately well known that the Americans didn't behave very well in occupied Germany, though we have a rosy view of our own behaviour.

    I'm shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.

    Well, that’s how Bacque discovered the story. He noticed all sorts of Thank You letters from various Germans to a local French official, and when he interviewed one of them, the man furtively explained that he had been taken out of one of a camps as a local worker, thereby saving his life. After Bacque published his book, he claims an enormous number of former POWs got in touch with him, saying how grateful they were that the true story was finally being revealed to the world.

    As I mentioned in my article, all historians admit that at least 2 million expelled German civilians died on their “Trail of Tears” (and perhaps the figure was much higher), which was certainly the greatest peacetime “ethnic cleansing” in the history of the world. But virtually no Americans are aware of it, since it has almost never gotten any media attention. And my impression is that Germans who talk about it too loudly these days may be arrested and thrown into prison.

    The central point of my entire American Pravda series is that our Media creates Reality, and I think this is a pretty good example of that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    And my impression is that Germans who talk about it too loudly these days may be arrested and thrown into prison.
     
    That's not true, one can talk openly about the expulsions of Germans from Eastern Europe and the lost Eastern territories. It's just that one will immediately be accused by "good" Germans of wanting to trivialize German guilt, reversing cause and effect etc.
    In recent years there has been a new spin on the issue though, the issue is now used for "refugees welcome" propaganda (because the WW2 refugees are supposedly the same as the "refugees" today).
    , @Shawn Returns
    We have the name "Trail of Tears," the Holocaust, the Holodomor, but we need a memorable name for the flight and expulsion of Germans from 1944-50.

    Any ideas?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @David In TN
    The proposed Baku attack was mentioned by William L. Shirer in his 1969 book, "The Collapse of the Third Republic."

    The proposed Baku attack was mentioned by William L. Shirer in his 1969 book, “The Collapse of the Third Republic.”

    Vs.

    I had never read a single mention of this in any of my World War II histories

    Using logic we can deduce that Unz did not read William L. Shirer’s book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2.
     
    It's nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there's no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).
    It's unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified (but the kind of articles one reads here on Unz are rather counter-productive imo). But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I'll leave it at that.

    It’s nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there’s no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).

    It’s unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified

    Well, that’s certainly possible—I wasn’t there myself, and can’t really say for sure. But I found Bacque’s evidence and analysis quite persuasive, and the attempted rebuttal by Ambrose et. al. much less so.

    Based on the angry statements by the distinguished international human rights lawyer Alfred de Zayas, anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison, so I doubt it’s subject to much ongoing historical discussion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Letter published in NYT

    https://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/14/books/l-ike-and-the-disappearing-atrocities-211391.html
    I witnessed the atrocities Stephen E. Ambrose tries to deny or gloss over in his essay. In the spring of 1945 I was a United States Army prison guard at Andernach, on the Rhine.

    Mr. Ambrose mentions in passing that German prisoners of war "were beaten, denied water, forced to live . . . without shelter, given inadequate food rations and inadequate medical care. Their mail was withheld." But then he focuses only on the alleged food shortage. He doesn't address the other deprivations: were there also tent, blanket, clothing, medical and mailman shortages? There was certainly no water shortage; we were right on the Rhine, yet we denied the prisoners sufficient water. Maddened with thirst, some of them crawled under the wires and ran toward the river in open fields in broad daylight while American guards machine-gunned them.

    A friend in the camp kitchen showed me our abundant supplies and admitted we could feed the prisoners more. When I threw some of my surplus rations over the wires to them, I was threatened with imprisonment. I protested to my officers, and they said the starvation diet was ordered by "higher-ups" and was general policy. MARTIN BRECH Mahopac, N.Y.
     
    , @German_reader

    anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison
     
    I very much doubt that's true.
    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.
    Claiming the Americans starved German pows to death doesn't fall under these laws.
    , @David In TN
    Ambrose called a conference of historians from various countries to discuss Bacque's charges. They concluded there WAS widespread mistreatment of German POWS after WW II. They went into the reasons why. The European food shortage all over the continent. They also concluded some Americans "acted as brutally as the Nazis."

    Bacque's numbers were inflated and a German post-war commission on the subject had accounted for the POWs fate. Still, Ambrose said Bacque deserved thanks for raising the subject.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. utu says:
    @German_reader

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2.
     
    It's nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there's no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).
    It's unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified (but the kind of articles one reads here on Unz are rather counter-productive imo). But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I'll leave it at that.

    That NPD people believe it is not an argument. That you do not believe it is not an argument. So basically what is your argument?

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    My argument is that almost nobody in Germany believes that the Americans starved one million German pows to death (widespread mistreatment of pows in the Rheinwiesen camps is another matter). Given that other issues like indiscriminate Allied air raids or the war crimes committed by Soviet and French colonial troops are widely known (even if good Germans always try to excuse them), it seems very unlikely to me this claim is true.
    But I'm not going to bother arguing with you about this, frankly I'm sick of both the Germanophobes and the fake Germanophiles on this site.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Ron Unz says:

    Incidentally, I should probably make a general statement as well…

    Some of the commenters above are saying “Sure, we knew all about these things, what else is knew?”

    Others are saying they find this material extremely surprising, even shocking.

    I myself fall into both of these groups. Four or five years ago I would have been in the first category, and fifteen years ago I would have been in the second.

    Since I have absolutely no idea of how many of the readers of this webzine are aware of what, I feel that publishing these sorts of articles may sometimes serve a useful purpose.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    Everything you've published here is useful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Cleburne says:
    @Wally
    Ron Unz said"
    "Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control. For example, there was the notorious case of Oradour-sur-Glane, a village involved in Resistance activities, in which many hundreds of men, women, and children were herded into a church and other buildings and burned alive. Meanwhile, enormous numbers of Frenchmen and others had been deported to wartime Germany as slave-laborers, in total violation of every legal principle, producing an uncanny parallel to Stalin’s Gulag and underscoring the similarity of those two totalitarian regimes. This, at least, had always been my limited impression of that very unfortunate era."

    I call BS & propaganda right off the bat. Please give us proof of your "vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control."

    Be specific and present proof.
    If Oradour-sur-Glane is your best shot, then you truly have nothing.

    The “Oradour-sur-Glane massacre”? Been there, debunked that, see:
    ‘ Persecution in France for “The Waffen-SS: Innocent at Oradour” ‘
    By Vincent Reynouard: https://codoh.com/library/document/631/?lang=en
    and:
    France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glane: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7603

    And lots, lots more here: https://codoh.com/search/?sorting=relevance&q=oradour

    Of course there were the "enormous numbers" of Japanese-Americans "herded" into US concentration camps in total violation of every US legal principle before the SCOTUS insanely approved it upon FDR pressure, which Unz prefers to ignore.
    There were the "enormous numbers" of Christians & more "herded into brutal Soviet gulags which Unz prefers to ignore.

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    I’m increasingly convinced you’re a Hasbara/zionist troll, tasked with casting ordure on the revisionist movement by the arrogance, aggression and general obnoxiousness of your responses. You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar; that your every post inverts this standard principle indicates to me that your intentions are nefarious. It suggests at the least that anyone who braves “codoh.com will encounter not ad hominem-free, level playing field debate, but increasingly unhinged postings from people Who Got It All Figured Out, and so stay away.

    Which, when you think of it, is exactly WHAT THEY WANT.

    You’re busted, Wally.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    [If you want your comments published, you should attempt to produce original ones, rather than endlessly repeating the same text.]
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Ron Unz says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject.

    Actually, you’ve jogged my memory. I *do* think I probably read something about it in one of Buchanan’s columns almost thirty years ago. But since it seemed so utterly shocking and I never saw it discussed anywhere else in the media, I guess I just half-assumed it was some sort of crazy “conspiracy theory” that had quickly been debunked and completely forgot about it after a few years.

    After all, not every single thing that PJB has ever written is absolutely 100% correct…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    No, not all that Buchanan has written is 100% correct, but I am confident that at least 99% of what he has written that does not rather closely toe the line of some portion of what we may call the Whig sense of history's moral march is at least 90% correct.

    That's the reason he is so widely and wildly hated, feared and traduced. Pat Buchanan is to Leftists and Neocons as the crucifix is to vampires.

    That Libertarians almost invariably cannot see that is proof that Libertarianism is at best a hot air waste of time.

    , @Anon
    Sorry, can’t remember the names. About 30 years ago a book came out about Eisenhower’s death camps that was widely read and reviewed.

    About 2 years after that another book came out refuting the first book. The second book claimed the almost million in Eisenhower’s death camps were East Germans and were sent home to East Germany.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Art says:

    Clearly nationalistic tribal governments are more than capable of acting on the worst of human nature.

    Here are our current nationalistic government leaders.

    Donald Trump, Gina Haspel, Nikki Haley, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Mad Dog Mattis, and John Bolton.

    Oh dear’ – what is going to happen? How many of those people actually seek peace? None!

    Think Peace — Do No harm — Art.

    p.s. Of course the above answer to the fascist – Bibi Netanyahu – the most dangerous nationalist on the planet.

    p.s. Darwin’s notion “of the survival of the fittest” reinvigorated tribalism. WWI, WWII, and the current ME troubles are the result. We must return “to the seeking of the fittest ideas.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. utu says:
    @Ron Unz

    It’s nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there’s no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).

    It’s unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified
     
    Well, that's certainly possible---I wasn't there myself, and can't really say for sure. But I found Bacque's evidence and analysis quite persuasive, and the attempted rebuttal by Ambrose et. al. much less so.

    Based on the angry statements by the distinguished international human rights lawyer Alfred de Zayas, anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison, so I doubt it's subject to much ongoing historical discussion.

    Letter published in NYT

    https://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/14/books/l-ike-and-the-disappearing-atrocities-211391.html
    I witnessed the atrocities Stephen E. Ambrose tries to deny or gloss over in his essay. In the spring of 1945 I was a United States Army prison guard at Andernach, on the Rhine.

    Mr. Ambrose mentions in passing that German prisoners of war “were beaten, denied water, forced to live . . . without shelter, given inadequate food rations and inadequate medical care. Their mail was withheld.” But then he focuses only on the alleged food shortage. He doesn’t address the other deprivations: were there also tent, blanket, clothing, medical and mailman shortages? There was certainly no water shortage; we were right on the Rhine, yet we denied the prisoners sufficient water. Maddened with thirst, some of them crawled under the wires and ran toward the river in open fields in broad daylight while American guards machine-gunned them.

    A friend in the camp kitchen showed me our abundant supplies and admitted we could feed the prisoners more. When I threw some of my surplus rations over the wires to them, I was threatened with imprisonment. I protested to my officers, and they said the starvation diet was ordered by “higher-ups” and was general policy. MARTIN BRECH Mahopac, N.Y.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject.

    Buchanan … mainstream?

    Chris Wallace Defends MSNBC Firing Of Pat Buchanan

    Patrick Buchanan Quacks Like a Nazi Sympathizer [huffingtonpost.com]

    Jon Stewart Implies Pat Buchanan is a Nazi on The Daily Show

    Citing Neo-Nazi and Racist Sources, Buchanan Sounds the Alarm [splcenter.org]

    Pat Buchanan’s Revisionist Fantasy [washingtonpost.com]

    Is Pat Buchanan Anti-Semitic? [newsweek.com]

    PAT BUCHANAN THE JEWISH QUESTION [washingtonpost.com]

    MSNBC’s Pat Buchanan defends Hitler. Again. … Pat Buchanan: Hitler apologist … Pat Buchanan: Nazi Sympathizer*? … Pat Buchanan: The neo-Nazi is out of the closet … Pat Buchanan’s Vile Defense of Hitler … Pat Buchanan: hater of Israel, defender of old Nazis … Pat Buchanan: Anti-Semite … Pat Buchanan’s Apologia for Hitler … Pat Buchanan: Hitler’s Willing Prevaricator … Pat Buchanan Is A Nazi Sympathizer … Pat Buchanan: Hitler Was Right … Pat Buchanan and his Neo-Nazi ties

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. nickels says:

    Another epic piece!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. Wally says:
    @German_reader

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2.
     
    It's nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there's no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).
    It's unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified (but the kind of articles one reads here on Unz are rather counter-productive imo). But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I'll leave it at that.

    said:
    ” But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I’ll leave it at that.”

    One cannot deny what did not, could not have happen.
    I note that you have yet to refute any of the numerous ‘holocaust’ Revisionists at this site.
    I myself have posted numerous works by Revisionists which make mincemeat out of your fake ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ and you simply run away.

    If your head is in the sand, your ass is in the air.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paw
    I S L A M I S T ? Picture ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Wally says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Consider whatever you want, Churchill's invasion plans of neutral countries made it quite clear to Hitler that Churchill did not want peace

    fact:

    UK forces invaded & placed military forces in neutral Norway before the Germans arrived and threw them out.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Ron Unz

    I just completed Chris Bellamy’s Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means “your expungers” are not very good.
     
    Well, I haven't myself read that particular 2007 book, but out of curiosity, I just took it down from my shelf and consulted the index. There was no entry for "Baku" and when I checked all the references for the "Caucasus Oil-Fields" and "France", it was never mentioned. I'm not necessarily saying that you're lying. It's perfectly possible that there were a couple of sentences buried somewhere in the 800 pages of text, but the discussion was just too scanty to have been included in the 25 page index.

    By contrast, the article I linked at The National Interest treated the planned attack as a massive revelation, which surely would have changed the outcome of World War II, and it was considered so note-worthy that TNI republished it a couple of years later. I regard myself as someone reasonably knowledgeable about WWII, and I'd certainly never heard of it.

    Here's an analogy. In one of my recent JFK articles, I pointed out that LBJ was by far the most obvious suspect, and indeed the apparent conspirators identified in the Talbot and Douglass books had explicitly claimed that LBJ was part of the plot. Despite this, those authors only discuss the possible role of LBJ in a couple of paragraphs across 1,500(!) total pages, and treat it rather dismissively. However, it would be factually incorrect to claim that they "ignored" that theory:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-ii-who-did-it/

    Similarly, Rick Perlstein's three long books on the rise of what he considers America's somewhat "paranoid" conservative movement opens in the early 1950s, less than a decade after Soviet agents had come within a hairsbreadth of gaining control of the American government. However, he doesn't *totally* ignore that issue since he (rather dismissively) mentions Harry Dexter White in parts of two sentences across his 2,400 pages of text:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-deadly-world-of-post-war-politics/

    So nobody can honestly claim that Talbot, Douglass, and Perlstein failed to include mention of an overwhelmingly important issue, and you might very well be correct that Bellamy did the same.

    Here’s the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon “Look Inside” on “Baku” — there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):

    p. 237: “Suspicion, distrust and manipulation were still in the air. But on 23 June the NKGB reported that the Chief of the British Air Staff, Sir Charles Portal, had suggested cabling the commands in India and the Middle East ordering them to stop planning to bomb the Baku oilfields, which it had been feared, might be used to supply the Germans.”

    Read More
    • LOL: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Here’s the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon “Look Inside” on “Baku” — there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):
     
    Ha, ha, ha...

    Either our friend "Iffen" just finished reading Bellamy's 800 page book with greater care and attention to detail than anyone I've ever known in my life, or he's just unmasked himself as the biggest liar on this website...
    , @Kratoklastes

    Here’s the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon “Look Inside” on “Baku” — there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one)
     
    While I can't speak to the accuracy of Amazon's "Look Inside" feature, there is a really important point that is embedded in the very fact that these days one can do a fulltext search on most electronic documents. (And often if the electronic document is an image-PDF, software can convert it with quite-accurate OCR built in to most commercial PDF software).

    We take this sort of functionality for granted these days, but we should spend a few minutes each day in awesome wonder, because as you point out, it makes fact-checking so easy that there is no excuse for not doing it. (This is also why I find the source for every quotation that conforms to my prejudices: more than a few of the ones I grew up with in the 90s, turn out to be apocrypha).

    I am reminded of a time when someone was wrong on the internet: they had claimed that Thomas Paine wanted to a revolution to 'remake the world', as evidence of totalitarian tendencies in Paine - with a citation that they claimed to be from "Common Sense". You know the whole "we have it in our power to begin the world anew" thing.

    It took literally three seconds to do a fulltext search, and to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person who tried to impugn Paine's motives was a fool or a shill - that specific sentence does not appear in the text, and the closest thing that does appear, does so in a paragraph talking about getting the constitution right so as to prevent the government from becoming too powerful (oops - they fucked that one up, big time... they failed to understand that the Hamiltons of the world are very goal-oriented, and would subvert literally any document by "capturing" the bureaucracy and the judiciary).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Wally says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    http://www.unz.com/book/david_irving__hitlers-war/#p_8_34


    There is only one nation on earth, living in the heart of Europe in great compactness, of uniform race and language, tightly concentrated: and that is the German nation, with 110 million Germans in Central Europe. This comparison gives us cause to hope. One day the entire world must and shall belong to this united block of Central Europe.
     
    However elsewhere he makes reference to 95 million Germans instead, which seems more accurate.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @German_reader

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2.
     
    It's nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there's no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).
    It's unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified (but the kind of articles one reads here on Unz are rather counter-productive imo). But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I'll leave it at that.

    The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis)

    Godwined.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Wally says:
    @SunBakedSuburb
    The descriptions of the deprivation and cruelty visited upon the surviving German population by the Allied occupation brings to mind the absolute shame of war, as in, why do humans allow themselves to be herded into wars that ultimately serve the interests of corrupt elites? It's embarrassing.

    Given human nature, pacifism is foolish and unrealistic: sometimes violence is necessary and certain people need to be killed. But participation in large-scale wars where fortunes can be made makes suckers out of the participants.

    Hey Mr. Unz! The following three books by author and investigative journalist Christopher Simpson may be good candidates for your HTML archive: Blowback (1983), which covers the American recruitment of Nazi scientists and psy-war experts in an operation known as 'Paperclip'; Science of Coercion (1994) details how the media and advertising industry were used, in the post-war period, to further the aims of newly-birthed national security state; The Splendid Blond Beast (1993) tells of the response of the U.S. administrative state and its financial allies to the European Holocaust.

    Wow! The US recruited German scientists, so what?
    Who didn’t.

    Please tell us exactly what proof the book ‘The Splendid Blond Beast’ provides for the claimed, yet impossible ‘holocaust’ narrative.

    Specifics please.

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Anon[207] • Disclaimer says:
    @WHAT
    That is a lot of reading, thanks.

    On a tangential note, there is nothing uniquely ukrainian about soviet-made famine of 30's, and it was never seen as such before 90's, when now "independent" Ukraine attempted to create a brand, directly aping Holocaust brand.

    The Ukrainian famine was well known in the 1930s when it happened and has been well known ever since.

    Walter Duranty and other American communists journalists in Russia at the time covered up.

    Other American communist journalists in Russia at the time exposed the famine as soon as they left Russia.

    If you are interested read Assignment in Utopia and other books by Eugene Lyon about conditions in Russia and Ukraine during the genocidal famine.

    I’ve read plenty of pro communist books written about the famine blaming the evil capitalist Kulaks for trying to keep some food for themselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WHAT
    Again: it is not "ukrainian". What was actually hit is the region known in russian as chernozemie, literally black earth, referencing its fertility. Which is to say, Volga.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Ron Unz

    It’s nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there’s no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).

    It’s unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified
     
    Well, that's certainly possible---I wasn't there myself, and can't really say for sure. But I found Bacque's evidence and analysis quite persuasive, and the attempted rebuttal by Ambrose et. al. much less so.

    Based on the angry statements by the distinguished international human rights lawyer Alfred de Zayas, anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison, so I doubt it's subject to much ongoing historical discussion.

    anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison

    I very much doubt that’s true.
    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.
    Claiming the Americans starved German pows to death doesn’t fall under these laws.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.
     
    Well, what do I know---I don't live in Germany. But Alfred de Zayas seems like a highly regarded international figure, and in his Foreword to the 2007 edition of Bacque's second book, he basically said that the laws recently passed in Germany will send you to jail if you question Official Truth, by e.g. arguing that the Americans deliberately starved to death a million POWs or turned all of Germany into a gigantic concentration camp during 1945-50, causing the deaths of maybe 10 million German civilians.

    And on p. 45 and especially p. 134 n. 67 of his second book, Bacque describes how someone who started investigating the apparent site of one of the mass graves of the POWs was threatened with a 250,000 DM fine by the government and ordered to stop. If there aren't any mass graves, why would the German government do that?

    Look, I found Bacque's book quite persuasive, but maybe you won't. If you're correct that nobody in Germany gets thrown into prison on this issue, why not buy and read them, then decide for yourself?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Wally says:
    @SunBakedSuburb
    I appreciate contrarians and consider myself to be one. Everything should be up for debate, whether it be African IQ or details regarding the motive for the European Holocaust. But to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly.

    said:
    “But to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly.”

    Oh Yawn.
    That’s exactly the kind of limited thinking that the “Holocau$t Industry” demands from you and those like you. You have become an unthinking, propagandized lemming.

    I note that you don’t even try to refute the information about Nuremberg that I posted. Then you posted a dodging, non-response. Please grow up.

    How about showing us the alleged millions of human remains that Jews claim still exist in known locations.

    How about telling us how the scientifically impossible ‘gas chambers’ worked.

    Try to refute these:

    The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies: http://codoh.com/library/document/865/?lang=en

    Chemistry of Auschwitz / Birkenau

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Jake says:

    Everybody should pray for Ron Unz. He is telling, through his own articles and placing online books and articles by others, far, far to much truth about the voracious, self-righteous, hypocritical monster that is the Anglo-Zionist Empire. And, it must be stressed, it is rightly designated as Anglo-Zionist at least as far back as to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell.

    I assume that several people with major behind the scenes power have already discussed plans to have Ron Unz meet an unfortunate accident that takes his life.

    Read More
    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    • Replies: @Cleburne

    it is rightly designated as Anglo-Zionist at least as far back as to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell.
     
    Only by you, old buddy. You honestly don't know thing one about the English Civil War period, do you? Though I do appreciate you no longer insinuate Cromwell's Irish campaign ws financed by the rabbis of Amsterdam.

    If you're gonna have an idea fixe (sic?) then please have at it, but a little grounding in facts or even the possible would be a good thing. You're starting to get tiresome. At least your golem Wally posts interesting links now and again.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Youtube is full of old War Department propaganda videos about the occupation of Germany, as well alternative views. Together, it’s easy to question the official narrative, and to believe that Germans were deliberately killed in large numbers. A quick search gave the following examples.

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/eisenhowers-evil-deception-exterminating-german-pows-abroad-portraying-pows-u-s-soil-pampered/?doing_wp_cron=1512832636.0193889141082763671875

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tono Bungay
    I don't know about anybody else, but even before I know what this first film wants to tell me, I find myself squirming away from it. It reeks of propaganda right from the start. It may be full of nothing but truth, but its tone and manner are hideous.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @utu
    That NPD people believe it is not an argument. That you do not believe it is not an argument. So basically what is your argument?

    My argument is that almost nobody in Germany believes that the Americans starved one million German pows to death (widespread mistreatment of pows in the Rheinwiesen camps is another matter). Given that other issues like indiscriminate Allied air raids or the war crimes committed by Soviet and French colonial troops are widely known (even if good Germans always try to excuse them), it seems very unlikely to me this claim is true.
    But I’m not going to bother arguing with you about this, frankly I’m sick of both the Germanophobes and the fake Germanophiles on this site.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    I’m sick of both the Germanophobes and the fake Germanophiles on this site
     
    I am neither. I am T & J person. Anyway, I have noticed you have been absent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Jake says:
    @Ron Unz

    but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject.
     
    Actually, you've jogged my memory. I *do* think I probably read something about it in one of Buchanan's columns almost thirty years ago. But since it seemed so utterly shocking and I never saw it discussed anywhere else in the media, I guess I just half-assumed it was some sort of crazy "conspiracy theory" that had quickly been debunked and completely forgot about it after a few years.

    After all, not every single thing that PJB has ever written is absolutely 100% correct...

    No, not all that Buchanan has written is 100% correct, but I am confident that at least 99% of what he has written that does not rather closely toe the line of some portion of what we may call the Whig sense of history’s moral march is at least 90% correct.

    That’s the reason he is so widely and wildly hated, feared and traduced. Pat Buchanan is to Leftists and Neocons as the crucifix is to vampires.

    That Libertarians almost invariably cannot see that is proof that Libertarianism is at best a hot air waste of time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Ron Unz

    I’m shocked by the allegation the Allies under Eisenhower starved a million or more German POWs to death after WW2. Are there survivor testimonies? Camp guard testimonies? Even if illegal in Germany to tell of this, I would have thought rumours would be more widespread.
     
    Well, that's how Bacque discovered the story. He noticed all sorts of Thank You letters from various Germans to a local French official, and when he interviewed one of them, the man furtively explained that he had been taken out of one of a camps as a local worker, thereby saving his life. After Bacque published his book, he claims an enormous number of former POWs got in touch with him, saying how grateful they were that the true story was finally being revealed to the world.

    As I mentioned in my article, all historians admit that at least 2 million expelled German civilians died on their "Trail of Tears" (and perhaps the figure was much higher), which was certainly the greatest peacetime "ethnic cleansing" in the history of the world. But virtually no Americans are aware of it, since it has almost never gotten any media attention. And my impression is that Germans who talk about it too loudly these days may be arrested and thrown into prison.

    The central point of my entire American Pravda series is that our Media creates Reality, and I think this is a pretty good example of that.

    And my impression is that Germans who talk about it too loudly these days may be arrested and thrown into prison.

    That’s not true, one can talk openly about the expulsions of Germans from Eastern Europe and the lost Eastern territories. It’s just that one will immediately be accused by “good” Germans of wanting to trivialize German guilt, reversing cause and effect etc.
    In recent years there has been a new spin on the issue though, the issue is now used for “refugees welcome” propaganda (because the WW2 refugees are supposedly the same as the “refugees” today).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Unzerker says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Adolf Hitler makes reference to 110 million Germans living in Central Europe in the late 1930s.

    What was the postwar population of West Germany, East Germany, Austria, and the German cantons of Switzerland (I assume these were included by him)? Less Germany's acknowledge war casualties (both military and civilian).

    "Greater Germany" of March 1939 contained 83 million Germans. It seems that West Germany, East Germany, and Austria combined contained 76 million people in 1950, and this includes the expellees.

    Total acknowledged deaths in the war are around 7 million. A number of 12 million expellees returning to Germany (arbitrary on my part) indicates postwar casualties of 12 million--though this ignores births and deaths of natural causes.

    Never forget the 12 million?

    A number of 12 million expellees returning to Germany

    Most of those were from parts of “Greater Germany” that were no longer part of post war Germany.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Jake says:
    @Ron Unz
    Incidentally, I should probably make a general statement as well...

    Some of the commenters above are saying "Sure, we knew all about these things, what else is knew?"

    Others are saying they find this material extremely surprising, even shocking.

    I myself fall into both of these groups. Four or five years ago I would have been in the first category, and fifteen years ago I would have been in the second.

    Since I have absolutely no idea of how many of the readers of this webzine are aware of what, I feel that publishing these sorts of articles may sometimes serve a useful purpose.

    Everything you’ve published here is useful.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Falconer says:

    “Most historians agree that around 20,000 lives were lost in the notorious “Reign of Terror” during the French Revolution…”

    That could be called “French Pravda”. The figure excludes the slaughter in Vendee 1793-1794. As many as 450,000 were killed out of a population of 800,000. Most deaths were Catholic traditionalists fighting the revolution, thus they were on the “wrong side of history”.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Anon
    The Reign of Terror refers to the killings in just one year 1793 to 1794.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Anon[207] • Disclaimer says:
    @Colin Wright
    '...Based upon this simple analysis, he makes a reasonably strong case that the excess German deaths during that period amounted to at least around 10 million, and possibly many millions more...'

    Again, meh. Just arbitrarily, what we have here is whitewash, followed by exaggerated revisionism.

    If there had been ten million deaths, we'd have pictures of mountains of corpses and grotesquely emaciated survivors.

    We don't. I'll leave aside deaths from Red Army atrocities in the East -- those could come to several million, although we'll never know. For actual excess deaths within occupied Germany within its post-Potsdam borders, I think ten million is improbable. Conditions could have been very horrific, and occupation policy incredibly brutal, and we might well have had a million -- but not ten million -- excess deaths.

    I'm vaguely reminded of the rather silly estimate of ten million ('or more') deaths attributed to King Leopold's Congo Free State in King Leopold's Ghost. Careful consideration usually makes it clear that while things were no doubt awful, the death toll just wasn't as high as some are tempted to claim.

    At a guess, somewhere between the whitewash and the sensationalistic revision lies the less impressive but still quite grim truth. Five hundred thousand? Four million? Someone should look into it.

    I’ve always just assumed that the tales of King Leopold’s atrocities in Congo were just British propaganda aimed at Belgium because the British didn’t want to share Africa even with France, let alone intruders like Germany Italy and Belgium.

    Same with all British propaganda tales. I remember one of the Churchill hagiographies laid out a compete justification for his destruction of the French fleet and murder of the 2,000 French sailors.

    Actually. There was absolutely totally no reason to destroy the French fleet to
    “ prevent it from being used by the Germans to attack Britain”

    The French Admiralty made plans years before of what they would do if any hostile power conquered France. The Mediterranean fleet would sail west to the Atlantic and meet up with the Atlantic fleet around the Azores.

    The fleets would then sail off the coasts of French colonies in Africa. If the conquest and occupation continued the entire fleet would sail to S America and stay till the situation resolved itself.

    Arrangements had already been made with the Brazil and Argentina governments. Plenty of fuel food and supplies were stashed in the French African colonies.

    But war criminal Churchill destroyed the fleet and murdered the sailors. The number killed ranged from 1,7000 2,000 depending on the source.

    In the spring of 1940 before the French surrender Churchill crossed to France met with the president premier and the cabinet and proposed a union of France and Britain

    It never happened. Churchill always wanted to emulate his ancestor Jack Churchill Duke of Marlborough, a great hero of the John Bull British supremacist school of British history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    In the spring of 1940 before the French surrender Churchill crossed to France met with the president premier and the cabinet and proposed a union of France and Britain
     
    Not exactly. The plan came from Churchill who get it approved by British Cabinet on June 16. De Gaulle who was already in London agreed. De Gaulle called Reynaud the French price minister who was in Bordeaux who became enthusiastic about the Franco-British Union after talking with Churchill on the phone.

    Reynaud presented the proposal to the French Council of Ministers, but it was rejected as a British plot to seize the French empire. Marshal Pétain, 84 years old and the great hero of World War I, believed it was his duty to save France from total destruction and accept an armistice with Germany. Britain was doomed, he said, and union would be “fusion with a corpse.” Another minister concluded: “Better be a Nazi province. At least we know what that means.”
     
    Pétain saw through it. Could British be taken seriously after the evacuation from Dunkirk? All Churchill wanted was to assure that France would fight to the end (to the last French soldier and French citizen for British Empire) and that French navy would not fall into Germany. Most importantly Pétain wanted to avoid the “polandization" of France. And Hitler did not want to “polandize” France as long as he could get cheap and easy occupation. And Pétain also wanted easy occupations for the French not like the bloodbath in Poland. And he got it. He saved countless lives of the French. De Gaulle saved France's honor. Pétain accepted personal infamy and dishonor to save the French people. He was the true hero.
    , @Anon
    This is silly stuff from someone with a dodgy grasp of reality. Where is the evidence of Winston Churchill wanting to emulate his ancestor John (not commonly known as Jack) Churchill who fought as a battlefield general in command on the Continent against the French?

    More important how can his decision to have the French fleet sunk rather than rely on the word of one French admiral (ever heard of military people being sacked or overruled? Ah yes, the names Kimmel and McArthur come to mind don't they, as well as Sir John French, Wavell, Auchinleck and just a few hundred others) be regarded as something he did other than with great regret after calculating that he couldn't take the risk of it falling into German hands even if the risk was small?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. WHAT says:
    @Anon
    The Ukrainian famine was well known in the 1930s when it happened and has been well known ever since.

    Walter Duranty and other American communists journalists in Russia at the time covered up.

    Other American communist journalists in Russia at the time exposed the famine as soon as they left Russia.

    If you are interested read Assignment in Utopia and other books by Eugene Lyon about conditions in Russia and Ukraine during the genocidal famine.

    I’ve read plenty of pro communist books written about the famine blaming the evil capitalist Kulaks for trying to keep some food for themselves.

    Again: it is not “ukrainian”. What was actually hit is the region known in russian as chernozemie, literally black earth, referencing its fertility. Which is to say, Volga.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Cleburne says:
    @Jake
    Everybody should pray for Ron Unz. He is telling, through his own articles and placing online books and articles by others, far, far to much truth about the voracious, self-righteous, hypocritical monster that is the Anglo-Zionist Empire. And, it must be stressed, it is rightly designated as Anglo-Zionist at least as far back as to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell.

    I assume that several people with major behind the scenes power have already discussed plans to have Ron Unz meet an unfortunate accident that takes his life.

    it is rightly designated as Anglo-Zionist at least as far back as to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell.

    Only by you, old buddy. You honestly don’t know thing one about the English Civil War period, do you? Though I do appreciate you no longer insinuate Cromwell’s Irish campaign ws financed by the rabbis of Amsterdam.

    If you’re gonna have an idea fixe (sic?) then please have at it, but a little grounding in facts or even the possible would be a good thing. You’re starting to get tiresome. At least your golem Wally posts interesting links now and again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. That does not change because you would prefer it not to be true. And that truth does have fruits; it does produce after its kind. The Anglo-Zionist Empire was fully inherent not just in archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell, but in the heretical preaching, oral and written, of the earliest 'radical Reformers' from England.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Ron Unz says:
    @Tono Bungay
    I appreciate your work in presenting these books for our inspection. I don't expect ever to reach conclusions about any historical events; they're all too complicated for me. But I'd like to make a few little points: (1) Laval was widely regarded during the Occupation as very pro-German; he was dismissed by Petain at one point but reinstated at the Germans' insistence. Nonetheless, formal communications between German officers and administrators during this period express frustration with what they saw as Laval's reluctance and slowness in regard to measures like turning over Jews or supplying French laborers. (2) I have read detailed accounts of many of the principal trials of Vichy officials (Pucheu, Laval, Petain, Vallat) as well as of the writers Robert Brasillach and Charles Maurras. Almost all of them are fraught with obvious bias. The trial of Laval in particular has many egregious aspects, from the composition of the jury to the jury members' open insults in court of him. (3) Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit. He is detested by many on the French right, but if you want to be taken seriously on this you can't honestly avoid engaging with his arguments. (4) Petain was certainly very old (84) in 1940, but you are wrong to say that he was then in his "dotage"; he was very fit both physically and mentally when he became chief of state. (5) When you write that your "understanding of the post-war history of France was entirely wrong," it seems to me that you are leaping far too quickly. Just because a few books contradict orthodoxy doesn't mean the orthodoxy is largely wrong.

    Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit.

    I must reemphasize my complete lack of personal expertise in the post-war history of France, and I certainly haven’t read the Paxton book you cite. However, here’s my perspective…

    Unless you believe that Huddleston is flat-out lying, the Socialist Minister of the Interior in March 1945, who controlled France’s national police force and had best access to the data, informed the De Gaulle people that there had been approximately 105,000 “summary executions” during the previous six months, and the American authorities had estimated 80,000 political killings during the first part of that period. These figures were widely circulated and accepted as correct at the time. Communists and other leftwing groups were apparently responsible for the overwhelming majority of these killings, which targeted conservatives and right-wingers.

    Then, thirty years later, Robert Paxton, apparently a somewhat fervent “anti-Fascist” historian based in the U.S., published a book claiming that there had actually only been 10,000 killings. Offhand, it’s not clear to me how Paxton in 1972 would have such better information than France’s own Interior Minister in 1945. It’s certainly possible, but I think it far more likely that he merely rewrote history for ideological reasons, and Wikipedia and others just repeated it for the same sorts of reasons. This does occasionally happen you know…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    The Nazis were National Socialist Worker's Party. The Nazis were founded in a gay bar. Perhaps 90% of the Brownshirt leadership was gay, most them hot for teen boys. The Nazi leadership was filled with every possible anti-Christian form of spirituality available to Germans, save Talmudism.

    The Nazis were no more 'conservative' than are the Neocons. And yet during and after WW2. the Left cast Nazis not just as arch-conservative, but as the definitive conservatives, and then used that false definition as justification to murder or destroy publicly and professionally large numbers of people who would have stood up to them.

    That the 'moderates' and 'conservatives' of the UK and USA accepted all that, even taking gleeful part, tells a great deal about how the WASP world was in the good ole days before it supposedly was altered totally by radical Jews in the 1960s.
    , @Tono Bungay
    Thanks for the reply. I don't consider myself capable of sorting the matter out. Paxton is detested by many French nationalists for his manifold attack on Vichy; which is also likely why he is, I would imagine, the authority most often quoted on the subject. In general, I would think that time should improve historians' ability to determine such facts as the number of people killed during a particular period, so I am not particularly disturbed by the idea that a contemporaneous account might need severe adjustment later. On the other hand, Paxton's criticisms of Vichy, especially of the notion that Vichy did its best under horrible circumstances, might be said to fail to account for the high number of French Jews who survived the war. My main point is that one or two books, no matter how persuasive, can't be taken as true without the benefit of reflection, criticism, argument and so forth. I have no doubt that we're in agreement on this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Ron Unz says:
    @for-the-record
    Here's the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon "Look Inside" on "Baku" -- there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):

    p. 237: "Suspicion, distrust and manipulation were still in the air. But on 23 June the NKGB reported that the Chief of the British Air Staff, Sir Charles Portal, had suggested cabling the commands in India and the Middle East ordering them to stop planning to bomb the Baku oilfields, which it had been feared, might be used to supply the Germans."

    Here’s the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon “Look Inside” on “Baku” — there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):

    Ha, ha, ha…

    Either our friend “Iffen” just finished reading Bellamy’s 800 page book with greater care and attention to detail than anyone I’ve ever known in my life, or he’s just unmasked himself as the biggest liar on this website…

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)
    , @iffen
    Let’s see, Colin Wright says he knew about it but does not give his source, David in TN knew about it because Shiver (another obscure writer that no one has ever heard of) wrote about it and iffen knew about it from reading Bellamy (a completely unknown writer except to the The Boston Globe,The Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph).

    It seems that in the real world writers write about the plan and readers read about it. Seems the purging only took place in bizzarro world.
    , @Johnny Rico
    I apologize if I've missed something on this thread, Ron, but I'm a little unclear on why nobody has looked into this book:

    Operation Pike: Britain Versus the Soviet Union, 1939-1941

    It is, after all, the reference for the 2015 article that you mentioned:

    In the Early Days of World War II, Britain and France Planned to Bomb Russia

    It is VERY good. I had never heard of this Operation Pike and my personal feeling is that the extent to which it has been ignored by historians the last 75 years is important for a number of reasons. What those reasons are exactly, I've got to consider, since I am still a little shocked at this discovery. It is not every day you come across such fascinating stuff. Thank you.

    Cover
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/cover.jpg

     

    Contents 1
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/contents.jpg

     

    Contents 2
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/contents_2.jpg

     

    Preface
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/preface_1_b.jpg

     

    Pref x
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/pre_x_b.jpg

     

    Pref xi
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/pre_xi_b.jpg

     

    Pref xii
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/page_xii_b.jpg

     

    Pref xiii
    https://kilodocuments.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/page_xiii_b.jpg

     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rod1963
    Quite true.

    My father(now deceased) was a WWII veteran(3ID, 3rd cavalry recce - provisional ) who saw action in North Africa, Sicily and Southern Italy He also served in the occupation of Germany after the war in the Constabulary. He saw the occupation first hand and could attest to much what Unz has written, plus a lot more. Oddly enough the Starts & Stripes for that era was never put on-line and there is a reason for it.

    Rations were so limited for the Germans after the war you could buy a woman with a candy bar. Quartering of American troops - especially officers and NCO's in German homes was the norm.

    He told me stories of our side routinely killing German soldiers who surrendered. It was especially bad with front line units who didn't want to be bothered to detail some men to escort them back to the rear.

    BTW this practice really got going with the Army Rangers in Tunisia where they butchered some 300 Italian soldiers who surrendered in cold blood during a raid. This was sanctioned by Army higher ups. At Anzio those Rangers got their comeuppance and got their butt kicked. The Italian military at the time demanded the Germans turn over the Ranger POW's to be executed, but luckily the Germans didn't. They should have. No one would have missed them.

    Rules of war weren't really followed. At Monte Casino, allied commanders imported a contingent of Moroccan colonial troops who proceeded to rape and pillage the Italian countryside with the approval of French Army authorities. Sophia Loren even had a movie made about their crimes.

    BTW my old man was a big fan of Col. Hackworth, whom he admired.

    Another movie, Roman spring of Mrs Stone has a few lines about the rapes of Italian women. But in the movie the rapes were committed by Americans implied White Americans not the French Arabs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tom Welsh
    "Although Petain’s new French government guaranteed that its powerful navy would never be used against the British, Churchill took no chances, and quickly launched an attack on the fleet of its erstwhile ally, whose ships were already disarmed and helplessly moored in port..."

    I don't think this is entirely accurate. According to Wikipedia,

    "Churchill ordered the British ships to open fire against the French ships and the British commenced from 17,500 yd (9.9 mi; 16.0 km).[16] The third British salvo scored hits and caused a magazine explosion aboard Bretagne, which sank with 977 of her crew at 6:09 p.m. After thirty salvoes, the French ships stopped firing; the British force altered course to avoid return fire from the French coastal forts but Provence, Dunkerque and the destroyer Mogador were damaged and run aground by their crews.[17] Strasbourg and four destroyers managed to avoid the magnetic mines and escape to the open sea under attack from a flight of bomb-armed Swordfish from Ark Royal. The French ships responded with anti-aircraft fire and shot down two Swordfish, the crews being rescued by the destroyer HMS Wrestler".

    The French ships were by no means disarmed, although they were bottled up in harbour and the British had mined the exits. Moreover the two new battlecruisers were docked with their main armament facing inland. However Wikipedia clearly states that they returned fire for 30 salvoes, and several ships - including one of the battlecruisers - escaped to sea.

    Wikipedia???? Wikipedia ???? Really?

    I no more believe Wikipedia than I believe the Washington Post NYTimes and the rest of the lying press.

    Wikepedia is good for dates or if you can’t remember a name. That’s it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Anon[257]:

    According to Freeman Dyson - "Wikipedia: nobody trusts it; everybody uses it".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tono Bungay
    I appreciate your work in presenting these books for our inspection. I don't expect ever to reach conclusions about any historical events; they're all too complicated for me. But I'd like to make a few little points: (1) Laval was widely regarded during the Occupation as very pro-German; he was dismissed by Petain at one point but reinstated at the Germans' insistence. Nonetheless, formal communications between German officers and administrators during this period express frustration with what they saw as Laval's reluctance and slowness in regard to measures like turning over Jews or supplying French laborers. (2) I have read detailed accounts of many of the principal trials of Vichy officials (Pucheu, Laval, Petain, Vallat) as well as of the writers Robert Brasillach and Charles Maurras. Almost all of them are fraught with obvious bias. The trial of Laval in particular has many egregious aspects, from the composition of the jury to the jury members' open insults in court of him. (3) Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit. He is detested by many on the French right, but if you want to be taken seriously on this you can't honestly avoid engaging with his arguments. (4) Petain was certainly very old (84) in 1940, but you are wrong to say that he was then in his "dotage"; he was very fit both physically and mentally when he became chief of state. (5) When you write that your "understanding of the post-war history of France was entirely wrong," it seems to me that you are leaping far too quickly. Just because a few books contradict orthodoxy doesn't mean the orthodoxy is largely wrong.

    The 10,000 killed figure comes from just one part of the war between the communists and Guallists. That was summer of 1944 souther France where the communist Franc Tieurs free shooters were very strong and planned , with the assistance of Russians of course to take over France after the war as the native communists and Russians took over Poland and the rest of E Europe after the war.

    These mini civil wars between communists and Catholic/Gaullists went on all over France 1944 45. 10,000 here, 12,000 there it could be 80,000. And the Gaullists won unlike E Europe where the native communists gave lists of non communist leaders to the Russian troops as they arrived.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. iffen says:
    @Ron Unz

    Here’s the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon “Look Inside” on “Baku” — there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):
     
    Ha, ha, ha...

    Either our friend "Iffen" just finished reading Bellamy's 800 page book with greater care and attention to detail than anyone I've ever known in my life, or he's just unmasked himself as the biggest liar on this website...

    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    Rather the British THOUGHT they would.

    As it turned out it required far more ordnance to destroy industry than anyone thought before the war.

    The Oil Campaign (against Roumania and Germany) involved 680 separate bombing raids by the RAF and USAAF, and this with (mostly) four-engined bombers that were only available in small numbers at the time (and the Lancaster didn't enter service until 1942).

    Wikipedia does not mention RAF casualties, but the USAAF lost 5,400 aircraft in the Oil Campaign.

    Anglo-French raids on the Caucasus with medium bombers would've been completely ineffective, unless the dubious theory that the entire Caucasus could be set aflame with a small number of incendiaries was correct.
    , @Ron Unz

    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)
     
    Ha, ha, ha... Our friend "Iffen" really slipped up this time.

    Since 2015, he's been one of the most frequent commenters on this website, averaging a couple of thousand comments per year, but generally rather bland and mediocre. I think he claims to be some sort of Christian Zionist living in the Deep South, which may or may not be correct. He certainly does defend Israel an awful lot, and mostly supports the Official Narrative but from a conservative direction. Okay.

    But now I publish this article, and mention I'd never been aware of the planned French attack on the Baku oilfields in Spring 1940, and ridicules me, saying "everybody knows about that" from the Bellamy book, which he himself just recently read. When challenged, he cites two very short sentences about a possible British attack in Summer 1941, which has absolutely nothing to do with my statement.

    Now I can't recall "Iffen" ever previously demonstrating any deep knowledge or interest in history. Bellamy's book is 800(!) pages long. Does anybody seriously believe that "Iffen" just happened to have recently read it, and so clearly remembered those particular 35 words lost among perhaps 500,000 others? Especially since the quote he found has absolutely nothing to do with my own statement?

    It seems pretty obvious that "Iffen" just did a little quick Googling, and came across a Bellamy reference, maybe even somewhere on Wikipedia. Since he knew nothing of the actual history, he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    So we have a very prolific, pro-Israel commenter, who generally defends the Official Narrative but does so from a rightwing perspective, and attempts to ridicule elements of this highly controversial article by pretending to have read extremely long books he very clearly hasn't.

    Presumably, he's supplementing his meager Social Security or Disability checks by doing some commenting work for the ADL or the SPLC or that sort of thing...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Ahh! You put a lot of reading in front of me today, Ron, thank you!

    I scooped ‘Germany Must Perish!’ on Amazon years ago back before their confiscation efforts began targeting it. A short but valuable read. One of my first stops when I initially stumbled down the proverbial rabbit hole of establishment revisionism.

    Another good one I often used for quick references is ‘Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides’ by Thomas Dalton. A well organized evisceration of the establishment historical narrative. I might have to go back and check out the newest edition, as the book seems to have doubled in length in the last 2 editions.

    Took my old man 3 years of avoiding those two books (and me) before he finally gave them back at my demand, only having read “most” (probably very little, in reality) of them in that entire time. Shame none of it was able to open his mind. Something about old dogs and new tricks applies here. In between his ears sits Rachel Maddow, hysterically waving a KKK newspaper around and clucking about the sky falling.

    Sadly, his brand of ideologue is the norm here in the Bay Area, where I seem to have a very different living experience than Ron does. I’m not in a white enclave, though. I’m out with the rest of the churlish masses at ground level in downtown, not even 2 blocks from the Convention Center’s South Hall, where Trump’s infamously violent San Jose rally took place. As seen all over YouTube.

    The Ministry of Truth is alive and in full force here, with much of the population, both domestic and imported, working voluntarily in their service. I can not wait to finally get out of here this summer and move to where I won’t get fired from the office or assaulted at the light rail station for not being so far left that I can’t see center field.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Heros
    A tip of the hat to Ron Unz for posting this American Pravda series. I enjoy reading these book reviews and the comments, and I appreciate him making the text available on the internet.

    However, I do find reading these Pravda reviews very frustrating. There seems to be some intellectual or scholarly need to constantly defer to the accepted narrative, often missing the bullseye, even though these very authors of the narrative been proven to be liars time and again.

    Compare Adolf Hitler commanding the German Army to strictly follow the Geneva Conventions throughout the war, forbidding rape and looting in France even after Versailles in 1919 and Saar in 1939, letting England escape at Dunkirk, and finally desperately sending Hess to try to make peace and stave off war and communism to (((their))) narrative of histories biggest tyrant leading racial supremacist people on endless wars for world conquest. To most Unz readers it is becoming clear that Hitler was trying to defend Germany, not conquer the world.

    I must say, I look forward to Ron Unz delving deeper into Pravda style propaganda coming out of the jewish media in the 1930's. An expose of the "shoa" would also be of historical significance.

    I would like to touch on Oradour-sur-Glane where Unz writes:


    "a village involved in Resistance activities, in which many hundreds of men, women, and children were herded into a church and other buildings and burned alive."
     
    Unz appears to accepting the (((narrative))) here. I think Oradour-sur-Glane was a kind of French Katyn. The SS caught up with jewish communist terrorists, the "Maquis", who had tortured and murdered an SS officer. The SS claim is that the Maquis had hidden dynamite and weapons in the steeple, or even rigged the church, and the end result was exactly what the perpetrators wanted. The SS were given victors justice, another case of jews recklessly wasting goyim lives in pursuit of their communist and zionist agendas is covered up, and once again Germans are portrayed as Huns bent on world conquest.

    The communist so called resistance with Russian advisors did their best to take over France as they did E Europe after the war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Russian advisors? But
    "Was the French Resistance Jewish? Jews led—and purposefully did not lead—some of the many specialized groups that fought Vichy France and its Nazi occupiers", by Renée Poznanski
    May 3, 2016 @https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/201308/was-the-french-resistance-jewish

    "French Jews—under a double jeopardy of anti-Semitic law (French and German), stripped of their possessions, interned in camps, then sent on to Auschwitz—contributed in full to the story of the Resistance. Extremely numerous in the different movements formed in France as well as in London around Gen. de Gaulle, they also created specifically tasked groups; many Jews were associated with the French Communist Party, while others specialized in the saving of those threatened with deportation.
    After the liberation, Georges Zérapha concluded that from June 1940 to December 1941 Jews led the way from bottom to top in the majority of subgroups of the Resistance. They were among the first to reach London, from Raymond Aron to André Weill-Curiel and including René Cassin. We find them among the founders of the Musée de l’Homme network in 1940, publishing the first issue of the magazine Résistance on Dec. 15, 1940. Of the six founders of Libération in July 1941, three were Jews. Jean-Pierre Lévy created and ran Franc–Tireur. Robert Salmon was one of the two founders of Défense de la France; it was he who chose to give this name to the new journal, whose first number appeared in July 1941. These examples give only a partial idea of the early and massive Jewish presence at high positions in all the various movements...
    the massive presence of Jews in the Resistance remained extremely discrete...
    In the north [Paris], even while Solidarité specialized in social work and propaganda, the First detachment FTP (“Franc-Tireurs Partisans”)-MOI, composed of Romanians and Hungarians of which 90 percent were Jewish, and the Second detachment, entirely composed of Jews, excelled at military actions. (The MOI created four detachments in all.) The push for the actions of the detachments came from the Party, while the troops increased in number as anti-Semitic repression increased. The contributions of the Jews is particularly impressive: In February 1943, out of 36 actions taken by the four detachments of FTP-MOI of the capital, 15 were realized by the Jewish Second detachment...
    The Jewish Communist military groups were practically alone in Paris from June to November 1943. Joseph Epstein (Col. Gilles) was named responsible for all military actions led by the communists at Paris, and a team entirely composed of Jewish women transported the weapons needed by the different units. An intelligence service that prepared all the actions was in the hands of a group of Jewish women who were attached to the MOI. Later this activity extended into the non-occupied regions: to Grenoble from September 1943 to March 1944; to Lyon after May 1944. At Toulouse, up until its fall in the spring of 1944, the Marcel Langer group instigated essentially all armed action. Given the efficiency of the Vichy police services, the price paid for all these actions was extremely high: massive arrests in November 1942, March 1943, June-July 1943, the slaughter of November 1943.
    The nature of the activity led by these groups of Jewish Communists appeared clearly in an extremely rich and diverse clandestine press...
    The reconstruction of the Jewish world in France could only follow the plan imposed on it by French society; that society equally pressed the Jewish world to regroup under the banner of a united Resistance. A coming-together of the various political centers of a Jewish resistance led, at the end of July 1943 in Grenoble, to the formation of a “Comité général de défence” that united Communists, Zionists of all types, and Bundists under a single roof. In some ways this was a duplication in Jewish circles of the creation in May 1943 of the “National Resistance Council” which legitimized the entry of the Communists into the French political world..."

    And it goes on and on. The conclusion is somewhat intriguing:
    "It was, however, necessary to wait for the 1970s and the ripening of French memories of WWII, the Vichy government, and the Shoah before the Jewish contribution to the Resistance gained even minimal recognition in France"(!!!). After the war many heroes present themselves!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. iffen says:
    @Ron Unz

    Here’s the sole reference (at least according to an Amazon “Look Inside” on “Baku” — there are 8 hits, of which this seems to be the only relevant one):
     
    Ha, ha, ha...

    Either our friend "Iffen" just finished reading Bellamy's 800 page book with greater care and attention to detail than anyone I've ever known in my life, or he's just unmasked himself as the biggest liar on this website...

    Let’s see, Colin Wright says he knew about it but does not give his source, David in TN knew about it because Shiver (another obscure writer that no one has ever heard of) wrote about it and iffen knew about it from reading Bellamy (a completely unknown writer except to the The Boston Globe,The Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph).

    It seems that in the real world writers write about the plan and readers read about it. Seems the purging only took place in bizzarro world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @iffen
    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)

    Rather the British THOUGHT they would.

    As it turned out it required far more ordnance to destroy industry than anyone thought before the war.

    The Oil Campaign (against Roumania and Germany) involved 680 separate bombing raids by the RAF and USAAF, and this with (mostly) four-engined bombers that were only available in small numbers at the time (and the Lancaster didn’t enter service until 1942).

    Wikipedia does not mention RAF casualties, but the USAAF lost 5,400 aircraft in the Oil Campaign.

    Anglo-French raids on the Caucasus with medium bombers would’ve been completely ineffective, unless the dubious theory that the entire Caucasus could be set aflame with a small number of incendiaries was correct.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Did you grow up in Germany and pass through their school system?
    Did you notice the incessant TV presentations of Germany's crimes of that time? Every year and every year ad nauseum?
    How could you even lift up your head as a German. You are the scum of the earth.
    Calls came in to the Radio Station of BR2 in Bavaria in 2015. (Probably others too). People stated that now, finally, they could be proud of themselves again.
    Germans are a totally conditioned people.

    But Germans are in charge of Germany and in charge of Europe…they’re responsible for their own condition. I suspect even Hitler would have agreed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Bill P says:

    Wouldn’t surprise me much if the French weren’t really so keen on the allies during the war. I lived in Brittany as a child and there was bomb damage everywhere — in 1985! It was worse in Normandy and along the coast, e.g Le Havre and St. Malo, but even Nantes still had a lot of blast marks on buildings in town.

    Back then, I often wondered how French could put up with that and be such staunch supporters of the Anglo-American forces. As an adult I’ve come to the conclusion that they probably weren’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    In both WW 1 and WW 2 there was a saying, “ England will fight to the last French man”

    In both wars, France had a bigger, better equipped and more professional army. The British war mongers knew they couldn’t possibly win a war with Germany without France Russia and the United States.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Dan Hayes says:
    @Anon
    Wikipedia???? Wikipedia ???? Really?

    I no more believe Wikipedia than I believe the Washington Post NYTimes and the rest of the lying press.

    Wikepedia is good for dates or if you can’t remember a name. That’s it.

    Anon[257]:

    According to Freeman Dyson – “Wikipedia: nobody trusts it; everybody uses it”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Yes, this piece would sit comfortably with companion pieces on the famine in India left uncontrolled by Churchill or the millions of black and brown soldiers who fought in both World Wars.

    The Guardian releases them every now and again and each one always says that it is hidden information that the white people in charge don't want you to know.

    At least, this is the case ever since it went full Teen Vogue.

    While decrying one of their writers as a racial huckster I was told by their friend that I was privileged to already know this stuff and that the huckster was writing for those with less of an education. They were essentially being generous, it was argued.

    "After all, look at the lack of black and brown people in WWII films like Dunkirk."

    They have a point about the films (if not Dunkirk specifically) but I can't help but sense that they're always trying to get something out of it. I suspect that others sense it too and that is why those others switch off. There's a limited time after a tragedy for it to be established as needing to be talked about and for its upbringing to seem authentic.

    As far as I know, there were no Indian Arab or African troops sent by the British to fight in France and evacuated at Dunkirk. So why would be those troops featured in a movie about Dunkirk.

    The Indian troops were either in Egypt or on reserve in India until the D Day invasion. The French Arab and African troops stayed in the French colonies until shortly before D Day.

    American blacks weren’t in combat. They were support troops. As support troops they did participate in the Normandy invasion but they went in a rape and looting rampage as did the French Arab troops in Italy

    Black chauvinist historians deny this but it happened.

    How can one make an American movie about WW2 black combat troops when there weren’t any?

    The Indians were known as superb troops. There are sections of the cemeteries with Hindu Muslim type monuments filled with thousands of Indians.

    The raping looting black Americans and Arabs are best forgotten.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom67
    You go overboard here. I am German and I can tell you 100% that the memories of German civilians regarding American black soldiers is nothing but good. They were by far the most popular of the occupation troops. Not for them the treatment of Germans as a lower form of life. They shared their food, gave candies to the kids and completely disregarded non-fraternisation.
    In fact black American soldiers were famously fond of Germany as they never met with the kind of racism that they were accustomed to from home. I remember distinctly hearing that time and again from black Americans when I grew up in Heidelberg where there were about 30 000 American troops.
    So please correct this. You are really doing a disservice to the good memory that black American soldiers have left in Germany
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bill P
    Wouldn't surprise me much if the French weren't really so keen on the allies during the war. I lived in Brittany as a child and there was bomb damage everywhere -- in 1985! It was worse in Normandy and along the coast, e.g Le Havre and St. Malo, but even Nantes still had a lot of blast marks on buildings in town.

    Back then, I often wondered how French could put up with that and be such staunch supporters of the Anglo-American forces. As an adult I've come to the conclusion that they probably weren't.

    In both WW 1 and WW 2 there was a saying, “ England will fight to the last French man”

    In both wars, France had a bigger, better equipped and more professional army. The British war mongers knew they couldn’t possibly win a war with Germany without France Russia and the United States.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    I believe that 25% of the Oxford class of 1918 died in the great war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. The domestic US euphemism for this was the refugee problem, and you find detailed consideration of it in the correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and other Americans of international repute. American yokels are unique in forgetting this historic international crisis. The outside world remembers it perfectly well. Everyone knows preeminent international civil servant Alfred-Maurice De Zayas, former Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order (well, everyone in the civilized world knows him.) De Zayas made his name researching it.

    https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/bib121594

    Or look at Nemesis at Potsdam, or 50 Theses on the Expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe, or multiple articles in international law journals. He’s widely cited. That the definitive work of De Zayas is lost down America’s memory hole of course supports your argument that US education is pure propaganda.

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it’s going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all. It’s already been punctured in your comments. It’s another right-wing credo like denying global warming. Vindictive genocidal retribution is as American as apple pie. Americans don’t need communist ideology or handlers to motivate that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LSJohn
    Regarding Harry D. White: FBI claims that it confirmed Treasury officials White, Frank Coe and Harold Glasser as Soviet agents. I consider this less than confirming, but considerably more than rumor. Documents produced by Whitaker Chambers allegedly demonstrated conclusively that White had passed sensitive information to Soviet intelligence agents on at least 2 occasions. Elizabeth Bently, a confessed Soviet spy, said White was a Soviet "agent of influence."
    , @JackOH
    Schoolmarm, thanks for your comment. I exchanged brief correspondence with Prof. de Zayas back in the 1990s. He's truly an extraordinary man of great moral and professional courage.

    "Vindictive genocidal retribution is as American as apple pie" had me thinking of Black activist H. Rap Brown's "violence is as American as cherry pie". Y'know, I want to disagree strongly solely out of a sense of psychological self-interest---who in his right mind wants to admit his country is a threat to human decency, and there's damn near nothing he can do about it?

    FWIW-There's been a modern literature of German political grievances going back 150 years with Austrian Germans fearing the ascendant Slavs within Austria-Hungary. I think there's some uneasiness that to make something of the severe punishment meted out to Germans beginning about 1944 could add weight to those German grievances, and threaten the legitimacy of the Allied victory. Just speculating, that's all.

    Did or do you teach? What type of schools? (BTW-welcome to Unz Review.)
    , @Ron Unz

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it’s going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all.
     
    Well, until about a dozen years ago I'm not even sure I'd ever heard of Harry Dexter White. But his name came up here and there, along with the Venona Decrypts that I'd sometimes read about, so maybe around seven years ago, I sat down and read three or four of the Venona books, and found them very, very persuasive, and scrupulous in their scholarly quality. The evidence they provided against White, Alger Hiss, and many dozens of other individuals seemed pretty conclusive to me, proving that they were Soviet agents of various sorts. Obviously, there's no way to be absolutely sure about anything, but I found the Venona evidence very, very persuasive.

    I should also point out that after White and various other apparent Soviet agents came under sharp suspicion and the government planned to prosecute them for perjury and then use the threat of heavy prison time to get them to reveal the rest of their network, they suddenly all died under somewhat mysterious circumstances, as I discussed in my last article. That sort of thing tends to happen to spies who get caught much more frequently than to innocent people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Ron Unz says:
    @iffen
    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)

    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)

    Ha, ha, ha… Our friend “Iffen” really slipped up this time.

    Since 2015, he’s been one of the most frequent commenters on this website, averaging a couple of thousand comments per year, but generally rather bland and mediocre. I think he claims to be some sort of Christian Zionist living in the Deep South, which may or may not be correct. He certainly does defend Israel an awful lot, and mostly supports the Official Narrative but from a conservative direction. Okay.

    But now I publish this article, and mention I’d never been aware of the planned French attack on the Baku oilfields in Spring 1940, and ridicules me, saying “everybody knows about that” from the Bellamy book, which he himself just recently read. When challenged, he cites two very short sentences about a possible British attack in Summer 1941, which has absolutely nothing to do with my statement.

    Now I can’t recall “Iffen” ever previously demonstrating any deep knowledge or interest in history. Bellamy’s book is 800(!) pages long. Does anybody seriously believe that “Iffen” just happened to have recently read it, and so clearly remembered those particular 35 words lost among perhaps 500,000 others? Especially since the quote he found has absolutely nothing to do with my own statement?

    It seems pretty obvious that “Iffen” just did a little quick Googling, and came across a Bellamy reference, maybe even somewhere on Wikipedia. Since he knew nothing of the actual history, he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    So we have a very prolific, pro-Israel commenter, who generally defends the Official Narrative but does so from a rightwing perspective, and attempts to ridicule elements of this highly controversial article by pretending to have read extremely long books he very clearly hasn’t.

    Presumably, he’s supplementing his meager Social Security or Disability checks by doing some commenting work for the ADL or the SPLC or that sort of thing…

    Read More
    • Agree: Druid
    • LOL: iffen
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Iffen didn't really claim that "everybody knows about it", just that it's mentioned in some WW2 histories.
    And tbh, I don't know why you regard it as surprising, it has long been known that parts of Britain's and France's leadership in 1939/40 seriously considered military action against the Soviet Union, since they (correctly) considered it a de facto ally of Germany.
    There's even an entire Wikipedia page about plans for an intervention in the Finnish-Soviet winter war:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_plans_for_intervention_in_the_Winter_War

    iirc the British had even already painted some aircraft which were intended for delivery to Finland with the blue swastika of the Finnish air force.
    , @iffen
    Bellamy’s book is 800(!) pages long.

    Think of the word count!

    You and JR will shit bricks over the total.
    , @iffen
    he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    This is true.

    I conflated the 1940 plan with the 1941 plan.

    In my defense, I only scan a few examples of your hokum from time to time and do not actually "read" it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. This article’s description of the situation in France during and after the war is aligned with my understanding based on my reading while studying in Paris in 1988-1989. At that time the postwar demonization of the German occupiers and “collabos” and worship of the Resistance was coming under critical examination, and it was becoming widely accepted in France that there had indeed been 100 fake résistants for every real one. The mass executions of collabos, the injustice and brutality of which had previously been obscured by the heroic myth of the noble war against the Nazis, were beginning to be seen as a source of national shame. This revisionist historical moment (1988-89) coincided with a transition from the “heroic communist existentialism” of Sartre and Camus to the postmodern nihilism of Lyotard and Derrida. I suspect that the collapse of the heroic grand récit of the “good war” (at least among many French intellectuals) was a factor behind Lyotard’s assertion that Western culture had become nihilistic due to the collapse of all “great narratives.”

    That brief postmodern moment (the last two decades of the 20th century) was literally blown up on September 11, 2001, when the neocons created a new grand récit of a new “good war.” They were consciously trying to re-create a World War II atmosphere by modeling the event on Pearl Harbor and having their media assets spread the New Pearl Harbor meme before and after the event. See: https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-unspoken-truth-on-911-september-11-the-new-pearl-harbor/5354760 . They probably imagined that in so doing they were saving Western civilization as well as Israel…though I think the latter weighed more heavily on their decision to make such a radical and risky move.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  111. @Ron Unz

    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)
     
    Ha, ha, ha... Our friend "Iffen" really slipped up this time.

    Since 2015, he's been one of the most frequent commenters on this website, averaging a couple of thousand comments per year, but generally rather bland and mediocre. I think he claims to be some sort of Christian Zionist living in the Deep South, which may or may not be correct. He certainly does defend Israel an awful lot, and mostly supports the Official Narrative but from a conservative direction. Okay.

    But now I publish this article, and mention I'd never been aware of the planned French attack on the Baku oilfields in Spring 1940, and ridicules me, saying "everybody knows about that" from the Bellamy book, which he himself just recently read. When challenged, he cites two very short sentences about a possible British attack in Summer 1941, which has absolutely nothing to do with my statement.

    Now I can't recall "Iffen" ever previously demonstrating any deep knowledge or interest in history. Bellamy's book is 800(!) pages long. Does anybody seriously believe that "Iffen" just happened to have recently read it, and so clearly remembered those particular 35 words lost among perhaps 500,000 others? Especially since the quote he found has absolutely nothing to do with my own statement?

    It seems pretty obvious that "Iffen" just did a little quick Googling, and came across a Bellamy reference, maybe even somewhere on Wikipedia. Since he knew nothing of the actual history, he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    So we have a very prolific, pro-Israel commenter, who generally defends the Official Narrative but does so from a rightwing perspective, and attempts to ridicule elements of this highly controversial article by pretending to have read extremely long books he very clearly hasn't.

    Presumably, he's supplementing his meager Social Security or Disability checks by doing some commenting work for the ADL or the SPLC or that sort of thing...

    Iffen didn’t really claim that “everybody knows about it”, just that it’s mentioned in some WW2 histories.
    And tbh, I don’t know why you regard it as surprising, it has long been known that parts of Britain’s and France’s leadership in 1939/40 seriously considered military action against the Soviet Union, since they (correctly) considered it a de facto ally of Germany.
    There’s even an entire Wikipedia page about plans for an intervention in the Finnish-Soviet winter war:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_plans_for_intervention_in_the_Winter_War

    iirc the British had even already painted some aircraft which were intended for delivery to Finland with the blue swastika of the Finnish air force.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    I stand corrected, GR.

    The 1940 plan is obviously in a different universe from the 1941 plan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Vinnie O says:

    I easily located a copy of Kaufman’s “Germany Must Perish” on Bookfinder. USED copies are selling for as much as $6,000 USDs?!! But some nice people in India will sell me a reprint for less than $10. I don’t understand the used book market at all.

    I can remember reading attacks on “Other Losses” in the Washington Post years ago. In my innocence I accepted what HAD to be the “truth”. Now I know better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. iffen says:
    @Ron Unz

    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)
     
    Ha, ha, ha... Our friend "Iffen" really slipped up this time.

    Since 2015, he's been one of the most frequent commenters on this website, averaging a couple of thousand comments per year, but generally rather bland and mediocre. I think he claims to be some sort of Christian Zionist living in the Deep South, which may or may not be correct. He certainly does defend Israel an awful lot, and mostly supports the Official Narrative but from a conservative direction. Okay.

    But now I publish this article, and mention I'd never been aware of the planned French attack on the Baku oilfields in Spring 1940, and ridicules me, saying "everybody knows about that" from the Bellamy book, which he himself just recently read. When challenged, he cites two very short sentences about a possible British attack in Summer 1941, which has absolutely nothing to do with my statement.

    Now I can't recall "Iffen" ever previously demonstrating any deep knowledge or interest in history. Bellamy's book is 800(!) pages long. Does anybody seriously believe that "Iffen" just happened to have recently read it, and so clearly remembered those particular 35 words lost among perhaps 500,000 others? Especially since the quote he found has absolutely nothing to do with my own statement?

    It seems pretty obvious that "Iffen" just did a little quick Googling, and came across a Bellamy reference, maybe even somewhere on Wikipedia. Since he knew nothing of the actual history, he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    So we have a very prolific, pro-Israel commenter, who generally defends the Official Narrative but does so from a rightwing perspective, and attempts to ridicule elements of this highly controversial article by pretending to have read extremely long books he very clearly hasn't.

    Presumably, he's supplementing his meager Social Security or Disability checks by doing some commenting work for the ADL or the SPLC or that sort of thing...

    Bellamy’s book is 800(!) pages long.

    Think of the word count!

    You and JR will shit bricks over the total.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. utu says:
    @German_reader
    My argument is that almost nobody in Germany believes that the Americans starved one million German pows to death (widespread mistreatment of pows in the Rheinwiesen camps is another matter). Given that other issues like indiscriminate Allied air raids or the war crimes committed by Soviet and French colonial troops are widely known (even if good Germans always try to excuse them), it seems very unlikely to me this claim is true.
    But I'm not going to bother arguing with you about this, frankly I'm sick of both the Germanophobes and the fake Germanophiles on this site.

    I’m sick of both the Germanophobes and the fake Germanophiles on this site

    I am neither. I am T & J person. Anyway, I have noticed you have been absent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Anyway, I have noticed you have been absent.
     
    I had decided to stop commenting...probably should have stuck with that decision. Several reasons, but one is I'm absolutely sick of the discussions about German issues here...it's always deranged neonazi clowns like this super-moron wally vs. various Russian/Polish/Serbian patriots or (worst of all) some obsessively anti-German anglo ("Hey, look at the evil Hun! Still trying to dominate Europe, EU is a German plot, you know! Let's get Bomber Command out again!")...none of those people know anything at all about present-day Germany.
    Not interested in that nonsense anymore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. LSJohn says:
    @Ron Unz

    I just completed Chris Bellamy’s Absolute War and he details the plan to bomb Baku.

    That means “your expungers” are not very good.
     
    Well, I haven't myself read that particular 2007 book, but out of curiosity, I just took it down from my shelf and consulted the index. There was no entry for "Baku" and when I checked all the references for the "Caucasus Oil-Fields" and "France", it was never mentioned. I'm not necessarily saying that you're lying. It's perfectly possible that there were a couple of sentences buried somewhere in the 800 pages of text, but the discussion was just too scanty to have been included in the 25 page index.

    By contrast, the article I linked at The National Interest treated the planned attack as a massive revelation, which surely would have changed the outcome of World War II, and it was considered so note-worthy that TNI republished it a couple of years later. I regard myself as someone reasonably knowledgeable about WWII, and I'd certainly never heard of it.

    Here's an analogy. In one of my recent JFK articles, I pointed out that LBJ was by far the most obvious suspect, and indeed the apparent conspirators identified in the Talbot and Douglass books had explicitly claimed that LBJ was part of the plot. Despite this, those authors only discuss the possible role of LBJ in a couple of paragraphs across 1,500(!) total pages, and treat it rather dismissively. However, it would be factually incorrect to claim that they "ignored" that theory:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-ii-who-did-it/

    Similarly, Rick Perlstein's three long books on the rise of what he considers America's somewhat "paranoid" conservative movement opens in the early 1950s, less than a decade after Soviet agents had come within a hairsbreadth of gaining control of the American government. However, he doesn't *totally* ignore that issue since he (rather dismissively) mentions Harry Dexter White in parts of two sentences across his 2,400 pages of text:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-deadly-world-of-post-war-politics/

    So nobody can honestly claim that Talbot, Douglass, and Perlstein failed to include mention of an overwhelmingly important issue, and you might very well be correct that Bellamy did the same.

    The current “Pravda” article, along with your reply here, are good examples of the reasons you have become my favorite writer to read.

    Here’s one detail I consider important to this general subject:

    The similarities between the Morgenthau Plan that was unofficially repudiated in public remarks, but not officially replaced until July 1947, the agreement reached between Roosevelt and British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden at the “Second” Quebec Conference of 1944, and the military document ordering the post-war “administration” of Germany, JCS 1067, all agreed in important aspects not favorable to Germany or its civilian population. All pointed to deindustrialization, envisioning a “new” pastoral Germany, with the disassembled industrial assets throughout the Ruhr and Saar shipped to “victims of Gemany’s crimes” mostly, as it played out, the USSR.

    The Marshall Plan ‘s implementation did not begin until mid-’48.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James N. Kennett

    All pointed to deindustrialization, envisioning a “new” pastoral Germany, with the disassembled industrial assets throughout the Ruhr and Saar shipped to “victims of Gemany’s crimes” mostly, as it played out, the USSR.
     
    Did this happen? It would imply that industrial assets in the American, British and French zones of occupation were shipped to the USSR.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. iffen says:
    @German_reader
    Iffen didn't really claim that "everybody knows about it", just that it's mentioned in some WW2 histories.
    And tbh, I don't know why you regard it as surprising, it has long been known that parts of Britain's and France's leadership in 1939/40 seriously considered military action against the Soviet Union, since they (correctly) considered it a de facto ally of Germany.
    There's even an entire Wikipedia page about plans for an intervention in the Finnish-Soviet winter war:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_plans_for_intervention_in_the_Winter_War

    iirc the British had even already painted some aircraft which were intended for delivery to Finland with the blue swastika of the Finnish air force.

    I stand corrected, GR.

    The 1940 plan is obviously in a different universe from the 1941 plan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @utu

    I’m sick of both the Germanophobes and the fake Germanophiles on this site
     
    I am neither. I am T & J person. Anyway, I have noticed you have been absent.

    Anyway, I have noticed you have been absent.

    I had decided to stop commenting…probably should have stuck with that decision. Several reasons, but one is I’m absolutely sick of the discussions about German issues here…it’s always deranged neonazi clowns like this super-moron wally vs. various Russian/Polish/Serbian patriots or (worst of all) some obsessively anti-German anglo (“Hey, look at the evil Hun! Still trying to dominate Europe, EU is a German plot, you know! Let’s get Bomber Command out again!”)…none of those people know anything at all about present-day Germany.
    Not interested in that nonsense anymore.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    various Russian/Polish/Serbian patriots or (worst of all) some obsessively anti-German anglo

    I can see it quite well. But there is some lesson to be learned from it for a German and Germans in general. You need to start putting some resistance mostly along the T-truth line and J-justice line. The latter is because Germany has been vilified enough and has paid enough. There is no more justice to be extracted from Germany and Germany should speak the truth about its own suffering and about the un-truths that are being told.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. LSJohn says:
    @The Schoolmarm
    The domestic US euphemism for this was the refugee problem, and you find detailed consideration of it in the correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and other Americans of international repute. American yokels are unique in forgetting this historic international crisis. The outside world remembers it perfectly well. Everyone knows preeminent international civil servant Alfred-Maurice De Zayas, former Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order (well, everyone in the civilized world knows him.) De Zayas made his name researching it.

    https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/bib121594

    Or look at Nemesis at Potsdam, or 50 Theses on the Expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe, or multiple articles in international law journals. He's widely cited. That the definitive work of De Zayas is lost down America's memory hole of course supports your argument that US education is pure propaganda.

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it's going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all. It's already been punctured in your comments. It's another right-wing credo like denying global warming. Vindictive genocidal retribution is as American as apple pie. Americans don't need communist ideology or handlers to motivate that.

    Regarding Harry D. White: FBI claims that it confirmed Treasury officials White, Frank Coe and Harold Glasser as Soviet agents. I consider this less than confirming, but considerably more than rumor. Documents produced by Whitaker Chambers allegedly demonstrated conclusively that White had passed sensitive information to Soviet intelligence agents on at least 2 occasions. Elizabeth Bently, a confessed Soviet spy, said White was a Soviet “agent of influence.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. JackOH says:
    @The Schoolmarm
    The domestic US euphemism for this was the refugee problem, and you find detailed consideration of it in the correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and other Americans of international repute. American yokels are unique in forgetting this historic international crisis. The outside world remembers it perfectly well. Everyone knows preeminent international civil servant Alfred-Maurice De Zayas, former Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order (well, everyone in the civilized world knows him.) De Zayas made his name researching it.

    https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/bib121594

    Or look at Nemesis at Potsdam, or 50 Theses on the Expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe, or multiple articles in international law journals. He's widely cited. That the definitive work of De Zayas is lost down America's memory hole of course supports your argument that US education is pure propaganda.

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it's going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all. It's already been punctured in your comments. It's another right-wing credo like denying global warming. Vindictive genocidal retribution is as American as apple pie. Americans don't need communist ideology or handlers to motivate that.

    Schoolmarm, thanks for your comment. I exchanged brief correspondence with Prof. de Zayas back in the 1990s. He’s truly an extraordinary man of great moral and professional courage.

    “Vindictive genocidal retribution is as American as apple pie” had me thinking of Black activist H. Rap Brown’s “violence is as American as cherry pie”. Y’know, I want to disagree strongly solely out of a sense of psychological self-interest—who in his right mind wants to admit his country is a threat to human decency, and there’s damn near nothing he can do about it?

    FWIW-There’s been a modern literature of German political grievances going back 150 years with Austrian Germans fearing the ascendant Slavs within Austria-Hungary. I think there’s some uneasiness that to make something of the severe punishment meted out to Germans beginning about 1944 could add weight to those German grievances, and threaten the legitimacy of the Allied victory. Just speculating, that’s all.

    Did or do you teach? What type of schools? (BTW-welcome to Unz Review.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Schoolmarm
    Would that my lot in life were so innocuous. Do you have a protonmail account? One is bashful in open sources
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. iffen says:
    @Ron Unz

    Chris Bellamy Absolute War

    Page 410

    Instead, the British sought to collate intelligence and above all, to ensure that the Germans did not seize the Caucasus oilfields. If that looked likely, and the Russians did not destroy them, then the British would. (5)
     
    Ha, ha, ha... Our friend "Iffen" really slipped up this time.

    Since 2015, he's been one of the most frequent commenters on this website, averaging a couple of thousand comments per year, but generally rather bland and mediocre. I think he claims to be some sort of Christian Zionist living in the Deep South, which may or may not be correct. He certainly does defend Israel an awful lot, and mostly supports the Official Narrative but from a conservative direction. Okay.

    But now I publish this article, and mention I'd never been aware of the planned French attack on the Baku oilfields in Spring 1940, and ridicules me, saying "everybody knows about that" from the Bellamy book, which he himself just recently read. When challenged, he cites two very short sentences about a possible British attack in Summer 1941, which has absolutely nothing to do with my statement.

    Now I can't recall "Iffen" ever previously demonstrating any deep knowledge or interest in history. Bellamy's book is 800(!) pages long. Does anybody seriously believe that "Iffen" just happened to have recently read it, and so clearly remembered those particular 35 words lost among perhaps 500,000 others? Especially since the quote he found has absolutely nothing to do with my own statement?

    It seems pretty obvious that "Iffen" just did a little quick Googling, and came across a Bellamy reference, maybe even somewhere on Wikipedia. Since he knew nothing of the actual history, he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    So we have a very prolific, pro-Israel commenter, who generally defends the Official Narrative but does so from a rightwing perspective, and attempts to ridicule elements of this highly controversial article by pretending to have read extremely long books he very clearly hasn't.

    Presumably, he's supplementing his meager Social Security or Disability checks by doing some commenting work for the ADL or the SPLC or that sort of thing...

    he carelessly assumed it must refer to the same matter I was discussing.

    This is true.

    I conflated the 1940 plan with the 1941 plan.

    In my defense, I only scan a few examples of your hokum from time to time and do not actually “read” it.

    Read More
    • Troll: Rurik
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Jake says:
    @Cleburne

    it is rightly designated as Anglo-Zionist at least as far back as to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell.
     
    Only by you, old buddy. You honestly don't know thing one about the English Civil War period, do you? Though I do appreciate you no longer insinuate Cromwell's Irish campaign ws financed by the rabbis of Amsterdam.

    If you're gonna have an idea fixe (sic?) then please have at it, but a little grounding in facts or even the possible would be a good thing. You're starting to get tiresome. At least your golem Wally posts interesting links now and again.

    Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. That does not change because you would prefer it not to be true. And that truth does have fruits; it does produce after its kind. The Anglo-Zionist Empire was fully inherent not just in archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell, but in the heretical preaching, oral and written, of the earliest ‘radical Reformers’ from England.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cleburne
    Jake, I'm not sure you know what a Judaizing heresy is. Else you don't know thing one about the basis of Puritan theology, considered as a whole is more or less the exact opposite of how "judaizing heresy" is understood here in my world, from St Paul down to Tobias Crisp.

    If I may invoke the spirit of Kamerad Walthar, please provide sources for the "full inherency" of Anglo-Zionism in the "earliest radical preachers."

    It's a shame you're confused on these points, because quite honestly I think you and I would otherwise be in agreement on most things.

    Best regards.

    , @Cleburne
    Jake, can you just tell me where you came across your interesting ideas? I know David Gelertner made an argument to this effect in that ridiculous "Americanism" book, but he's a propagandist, not a scholar. "In Search of the City on the Hill" by Richard Gamble does a good shop of showing that the notion of Puritans as exceptionalists was largely the invention of Perry Miller with his series on American puritans that began with "Mission Into the Wilderness." The American Puritans were a pretty wretched bunch, but it wasn't until the early to mid 1800s that they appointed themselves correctors of God's work, to use Dostoevsky's phrase.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Cleburne says:
    @Jake
    Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. That does not change because you would prefer it not to be true. And that truth does have fruits; it does produce after its kind. The Anglo-Zionist Empire was fully inherent not just in archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell, but in the heretical preaching, oral and written, of the earliest 'radical Reformers' from England.

    Jake, I’m not sure you know what a Judaizing heresy is. Else you don’t know thing one about the basis of Puritan theology, considered as a whole is more or less the exact opposite of how “judaizing heresy” is understood here in my world, from St Paul down to Tobias Crisp.

    If I may invoke the spirit of Kamerad Walthar, please provide sources for the “full inherency” of Anglo-Zionism in the “earliest radical preachers.”

    It’s a shame you’re confused on these points, because quite honestly I think you and I would otherwise be in agreement on most things.

    Best regards.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. utu says:
    @German_reader

    Anyway, I have noticed you have been absent.
     
    I had decided to stop commenting...probably should have stuck with that decision. Several reasons, but one is I'm absolutely sick of the discussions about German issues here...it's always deranged neonazi clowns like this super-moron wally vs. various Russian/Polish/Serbian patriots or (worst of all) some obsessively anti-German anglo ("Hey, look at the evil Hun! Still trying to dominate Europe, EU is a German plot, you know! Let's get Bomber Command out again!")...none of those people know anything at all about present-day Germany.
    Not interested in that nonsense anymore.

    various Russian/Polish/Serbian patriots or (worst of all) some obsessively anti-German anglo

    I can see it quite well. But there is some lesson to be learned from it for a German and Germans in general. You need to start putting some resistance mostly along the T-truth line and J-justice line. The latter is because Germany has been vilified enough and has paid enough. There is no more justice to be extracted from Germany and Germany should speak the truth about its own suffering and about the un-truths that are being told.

    Read More
    • Agree: Lauri Törni, Hu Mi Yu
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I tend to agree, though there are problems with that, German crimes during the Nazi era can't be denied, and Germany needs to find some kind of mutually acceptable relationship with her neighbours and Russia...excessive revisionism could harm that.
    Germans really need to realize one thing though...the English-speaking world isn't our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.
    , @EugeneGur

    Germany has been vilified enough and has paid enough
     
    I am not sure what you mean by "enough". I guess I qualify as a Russian patriot, but don't see anything wrong with the Germans listening to the Russian side of the story for a change. At some point, we the Russian stupidly have decided that "Germany has paid enough", withdraw our troops from the Eastern Germany and agreed to the Germany reunification.

    What did we get as a result? We now have the German troops stationed in Estonia right on our border. We have Germany complicit in the coup in Ukraine that brought neo-Nazi to power, the same people the German Nazis used to do their dirty work for them 75 years ago. The German press and the German government are unbelievably hostile to Russia for the reason that entirely escapes me, for Russia hasn't done any harm to Germany, and, considering our history, has been more than accommodating. It can't be the Angela's bicycle, can it?

    Perhaps, Germany has paid enough but it doesn't seem like it learned its lesson. But we have.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Cleburne says:
    @Jake
    Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. That does not change because you would prefer it not to be true. And that truth does have fruits; it does produce after its kind. The Anglo-Zionist Empire was fully inherent not just in archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell, but in the heretical preaching, oral and written, of the earliest 'radical Reformers' from England.

    Jake, can you just tell me where you came across your interesting ideas? I know David Gelertner made an argument to this effect in that ridiculous “Americanism” book, but he’s a propagandist, not a scholar. “In Search of the City on the Hill” by Richard Gamble does a good shop of showing that the notion of Puritans as exceptionalists was largely the invention of Perry Miller with his series on American puritans that began with “Mission Into the Wilderness.” The American Puritans were a pretty wretched bunch, but it wasn’t until the early to mid 1800s that they appointed themselves correctors of God’s work, to use Dostoevsky’s phrase.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    that they appointed themselves correctors of God’s work, to use Dostoevsky’s phrase.


    I have to read some Dostoevsky.
    , @Jake
    Which interesting ideas? That Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy? That was very openly discussed during the Tudor age and proved central to the absurd assertion that Anglicanism was the perfect ideal between the equally extreme poles of Catholicism and radical Reformationism, which in England was Puritanism. In fact, the centrality of Judaizing heresy to the entire Reformation was a major discussion from very early in Martin Luther's career as 'reformer.' For example, Luther chose to use the Pharisaic/Talmudic Bible as the Protestant Old Testament rather than the Catholic Old Testament, which means he asserted that Jews who opposed Christ had the authority to declare what is and is not Scripture even some 60 years or so post-Crucifixion and Resurrection (which was when the Pharisees finally decided which books were and were not Jewish Bible.

    And that marks Luther as a Judaizer, for he made Jews superior to Christ's Church and its authority.

    But Anglo-Saxon Judaizing was of another sort: it featured a growing faith that the Anglo-Saxon race was the Jewish race for the Christian age. That led to two things of great importance. One is utter insanity of belief that Anglo-Saxons are literally 'children of Israel, ' as in The Lost Tribes. That nonsense crops up over and over in English-speaking Protestantism. The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God's chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God's chosen master race does God's will.

    That Puritan problem did not begin after 1800 in America. It was in America as soon as Anglo-Saxon Puritans arrived. It is indeed much easier to see when you read an Abolitionist declaring that if God were not an Abolitionist then chains should be put on God. But it was planted in New England even before 1630.

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted 'baptists,' and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.

    Because this is all derived from heresy, from perversion of theology and attendant moral philosophy, there is no political solution. The only solution is conversion and repentance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. iffen says:
    @Cleburne
    Jake, can you just tell me where you came across your interesting ideas? I know David Gelertner made an argument to this effect in that ridiculous "Americanism" book, but he's a propagandist, not a scholar. "In Search of the City on the Hill" by Richard Gamble does a good shop of showing that the notion of Puritans as exceptionalists was largely the invention of Perry Miller with his series on American puritans that began with "Mission Into the Wilderness." The American Puritans were a pretty wretched bunch, but it wasn't until the early to mid 1800s that they appointed themselves correctors of God's work, to use Dostoevsky's phrase.

    that they appointed themselves correctors of God’s work, to use Dostoevsky’s phrase.

    I have to read some Dostoevsky.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. utu says:
    @schrub
    I am surprised that no one has mentioned John Sack's book "An Eye For An Eye: which details the savage retribution waged again post-war Germans by Jewish individuals and groups.

    https://www.amazon.com/Eye-John-Sack/dp/0465042147/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1531146949&sr=1-1&keywords=john+sack+an+eye+for+an+eye&dpID=51WowIcoQ1L&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

    (Read the comments.)

    Sack was savagely attacked for having written this book, something his Wikipedia entry fails to fully disclose.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Eye_for_an_Eye:_The_Untold_Story_of_Jewish_Revenge_Against_Germans_in_1945

    By the time of his very mysterious and premature death, John Sack had become a virtual "non-person", totally ostracised by both the media and academia for having written it. The book's publication ended up effectively destroying his ability to make any sort of living whatsoever as a writer. He had become totally (and I mean totally) blacklisted.

    I am surprised that Sack's book is back in publication. It was unobtainable for many years. Get it while you can!

    Note: Probably the most savage of the Jews who were deliberately put in charge of a German prisoner of war camps was Salomon Morel. His eventual "punishment" for his misdeeds (which included personally killing as many as 1,500 German POWs, usually with a baseball bat) was dying in a warm bed in Israel at a very advanced age in a country which now lauds him a hero.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Morel

    John Sack’s book “An Eye For An Eye”

    Yes, it is a very good book. I liked the parts about Jewish communist perpetrators of horrible crimes who enjoy living in NY, NJ and CA while complaining about anti-Semites in Poland and Russia.

    I always wondered what were the origins of the book, i.e., how John Sack got on the project? Did somebody sponsor him? I suspected that something bad was happening to him but I did not know that he became “non-person.” Do you know more about him?

    There is pdf of the book somewhere on line. Perhaps also Ron Unz could make it available.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    There is pdf of the book somewhere on line.

    Le voilà:

    http://www.solargeneral.org/wp-content/uploads/library/eye-for-an-eye-john-sack.pdf


    I always wondered what were the origins of the book, i.e., how John Sack got on the project?

    He talks about this in the preface.

    Once again, I felt that I was confronting something too big for one little three-pound brain, for I was learning that, yes, the Holocaust happened, the Germans killed Jews, but that a second atrocity happened that the Jews who committed it covered up: one where the Jews killed Germans. God knows the Jews were provoked, but I learned that in 1945 they killed a great number of Germans: not Nazis, not Hider's trigger men, but German civilians, German men, women, children, babies, whose "crime" was just to be Germans. Through the wrath of Jews, however understandable, the Germans lost more civilians than at Dresden, more than, or just as many as, the Japanese at Hiroshima, the Americans at Pearl Harbor, the British in the Battle of Britain, or the Jews themselves in Poland's occasional pogroms: so I now learned, and I was aghast to learn it. This was no Holocaust of the moral equivalent of the Holocaust, but I knew that if I reported it, I’d be exhibiting, well, call it chutzpah, for I could guess what the world would say, but I felt I’d be doing the righteous thing both as a reporter and as a man who's a Jew.

    I'm not a Biblical scholar, but I went to Saturday school (I was voted the “most religious") and I knew that the Torah tells us to bear honest witness, tells us, indeed, that if someone sins and we know it and don’t report it, then we're guilty too. The men (and the woman, a scholar says) who wrote the Torah didn’t cover up Jewish misdeeds. Even when Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, sinned — God told him to go to Israel, but he went to Egypt instead — the Torah reported it. It reported that Judah, whose name is the source of "Jew," made love to a harlot, and it reported that Moses, even Moses, trespassed against the Lord, who then didn't let him into the Promised Land. The people who wrote the Torah (or according to Orthodox Jews, the God who wrote it) believed that we Jews couldn’t proclaim, "Thou shalt not cover," "Thou shalt not steal," "Thou shalt not kill," if we ourselves did it and covered it up, and I, as a Jew doing research in Europe, felt that I must report what the Jewish commandants did if Jews were to keep any moral authority. I suspected that some Jews would ask me, "How could a Jew write this book?" and I knew that my answer must be "No, how could a Jew not write it?"
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @utu
    various Russian/Polish/Serbian patriots or (worst of all) some obsessively anti-German anglo

    I can see it quite well. But there is some lesson to be learned from it for a German and Germans in general. You need to start putting some resistance mostly along the T-truth line and J-justice line. The latter is because Germany has been vilified enough and has paid enough. There is no more justice to be extracted from Germany and Germany should speak the truth about its own suffering and about the un-truths that are being told.

    I tend to agree, though there are problems with that, German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied, and Germany needs to find some kind of mutually acceptable relationship with her neighbours and Russia…excessive revisionism could harm that.
    Germans really need to realize one thing though…the English-speaking world isn’t our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied
     
    But some probably can and should be contested. We do not know what can and what cannot be denied until research is done from the perspective and interests of Germans and Germany. This is your duty to do it. Duty to higher ideals and duty to your ancestors. I know it is a very delicate issue but it must be done. This is the only path.

    As far as the English-speaking world there is no point of getting upset. They just mean business and there are not different now from what they were before the WWII. You must understand where they are coming from. The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII. They indoctrinated you to emasculate you and Germans did it willingly because they knew that by playing dead and docile they would be safer. And it worked up to the point. Now cultural and even biological survival of German nation is at the stake. The conflict between Anglo-American and German cultures is deep and philosophical. The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world. In terms of Russia I doubt that Russia can provide you much in terms of cultural model but in long run an alliance with Russia would be very good for the world and for Germany. Europe and Russian is the only power that can counterbalance the power of America and China. We need a tri-polar world. Europe and Russia is the last hope to save the western civilization. And there is no Europe w/o strong Germany. Strong in a spiritual sense.
    , @dfordoom

    Germans really need to realize one thing though…the English-speaking world isn’t our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.
     
    Agreed. In fact it's a terrible mistake for any nation to harbour sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain. Two remarkably treacherous nations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. iffen says:

    the English-speaking world isn’t our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.

    Why in the world would you say this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Slavs at least have very good reasons for resentment of Germany (Intelligenzaktion, destruction of Warsaw, siege of Leningrad etc.).
    The British...not so much. They caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German civilians in both world wars (blockade in WW1, area bombing in WW2) and destroyed most of our cities, everything Germany may have done against Britain was repaid tenfold...and yet one still gets the feeling they think it wasn't enough. This constant whining in British public discourse "The Hun is out to dominate Europe again! 4th Reich!"...that's not rational anymore, it's an expression of a deep-seated pathology.
    It's taken me a long time to accept this, my father's English, if any German should be predisposed to Anglophilia, it should be me...but I've come to the conclusion that a non-trivial segment of the British public isn't just opposed to specific German policies, but rather to the very existence of Germany (Thatcher of course demonstrated that attitude back in 1989 when she begged the Soviets not to allow reunification). There's nothing to be done about that, no sense in trying to accommodate those people.
    As for you Americans, it will always be 1945 for you...when the German steps out of line, just remind him of his Nazi past and how you "liberated" him, and everything you've done for him for which he has to be eternally grateful. I can remember the kind of things that were written in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003...one clever American pundit wrote that apparently the American reeducation of Germans had gone too far since they were now so pacifistic, and that maybe they should now be reeducated into fighting for freedom. That attitude of barely veiled contempt is typical. Trump shows it as well with all those accusations about "freeloading"...all the more galling when one remembers that German troops died in Afghanistan, and how Trump and his ilk are constantly fawning not just over Israel, but even over those horrible retrograde Gulf states.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @iffen
    the English-speaking world isn’t our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.


    Why in the world would you say this?

    Slavs at least have very good reasons for resentment of Germany (Intelligenzaktion, destruction of Warsaw, siege of Leningrad etc.).
    The British…not so much. They caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German civilians in both world wars (blockade in WW1, area bombing in WW2) and destroyed most of our cities, everything Germany may have done against Britain was repaid tenfold…and yet one still gets the feeling they think it wasn’t enough. This constant whining in British public discourse “The Hun is out to dominate Europe again! 4th Reich!”…that’s not rational anymore, it’s an expression of a deep-seated pathology.
    It’s taken me a long time to accept this, my father’s English, if any German should be predisposed to Anglophilia, it should be me…but I’ve come to the conclusion that a non-trivial segment of the British public isn’t just opposed to specific German policies, but rather to the very existence of Germany (Thatcher of course demonstrated that attitude back in 1989 when she begged the Soviets not to allow reunification). There’s nothing to be done about that, no sense in trying to accommodate those people.
    As for you Americans, it will always be 1945 for you…when the German steps out of line, just remind him of his Nazi past and how you “liberated” him, and everything you’ve done for him for which he has to be eternally grateful. I can remember the kind of things that were written in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003…one clever American pundit wrote that apparently the American reeducation of Germans had gone too far since they were now so pacifistic, and that maybe they should now be reeducated into fighting for freedom. That attitude of barely veiled contempt is typical. Trump shows it as well with all those accusations about “freeloading”…all the more galling when one remembers that German troops died in Afghanistan, and how Trump and his ilk are constantly fawning not just over Israel, but even over those horrible retrograde Gulf states.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    But, but what about the Marshall Plan?
    , @ivan
    The British had every reason to wish the Germans ill, since the Germans planned to upend their Empire through subversion. The Germans are directly responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, since they tried every means to cause an uprising of the Muslim subjects in the Middle-East and India, during both world wars. They tried the same tricks with the Soviet Union, recruiting Kazakhs and Tartars to fight the Soviets. Then they became for a time the international headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Now it is one thing to destroy the British Empire and the Soviet Union and replace it with something better. But the Germans never had the larger liberal ideas about the equality of all men that the British subscribed to, at least in theory. Nor did they have that idea that the white man was nothing special that the Communists held, again in theory. The Germans were the worst of the lot of the Westerners, given to much bathos about their thwarted destiny, but having nothing to offer to subject peoples except a throwback to a racist empire with themselves leading from the front. They got, it has to be said after all the song and dance, what they deserved in the WWII.
    , @Bill P
    Oh don't be so categorical. Come visit the US and be as openly German as you want, then report back on how people received you.

    So long as you stay out of certain urban ghettos nobody will have a problem with you. Actually, they'll probably be interested and friendly, and try to make you comfortable and happy.

    Now switch places with an American like me and visit Europe. In that case you'll run into plenty of assholes who give you their unsolicited, uninformed opinion on America and feel self righteous about making you feel unwelcome.

    US animus toward Germany is greatly exaggerated -- people shouldn't take Hollywood so seriously. So many Americans are German that even our national cuisine is more German than British. Every time I'm in Europe and some European starts spouting off on "yankees" and whatnot I always tell them to go to the US and spend some time there (not just in NYC, LA or Miami) and get to know the locals, then get back to me.

    BTW, my kids' oma is a Bavarian immigrant, and she loves it here in the states.
    , @Rurik

    Slavs at least have very good reasons for resentment of Germany (Intelligenzaktion, destruction of Warsaw, siege of Leningrad etc.).
     
    were it not for the genocidal Bolsheviks/Soviets, Germany would have left the Slavs alone.

    Poland forced the issue by abusing the ethnic Germans under its illegitimate domination.

    but for the Pole's arrogant intractability over The Corridor, the war would have been much more difficult for the Zionists to foist

    everything Germany may have done against Britain was repaid tenfold…and yet one still gets the feeling they think it wasn’t enough. ... ...that’s not rational anymore, it’s an expression of a deep-seated pathology.

    There’s nothing to be done about that, no sense in trying to accommodate those people.
    As for you Americans, it will always be 1945 for you…when the German steps out of line, just remind him of his Nazi past and how you “liberated” him,
     
    and this you put down to British and American hostility?

    Who do you think has determined the foreign (and domestic) policy of these nations?

    Germans and Brits and (White, West European) Americans (especially of German, Anglo Saxon heritage) are basically the same people.

    Why on God's green earth should your typical American have anything against your typical German?

    There is no reason. Other than (psychotic, pathological, Talmudic) Jewish supremacist hostility to Germans in particular.

    Have you ever heard of the Balfour Declaration?

    Do you understand who was behind the push for war with Germany in the ZUSA?

    I can remember the kind of things that were written in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003…one clever American pundit wrote that apparently the American reeducation of Germans had gone too far since they were now so pacifistic, and that maybe they should now be reeducated into fighting for freedom.
     
    Who, pray tell, do you think is behind the Eternal Wars in the Middle East?

    the typical American?!

    No one is that &$#@ stupid. No one.

    Do you think all the Americans of German ancestry loath themselves (and their homeland) as much as you Germans obviously do?

    Do you have any idea how hilarious it is for the Fiend to mock the German people for having been demonized and scourged as evil Nazis for generations now, only to be further humiliated by being told its time you became more war-like, so you can more effectively be used as cannon fodder in the Jewish supremacist's Eternal Wars.

    Trump and his ilk are constantly fawning not just over Israel,

     

    yea, that because all these Americans of German heritage, (including Trump) all hate Germans and Germany.

    AND IT HAS NOTHING!! WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH ZIONISTS OR JEWISH SUPREMACISTS WHO OWN OUR CENTRAL BANKS AND MEDIA!!!!!!!

    And anyone who says otherwise is an evil Nazi, racist, KKK, Adolf Hitler!

    Huh?
    , @fnn
    This could be Trump trying to bring an end to NATO through the back door, so to speak. Recall the hysteria when, during the campaign, Trump said, "NATO is obsolete." He quickly backed off from that statement and started using other arguments against NATO as presently constituted.
    , @IBC
    You're greatly over-weighting some of the sensationalist rhetoric and headlines out there. At this point, anti-German sentiments in the US are almost exclusively centered around the Nazis and the Holocaust. Americans are mostly very pro-German. And in fact, when it comes to things like "German engineering" or the Autobahn, I think many Americans are almost credulously over-enthusiastic.

    And apparently most people in the UK also have a favorable opinion of Germany:

    http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/15/favorable-views-of-germany-dont-erase-concerns-about-its-influence-within-eu/

    I've read a number of your comments and they're usually reasonable and offer an interesting perspective. You're definitely not a "Holocaust-denier," but you are a bit of a German nationalist and that's not necessarily a bad thing. But I think that WWII was 100 percent Germany's choice and Germany was also largely to blame for starting WWI, though less exclusively. And I think that in the past, there was a fanatical aspect to German nationalism, and something similar also existed in Japan. And both countries had political systems that didn't effectively check that sort of extremism even in the face of impending national catastrophe. So that is one of the reasons why it continues to be important to study actual history --to learn from it so we can avoid some of the mistakes of the past rather than just building narratives to suit contemporary political purposes.

    But regarding allegations of especially bad treatment of German ex-soldiers and civilians in the American zone of occupation; I wouldn't be surprised that some of it's true, but if anything, I would have thought that the British zone of occupation would have been worse since many British civilians had been killed directly by the Germans and several British cities were heavily damaged. So there would have been more of revenge motive. And the British public itself would have been living under austere rationing conditions at that time (and actually all the way until 1954) and the government was heavily in debt. So there would have been logistical rationalizations as well. And yet you say that your grandfather was treated fairly well. And I've also read that the British Army did actually encourage some rebuilding of Germany industry as in the case of the Volkswagen plant in Wolfsburg, which by 1949 had recovered to the point where it could even start exporting cars to the USA.

    And you can remind the British tabloid-style nationalists that Germans played a key role in helping to defeat Napoleon. And they were mostly on the British side in the American Revolution, though obviously that won't help you with Americans.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Bill Jones says: • Website
    @Anon
    In both WW 1 and WW 2 there was a saying, “ England will fight to the last French man”

    In both wars, France had a bigger, better equipped and more professional army. The British war mongers knew they couldn’t possibly win a war with Germany without France Russia and the United States.

    I believe that 25% of the Oxford class of 1918 died in the great war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. TheBoom says:

    Ron, as usual an interesting, eye-opening article. I like that you don’t pretend to know more than what you know and, instead, try to sift through the claims to figure out the truth. However, you need to address the pink elephant in the room: the role Jews played in the persecution of German citizenry, sham trials and both covering up the truth and banishment from the public space writers who dared to go against the approved narratives. You especially should not be shocked that Hollywood movies have not been made about these topics, no more than you should be puzzled that they haven’t been made about the Holodomore (as one Israeli writer has noted “Stalin’s Jews” conducted the Holodomore.) No mainstream media coverage or movie will be allowed that portrays Jews as committing genocide or being heavily involved in the slave trade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. iffen says:
    @German_reader
    Slavs at least have very good reasons for resentment of Germany (Intelligenzaktion, destruction of Warsaw, siege of Leningrad etc.).
    The British...not so much. They caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German civilians in both world wars (blockade in WW1, area bombing in WW2) and destroyed most of our cities, everything Germany may have done against Britain was repaid tenfold...and yet one still gets the feeling they think it wasn't enough. This constant whining in British public discourse "The Hun is out to dominate Europe again! 4th Reich!"...that's not rational anymore, it's an expression of a deep-seated pathology.
    It's taken me a long time to accept this, my father's English, if any German should be predisposed to Anglophilia, it should be me...but I've come to the conclusion that a non-trivial segment of the British public isn't just opposed to specific German policies, but rather to the very existence of Germany (Thatcher of course demonstrated that attitude back in 1989 when she begged the Soviets not to allow reunification). There's nothing to be done about that, no sense in trying to accommodate those people.
    As for you Americans, it will always be 1945 for you...when the German steps out of line, just remind him of his Nazi past and how you "liberated" him, and everything you've done for him for which he has to be eternally grateful. I can remember the kind of things that were written in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003...one clever American pundit wrote that apparently the American reeducation of Germans had gone too far since they were now so pacifistic, and that maybe they should now be reeducated into fighting for freedom. That attitude of barely veiled contempt is typical. Trump shows it as well with all those accusations about "freeloading"...all the more galling when one remembers that German troops died in Afghanistan, and how Trump and his ilk are constantly fawning not just over Israel, but even over those horrible retrograde Gulf states.

    But, but what about the Marshall Plan?

    Read More
    • Replies: @David In TN
    "But, what about the Marshall Plan?"

    And the Berlin Airlift. BTW I am well aware the Germans were treated harshly after WW II.

    , @SolontoCroesus
    Great Britain received the largest amount of Marshall Plan aid, at $3297 million, more than twice as much as W. Germany's $1448 million.

    France was second to Britain, at $2296 million.

    Italy & Trieste received approx. $1200 million, as did Netherlands.

    The eleven remaining recipients of Marshall Plan aid received grants ranging from $43 million to $777 million.

    Americans tend to exaggerate their generosity to West Germany, especially hypocritical since so much (criminal) damage was inflicted on Germany, and so much of Germany's wealth, in patents, technology, and brain power, was removed from Germany for the benefit of Allies.

    Nor was Marshall Plan heroically munificent to other Allies, such as France and Italy, where Allied forces inflicted far more death and destruction than did the German invasion and occupation.

    One more very important reason that the dogmatized holocaust narrative is a pernicious deception is that the American people have unrealistic knowledge about how they achieved what they have, and their expectations that it will continue. The Hollywood version of the world wars must be debunked in order for Americans to rationally plot their economic and political future.

    The American people must internalize, must take on board in a serious way honest-to-reality information such as Ron Unz presented here: USA post-war prosperity was achieved by means of an unnecessary and in many ways unjust and immoral war. Put another way, WWII was necessary for the purpose of creating a generation-and-a-half of American prosperity.

    Now that USA has spent that war loot, but with the sense that the prosperity it brought was normative, how are US leaders to re-create that plateau of wealth, how to MAGA short of more war?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Joe Wong says:

    Unconditional Hatred is a Western trait particular the Anglo, it is in their gene and their cult and religious based culture. Despite Chinese self-exploitation to support the Westerners’ luxurious life style and high living standard on the cheap, they are still being hated by their Western beneficiaries unconditionally. If one compares what Peter Navarro has been saying to Hitler’s speeches, one wonders why people called Hitler mad man full of hatred. Yet Peter Navarro is in the core of Western civilization and it is embarking on another world war to destroy the world because of their unconditional hatred and unfathomable insanity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  134. ivan says:
    @German_reader
    Slavs at least have very good reasons for resentment of Germany (Intelligenzaktion, destruction of Warsaw, siege of Leningrad etc.).
    The British...not so much. They caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German civilians in both world wars (blockade in WW1, area bombing in WW2) and destroyed most of our cities, everything Germany may have done against Britain was repaid tenfold...and yet one still gets the feeling they think it wasn't enough. This constant whining in British public discourse "The Hun is out to dominate Europe again! 4th Reich!"...that's not rational anymore, it's an expression of a deep-seated pathology.
    It's taken me a long time to accept this, my father's English, if any German should be predisposed to Anglophilia, it should be me...but I've come to the conclusion that a non-trivial segment of the British public isn't just opposed to specific German policies, but rather to the very existence of Germany (Thatcher of course demonstrated that attitude back in 1989 when she begged the Soviets not to allow reunification). There's nothing to be done about that, no sense in trying to accommodate those people.
    As for you Americans, it will always be 1945 for you...when the German steps out of line, just remind him of his Nazi past and how you "liberated" him, and everything you've done for him for which he has to be eternally grateful. I can remember the kind of things that were written in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003...one clever American pundit wrote that apparently the American reeducation of Germans had gone too far since they were now so pacifistic, and that maybe they should now be reeducated into fighting for freedom. That attitude of barely veiled contempt is typical. Trump shows it as well with all those accusations about "freeloading"...all the more galling when one remembers that German troops died in Afghanistan, and how Trump and his ilk are constantly fawning not just over Israel, but even over those horrible retrograde Gulf states.

    The British had every reason to wish the Germans ill, since the Germans planned to upend their Empire through subversion. The Germans are directly responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, since they tried every means to cause an uprising of the Muslim subjects in the Middle-East and India, during both world wars. They tried the same tricks with the Soviet Union, recruiting Kazakhs and Tartars to fight the Soviets. Then they became for a time the international headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Now it is one thing to destroy the British Empire and the Soviet Union and replace it with something better. But the Germans never had the larger liberal ideas about the equality of all men that the British subscribed to, at least in theory. Nor did they have that idea that the white man was nothing special that the Communists held, again in theory. The Germans were the worst of the lot of the Westerners, given to much bathos about their thwarted destiny, but having nothing to offer to subject peoples except a throwback to a racist empire with themselves leading from the front. They got, it has to be said after all the song and dance, what they deserved in the WWII.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Paw says:
    @Wally
    said:
    " But since this thread is certainly going to turn into the usual contest between neonazis/Holocaust deniers and obsessive Germanophobes of either the Anglo or Slav kind, I’ll leave it at that."

    One cannot deny what did not, could not have happen.
    I note that you have yet to refute any of the numerous 'holocaust' Revisionists at this site.
    I myself have posted numerous works by Revisionists which make mincemeat out of your fake '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' and you simply run away.

    If your head is in the sand, your ass is in the air.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/20180118_outrage.png?itok=RhdJTA4x

    www.codoh.com

    I S L A M I S T ? Picture ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Ron Unz says:
    @The Schoolmarm
    The domestic US euphemism for this was the refugee problem, and you find detailed consideration of it in the correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and other Americans of international repute. American yokels are unique in forgetting this historic international crisis. The outside world remembers it perfectly well. Everyone knows preeminent international civil servant Alfred-Maurice De Zayas, former Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order (well, everyone in the civilized world knows him.) De Zayas made his name researching it.

    https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/bib121594

    Or look at Nemesis at Potsdam, or 50 Theses on the Expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe, or multiple articles in international law journals. He's widely cited. That the definitive work of De Zayas is lost down America's memory hole of course supports your argument that US education is pure propaganda.

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it's going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all. It's already been punctured in your comments. It's another right-wing credo like denying global warming. Vindictive genocidal retribution is as American as apple pie. Americans don't need communist ideology or handlers to motivate that.

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it’s going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all.

    Well, until about a dozen years ago I’m not even sure I’d ever heard of Harry Dexter White. But his name came up here and there, along with the Venona Decrypts that I’d sometimes read about, so maybe around seven years ago, I sat down and read three or four of the Venona books, and found them very, very persuasive, and scrupulous in their scholarly quality. The evidence they provided against White, Alger Hiss, and many dozens of other individuals seemed pretty conclusive to me, proving that they were Soviet agents of various sorts. Obviously, there’s no way to be absolutely sure about anything, but I found the Venona evidence very, very persuasive.

    I should also point out that after White and various other apparent Soviet agents came under sharp suspicion and the government planned to prosecute them for perjury and then use the threat of heavy prison time to get them to reveal the rest of their network, they suddenly all died under somewhat mysterious circumstances, as I discussed in my last article. That sort of thing tends to happen to spies who get caught much more frequently than to innocent people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Schoolmarm
    The controversy begins with disjunct worldviews, I think. For the Roosevelt administration, White was a New Dealer preoccupied with capitalist failure in the depression and groping for a way to recoup. That is what made him look Bolshy, at least to the right. He also valued the abiding internationalist principle of friendly relations between nations. Dulles' ultras at the CIA tried to criminalize that (as CIA is trying again now with Trump.)

    But at Bretton Woods White was working for the bankers. Bretton Woods was Wall Street's attempt to end-run ECOSOC. Russia did, and still does, take more interest in the ECOSOC alternative. One of the very odd things about CIA is, they think you have to spy on diplomacy. The point of diplomacy is you don't need to skulk around spying on it, you just go and ask the envoys what they think. It's a very silly example of going around with your hammer looking for nails to pound.

    As for VENONA, there's a reason why secret evidence used to be frowned upon. It's often full of craps. Even assuming that it's not fabricated, nothing in it could have proven White's guilt in a functioning court of the time. VENONA emerged as secret evidence, corroborating Chambers and Bentley, who had proved unconvincing. White was considered to have vindicated himself when he died. VENONA wasn't even used to put Hiss away. The cornier, crowd-pleasing pumpkin papers did that. There's more detail in the comments to the previous Pravda.

    A thousand thanks for cutting a little chink in the Iron Curtain to let the common knowledge of the outside world seep into your country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Ron if you liked John T. Flynn you will enjoy the forgotten books of disappeared (down the Memory Hole) London Times foreign correspondent Douglas Lancelot Reed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  138. Jake says:
    @Ron Unz

    Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit.
     
    I must reemphasize my complete lack of personal expertise in the post-war history of France, and I certainly haven't read the Paxton book you cite. However, here's my perspective...

    Unless you believe that Huddleston is flat-out lying, the Socialist Minister of the Interior in March 1945, who controlled France's national police force and had best access to the data, informed the De Gaulle people that there had been approximately 105,000 "summary executions" during the previous six months, and the American authorities had estimated 80,000 political killings during the first part of that period. These figures were widely circulated and accepted as correct at the time. Communists and other leftwing groups were apparently responsible for the overwhelming majority of these killings, which targeted conservatives and right-wingers.

    Then, thirty years later, Robert Paxton, apparently a somewhat fervent "anti-Fascist" historian based in the U.S., published a book claiming that there had actually only been 10,000 killings. Offhand, it's not clear to me how Paxton in 1972 would have such better information than France's own Interior Minister in 1945. It's certainly possible, but I think it far more likely that he merely rewrote history for ideological reasons, and Wikipedia and others just repeated it for the same sorts of reasons. This does occasionally happen you know...

    The Nazis were National Socialist Worker’s Party. The Nazis were founded in a gay bar. Perhaps 90% of the Brownshirt leadership was gay, most them hot for teen boys. The Nazi leadership was filled with every possible anti-Christian form of spirituality available to Germans, save Talmudism.

    The Nazis were no more ‘conservative’ than are the Neocons. And yet during and after WW2. the Left cast Nazis not just as arch-conservative, but as the definitive conservatives, and then used that false definition as justification to murder or destroy publicly and professionally large numbers of people who would have stood up to them.

    That the ‘moderates’ and ‘conservatives’ of the UK and USA accepted all that, even taking gleeful part, tells a great deal about how the WASP world was in the good ole days before it supposedly was altered totally by radical Jews in the 1960s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ivan
    The Nazis in Austria, after shooting Engelbert Dollfuss the Austrian 'dictator', made sure that he died not receiving the consolation of Communion and Extreme Unction, the final sacraments for all devout Catholics, even though he had lingered on for a few hours . But for the anti-Catholic crowd, the Nazis were all Catholics gone bad. Churchill for all his drunkenness had the Nazis down correctly as a pagan recrudescence into modern Europe. But who was responsible for the incomplete evangelisation of the Germans? Why its the Proddies of course, arch-propagandists from whom even the Communists could learn a thing or two.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison
     
    I very much doubt that's true.
    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.
    Claiming the Americans starved German pows to death doesn't fall under these laws.

    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.

    Well, what do I know—I don’t live in Germany. But Alfred de Zayas seems like a highly regarded international figure, and in his Foreword to the 2007 edition of Bacque’s second book, he basically said that the laws recently passed in Germany will send you to jail if you question Official Truth, by e.g. arguing that the Americans deliberately starved to death a million POWs or turned all of Germany into a gigantic concentration camp during 1945-50, causing the deaths of maybe 10 million German civilians.

    And on p. 45 and especially p. 134 n. 67 of his second book, Bacque describes how someone who started investigating the apparent site of one of the mass graves of the POWs was threatened with a 250,000 DM fine by the government and ordered to stop. If there aren’t any mass graves, why would the German government do that?

    Look, I found Bacque’s book quite persuasive, but maybe you won’t. If you’re correct that nobody in Germany gets thrown into prison on this issue, why not buy and read them, then decide for yourself?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    If you’re correct that nobody in Germany gets thrown into prison on this issue, why not buy and read them, then decide for yourself?
     
    James Bacque books are in German translation at

    https://www.amazon.de/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=James+Bacque
    , @JackOH
    Ron, I read Bacque's first book and several of de Zayas's books. Their motives seem to me pristine, unassailable. Neither has ethnic German skin in the game. Neither was fronting for a faction, an ideology, a lobby, a think tank, a grant proposal. Neither had the Zeitgeist, the weight of post-WWII verbiage, favoring them.

    Both had alternate paths that were immediately available to them. Bacque could have continued with the book he'd planned on writing before he was distracted by stories of unusual cruelty against Germans in American POW/"disarmed enemy forces" camps. De Zayas, a very upmarket guy, had, I think, a corporate law career open to him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Tom67 says:

    Mr. Unz!

    My congratulations! I am a german authour of several books about the period. I don´t publish here my real name as I still want to get published in Germany.

    James Bacque and his book “other losses” about German POWS in Western captivity have intrigued me for a long time. I wondered how is it possible that such a war crime has been swept under the carpet? Or else whether the numbers of Bacque are true or not?

    Here my conclusion:

    From about March 1945 the internal record keeping of the Wehrmacht becomes patchy. The same holds true for any population statistics. We only have German population statistics again from the early Fifties. Roughly a quarter of the population of the former Reich though where expellees. There was no way to match up local data with that quarter of the population anymore. You see the problems and also the scope for obfuscation.

    We don´t know the exact numbers anymore. What we have is the number of missing. But to get somebody reported as missing there needs to be somebody who reports him! But there were whole families wiped out in the war. Also people might know the fate of their relatives and that was good enough for them. And as their death wasn´t recorded anywhere they simply disappeared.

    Starting from the Fifties, when the West German goverment was established calls grew in the population to clear the fate of those missing soldiers. The number was about 2.6 Millions. Which is certainly short of the number of those who had actually died. (See above)

    2,6 Million is a huge number by any means and both sides in the cold war needed their respective Germans. Therefore the soldiers who had died in Western allied captivity had to be swept under the carpet. What the West did was to publizise the horrible treatment of German POW´s in Soviet camps. And it was horrible indeed. The airwaves were flooded with memories of the survivors and in public conscience it was in the Soviet Union where they all had perished.

    But you might wonder: what about the millions who had been in camps run by the western allies and had experienced horrible treatment? Sure they hadn´t forgotten. But each and every one of them believed that their camp had been an exception. I knew one such man, a tank soldier who was in a camp of about 50 000. Half of them perished without food and shelter. Still he thought the Americans had made a mistake. They must have thought that they were SS as both services had black uniforms.

    So why didn´t the Soviets use the dead for their own purposes? Because they did not want to bring further attention to their own crimes. What they did though was to fan the memories of the bombing of German cities and especially Dresden. That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war. After 1989 West German authorities were simply not able to put a lid on it again. Much to the displeasure of the British and American governments. All they managed to do was to massage the numbers until they arrived at the very lowest possible. In fact only the numbers of dead bodies was now accepted. That is 25 000.Which is ridiculous if you consider that many were burned without trace or buried under the rubble.

    But back to the missing soldiers. Things remained as they were until Bacque published his book. First the book was acclaimed by Ambrose, the biographer of Eisenhower . This fact is now down the memory hole because Ambrose, undoubtedly after much pressure, suddenly changed his mind and published a counter narrative. The counter narrative has prevailed.

    Still so what about the truth of Bacques findings? When I was in Moscow working in the archives I asked one of the foremost Russian experts. I don´t want to give his name without permission but I might say that he is Jewish, knows German very well and teaches history in both Germany and Russia. He is a “real” historian. That is a historians historian. Meaning he doesn´t work with an eye to fame or public acclaim but patiently toils away in the archives. He knows every single archive that contains information about German POW. Furthermore not only are all these archives from the Nineties open to research, there were also open to Germans many of whom finally found out where their father or brother had died. And here comes a very, very important point: from the moment when captured German soldiers arrived at the rear all their names were recorded. All of them. Not to do it would have been severely punished. Of course that doesn´t exclude the possibilty that captured soldiers were executed on the spot and their death never recorded. The Germans did the same. But these were exceptions on both sides of the front. As a rule captured soldiers were delivered to the rear.

    And we have the numbers: 1,4 million German soldiers died in Soviet captivity. Which is about a third of all taken prisoner. Remember 2,6 million were reported missing and according to Western propaganda they had all died in Soviet capitivity. Suddenly there are more than a Million left most of whom must have died somewhere else.

    And please remember that these are only the numbers of those that somebody was interested in after the war. As already mentioned nobody know how many were either never reported or else their loved ones somehow knew about their fate and therefore never reported them as missing. We are talking here about huge numbers of people.

    Hundreds of thousands of those must have died in Western captivity. Maybe even a million as Bacque claimed after reviewing American archives.

    So I believe on balance yes, the numbers of Bacque are probably right.

    Finally a word about something that I find really striking: many more Soviet soldiers were taken prisoners by Germany that German soldiers by the Soviet Union. About half of them died in German captivity. More than two million. If one further considers that there was wide spread starvation in the USSR after the war the Soviet treatment of German POW´s was relatively speaking better than the German treatment of Soviet soldiers.

    With the Western allies it is the exact opposite. Whereas both sides (Germany and the Western allies) treated their respective POW´s during the war according to the Geneva convention after the war the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.

    Finally a word about forced labour in Germany. What you write about the treatment of French forced labour in Germany strikes me to be true. When I was in my early Twenties and travelling without a penny in France I took up a job with a travelling fun fair. We travelled from small town to small town in Bergerac. I remember how embarrassed I was at how friendly I was treated by the older people. Most men had been in Germany during the war where they had taken the place of farmers or tradesmen who had been drafted into the Wehrmacht. These folks spoke German with the heavy regional accents of where ever they had been stationed and evidently had only good memories. I was invited to drink with them, a butcher presented me with sausages and I was given Baguettes for free. This happened not one but several times.

    What ever. Thanks for your article Ron. You are certainly right that the victors write history and there´s much that is horribly distorted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Thanks so much for the very kind words, and also very important perspective of someone with such detailed professional knowledge on the topic.

    My own expertise on this subject is extremely limited. All I really know is what I read in the two Bacque books and the attempted refutation by Ambrose and his co-authors.

    By making that information more widely available, I was hoping to provoke discussion by more knowledgeable individuals, exactly such as yourself.
    , @renfro
    Thanks for that information......very enlightening .
    , @German_reader

    That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war.
     
    That's not true, many German cities have commemorations of Allied WW2 air raids, e.g. for Würzburg (bombed in March 1945) I found this, from March this year:
    https://www.wuerzburgerleben.de/2018/03/13/gedenken-bombenangriff-16-03-1945/
    Of course these commemorations are highly politically correct nowadays and always strongly emphasize German responsibility for WW2. But it's not true that there's any pretense those air raids didn't happen or that they aren't officially commemorated.

    the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.
     
    My German grandfather was taken prisoner by the British in northern Germany in early 1945 and wasn't mistreated at all. Security at his pow camp was extremely lax, iirc he wasn't even formally dismissed, but eventually just left on his own account and took a train home.
    Anecdotal evidence, but one could say the same about many of those negative accounts.
    There's certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.
    , @utu
    Great comment. Perhaps you could write an article for unz.com anonymously. Expand on what you wrote here and be more rigorous about numbers. You know about it more than anybody who comments here. It would be a great service.
    , @EugeneGur

    What the West did was to publizise the horrible treatment of German POW´s in Soviet camps. And it was horrible indeed.
     
    How horrible exactly was the treatment? The were poorly fed - yes, they were, but so were our own people who were starving.

    My mother's family is from Stalingrad, and after the war many German POW worked to rebuild the city they destroyed. My mother remembers this well, and she says that the German soldiers were in fairly poor condition - "just like us". The officers, on the other hand, were much better off, since they received food from the Red Cross. No one felt it necessary to send anything to out starving children.

    You do know that when the 6th Army was surrounded at Stalingrad, they stopped feeding their Soviet prisoners altogether, so by the time the Army surrendered they were ALL dead or dying? Speaking of horrible treatment - just for comparison's sake.
    , @prusmc
    I knew three former Army Air Force members who were POWs from the Germans . One shot down at Polesti hated them. One shot down near end of the War held no hostility and said one day the guards vanished and the POWs just started walking West.
    Ironically, I understand that some Germans held as POWs in US escaped and blended in with the last one being apprehended in 1955.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Bill P says:
    @German_reader
    Slavs at least have very good reasons for resentment of Germany (Intelligenzaktion, destruction of Warsaw, siege of Leningrad etc.).
    The British...not so much. They caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German civilians in both world wars (blockade in WW1, area bombing in WW2) and destroyed most of our cities, everything Germany may have done against Britain was repaid tenfold...and yet one still gets the feeling they think it wasn't enough. This constant whining in British public discourse "The Hun is out to dominate Europe again! 4th Reich!"...that's not rational anymore, it's an expression of a deep-seated pathology.
    It's taken me a long time to accept this, my father's English, if any German should be predisposed to Anglophilia, it should be me...but I've come to the conclusion that a non-trivial segment of the British public isn't just opposed to specific German policies, but rather to the very existence of Germany (Thatcher of course demonstrated that attitude back in 1989 when she begged the Soviets not to allow reunification). There's nothing to be done about that, no sense in trying to accommodate those people.
    As for you Americans, it will always be 1945 for you...when the German steps out of line, just remind him of his Nazi past and how you "liberated" him, and everything you've done for him for which he has to be eternally grateful. I can remember the kind of things that were written in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003...one clever American pundit wrote that apparently the American reeducation of Germans had gone too far since they were now so pacifistic, and that maybe they should now be reeducated into fighting for freedom. That attitude of barely veiled contempt is typical. Trump shows it as well with all those accusations about "freeloading"...all the more galling when one remembers that German troops died in Afghanistan, and how Trump and his ilk are constantly fawning not just over Israel, but even over those horrible retrograde Gulf states.

    Oh don’t be so categorical. Come visit the US and be as openly German as you want, then report back on how people received you.

    So long as you stay out of certain urban ghettos nobody will have a problem with you. Actually, they’ll probably be interested and friendly, and try to make you comfortable and happy.

    Now switch places with an American like me and visit Europe. In that case you’ll run into plenty of assholes who give you their unsolicited, uninformed opinion on America and feel self righteous about making you feel unwelcome.

    US animus toward Germany is greatly exaggerated — people shouldn’t take Hollywood so seriously. So many Americans are German that even our national cuisine is more German than British. Every time I’m in Europe and some European starts spouting off on “yankees” and whatnot I always tell them to go to the US and spend some time there (not just in NYC, LA or Miami) and get to know the locals, then get back to me.

    BTW, my kids’ oma is a Bavarian immigrant, and she loves it here in the states.

    Read More
    • Agree: David In TN
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Ron Unz says:
    @Tom67
    Mr. Unz!

    My congratulations! I am a german authour of several books about the period. I don´t publish here my real name as I still want to get published in Germany.

    James Bacque and his book "other losses" about German POWS in Western captivity have intrigued me for a long time. I wondered how is it possible that such a war crime has been swept under the carpet? Or else whether the numbers of Bacque are true or not?

    Here my conclusion:

    From about March 1945 the internal record keeping of the Wehrmacht becomes patchy. The same holds true for any population statistics. We only have German population statistics again from the early Fifties. Roughly a quarter of the population of the former Reich though where expellees. There was no way to match up local data with that quarter of the population anymore. You see the problems and also the scope for obfuscation.

    We don´t know the exact numbers anymore. What we have is the number of missing. But to get somebody reported as missing there needs to be somebody who reports him! But there were whole families wiped out in the war. Also people might know the fate of their relatives and that was good enough for them. And as their death wasn´t recorded anywhere they simply disappeared.

    Starting from the Fifties, when the West German goverment was established calls grew in the population to clear the fate of those missing soldiers. The number was about 2.6 Millions. Which is certainly short of the number of those who had actually died. (See above)

    2,6 Million is a huge number by any means and both sides in the cold war needed their respective Germans. Therefore the soldiers who had died in Western allied captivity had to be swept under the carpet. What the West did was to publizise the horrible treatment of German POW´s in Soviet camps. And it was horrible indeed. The airwaves were flooded with memories of the survivors and in public conscience it was in the Soviet Union where they all had perished.

    But you might wonder: what about the millions who had been in camps run by the western allies and had experienced horrible treatment? Sure they hadn´t forgotten. But each and every one of them believed that their camp had been an exception. I knew one such man, a tank soldier who was in a camp of about 50 000. Half of them perished without food and shelter. Still he thought the Americans had made a mistake. They must have thought that they were SS as both services had black uniforms.

    So why didn´t the Soviets use the dead for their own purposes? Because they did not want to bring further attention to their own crimes. What they did though was to fan the memories of the bombing of German cities and especially Dresden. That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war. After 1989 West German authorities were simply not able to put a lid on it again. Much to the displeasure of the British and American governments. All they managed to do was to massage the numbers until they arrived at the very lowest possible. In fact only the numbers of dead bodies was now accepted. That is 25 000.Which is ridiculous if you consider that many were burned without trace or buried under the rubble.

    But back to the missing soldiers. Things remained as they were until Bacque published his book. First the book was acclaimed by Ambrose, the biographer of Eisenhower . This fact is now down the memory hole because Ambrose, undoubtedly after much pressure, suddenly changed his mind and published a counter narrative. The counter narrative has prevailed.

    Still so what about the truth of Bacques findings? When I was in Moscow working in the archives I asked one of the foremost Russian experts. I don´t want to give his name without permission but I might say that he is Jewish, knows German very well and teaches history in both Germany and Russia. He is a "real" historian. That is a historians historian. Meaning he doesn´t work with an eye to fame or public acclaim but patiently toils away in the archives. He knows every single archive that contains information about German POW. Furthermore not only are all these archives from the Nineties open to research, there were also open to Germans many of whom finally found out where their father or brother had died. And here comes a very, very important point: from the moment when captured German soldiers arrived at the rear all their names were recorded. All of them. Not to do it would have been severely punished. Of course that doesn´t exclude the possibilty that captured soldiers were executed on the spot and their death never recorded. The Germans did the same. But these were exceptions on both sides of the front. As a rule captured soldiers were delivered to the rear.

    And we have the numbers: 1,4 million German soldiers died in Soviet captivity. Which is about a third of all taken prisoner. Remember 2,6 million were reported missing and according to Western propaganda they had all died in Soviet capitivity. Suddenly there are more than a Million left most of whom must have died somewhere else.

    And please remember that these are only the numbers of those that somebody was interested in after the war. As already mentioned nobody know how many were either never reported or else their loved ones somehow knew about their fate and therefore never reported them as missing. We are talking here about huge numbers of people.

    Hundreds of thousands of those must have died in Western captivity. Maybe even a million as Bacque claimed after reviewing American archives.

    So I believe on balance yes, the numbers of Bacque are probably right.

    Finally a word about something that I find really striking: many more Soviet soldiers were taken prisoners by Germany that German soldiers by the Soviet Union. About half of them died in German captivity. More than two million. If one further considers that there was wide spread starvation in the USSR after the war the Soviet treatment of German POW´s was relatively speaking better than the German treatment of Soviet soldiers.

    With the Western allies it is the exact opposite. Whereas both sides (Germany and the Western allies) treated their respective POW´s during the war according to the Geneva convention after the war the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.

    Finally a word about forced labour in Germany. What you write about the treatment of French forced labour in Germany strikes me to be true. When I was in my early Twenties and travelling without a penny in France I took up a job with a travelling fun fair. We travelled from small town to small town in Bergerac. I remember how embarrassed I was at how friendly I was treated by the older people. Most men had been in Germany during the war where they had taken the place of farmers or tradesmen who had been drafted into the Wehrmacht. These folks spoke German with the heavy regional accents of where ever they had been stationed and evidently had only good memories. I was invited to drink with them, a butcher presented me with sausages and I was given Baguettes for free. This happened not one but several times.

    What ever. Thanks for your article Ron. You are certainly right that the victors write history and there´s much that is horribly distorted.

    Thanks so much for the very kind words, and also very important perspective of someone with such detailed professional knowledge on the topic.

    My own expertise on this subject is extremely limited. All I really know is what I read in the two Bacque books and the attempted refutation by Ambrose and his co-authors.

    By making that information more widely available, I was hoping to provoke discussion by more knowledgeable individuals, exactly such as yourself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    Did you catch Bacque's reply to court historian J. Keegan in regards to apple pie Ambrose and his co-authors' book "refuting" him? Worth reading it in full.
    This is a letter by James Bacque, author of Other Losses. It appeared in The Times Literary Supplement of August 20, 1993.
    Full letter can be read @ https://www.historiography-project.com/misc/bacque_letter.php
    James Bacque Answers a Critic (8/20/1993)

    It is every writer's delight to be attacked in a famous journal by a confused critic, so my thanks go to John Keegan for airing his views on my work in the TLS on July 23.

    Mr Keegan has been misled by the editors of the book, "Eisenhower and the German POWs: Facts against falsehood," which he cites to refute me. The principal editor, Stephen E. Ambrose, clearly does not know what he thinks from day to day, because he has varied wildly from strong approval of my book, "Other Losses," to snarling slanders of me personally, together with buffoonish misrepresentations of American army policies. Having kindly read my manuscript, he wrote to me as follows: "I am not arguing with the basic truth of your discovery...you have the goods on these guys, you have the quotes from those who were present and saw with their own eyes, you have the broad outline of a truth so terrible I really can't bear it...you really have made a major historical discovery..." It appears from the latest Ambrose writings that, indeed, the truth was something he could not bear.

    The same might be said for his co-editor, Gunter Bischof, an Austrian. Keegan admires the "scholarship" of Bischof, but Bischof does not know a displaced persons camp from a prison camp. He chastises me for stating that there was a US Army prison camp at Ebensee in Austria: he says that the camp was for DPs. In fact, I have photocopies of General Mark Clark's secret report about the condition of prisoners of war in the camp, plus US Army medical reports of prisoners in the camp, plus eyewitness accounts of the catastrophe among dozens of thousands of prisoners, including the manuscript of a diary kept by the priest Franz Loidl who ministered to the dying. This manuscript is on deposit in the Church History Institute of the Catholic Theological Faculty, University of Vienna.

    In the same book so admired by Keegan is a gross error made by Rudiger Overmanns, who does not even know the number of prisoners taken by the Americans. This was not 3.8 million as he says, but over 6 million, according to US Army records in Suitland, Maryland. Of course, this error, conveniently for Ambrose and Keegan, apparently diminishes the number of lives for which the Americans were responsible. [...]

    Mr Keegan does not accept the definition of the term "Other Losses" given me by Colonel Philip S. Lauben. He is unaware of the US Army report discovered by Richard Boylan, a senior archivist at the US National Archives, which confirms Lauben. The report plainly states that the "Other Loses" category of prisoners meant deaths and escapes. And finally, of course, 1,700,000 Germans, plus hundreds of thousands of other Europeans, are still missing from their families. This astounding fact is normally neglected by the Western apologists, unless they can also use it to hammer the Soviets, saying they all died in the Gulag. But now that the Soviets are gone, their archives are open and the truth at last emerges. [...]
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Tom67 says:
    @Anon
    As far as I know, there were no Indian Arab or African troops sent by the British to fight in France and evacuated at Dunkirk. So why would be those troops featured in a movie about Dunkirk.

    The Indian troops were either in Egypt or on reserve in India until the D Day invasion. The French Arab and African troops stayed in the French colonies until shortly before D Day.

    American blacks weren’t in combat. They were support troops. As support troops they did participate in the Normandy invasion but they went in a rape and looting rampage as did the French Arab troops in Italy

    Black chauvinist historians deny this but it happened.

    How can one make an American movie about WW2 black combat troops when there weren’t any?

    The Indians were known as superb troops. There are sections of the cemeteries with Hindu Muslim type monuments filled with thousands of Indians.

    The raping looting black Americans and Arabs are best forgotten.

    You go overboard here. I am German and I can tell you 100% that the memories of German civilians regarding American black soldiers is nothing but good. They were by far the most popular of the occupation troops. Not for them the treatment of Germans as a lower form of life. They shared their food, gave candies to the kids and completely disregarded non-fraternisation.
    In fact black American soldiers were famously fond of Germany as they never met with the kind of racism that they were accustomed to from home. I remember distinctly hearing that time and again from black Americans when I grew up in Heidelberg where there were about 30 000 American troops.
    So please correct this. You are really doing a disservice to the good memory that black American soldiers have left in Germany

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    You are right about your experience if black American occupation troops in Geemany

    But they were not combat troops anywhere in WW 2 and in France and Italy they did go on a rape rampage while the war was still going in

    They were convicted of more than 150 rapes committed in Normandy in the summer of 1944. That’s just the ones the women were not too ashamed to report and where there was sufficient evidence to convict.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. renfro says:
    @Tom67
    Mr. Unz!

    My congratulations! I am a german authour of several books about the period. I don´t publish here my real name as I still want to get published in Germany.

    James Bacque and his book "other losses" about German POWS in Western captivity have intrigued me for a long time. I wondered how is it possible that such a war crime has been swept under the carpet? Or else whether the numbers of Bacque are true or not?

    Here my conclusion:

    From about March 1945 the internal record keeping of the Wehrmacht becomes patchy. The same holds true for any population statistics. We only have German population statistics again from the early Fifties. Roughly a quarter of the population of the former Reich though where expellees. There was no way to match up local data with that quarter of the population anymore. You see the problems and also the scope for obfuscation.

    We don´t know the exact numbers anymore. What we have is the number of missing. But to get somebody reported as missing there needs to be somebody who reports him! But there were whole families wiped out in the war. Also people might know the fate of their relatives and that was good enough for them. And as their death wasn´t recorded anywhere they simply disappeared.

    Starting from the Fifties, when the West German goverment was established calls grew in the population to clear the fate of those missing soldiers. The number was about 2.6 Millions. Which is certainly short of the number of those who had actually died. (See above)

    2,6 Million is a huge number by any means and both sides in the cold war needed their respective Germans. Therefore the soldiers who had died in Western allied captivity had to be swept under the carpet. What the West did was to publizise the horrible treatment of German POW´s in Soviet camps. And it was horrible indeed. The airwaves were flooded with memories of the survivors and in public conscience it was in the Soviet Union where they all had perished.

    But you might wonder: what about the millions who had been in camps run by the western allies and had experienced horrible treatment? Sure they hadn´t forgotten. But each and every one of them believed that their camp had been an exception. I knew one such man, a tank soldier who was in a camp of about 50 000. Half of them perished without food and shelter. Still he thought the Americans had made a mistake. They must have thought that they were SS as both services had black uniforms.

    So why didn´t the Soviets use the dead for their own purposes? Because they did not want to bring further attention to their own crimes. What they did though was to fan the memories of the bombing of German cities and especially Dresden. That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war. After 1989 West German authorities were simply not able to put a lid on it again. Much to the displeasure of the British and American governments. All they managed to do was to massage the numbers until they arrived at the very lowest possible. In fact only the numbers of dead bodies was now accepted. That is 25 000.Which is ridiculous if you consider that many were burned without trace or buried under the rubble.

    But back to the missing soldiers. Things remained as they were until Bacque published his book. First the book was acclaimed by Ambrose, the biographer of Eisenhower . This fact is now down the memory hole because Ambrose, undoubtedly after much pressure, suddenly changed his mind and published a counter narrative. The counter narrative has prevailed.

    Still so what about the truth of Bacques findings? When I was in Moscow working in the archives I asked one of the foremost Russian experts. I don´t want to give his name without permission but I might say that he is Jewish, knows German very well and teaches history in both Germany and Russia. He is a "real" historian. That is a historians historian. Meaning he doesn´t work with an eye to fame or public acclaim but patiently toils away in the archives. He knows every single archive that contains information about German POW. Furthermore not only are all these archives from the Nineties open to research, there were also open to Germans many of whom finally found out where their father or brother had died. And here comes a very, very important point: from the moment when captured German soldiers arrived at the rear all their names were recorded. All of them. Not to do it would have been severely punished. Of course that doesn´t exclude the possibilty that captured soldiers were executed on the spot and their death never recorded. The Germans did the same. But these were exceptions on both sides of the front. As a rule captured soldiers were delivered to the rear.

    And we have the numbers: 1,4 million German soldiers died in Soviet captivity. Which is about a third of all taken prisoner. Remember 2,6 million were reported missing and according to Western propaganda they had all died in Soviet capitivity. Suddenly there are more than a Million left most of whom must have died somewhere else.

    And please remember that these are only the numbers of those that somebody was interested in after the war. As already mentioned nobody know how many were either never reported or else their loved ones somehow knew about their fate and therefore never reported them as missing. We are talking here about huge numbers of people.

    Hundreds of thousands of those must have died in Western captivity. Maybe even a million as Bacque claimed after reviewing American archives.

    So I believe on balance yes, the numbers of Bacque are probably right.

    Finally a word about something that I find really striking: many more Soviet soldiers were taken prisoners by Germany that German soldiers by the Soviet Union. About half of them died in German captivity. More than two million. If one further considers that there was wide spread starvation in the USSR after the war the Soviet treatment of German POW´s was relatively speaking better than the German treatment of Soviet soldiers.

    With the Western allies it is the exact opposite. Whereas both sides (Germany and the Western allies) treated their respective POW´s during the war according to the Geneva convention after the war the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.

    Finally a word about forced labour in Germany. What you write about the treatment of French forced labour in Germany strikes me to be true. When I was in my early Twenties and travelling without a penny in France I took up a job with a travelling fun fair. We travelled from small town to small town in Bergerac. I remember how embarrassed I was at how friendly I was treated by the older people. Most men had been in Germany during the war where they had taken the place of farmers or tradesmen who had been drafted into the Wehrmacht. These folks spoke German with the heavy regional accents of where ever they had been stationed and evidently had only good memories. I was invited to drink with them, a butcher presented me with sausages and I was given Baguettes for free. This happened not one but several times.

    What ever. Thanks for your article Ron. You are certainly right that the victors write history and there´s much that is horribly distorted.

    Thanks for that information……very enlightening .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Jake says:
    @Cleburne
    Jake, can you just tell me where you came across your interesting ideas? I know David Gelertner made an argument to this effect in that ridiculous "Americanism" book, but he's a propagandist, not a scholar. "In Search of the City on the Hill" by Richard Gamble does a good shop of showing that the notion of Puritans as exceptionalists was largely the invention of Perry Miller with his series on American puritans that began with "Mission Into the Wilderness." The American Puritans were a pretty wretched bunch, but it wasn't until the early to mid 1800s that they appointed themselves correctors of God's work, to use Dostoevsky's phrase.

    Which interesting ideas? That Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy? That was very openly discussed during the Tudor age and proved central to the absurd assertion that Anglicanism was the perfect ideal between the equally extreme poles of Catholicism and radical Reformationism, which in England was Puritanism. In fact, the centrality of Judaizing heresy to the entire Reformation was a major discussion from very early in Martin Luther’s career as ‘reformer.’ For example, Luther chose to use the Pharisaic/Talmudic Bible as the Protestant Old Testament rather than the Catholic Old Testament, which means he asserted that Jews who opposed Christ had the authority to declare what is and is not Scripture even some 60 years or so post-Crucifixion and Resurrection (which was when the Pharisees finally decided which books were and were not Jewish Bible.

    And that marks Luther as a Judaizer, for he made Jews superior to Christ’s Church and its authority.

    But Anglo-Saxon Judaizing was of another sort: it featured a growing faith that the Anglo-Saxon race was the Jewish race for the Christian age. That led to two things of great importance. One is utter insanity of belief that Anglo-Saxons are literally ‘children of Israel, ‘ as in The Lost Tribes. That nonsense crops up over and over in English-speaking Protestantism. The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God’s chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God’s chosen master race does God’s will.

    That Puritan problem did not begin after 1800 in America. It was in America as soon as Anglo-Saxon Puritans arrived. It is indeed much easier to see when you read an Abolitionist declaring that if God were not an Abolitionist then chains should be put on God. But it was planted in New England even before 1630.

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted ‘baptists,’ and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.

    Because this is all derived from heresy, from perversion of theology and attendant moral philosophy, there is no political solution. The only solution is conversion and repentance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seraphim
    What's really interesting about these 'interesting ideas' is that they are the pure truth. The Church had to fight the Judaizers from the very beginning. Christian-Zionism is the metastases of the Judaizing cancer which gnawed at the Churchs' body for centuries. Anglo-Saxons have been the most thoroughly infected by it (in England Reformation went hand in hand with the theft of Church properties - and the communal ones - by the minions of the great reformer Henry VIII). In America it offered the ideological justification for the theft of natives' lands and of Spanish colonies.
    The attempts at Judaizing the Russian Church failed. The Orthodox Church was a much stronger barrier that the Roman-Catholic (weakened by an early onset of the disease) and that explains the ferocity visited upon the Orthodox Church and the relentless barrage of filth and calumnies thrown at her by Jews and Judaizers.
    , @Cleburne

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted ‘baptists,’ and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.
     
    Jake, I'm in agreement with much of what you've written there. Again, though -- I think you really need to distinguish between the American Puritans and the English. The English Puritans did not "murderously" persecute Baptists and if anything tended toward a sort of universalism. Cromwell's Eastern Association Horse was known as a hotbed of Puritan pluralism, which deeply offended your pals the Celtic Scots.

    The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God’s chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God’s chosen master race does God’s will.
     
    I don't mean to be completely dismissive of your arguments -- I completely agree that the Yankee has crowned himself as Lord of This World and means to drag the rest of humanity to it, kicking and screaming -- but didn't some version of this appear among the Germans and French as well? And I'm not sure that was the central focus of Cromwell's foreign policy. Did it become the ideological first mover of the New Englanders after the Civil War, assisted by the social gospel and the progressive movement? Indeed it did, but you should really consider the German/Hegelian roots of that whole mess. You jump from 1630 to 1850 with no account for the intervening years, and read 1630 through the shares of 1850. That's just wrong, from the point of view of intellectual history.

    Far as your point about Luther. I'll have to run it down, but didn't Jerome use the Pharisee version of the Old Testament for the Vulgate? I think Margaret Barker discussed this in "Temple Mysticism." I don't see how that makes Luther, who famously did not care for Jews, an early Christian Zionist, who are indeed vile people.

    Also, "judaizing heresy" (to me, and I think to many real scholars) means the adoption of the Jewish law as a pre-requisite for salvation.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Druid says:
    @Lauri Törni
    Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control.



    .... and this is why all so called 'in-depth' articles regarding WW2 and Germany are extremely biased.

    "Nazi-crimes" don't even begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of Allied - Soviet Union included.

    Even prominent Jews have arrogantly boasted, that the 'concentration camps' and the 'killed' German Jews perfectly served their purpose. 250.000 German Jews lived in Nazi-Germany, but the international Jewish community kept on increasing the number of 'killed' Jews in Germany up to 6 million.

    When people continue referring to Hitler's "horrid deeds" - in order to justify their own deeds - they 'forgive' their own actions and act as if they never happened and they use the same old scapegoat: Germany and Hitler.

    Mannerheim was a man of honesty and integrity, "The Last European Knight" as the historians call him.

    President Mannerheim's Letter to the Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler, Sept. 2, 1944

    In this hour of hard decisions I am impelled to inform you, that I have arrived at the conviction, that the salvation of my nation makes it my duty to find a means of ending the war.

    The general development of total war, greatly restricts Germany's ability to send us sufficient help at the right time and in the difficult situations, which can be expected.

    It is my sincere belief, however, that Germany wishes to offer us this assistance. But the dispatch of a single German division to Finland requires such a long time, that our resistance against the overwhelming superiority of the enemy might break down before its arrival. I also fully understand, that the situation does not permit a sufficient number of German divisions being kept permanently in readiness in Finland. The experiences of the past summer confirm this.

    The judgment of the war situation, which I have just given, is shared by a growing majority of the representatives of the Finnish people. Even should my opinion be other than it is, it would not be possible for me, having regard to our constitution, to ignore the plainly shown wishes of the majority of the nation.

    When Field-Marshal Keitel recently visited me, he insisted that the people of Greater Germany could doubtless continue the war for another ten years if necessary.

    I replied, that even if one might hope that this be true of a nation of ninety millions, it was equally true, that we Finns were physically incapable of continuing the war. The Russians' great assaults in June exhausted our reserves. We cannot expose ourselves to another such blood-letting, without the whole future of the small Finnish nation being jeopardized.

    I wish especially to emphasize, that Germany will live on, even if fate should not crown your arms with victory.

    Nobody could give such an assurance regarding Finland. If that nation of barely four millions be militarily defeated, there can be little doubt, that it will be driven into exile or exterminated. I cannot expose my people to such a fate.

    Even though I can hardly hope, that my opinions and reasons will be accepted by you, I wish to send you these lines before the hour of decision.

    Our roads will probably soon part, but the memory of our German brothers-in-arms will live on.

    In Finland, the Germans have certainly not been the representatives of a foreign usurper, but helpers and brothers-in-arms, but even though that be the case, the position of foreigners is bound to be a very difficult one.

    I can assure you, that during the past years nothing whatever has happened, which could cause us to regard the German troops as oppressors or invaders.

    The conduct of the German Army in Northern Finland towards the local population and the local authorities will, I think, stand out in our history as an almost unique example of correct and friendly relations in similar conditions.

    I regard it as my duty to lead my people out of the war.

    The arms, which you have generously given us, I will never of my own accord turn against Germans.

    I cherish the hope that, even though you may take exception to my letter, you will share my wish and the wish of all Finns, that the change in our relations may not give rise to animosity.

    Source: The Memoirs of Marshal Mannerheim. Cassell & Co., London, 1953.
    https://histdoc.net/history/1941-1948/mannerheim1944-09-02.html

    ****

    When Germans retreated and took part in the 'pretend-war', i.e. Finns shot in the air and Germans pretendend to flee the Finnish troops, everything was fine.

    Until the Russian troops swooped in and massacred Finns and burned down villages in Northern Finland. Finns were forced to say, that it was the Germans who did it, although it wasn't true.

    I'm sick and tired of sugar-coating and blurring facts, so that they fit in the official narrative.

    Finnish Jews fought beside Germans against Soviet troops. Not one incident of indecent behavior was reported. They got along and they were brothers-in-arms.

    Finnish Jews fought for Finland and they did it voluntarily.

    Finland didn't have a "Jewish question" unlike Germany had. Had Hitler called them by their codename - Communists - things might have been different.

    During the Continuation War Finland was also forced to put up concentration camps, all Finnish communists were put there, because they allied with the aggressor, Soviet Union.

    When Hitler did the same, put Communists (mostly Jews) in concentration camps, so that they could not wage war against Germans and Germany, it enraged the international secret Communist system as well as the international Jewish community. And they turned the international community against Germany - and Finland also, since Finland did not have a Jewish (read: Communist) question.

    To be honest, I am extremely proud of the fact, that Finns shared the defeat of WW2 with Germans!

    Rather a war criminal together with Germany, than a victor together with the Allied. Our conscience is clear.

    But the rest of the countries, who either stood by as spectators or participated with the bullies, they should do some honest soul-searching - instead of continuning with the passé blaming game.

    When the whole world ganged up on tiny Finland, Germany was THE ONLY ONE, who took our side. Like in a school yard, where one big bully beats a small boy and others stand by - on the bully's side - without lifting a finger for the small boy. Then one of the big bullies - Germany - goes to the small boy laying on the ground, promises to fight with him, and also gets beaten.

    I raised my son to ALWAYS go between a fight and ALWAYS take the weaker one's side. NEVER stand by as a passive specator (aka enabler), but to take ACTION.

    All the nations are busy washing their bloody hands - with blood - instead of standing up and admitting their guilt.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDN7zhtCLRM

    Good on you!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Anon[241] • Disclaimer says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    Yours is a very good comment — daring enough to realistically look at human psychology.

    (And that’s why when the media want something to register/be minded, they [have to] go on endlessly about it.
    Nothing devoid of glamour loudness and repetition would work.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Seraphim says:
    @Anon
    The communist so called resistance with Russian advisors did their best to take over France as they did E Europe after the war.

    Russian advisors? But
    “Was the French Resistance Jewish? Jews led—and purposefully did not lead—some of the many specialized groups that fought Vichy France and its Nazi occupiers”, by Renée Poznanski
    May 3, 2016 @https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/201308/was-the-french-resistance-jewish

    “French Jews—under a double jeopardy of anti-Semitic law (French and German), stripped of their possessions, interned in camps, then sent on to Auschwitz—contributed in full to the story of the Resistance. Extremely numerous in the different movements formed in France as well as in London around Gen. de Gaulle, they also created specifically tasked groups; many Jews were associated with the French Communist Party, while others specialized in the saving of those threatened with deportation.
    After the liberation, Georges Zérapha concluded that from June 1940 to December 1941 Jews led the way from bottom to top in the majority of subgroups of the Resistance. They were among the first to reach London, from Raymond Aron to André Weill-Curiel and including René Cassin. We find them among the founders of the Musée de l’Homme network in 1940, publishing the first issue of the magazine Résistance on Dec. 15, 1940. Of the six founders of Libération in July 1941, three were Jews. Jean-Pierre Lévy created and ran Franc–Tireur. Robert Salmon was one of the two founders of Défense de la France; it was he who chose to give this name to the new journal, whose first number appeared in July 1941. These examples give only a partial idea of the early and massive Jewish presence at high positions in all the various movements…
    the massive presence of Jews in the Resistance remained extremely discrete…
    In the north [Paris], even while Solidarité specialized in social work and propaganda, the First detachment FTP (“Franc-Tireurs Partisans”)-MOI, composed of Romanians and Hungarians of which 90 percent were Jewish, and the Second detachment, entirely composed of Jews, excelled at military actions. (The MOI created four detachments in all.) The push for the actions of the detachments came from the Party, while the troops increased in number as anti-Semitic repression increased. The contributions of the Jews is particularly impressive: In February 1943, out of 36 actions taken by the four detachments of FTP-MOI of the capital, 15 were realized by the Jewish Second detachment…
    The Jewish Communist military groups were practically alone in Paris from June to November 1943. Joseph Epstein (Col. Gilles) was named responsible for all military actions led by the communists at Paris, and a team entirely composed of Jewish women transported the weapons needed by the different units. An intelligence service that prepared all the actions was in the hands of a group of Jewish women who were attached to the MOI. Later this activity extended into the non-occupied regions: to Grenoble from September 1943 to March 1944; to Lyon after May 1944. At Toulouse, up until its fall in the spring of 1944, the Marcel Langer group instigated essentially all armed action. Given the efficiency of the Vichy police services, the price paid for all these actions was extremely high: massive arrests in November 1942, March 1943, June-July 1943, the slaughter of November 1943.
    The nature of the activity led by these groups of Jewish Communists appeared clearly in an extremely rich and diverse clandestine press…
    The reconstruction of the Jewish world in France could only follow the plan imposed on it by French society; that society equally pressed the Jewish world to regroup under the banner of a united Resistance. A coming-together of the various political centers of a Jewish resistance led, at the end of July 1943 in Grenoble, to the formation of a “Comité général de défence” that united Communists, Zionists of all types, and Bundists under a single roof. In some ways this was a duplication in Jewish circles of the creation in May 1943 of the “National Resistance Council” which legitimized the entry of the Communists into the French political world…”

    And it goes on and on. The conclusion is somewhat intriguing:
    “It was, however, necessary to wait for the 1970s and the ripening of French memories of WWII, the Vichy government, and the Shoah before the Jewish contribution to the Resistance gained even minimal recognition in France”(!!!). After the war many heroes present themselves!

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    This resistance was minimal.
    A few years ago a collection of WWII pictures was found in a French attic.
    The French were shocked, people sitting in front of pubs drinking, German soldiers walking through Paris on their own unarmed.
    , @aleksandar
    That's clearly stupid.
    As my family was deeply involved in Resistance and as I have made some research about it :
    1 - Jews joining De Gaulle in London, didn't do that as "jews" but simply as true patriots. Most of them were ww1 veterans.In fact most of people in London were Catholics and monarchists.
    2 - There was jews in the Resistance as there was Catholic, protestants or Boudhist. The way they try to kidnap The Resistance as jew is just ridiculous. The group cited in this article represents hardly 3 % of all french resistants.
    3 - In Paris saying that only jews were resistants in nonsense as they were FIRST communists and driven by anti-fascist ideology.
    4 - Most of the french resistance was rural as France was at this time obviously an agriculural country.
    No jews there , or if they were in, they didn't describe them as jews but as patriots. I found trace of none of them in the most important maquis for example. Maquis de l'Oisans 1526 résistants, maquis du Vercors around 3000, Maquis du Nivernais around 4000 and so on.
    5- One important pole was Resistance - Fer, the railwaymen, I personaly meet with some of them, and only one was jew. And clearly if I have told him about the fact that he was jew, He should have been very, very angry, answering that it's irrelevant.
    Revisionism at work here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Tom67
    Mr. Unz!

    My congratulations! I am a german authour of several books about the period. I don´t publish here my real name as I still want to get published in Germany.

    James Bacque and his book "other losses" about German POWS in Western captivity have intrigued me for a long time. I wondered how is it possible that such a war crime has been swept under the carpet? Or else whether the numbers of Bacque are true or not?

    Here my conclusion:

    From about March 1945 the internal record keeping of the Wehrmacht becomes patchy. The same holds true for any population statistics. We only have German population statistics again from the early Fifties. Roughly a quarter of the population of the former Reich though where expellees. There was no way to match up local data with that quarter of the population anymore. You see the problems and also the scope for obfuscation.

    We don´t know the exact numbers anymore. What we have is the number of missing. But to get somebody reported as missing there needs to be somebody who reports him! But there were whole families wiped out in the war. Also people might know the fate of their relatives and that was good enough for them. And as their death wasn´t recorded anywhere they simply disappeared.

    Starting from the Fifties, when the West German goverment was established calls grew in the population to clear the fate of those missing soldiers. The number was about 2.6 Millions. Which is certainly short of the number of those who had actually died. (See above)

    2,6 Million is a huge number by any means and both sides in the cold war needed their respective Germans. Therefore the soldiers who had died in Western allied captivity had to be swept under the carpet. What the West did was to publizise the horrible treatment of German POW´s in Soviet camps. And it was horrible indeed. The airwaves were flooded with memories of the survivors and in public conscience it was in the Soviet Union where they all had perished.

    But you might wonder: what about the millions who had been in camps run by the western allies and had experienced horrible treatment? Sure they hadn´t forgotten. But each and every one of them believed that their camp had been an exception. I knew one such man, a tank soldier who was in a camp of about 50 000. Half of them perished without food and shelter. Still he thought the Americans had made a mistake. They must have thought that they were SS as both services had black uniforms.

    So why didn´t the Soviets use the dead for their own purposes? Because they did not want to bring further attention to their own crimes. What they did though was to fan the memories of the bombing of German cities and especially Dresden. That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war. After 1989 West German authorities were simply not able to put a lid on it again. Much to the displeasure of the British and American governments. All they managed to do was to massage the numbers until they arrived at the very lowest possible. In fact only the numbers of dead bodies was now accepted. That is 25 000.Which is ridiculous if you consider that many were burned without trace or buried under the rubble.

    But back to the missing soldiers. Things remained as they were until Bacque published his book. First the book was acclaimed by Ambrose, the biographer of Eisenhower . This fact is now down the memory hole because Ambrose, undoubtedly after much pressure, suddenly changed his mind and published a counter narrative. The counter narrative has prevailed.

    Still so what about the truth of Bacques findings? When I was in Moscow working in the archives I asked one of the foremost Russian experts. I don´t want to give his name without permission but I might say that he is Jewish, knows German very well and teaches history in both Germany and Russia. He is a "real" historian. That is a historians historian. Meaning he doesn´t work with an eye to fame or public acclaim but patiently toils away in the archives. He knows every single archive that contains information about German POW. Furthermore not only are all these archives from the Nineties open to research, there were also open to Germans many of whom finally found out where their father or brother had died. And here comes a very, very important point: from the moment when captured German soldiers arrived at the rear all their names were recorded. All of them. Not to do it would have been severely punished. Of course that doesn´t exclude the possibilty that captured soldiers were executed on the spot and their death never recorded. The Germans did the same. But these were exceptions on both sides of the front. As a rule captured soldiers were delivered to the rear.

    And we have the numbers: 1,4 million German soldiers died in Soviet captivity. Which is about a third of all taken prisoner. Remember 2,6 million were reported missing and according to Western propaganda they had all died in Soviet capitivity. Suddenly there are more than a Million left most of whom must have died somewhere else.

    And please remember that these are only the numbers of those that somebody was interested in after the war. As already mentioned nobody know how many were either never reported or else their loved ones somehow knew about their fate and therefore never reported them as missing. We are talking here about huge numbers of people.

    Hundreds of thousands of those must have died in Western captivity. Maybe even a million as Bacque claimed after reviewing American archives.

    So I believe on balance yes, the numbers of Bacque are probably right.

    Finally a word about something that I find really striking: many more Soviet soldiers were taken prisoners by Germany that German soldiers by the Soviet Union. About half of them died in German captivity. More than two million. If one further considers that there was wide spread starvation in the USSR after the war the Soviet treatment of German POW´s was relatively speaking better than the German treatment of Soviet soldiers.

    With the Western allies it is the exact opposite. Whereas both sides (Germany and the Western allies) treated their respective POW´s during the war according to the Geneva convention after the war the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.

    Finally a word about forced labour in Germany. What you write about the treatment of French forced labour in Germany strikes me to be true. When I was in my early Twenties and travelling without a penny in France I took up a job with a travelling fun fair. We travelled from small town to small town in Bergerac. I remember how embarrassed I was at how friendly I was treated by the older people. Most men had been in Germany during the war where they had taken the place of farmers or tradesmen who had been drafted into the Wehrmacht. These folks spoke German with the heavy regional accents of where ever they had been stationed and evidently had only good memories. I was invited to drink with them, a butcher presented me with sausages and I was given Baguettes for free. This happened not one but several times.

    What ever. Thanks for your article Ron. You are certainly right that the victors write history and there´s much that is horribly distorted.

    That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war.

    That’s not true, many German cities have commemorations of Allied WW2 air raids, e.g. for Würzburg (bombed in March 1945) I found this, from March this year:

    https://www.wuerzburgerleben.de/2018/03/13/gedenken-bombenangriff-16-03-1945/

    Of course these commemorations are highly politically correct nowadays and always strongly emphasize German responsibility for WW2. But it’s not true that there’s any pretense those air raids didn’t happen or that they aren’t officially commemorated.

    the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.

    My German grandfather was taken prisoner by the British in northern Germany in early 1945 and wasn’t mistreated at all. Security at his pow camp was extremely lax, iirc he wasn’t even formally dismissed, but eventually just left on his own account and took a train home.
    Anecdotal evidence, but one could say the same about many of those negative accounts.
    There’s certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    There’s certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.
     
    Perhaps you should come with a list of what is extreme and what is not. What is permitted to be revised and what is not. One has to take risks. Find some courage.
    , @Den Lille Abe
    Your comment reflects my comment in the start. The British were Ok in their treatment, the person I spoke to also told me, he was processed (He as just a Feldwebel) and the an officer said something like: Well thats it, off you go, no loitering around, you have a country to rebuild!!
    So he did get back to his wife in Hamburg.
    , @Unzerker

    My German grandfather was taken prisoner by the British in northern Germany in early 1945 and wasn’t mistreated at all. Security at his pow camp was extremely lax, iirc
     
    German officers in the Dutch post war POW-camps were even allowed to keep their side arms.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. utu says:
    @German_reader
    I tend to agree, though there are problems with that, German crimes during the Nazi era can't be denied, and Germany needs to find some kind of mutually acceptable relationship with her neighbours and Russia...excessive revisionism could harm that.
    Germans really need to realize one thing though...the English-speaking world isn't our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.

    German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied

    But some probably can and should be contested. We do not know what can and what cannot be denied until research is done from the perspective and interests of Germans and Germany. This is your duty to do it. Duty to higher ideals and duty to your ancestors. I know it is a very delicate issue but it must be done. This is the only path.

    As far as the English-speaking world there is no point of getting upset. They just mean business and there are not different now from what they were before the WWII. You must understand where they are coming from. The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII. They indoctrinated you to emasculate you and Germans did it willingly because they knew that by playing dead and docile they would be safer. And it worked up to the point. Now cultural and even biological survival of German nation is at the stake. The conflict between Anglo-American and German cultures is deep and philosophical. The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world. In terms of Russia I doubt that Russia can provide you much in terms of cultural model but in long run an alliance with Russia would be very good for the world and for Germany. Europe and Russian is the only power that can counterbalance the power of America and China. We need a tri-polar world. Europe and Russia is the last hope to save the western civilization. And there is no Europe w/o strong Germany. Strong in a spiritual sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII.
     
    That's pretty perceptive, I have to agree.
    , @jilles dykstra
    Well, Katyn is over, Oradour is a fairy tale, jews were deported and died, but why and how ?
    Any other crimes ?
    , @Heros

    "The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world."
     
    I don't agree with this statement. Germans and Germany cannot hold a candle to Yankee and Anglozionist imperialists when it comes to pure satanic evil. "Yankee" is of course derived from the jews who originally settled in New Amsterdam.

    As far as I can tall, somewhere about the time of the East India shutting down rebellions in India and the Opium wars, the British Empire dropped all pretenses of Christianity and went full talmud. The Yankees were already there, Sherman had lead the way. And it was the "Sherman" tank that lead the charge into the Rhineland, Schwabia and Bavaria in a drunken orgy of rape, murder and plunder. They didn't need to burn Frankfurt or Munich as Sherman had burned Atlanta because May had already bombed them back to the stone age. Of course, as this American Pravda article shows, Eisenhower had POW's stripped of Geneva Convention rights so he could murder them in his death camps, a crime which he and his jewish cronies promptly projected onto Germany in histories most disgusting sham trials at Nuremburg.

    Meanwhile, throughout 2 world wars Germany, like the South in the war of Northern Aggression, or the Boers, had steadfastly stuck to the accepted rules of war, only to watch as the Zionist puppet states escalated their war crimes as their victory approached, knowing from centuries of jewish deception that all the satanic evil could not only be easily covered up in the mayhem after victory, but that the active participation of anglozionists in the blood letting orgy made them malleable and easy to control puppets after the victory.

    Unz barely touched on the extensive dehumanizing war time propaganda of the Allies (It would be great if someone made a post comparing German to Allied side to side), but a lot of it still sticks to Germans and Germany, but not to the anglozionists. Just read German_reader's comments on this thread, laced with guilt even today.

    One of the most incredible aspects of the German heritage, that was a prime target for destruction by the zionists, was German prowess at science, technology and manufacturing deriving from many places. After the war, German patents, machinery, documentation and even scientists were stolen and taken to the allies. Even today, German industry is firmly under anglozionist control, for example VW fined $19b. DB fined $10b. Meanwhile Bayer and Monsanto are merging to make a gigantic GMO /Food/Pharma/poison conglomerate, controlled by jews with virtual certainty.

    Airbus, eurofighter, or that AS400 transport are good example of anglo-germans together, or NOT.

    Germany doesn't need the anglos. It was the dying, jew polluted anglos that needed the Germans. And as we all know, they won.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. utu says:
    @Tom67
    Mr. Unz!

    My congratulations! I am a german authour of several books about the period. I don´t publish here my real name as I still want to get published in Germany.

    James Bacque and his book "other losses" about German POWS in Western captivity have intrigued me for a long time. I wondered how is it possible that such a war crime has been swept under the carpet? Or else whether the numbers of Bacque are true or not?

    Here my conclusion:

    From about March 1945 the internal record keeping of the Wehrmacht becomes patchy. The same holds true for any population statistics. We only have German population statistics again from the early Fifties. Roughly a quarter of the population of the former Reich though where expellees. There was no way to match up local data with that quarter of the population anymore. You see the problems and also the scope for obfuscation.

    We don´t know the exact numbers anymore. What we have is the number of missing. But to get somebody reported as missing there needs to be somebody who reports him! But there were whole families wiped out in the war. Also people might know the fate of their relatives and that was good enough for them. And as their death wasn´t recorded anywhere they simply disappeared.

    Starting from the Fifties, when the West German goverment was established calls grew in the population to clear the fate of those missing soldiers. The number was about 2.6 Millions. Which is certainly short of the number of those who had actually died. (See above)

    2,6 Million is a huge number by any means and both sides in the cold war needed their respective Germans. Therefore the soldiers who had died in Western allied captivity had to be swept under the carpet. What the West did was to publizise the horrible treatment of German POW´s in Soviet camps. And it was horrible indeed. The airwaves were flooded with memories of the survivors and in public conscience it was in the Soviet Union where they all had perished.

    But you might wonder: what about the millions who had been in camps run by the western allies and had experienced horrible treatment? Sure they hadn´t forgotten. But each and every one of them believed that their camp had been an exception. I knew one such man, a tank soldier who was in a camp of about 50 000. Half of them perished without food and shelter. Still he thought the Americans had made a mistake. They must have thought that they were SS as both services had black uniforms.

    So why didn´t the Soviets use the dead for their own purposes? Because they did not want to bring further attention to their own crimes. What they did though was to fan the memories of the bombing of German cities and especially Dresden. That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war. After 1989 West German authorities were simply not able to put a lid on it again. Much to the displeasure of the British and American governments. All they managed to do was to massage the numbers until they arrived at the very lowest possible. In fact only the numbers of dead bodies was now accepted. That is 25 000.Which is ridiculous if you consider that many were burned without trace or buried under the rubble.

    But back to the missing soldiers. Things remained as they were until Bacque published his book. First the book was acclaimed by Ambrose, the biographer of Eisenhower . This fact is now down the memory hole because Ambrose, undoubtedly after much pressure, suddenly changed his mind and published a counter narrative. The counter narrative has prevailed.

    Still so what about the truth of Bacques findings? When I was in Moscow working in the archives I asked one of the foremost Russian experts. I don´t want to give his name without permission but I might say that he is Jewish, knows German very well and teaches history in both Germany and Russia. He is a "real" historian. That is a historians historian. Meaning he doesn´t work with an eye to fame or public acclaim but patiently toils away in the archives. He knows every single archive that contains information about German POW. Furthermore not only are all these archives from the Nineties open to research, there were also open to Germans many of whom finally found out where their father or brother had died. And here comes a very, very important point: from the moment when captured German soldiers arrived at the rear all their names were recorded. All of them. Not to do it would have been severely punished. Of course that doesn´t exclude the possibilty that captured soldiers were executed on the spot and their death never recorded. The Germans did the same. But these were exceptions on both sides of the front. As a rule captured soldiers were delivered to the rear.

    And we have the numbers: 1,4 million German soldiers died in Soviet captivity. Which is about a third of all taken prisoner. Remember 2,6 million were reported missing and according to Western propaganda they had all died in Soviet capitivity. Suddenly there are more than a Million left most of whom must have died somewhere else.

    And please remember that these are only the numbers of those that somebody was interested in after the war. As already mentioned nobody know how many were either never reported or else their loved ones somehow knew about their fate and therefore never reported them as missing. We are talking here about huge numbers of people.

    Hundreds of thousands of those must have died in Western captivity. Maybe even a million as Bacque claimed after reviewing American archives.

    So I believe on balance yes, the numbers of Bacque are probably right.

    Finally a word about something that I find really striking: many more Soviet soldiers were taken prisoners by Germany that German soldiers by the Soviet Union. About half of them died in German captivity. More than two million. If one further considers that there was wide spread starvation in the USSR after the war the Soviet treatment of German POW´s was relatively speaking better than the German treatment of Soviet soldiers.

    With the Western allies it is the exact opposite. Whereas both sides (Germany and the Western allies) treated their respective POW´s during the war according to the Geneva convention after the war the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.

    Finally a word about forced labour in Germany. What you write about the treatment of French forced labour in Germany strikes me to be true. When I was in my early Twenties and travelling without a penny in France I took up a job with a travelling fun fair. We travelled from small town to small town in Bergerac. I remember how embarrassed I was at how friendly I was treated by the older people. Most men had been in Germany during the war where they had taken the place of farmers or tradesmen who had been drafted into the Wehrmacht. These folks spoke German with the heavy regional accents of where ever they had been stationed and evidently had only good memories. I was invited to drink with them, a butcher presented me with sausages and I was given Baguettes for free. This happened not one but several times.

    What ever. Thanks for your article Ron. You are certainly right that the victors write history and there´s much that is horribly distorted.

    Great comment. Perhaps you could write an article for unz.com anonymously. Expand on what you wrote here and be more rigorous about numbers. You know about it more than anybody who comments here. It would be a great service.

    Read More
    • Agree: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @German_reader

    You know about it more than anybody who comments here
     
    How do we know that? He doesn't give his name (nor that of the helpful Jewish historian in Russia he claims to know), and doesn't cite any sources that could be checked. It could all be made up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. renfro says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    I think a lot of his stuff was never really suppressed. People knew about it but they didn't react to it, just like people tend to do with a great many things they can't do anything about.

    For instance, I am by no means an avid reader of WWII histories and I actually find the subject rather tedious and in need of some benign neglect, but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war. No less a mainstream figure than Pat Buchanan has repeatedly mentioned this in his many books and columns touching on the subject. These facts have not been hidden from us, but they seldom seem to register with us or enter into our personal dramas. They are not met with the recognition, respect, outrage, indignation, or demands for justice that we might otherwise expect.

    I do not believe that this is due to any deliberate campaign of media suppression, and thus I think "Pravda" is too strong a word to describe the dynamic here. I believe it is mostly psychological and illustrative of the extreme selfishness and provincialism of human nature. Nobody really cares about anything unless it's their ox getting gored. Nobody seriously thinks about the millions who perish in faraway lands or decades-old wars. Many of these war crimes and atrocities were generally approved of at the time and thus never registered as infamous. Many more are simply ignored and forgotten because there is no profit for anyone in strip-mining them out of the past.

    Most journalists and media personalities are just like everybody else---they are a pack of ignorant jackals ruthlessly pursuing their own good and therefore certainly not interested in the truth. But neither are they a "Ministry of Truth" out to control and manipulate what everybody believes. For the fact that people do not care about the real story, I do not blame a conspiracy of media suppression. I blame the filthy rags and self-righteous hypocrisy of human nature.

    but even I knew that Eisenhower had starved hundreds of thousands of German civilians to death after the war.

    Regarding Eisenhower , he ‘cooperated’ in it but had to be ‘pushed’ to carry it out.
    Truman was deluged with complaints from Jews on the Jewish DP’s situation …so he sent several men to Germany to report on conditions…Earl Harrison and Joseph Schwartz among others.
    They reported to Truman that Eisenhower was not doing anything for the Jewish DPs so Truman pressured Eisenhower……in one letter to Eisenhower he orders him to step up the care of the Jews
    ….saying its been reported to him that the Jews are being treated by the US forces as bad as the nazis treated them.

    the letter….

    https://catalog.archives.gov/id/201125

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. utu says:
    @Ron Unz

    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.
     
    Well, what do I know---I don't live in Germany. But Alfred de Zayas seems like a highly regarded international figure, and in his Foreword to the 2007 edition of Bacque's second book, he basically said that the laws recently passed in Germany will send you to jail if you question Official Truth, by e.g. arguing that the Americans deliberately starved to death a million POWs or turned all of Germany into a gigantic concentration camp during 1945-50, causing the deaths of maybe 10 million German civilians.

    And on p. 45 and especially p. 134 n. 67 of his second book, Bacque describes how someone who started investigating the apparent site of one of the mass graves of the POWs was threatened with a 250,000 DM fine by the government and ordered to stop. If there aren't any mass graves, why would the German government do that?

    Look, I found Bacque's book quite persuasive, but maybe you won't. If you're correct that nobody in Germany gets thrown into prison on this issue, why not buy and read them, then decide for yourself?

    If you’re correct that nobody in Germany gets thrown into prison on this issue, why not buy and read them, then decide for yourself?

    James Bacque books are in German translation at

    https://www.amazon.de/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=James+Bacque

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. @utu
    Great comment. Perhaps you could write an article for unz.com anonymously. Expand on what you wrote here and be more rigorous about numbers. You know about it more than anybody who comments here. It would be a great service.

    You know about it more than anybody who comments here

    How do we know that? He doesn’t give his name (nor that of the helpful Jewish historian in Russia he claims to know), and doesn’t cite any sources that could be checked. It could all be made up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    How do we know that? He doesn’t give his name (nor that of the helpful Jewish historian in Russia he claims to know), and doesn’t cite any sources that could be checked. It could all be made up.
     
    Correct. I do not know it. It can be all made up. But wouldn't you like to hear more from him and see what he can bring into the discussion? I hope you would. I would like to see some numbers and arithmetics which could be contested and verified.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @utu

    German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied
     
    But some probably can and should be contested. We do not know what can and what cannot be denied until research is done from the perspective and interests of Germans and Germany. This is your duty to do it. Duty to higher ideals and duty to your ancestors. I know it is a very delicate issue but it must be done. This is the only path.

    As far as the English-speaking world there is no point of getting upset. They just mean business and there are not different now from what they were before the WWII. You must understand where they are coming from. The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII. They indoctrinated you to emasculate you and Germans did it willingly because they knew that by playing dead and docile they would be safer. And it worked up to the point. Now cultural and even biological survival of German nation is at the stake. The conflict between Anglo-American and German cultures is deep and philosophical. The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world. In terms of Russia I doubt that Russia can provide you much in terms of cultural model but in long run an alliance with Russia would be very good for the world and for Germany. Europe and Russian is the only power that can counterbalance the power of America and China. We need a tri-polar world. Europe and Russia is the last hope to save the western civilization. And there is no Europe w/o strong Germany. Strong in a spiritual sense.

    The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII.

    That’s pretty perceptive, I have to agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Druid says:
    @SunBakedSuburb
    I appreciate contrarians and consider myself to be one. Everything should be up for debate, whether it be African IQ or details regarding the motive for the European Holocaust. But to quibble over the numbers of innocent people killed in the Nazi death camps is ghoulish; ghastly.

    Quibble! The numbers are unbelievable and used as weapons, idiot. That’s why they’re important and Wally is right!

    Read More
    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    "... idiot."

    I've been called worse by better people. I'm an idiot and you and your friend Wally are fanatics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. utu says:
    @German_reader

    You know about it more than anybody who comments here
     
    How do we know that? He doesn't give his name (nor that of the helpful Jewish historian in Russia he claims to know), and doesn't cite any sources that could be checked. It could all be made up.

    How do we know that? He doesn’t give his name (nor that of the helpful Jewish historian in Russia he claims to know), and doesn’t cite any sources that could be checked. It could all be made up.

    Correct. I do not know it. It can be all made up. But wouldn’t you like to hear more from him and see what he can bring into the discussion? I hope you would. I would like to see some numbers and arithmetics which could be contested and verified.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. utu says:
    @German_reader

    That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war.
     
    That's not true, many German cities have commemorations of Allied WW2 air raids, e.g. for Würzburg (bombed in March 1945) I found this, from March this year:
    https://www.wuerzburgerleben.de/2018/03/13/gedenken-bombenangriff-16-03-1945/
    Of course these commemorations are highly politically correct nowadays and always strongly emphasize German responsibility for WW2. But it's not true that there's any pretense those air raids didn't happen or that they aren't officially commemorated.

    the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.
     
    My German grandfather was taken prisoner by the British in northern Germany in early 1945 and wasn't mistreated at all. Security at his pow camp was extremely lax, iirc he wasn't even formally dismissed, but eventually just left on his own account and took a train home.
    Anecdotal evidence, but one could say the same about many of those negative accounts.
    There's certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.

    There’s certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.

    Perhaps you should come with a list of what is extreme and what is not. What is permitted to be revised and what is not. One has to take risks. Find some courage.

    Read More
    • Agree: Yevardian
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I don't have a list. What one would have to do would be painstaking, detailed research about possible Allied war crimes, to see what's true and what isn't.
    E.g. some time ago I read about Soviet/Polish war crimes in East Saxony in 1945. There was a documented incident in a place called Niederkaina near Bautzen in April 1945 where Soviet troops (SMERSH according to some, Poles according to others) put about 200 German Volkssturm men in a barn and burned them alive, machine-gunning some who tried to escape. In the GDR this was of course covered up, and one wasn't allowed to talk about it. But the son of one of those killed there investigated in the 1990s and wrote a book about war crimes committed in East Saxony in April/May 1945 (Theodor Seidel, Kriegsverbrechen in Ostsachsen), based on documentary sources and interviews with witnesses (who are mostly dead now of course, so something like this would be much more difficult today).
    I only heard of that because there was a commemorative tablet for that massacre in Niederkaina...which was demolished by Antifa thugs a few months ago.
    Anyway, my point is, I just don't find the kind of revisionism one reads here credible, imo it's counter-productive because it veers off far too much into conspiracy theorising. If you think that makes me a self-hating cuck or whatever, fine, I don't care. I'm out of here, bye!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. ivan says:
    @Jake
    The Nazis were National Socialist Worker's Party. The Nazis were founded in a gay bar. Perhaps 90% of the Brownshirt leadership was gay, most them hot for teen boys. The Nazi leadership was filled with every possible anti-Christian form of spirituality available to Germans, save Talmudism.

    The Nazis were no more 'conservative' than are the Neocons. And yet during and after WW2. the Left cast Nazis not just as arch-conservative, but as the definitive conservatives, and then used that false definition as justification to murder or destroy publicly and professionally large numbers of people who would have stood up to them.

    That the 'moderates' and 'conservatives' of the UK and USA accepted all that, even taking gleeful part, tells a great deal about how the WASP world was in the good ole days before it supposedly was altered totally by radical Jews in the 1960s.

    The Nazis in Austria, after shooting Engelbert Dollfuss the Austrian ‘dictator’, made sure that he died not receiving the consolation of Communion and Extreme Unction, the final sacraments for all devout Catholics, even though he had lingered on for a few hours . But for the anti-Catholic crowd, the Nazis were all Catholics gone bad. Churchill for all his drunkenness had the Nazis down correctly as a pagan recrudescence into modern Europe. But who was responsible for the incomplete evangelisation of the Germans? Why its the Proddies of course, arch-propagandists from whom even the Communists could learn a thing or two.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tom67
    You go overboard here. I am German and I can tell you 100% that the memories of German civilians regarding American black soldiers is nothing but good. They were by far the most popular of the occupation troops. Not for them the treatment of Germans as a lower form of life. They shared their food, gave candies to the kids and completely disregarded non-fraternisation.
    In fact black American soldiers were famously fond of Germany as they never met with the kind of racism that they were accustomed to from home. I remember distinctly hearing that time and again from black Americans when I grew up in Heidelberg where there were about 30 000 American troops.
    So please correct this. You are really doing a disservice to the good memory that black American soldiers have left in Germany

    You are right about your experience if black American occupation troops in Geemany

    But they were not combat troops anywhere in WW 2 and in France and Italy they did go on a rape rampage while the war was still going in

    They were convicted of more than 150 rapes committed in Normandy in the summer of 1944. That’s just the ones the women were not too ashamed to report and where there was sufficient evidence to convict.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Brown
    You don't know what you're talking about so I'd suggest to you to be more humble and don't write about what you don't know. Here(at Unz) the goal is the truth. And the truth is: blacks, whites, yellows, browns can all be rapists.

    It's well known that Russians (White) raped thousands of German Women.

    It also known today, for those who are interested in the truth that "American troops committed thousands of rapes on French women they were 'liberating'"

    Only those who are not interested in the truth still believe that those rapes were committed only by blacks.

    "However, some justice was needed to be seen to be done, but even that process was deeply flawed. Of the mere 152 men who were tried for rape, 139 of the defendants were ‘coloured

    It appears that the American Army was keen to treat black soldiers as scapegoats, and labelled them as being ‘hypersexual’ and therefore more likely to be rapists."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334204/The-GIs-raped-France-We-know-mass-rape-German-women-Stalins-soldiers-Now-new-book-reveals-American-troops-committed-thousands-

    , @Them Guys
    That Book Ron named as one of the many others, Gruesome Harvest, I read it about 8 or more yrs ago when I discovered it at an online free book website. It was done in 10-12 chapters and each chapter was mainly devoted to a different aspect of all the events that happened in Germany.

    And Only what happened After Unconditional Surrender by Germany. The books writer guy, was sent there within a few months after wars ending. He was sent by a newspaper I cannot now recall name of, nor do I recall if it was a usa or British based newspaper...I do think he was American and sent by a usa newspaper...Just cannot now remember for certain...But I do distinctly remember he has an entire chapter on how, and his book at back index pages has aprox 130-140 documented references and names etc to back up and verify his info he wrote of.


    One chapter deals with how, I think it was Gen. Eisenhower(?) who gave an order to have something like 40,000 or so usa-Black army soldiers,sent to germany with orders to basically have a free pass or free reign of the object to get as many german women age 8-80 Raped. And main goal was to impregnate as many as possible so to cause half breed german babies that never could, when grown, produce a pure white german baby ever again. I think book also states, many of the negro soldiers were never before in germany until that point of wars end, then shipped in.


    His book highly detailed tons of info on the subject, and names many many names of various others sent to record events like he was, and others involved in that agenda, and it sure looked to me as his info and facts were nothing but honest and factual truths. When he started out he had barley any real knowledge of what he'd see once inside Germany. Every chapter goes deeply into every aspect of the several different issues he wrote of. He also wrote of what he saw and discovered about the British army as well as Russian army in the sections each were in.


    I cannot really recall much exact details now after so long since I read it. It was harder to read for me online back then as I rather have a Real paper book to read...Even now with internet so much faster and websites like that far better...I still prefer a Real Paper, hard cover or paperback Book I can hold in hand. It also makes it easier when you wish to backtrack to prior read info if in book form.


    Overall, I think that book writer did a good job exposing Far, Far more to me than I ever before knew of about WWII, and especially how it dispels so much we all were taught since we all were small kids, about the whole WWII/Nazis/Germany/Jews/Holyhoax events.


    The writer guy sure did not sound to me as if he had any agenda to lie or make stuff up on what he saw and wrote in the book. One things certain though, if even a Tenth of what that book details and exposes is actual-factual and truth...It sure paints a new revealing picture when compared to all we prior were told and taught...


    Even today and with just websites like UNZ and several other great info sites, it seems on a daily basis I get again awakened more, and more amazed at just how much false and fraud phony pure Crap Lies we were taught to believe when the issue is WWII and the rest related to it.


    Of course most of us never before knew or never suspected that all those great WWI and WWII Huge Hollywood production movies, and books and magazines articles, even WWII Old Black & White Photos, had so much total propaganda and out right Lies within most all of it.


    Maybe its good I am now 65 yrs old..because for about the past few yrs now, I cannot help but think how if only I was still a far younger man, say no older than 30-35 or less yet, I likely would travel to Russia, remain at least 6-12 months if allowed to, then if Russia looked to be as much closer Today to how My/Our America Used to be like as kids etc....I probably would move to Russia.


    It is as if America vs Russia has done a full 180 degree switcheroo, in the last 20 or so yrs eh...


    Every day I read or see photos or the avail. videos of yet another good thing or part of Russia. And I can't help but think back to how swell being an American used to feel as and be like..


    While every day here in America a direct opposite...Daily more reasons in print/video and photos that all portray America so much more like the old soviet Russia we were told of back as kids and younger adults...Like I say, a total 180 degree switch between todays usa vs Russia of today.


    And as far as that book I spoke of goes, as well as Ron's article here plus much other related same type infos I now know of, and have known for over 15-20 years regarding WWII/Hoax/Jews etc....I tend to believe its facts and truth like nothing we prior learned or were privy to know thanks to Marxist dumbing down of us all. So Yes, unless and until I see better "Proof" that "No such happened in germany" like a few germans here or others stated...Which unless I missed it?


    So Far, every reply posting here from those germans or others advising us all to Disavow and Ignore such claims as usa negro army members doing mass rapes of german women etc...Those posters replies have All been Based upon....Something they heard from some other german or person who said this or that about why we should not believe it happened.


    Sorry...But Unless they/You were actually There ON scene directly, right after, a couple 2-3 months right after WWII officially ended.....Then no matter where or who they/you heard it from, it is potentially hearsay stories that may or may not be truth. That books writer Was there, and I think he had zero to gain for telling truth and facts...Especially back then when Most msm's etc had a huge vested interest in spewing the "Official-Party line-Allies-Story to make germans look very bad and, done By Design big time eh. Yet this guys book, page after page of aprox.155 pgs or so(?) details no such paid for propagandas we see so much of typically.


    Plus as far as info from, German folks that post here...and NO offence intended here..But face facts. If you are a German citizen, Live in germany all your life or most of it, especially since born there and a small school kid etc....You have definitly been far greater Brainwashed on every possible issue on WWII, jews, holyhoax events, et al...Even far worse brainwashed then We Americans have been!....That really speaks Volumes too...As every American has been fully indoctrinated and propagandized, and Fed so much crap on same WWII and issues named, it simply aint funny.


    I'd even wager a bet if I were a betting type, that literally Everybody who is Now a wide awake person like most here at UNZ are on such issues...Were before awakened, All every one of Us, just as dumbed down and brainwashed as todays still unawake majority still are. Internet, yes Now makes it far faster and easier a process to awaken, however we who first began this process 20+ years ago really had to be dedicated to truths, and usually had to dig deep, very deep to finally get wized up. Ever since wwii ended, Germans, and many others in EU states, have been prohibited By Law from awakening...Hence why I feel German folks may tend to believe stuff, which is not so factual or truthful, yet They really do believe it as such. It is that "De-Nazification Agenda" perhaps eh...Americans never got that treatment, but we did get royally bamboozled and brainwashed badly.


    What entire World Now need's is a whole new agenda and policy of a Massive..De-Judaizification Program due to the entire worlds people, most anyways, have been totally Discombobulated and mesmerized by and through jewrys and zios Talmudic methods. Maybe a good De-Talmudification Program on a huge global wide scale needs happen too eh?


    Maybe someone old enough to have been IN WWII Europe then, and saw with own eyes the many lies we now discovered, maybe they were never asleep?....However my personal experience with several Uncles and my Father being in Europe wwii, and my Dad also was in Korea...Even them guys mainly held the same line of propaganda and lies we younger guys were taught as truth when it was not truth...Why they do or did that? I do not know since I cannot ask any due to by time I awoke them uncles were dead already. Plus my own Father Flat out refused to ever, ever speak about any war issues Period...The One Only thing my Dad would say, if someone really bugged him to give an answer about wwii or of Korea war...All I ever heard him answer was these exact words.


    "Well, War Is Hell"....No matter how much anyone tried to press my Dad for better first hand knowledge answers...No Dice...NO answers besides, War Is Hell. So I know nothing of what he did other than in one war he was infantry, in other war, rode a Horse in cavalry...Which? WWII or in Korea did he walk? Ride the Horse? I don't recall now...He just refused to ever talk of it period.


    But thankfully some guys talked eh! Especially them what wrote great facts filled Books like this book of my reply posting is all about and I recommend you read it too...Not long, 155 pgs? and reads fast, as long as you don't keep re reading too many parts that are so deeply intense and eye opening eh.


    PS: Thank You Ron Unz for so great a series of articles like this one, and other Pravda's I so far read. And thanks for so wonderful and great of a website...#1 site I say!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Seraphim says:
    @Jake
    Which interesting ideas? That Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy? That was very openly discussed during the Tudor age and proved central to the absurd assertion that Anglicanism was the perfect ideal between the equally extreme poles of Catholicism and radical Reformationism, which in England was Puritanism. In fact, the centrality of Judaizing heresy to the entire Reformation was a major discussion from very early in Martin Luther's career as 'reformer.' For example, Luther chose to use the Pharisaic/Talmudic Bible as the Protestant Old Testament rather than the Catholic Old Testament, which means he asserted that Jews who opposed Christ had the authority to declare what is and is not Scripture even some 60 years or so post-Crucifixion and Resurrection (which was when the Pharisees finally decided which books were and were not Jewish Bible.

    And that marks Luther as a Judaizer, for he made Jews superior to Christ's Church and its authority.

    But Anglo-Saxon Judaizing was of another sort: it featured a growing faith that the Anglo-Saxon race was the Jewish race for the Christian age. That led to two things of great importance. One is utter insanity of belief that Anglo-Saxons are literally 'children of Israel, ' as in The Lost Tribes. That nonsense crops up over and over in English-speaking Protestantism. The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God's chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God's chosen master race does God's will.

    That Puritan problem did not begin after 1800 in America. It was in America as soon as Anglo-Saxon Puritans arrived. It is indeed much easier to see when you read an Abolitionist declaring that if God were not an Abolitionist then chains should be put on God. But it was planted in New England even before 1630.

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted 'baptists,' and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.

    Because this is all derived from heresy, from perversion of theology and attendant moral philosophy, there is no political solution. The only solution is conversion and repentance.

    What’s really interesting about these ‘interesting ideas’ is that they are the pure truth. The Church had to fight the Judaizers from the very beginning. Christian-Zionism is the metastases of the Judaizing cancer which gnawed at the Churchs’ body for centuries. Anglo-Saxons have been the most thoroughly infected by it (in England Reformation went hand in hand with the theft of Church properties – and the communal ones – by the minions of the great reformer Henry VIII). In America it offered the ideological justification for the theft of natives’ lands and of Spanish colonies.
    The attempts at Judaizing the Russian Church failed. The Orthodox Church was a much stronger barrier that the Roman-Catholic (weakened by an early onset of the disease) and that explains the ferocity visited upon the Orthodox Church and the relentless barrage of filth and calumnies thrown at her by Jews and Judaizers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ivan
    In the book The Other Slavery by Andres Resendez, chronicling the enslavement of the Amerindians, the authour takes some pain to point out both Isabella and Ferdinand, regarded the Amerindians as their subjects and were watchful to prevent their enslavement at the hands of the agents of the Spanish enterprises. But you won't hear any of that over the cacophony of the Proddies always at the ready to bring out the red rag of the Inquisition.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Hadding says: • Website

    Prominent among those murdered following the “liberation” of France is the writer Robert Brasillach. His only offense consisted in having expressed the wrong opinions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  163. Here’s what I don’t get about this piece, Ron. The horrific account of systemic mistreatment of German POWs, a US war crime, is genuinely shocking. I recall reading brief accounts of this is the past, but not that responsibility lay with Eisenhower or that it was a direct result of deliberate US policy. If true, this should temper the story the US tells itself about WW2 as “the Good War” and all the “greatest generation” balderdash. But you conflate this admittedly all-too-terrible account with the tragedy of ethnic cleansing of Germans in the post-war period, which seems like a major misjudgment.

    I haven’t read widely on the subject, but I’ve been familiar with the sad story since I was an undergrad. From what I understand, the vast majority of Germans expelled from their homes lived in territories occupied by the Soviets. Is this incorrect? If not, what should the US have done to prevent it? Why doesn’t responsibility for those deaths fall mainly on Stalin? Maybe the US should have done more to prevent Germans from being victimized, but would the US public have supported a confrontation with the Soviets over the treatment of German civilians? American ignorance about history is surely vast, but I don’t think the ethnic cleansing of Germans is as widely unknown as you state. Rather, I think people under-react to it because there’s the sense that German started the worst war in history and reaped the whirlwind, bringing disaster down on the German people rather than turning Eastern and Central Europe in a 1000 year Reich.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seraphim
    There was also a sense of vengeance.
    , @Them Guys
    One of the Main complaints of Gen. G.Patton, and from his own Diary and many letters he wrote to his wife back home in usa, and letters he wrote to his now retired but former high level usa military officers etc.....Was how Patton was Ordered By Ike aka Eisenhower, to by force remove/evict entire German families, families Proved to have zero ties to Nazis or SS or military etc at all...

    Patton bitched like hell over and over to any and all msm reporters he was able to about how it so pissed him off to get orders to evict perfectly normal good solid german folks, all done so New Arrived "DP's" aka Displaced Persons...aka...Russian kommie jews could then move Into former germans homes.

    This was In german land an cities. Plus Pattons diary entries state how he had to send a small squad of usa army men into those same homes now occupied by the DP commie jews, in order to make threats of a M1 Rifle Butt to side of heads, if those new occupants kept refusing to use Toilets and sinks!....Patton marveled at how they refused to use a toilet, in a nice home complete with all modern stuff, for its time anyways, and they instead pissed and crapped at whatever part of homes biggest size room was...Patton stated that they typically used one single far corner in largest room.

    And they used toilets and bath sinks instead to dump all their household trash into until toilets were stacked half way to celling and so was sink also full of trash. Patton got fed up, sent pak of soldiers in to force them jews to clean it all up, and start to use toilets and sinks properly Or else!

    They must have actually had to rifle butt a few heads eh?...Since Patton declared sometimes it was his only last option to force them to believe he meant business and comply.

    Yes yes its hard to comprehend this as facts...But it is and in his Diary with a 1970's era Book written called "Inside of Pattons Diary" or some title close to that. You can find plenty online dealing with this issue and his diary.

    Basically patton said also that, he was in every possible area of all of Europe at least twice, met every type euro person that lives, and by end of war he determined that Germans were the absolute Best and Most like We usa white folks, of all others period. He said the very worst of all he ever saw or met or dealt with was Russian and eastern euro jewry. He did Not like them at all. He explains why too.

    PS: In Same Patton Diary, and same letters to home etc he stated "I Now know and am sorry to say, We American's Fought the Wrong Peoples! the wrong enemy, Instead he believed the real enemy was Bolshevik soviet jewish run kommies we needed get rid of, and if we don't, in another 40-50 yrs we'd be fighting them Here at home in America....Sure was spot on eh...Just consider how many bolsheviks grand kids now live in usa and run most every fucked up agenda, every msm, and fed gov etc etc etc
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Anon
    You are right about your experience if black American occupation troops in Geemany

    But they were not combat troops anywhere in WW 2 and in France and Italy they did go on a rape rampage while the war was still going in

    They were convicted of more than 150 rapes committed in Normandy in the summer of 1944. That’s just the ones the women were not too ashamed to report and where there was sufficient evidence to convict.

    You don’t know what you’re talking about so I’d suggest to you to be more humble and don’t write about what you don’t know. Here(at Unz) the goal is the truth. And the truth is: blacks, whites, yellows, browns can all be rapists.

    It’s well known that Russians (White) raped thousands of German Women.

    It also known today, for those who are interested in the truth that “American troops committed thousands of rapes on French women they were ‘liberating’”

    Only those who are not interested in the truth still believe that those rapes were committed only by blacks.

    “However, some justice was needed to be seen to be done, but even that process was deeply flawed. Of the mere 152 men who were tried for rape, 139 of the defendants were ‘coloured

    It appears that the American Army was keen to treat black soldiers as scapegoats, and labelled them as being ‘hypersexual’ and therefore more likely to be rapists.”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334204/The-GIs-raped-France-We-know-mass-rape-German-women-Stalins-soldiers-Now-new-book-reveals-American-troops-committed-thousands-

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The Venona papers are mostly transcripts of FBI tapes. The communist’s own spoken words proved what they were.

    Hiss testified that he didn’t know Chambers several times. Then he hedged that he “might have met” Chambers somewhere. The Hisses sold the chambers their car so obviously the Hisses knew the Chambers.

    Luckily, the education authorities have eliminated everything but Whites especially the White working class are evil racists in its history curriculum.

    So the only Hiss, White Wallace defenders left are the over 70 types who learned it from their FDR worshipping parents.
    , @Unzerker

    However, some justice was needed to be seen to be done, but even that process was deeply flawed. Of the mere 152 men who were tried for rape, 139 of the defendants were ‘coloured
     
    Thanks for showing the proof that blacks raped ten times more even though they were only a fraction of the US army. After that book came out you could read a lot of articles about the subject.

    Reminds me of that story about black GI's who were murdered by the Japanese after the war because they raped the local women every weekend.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Katsuyama_killing_incident

    And of course who can forget Emmet Till's father who was sentenced to death for raping two Italian women and murdering a third.
    , @Heros
    Some great tidbits from the Dailymail book review:

    "The writer said that the GIs ‘attacked, robbed . . . both on the street and in our houses’ and were essentially ‘a regime of terror, imposed by bandits in uniform’.

    But the biggest problem was sex. GIs were copulating with every French woman they could get their hands on, willingly or not, and worse still, they were doing it in public.

    ‘These things are happening in full daylight right in front of the children or other people who happen to be near,’ said one civilian.
    ...
    With the raping and the bombing, it was therefore understandable why some French wondered whether they really had been ‘liberated’ after all.
    ...
    French women who worked as prostitutes even looked back on their German clients with something approaching affection. GIs, it seemed, wanted more than just sex.

    ‘You had to keep an eye on your purse with those bastards,’ one woman recalled. ‘It’s sad to say, but I missed my Fritzes, who were gentler with women. I was not the only one to say it; all the women thought the same as me, only they did not always say it.’"
     

    So once again, we have the American Army riding in on Sherman tanks to rape, murder and loot. France was no more "liberated" than Iraq 60 years later or Richmond 80 years before.

    Note how once again we have multiple confirmations of how the Germans behaved better than even the supposedly best behaved ally, the US. People forget that it was France that had attacked German 3 times in the last 50 years. Germany had every right to extract a retribution far greater than what the jew and communist commanded French "resistance" were planning for these very same French people, let alone for the German people.

    HEADLINES: FRANCE INVADES GERMANY -- 1914, 1923, 1939

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/44/80/03/4480039ad0cc5d4f8e72f1f3089f6757.jpg
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/France_Invades_Ruhr_Chicago_Daily_Tribune_6_March_1923.jpg
    https://mlsvc01-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/57f72fd4301/5736ba1e-f507-4b5a-81ac-8b6f5c2b663e.jpg?ver=1427589992000

    The German soldiers in Vichy France were no different than US troops in Germany or Poland today, and with certainty behaved far more professionally.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @utu

    German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied
     
    But some probably can and should be contested. We do not know what can and what cannot be denied until research is done from the perspective and interests of Germans and Germany. This is your duty to do it. Duty to higher ideals and duty to your ancestors. I know it is a very delicate issue but it must be done. This is the only path.

    As far as the English-speaking world there is no point of getting upset. They just mean business and there are not different now from what they were before the WWII. You must understand where they are coming from. The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII. They indoctrinated you to emasculate you and Germans did it willingly because they knew that by playing dead and docile they would be safer. And it worked up to the point. Now cultural and even biological survival of German nation is at the stake. The conflict between Anglo-American and German cultures is deep and philosophical. The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world. In terms of Russia I doubt that Russia can provide you much in terms of cultural model but in long run an alliance with Russia would be very good for the world and for Germany. Europe and Russian is the only power that can counterbalance the power of America and China. We need a tri-polar world. Europe and Russia is the last hope to save the western civilization. And there is no Europe w/o strong Germany. Strong in a spiritual sense.

    Well, Katyn is over, Oradour is a fairy tale, jews were deported and died, but why and how ?
    Any other crimes ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @German_reader

    That is the reason why Dresden is the only city in Germany where there is an official commemoration of what happened in the war.
     
    That's not true, many German cities have commemorations of Allied WW2 air raids, e.g. for Würzburg (bombed in March 1945) I found this, from March this year:
    https://www.wuerzburgerleben.de/2018/03/13/gedenken-bombenangriff-16-03-1945/
    Of course these commemorations are highly politically correct nowadays and always strongly emphasize German responsibility for WW2. But it's not true that there's any pretense those air raids didn't happen or that they aren't officially commemorated.

    the Western allies treated German POW´s much, much worse than the German side had treated Western POW´s.
     
    My German grandfather was taken prisoner by the British in northern Germany in early 1945 and wasn't mistreated at all. Security at his pow camp was extremely lax, iirc he wasn't even formally dismissed, but eventually just left on his own account and took a train home.
    Anecdotal evidence, but one could say the same about many of those negative accounts.
    There's certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.

    Your comment reflects my comment in the start. The British were Ok in their treatment, the person I spoke to also told me, he was processed (He as just a Feldwebel) and the an officer said something like: Well thats it, off you go, no loitering around, you have a country to rebuild!!
    So he did get back to his wife in Hamburg.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Seraphim
    Russian advisors? But
    "Was the French Resistance Jewish? Jews led—and purposefully did not lead—some of the many specialized groups that fought Vichy France and its Nazi occupiers", by Renée Poznanski
    May 3, 2016 @https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/201308/was-the-french-resistance-jewish

    "French Jews—under a double jeopardy of anti-Semitic law (French and German), stripped of their possessions, interned in camps, then sent on to Auschwitz—contributed in full to the story of the Resistance. Extremely numerous in the different movements formed in France as well as in London around Gen. de Gaulle, they also created specifically tasked groups; many Jews were associated with the French Communist Party, while others specialized in the saving of those threatened with deportation.
    After the liberation, Georges Zérapha concluded that from June 1940 to December 1941 Jews led the way from bottom to top in the majority of subgroups of the Resistance. They were among the first to reach London, from Raymond Aron to André Weill-Curiel and including René Cassin. We find them among the founders of the Musée de l’Homme network in 1940, publishing the first issue of the magazine Résistance on Dec. 15, 1940. Of the six founders of Libération in July 1941, three were Jews. Jean-Pierre Lévy created and ran Franc–Tireur. Robert Salmon was one of the two founders of Défense de la France; it was he who chose to give this name to the new journal, whose first number appeared in July 1941. These examples give only a partial idea of the early and massive Jewish presence at high positions in all the various movements...
    the massive presence of Jews in the Resistance remained extremely discrete...
    In the north [Paris], even while Solidarité specialized in social work and propaganda, the First detachment FTP (“Franc-Tireurs Partisans”)-MOI, composed of Romanians and Hungarians of which 90 percent were Jewish, and the Second detachment, entirely composed of Jews, excelled at military actions. (The MOI created four detachments in all.) The push for the actions of the detachments came from the Party, while the troops increased in number as anti-Semitic repression increased. The contributions of the Jews is particularly impressive: In February 1943, out of 36 actions taken by the four detachments of FTP-MOI of the capital, 15 were realized by the Jewish Second detachment...
    The Jewish Communist military groups were practically alone in Paris from June to November 1943. Joseph Epstein (Col. Gilles) was named responsible for all military actions led by the communists at Paris, and a team entirely composed of Jewish women transported the weapons needed by the different units. An intelligence service that prepared all the actions was in the hands of a group of Jewish women who were attached to the MOI. Later this activity extended into the non-occupied regions: to Grenoble from September 1943 to March 1944; to Lyon after May 1944. At Toulouse, up until its fall in the spring of 1944, the Marcel Langer group instigated essentially all armed action. Given the efficiency of the Vichy police services, the price paid for all these actions was extremely high: massive arrests in November 1942, March 1943, June-July 1943, the slaughter of November 1943.
    The nature of the activity led by these groups of Jewish Communists appeared clearly in an extremely rich and diverse clandestine press...
    The reconstruction of the Jewish world in France could only follow the plan imposed on it by French society; that society equally pressed the Jewish world to regroup under the banner of a united Resistance. A coming-together of the various political centers of a Jewish resistance led, at the end of July 1943 in Grenoble, to the formation of a “Comité général de défence” that united Communists, Zionists of all types, and Bundists under a single roof. In some ways this was a duplication in Jewish circles of the creation in May 1943 of the “National Resistance Council” which legitimized the entry of the Communists into the French political world..."

    And it goes on and on. The conclusion is somewhat intriguing:
    "It was, however, necessary to wait for the 1970s and the ripening of French memories of WWII, the Vichy government, and the Shoah before the Jewish contribution to the Resistance gained even minimal recognition in France"(!!!). After the war many heroes present themselves!

    This resistance was minimal.
    A few years ago a collection of WWII pictures was found in a French attic.
    The French were shocked, people sitting in front of pubs drinking, German soldiers walking through Paris on their own unarmed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. dfordoom says: • Website
    @utu

    Yet everyone knows that the French resistance was weak and ineffectual
     
    More resistance you had worse off you were. Resisting was strongly encouraged by both London and Moscow to conduct war by civilians of other nations. This only lead to reprisals and more reprisals and death of countless civilians which were avoidable if there was no resistance. But creating the reprisals was the chief goal of resistance. Neither Moscow nor London wanted the occupied populations to begin to like their occupiers too much. And some did particularly in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. That's why the resistance got there the most intense which lead to the bloodbath in the Bloodlands (T. Snyder). The resistance itself in its so-called fight against Germans did not shorten the war by one day. They were mainly busy chasing real and invented collaborators and stealing from local population or fighting resistance of different ideological or ethnic orientations. In some areas local populations were very happy when German regiments were stationed near by so the resistance was kept away and in extreme cases villages organizing self-defence groups often armed by Germans to protect themselves from the so called resistance and partisans.

    By the way organizing resistance on occupied territories used to be a war crime. That's why the reprisals by occupiers were justified and condoned by various conventions.

    By the way organizing resistance on occupied territories used to be a war crime.

    Which is an inconvenient detail that rarely gets mentioned in the accepted narrative. The resistance fighters were in fact terrorists. Churchill was one of the most enthusiastic sponsors of terrorism in history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EugeneGur

    The resistance fighters were in fact terrorists.
     
    You are joking, right? People fighting to liberate their country from occupiers are "terrorists"? What a warped mind one has to have to come up with such an idea!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Ron Unz

    Robert Paxton is largely credited with damaging the position of the postwar defenders of Vichy; I believe he gives a figure for the victims of the postwar purges at around 10,000, that is, considerably lower than the ones you credit.
     
    I must reemphasize my complete lack of personal expertise in the post-war history of France, and I certainly haven't read the Paxton book you cite. However, here's my perspective...

    Unless you believe that Huddleston is flat-out lying, the Socialist Minister of the Interior in March 1945, who controlled France's national police force and had best access to the data, informed the De Gaulle people that there had been approximately 105,000 "summary executions" during the previous six months, and the American authorities had estimated 80,000 political killings during the first part of that period. These figures were widely circulated and accepted as correct at the time. Communists and other leftwing groups were apparently responsible for the overwhelming majority of these killings, which targeted conservatives and right-wingers.

    Then, thirty years later, Robert Paxton, apparently a somewhat fervent "anti-Fascist" historian based in the U.S., published a book claiming that there had actually only been 10,000 killings. Offhand, it's not clear to me how Paxton in 1972 would have such better information than France's own Interior Minister in 1945. It's certainly possible, but I think it far more likely that he merely rewrote history for ideological reasons, and Wikipedia and others just repeated it for the same sorts of reasons. This does occasionally happen you know...

    Thanks for the reply. I don’t consider myself capable of sorting the matter out. Paxton is detested by many French nationalists for his manifold attack on Vichy; which is also likely why he is, I would imagine, the authority most often quoted on the subject. In general, I would think that time should improve historians’ ability to determine such facts as the number of people killed during a particular period, so I am not particularly disturbed by the idea that a contemporaneous account might need severe adjustment later. On the other hand, Paxton’s criticisms of Vichy, especially of the notion that Vichy did its best under horrible circumstances, might be said to fail to account for the high number of French Jews who survived the war. My main point is that one or two books, no matter how persuasive, can’t be taken as true without the benefit of reflection, criticism, argument and so forth. I have no doubt that we’re in agreement on this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    In general, I would think that time should improve historians’ ability to determine such facts as the number of people killed during a particular period, so I am not particularly disturbed by the idea that a contemporaneous account might need severe adjustment later.
     
    Well, that's certainly possible. On the other hand, it's also much easier for ideologically-driven historians living several decades later on the other side of the Atlantic to make unpleasant historical realities go away with just a few strokes of their pen.

    My strong impression is that every political authority at the time believed that there had been over 100,000 killings during Liberation, and apparently no one much challenged that figure for decades afterward. If 40 years later, Paxton somehow cut the total by 90%, I'd be very curious to know how he managed to do so. Did he spend years of painstaking research consulting the archival death-records of every one of France's hundreds of arrondissements and adding up the total? Or did he just quote some Communist leader somewhere who claimed that the official figures were wildly exaggerated?
    , @Fluesterwitz
    One way to look at the cooperation of the Vichy government is as a hard-nosed attempt, only partially successful, to sacrifice foreign Jews in France in order to save Jewish French citizens. I am not sure if I buy it, but it is at least a plausible explanation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. utu says:
    @Anon
    I’ve always just assumed that the tales of King Leopold’s atrocities in Congo were just British propaganda aimed at Belgium because the British didn’t want to share Africa even with France, let alone intruders like Germany Italy and Belgium.

    Same with all British propaganda tales. I remember one of the Churchill hagiographies laid out a compete justification for his destruction of the French fleet and murder of the 2,000 French sailors.

    Actually. There was absolutely totally no reason to destroy the French fleet to
    “ prevent it from being used by the Germans to attack Britain”

    The French Admiralty made plans years before of what they would do if any hostile power conquered France. The Mediterranean fleet would sail west to the Atlantic and meet up with the Atlantic fleet around the Azores.

    The fleets would then sail off the coasts of French colonies in Africa. If the conquest and occupation continued the entire fleet would sail to S America and stay till the situation resolved itself.

    Arrangements had already been made with the Brazil and Argentina governments. Plenty of fuel food and supplies were stashed in the French African colonies.

    But war criminal Churchill destroyed the fleet and murdered the sailors. The number killed ranged from 1,7000 2,000 depending on the source.

    In the spring of 1940 before the French surrender Churchill crossed to France met with the president premier and the cabinet and proposed a union of France and Britain

    It never happened. Churchill always wanted to emulate his ancestor Jack Churchill Duke of Marlborough, a great hero of the John Bull British supremacist school of British history.

    In the spring of 1940 before the French surrender Churchill crossed to France met with the president premier and the cabinet and proposed a union of France and Britain

    Not exactly. The plan came from Churchill who get it approved by British Cabinet on June 16. De Gaulle who was already in London agreed. De Gaulle called Reynaud the French price minister who was in Bordeaux who became enthusiastic about the Franco-British Union after talking with Churchill on the phone.

    Reynaud presented the proposal to the French Council of Ministers, but it was rejected as a British plot to seize the French empire. Marshal Pétain, 84 years old and the great hero of World War I, believed it was his duty to save France from total destruction and accept an armistice with Germany. Britain was doomed, he said, and union would be “fusion with a corpse.” Another minister concluded: “Better be a Nazi province. At least we know what that means.”

    Pétain saw through it. Could British be taken seriously after the evacuation from Dunkirk? All Churchill wanted was to assure that France would fight to the end (to the last French soldier and French citizen for British Empire) and that French navy would not fall into Germany. Most importantly Pétain wanted to avoid the “polandization” of France. And Hitler did not want to “polandize” France as long as he could get cheap and easy occupation. And Pétain also wanted easy occupations for the French not like the bloodbath in Poland. And he got it. He saved countless lives of the French. De Gaulle saved France’s honor. Pétain accepted personal infamy and dishonor to save the French people. He was the true hero.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Thank you. I read several biographies glorifying the grandiose war criminal Churchill. They all implied he physically went over to France.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @OilcanFloyd
    Youtube is full of old War Department propaganda videos about the occupation of Germany, as well alternative views. Together, it's easy to question the official narrative, and to believe that Germans were deliberately killed in large numbers. A quick search gave the following examples.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wBvCIGq44eY
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x8XG-nbM3BE
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o7GpodZy0Wo
    http://www.renegadetribune.com/eisenhowers-evil-deception-exterminating-german-pows-abroad-portraying-pows-u-s-soil-pampered/?doing_wp_cron=1512832636.0193889141082763671875

    I don’t know about anybody else, but even before I know what this first film wants to tell me, I find myself squirming away from it. It reeks of propaganda right from the start. It may be full of nothing but truth, but its tone and manner are hideous.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OilcanFloyd
    The first two films are propaganda pieces put out by the U.S. and British governments right after the war. The first film is produced by the U.S. War Department for occupying soldiers, and the second is by the British government for the British public, I guess. Granted, the films were made after a long and bloody war, but the makers of the films did everything but portray Germans as rats running from the sewers. The mood of the films is ugly, and likely would have only made a bad situation on the ground worse. Judging by those two films, I can accept that there would have been an atmosphere in which atrocities were committed and accepted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Heros says:
    @utu

    German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied
     
    But some probably can and should be contested. We do not know what can and what cannot be denied until research is done from the perspective and interests of Germans and Germany. This is your duty to do it. Duty to higher ideals and duty to your ancestors. I know it is a very delicate issue but it must be done. This is the only path.

    As far as the English-speaking world there is no point of getting upset. They just mean business and there are not different now from what they were before the WWII. You must understand where they are coming from. The reason you are hurt by their attitudes it is because you have been indoctrinated into some idealism that from now on everything will be great and we all will love each other. But they do not reciprocate because they were not indoctrinated the same way. They kept their triumphalism. which only was reinforced after the WWII. They indoctrinated you to emasculate you and Germans did it willingly because they knew that by playing dead and docile they would be safer. And it worked up to the point. Now cultural and even biological survival of German nation is at the stake. The conflict between Anglo-American and German cultures is deep and philosophical. The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world. In terms of Russia I doubt that Russia can provide you much in terms of cultural model but in long run an alliance with Russia would be very good for the world and for Germany. Europe and Russian is the only power that can counterbalance the power of America and China. We need a tri-polar world. Europe and Russia is the last hope to save the western civilization. And there is no Europe w/o strong Germany. Strong in a spiritual sense.

    “The world needs Germany to offset what is bad in the Anglo-American world and Germany needs Anglo-American culture to offset what is bad in Germanic world.”

    I don’t agree with this statement. Germans and Germany cannot hold a candle to Yankee and Anglozionist imperialists when it comes to pure satanic evil. “Yankee” is of course derived from the jews who originally settled in New Amsterdam.

    As far as I can tall, somewhere about the time of the East India shutting down rebellions in India and the Opium wars, the British Empire dropped all pretenses of Christianity and went full talmud. The Yankees were already there, Sherman had lead the way. And it was the “Sherman” tank that lead the charge into the Rhineland, Schwabia and Bavaria in a drunken orgy of rape, murder and plunder. They didn’t need to burn Frankfurt or Munich as Sherman had burned Atlanta because May had already bombed them back to the stone age. Of course, as this American Pravda article shows, Eisenhower had POW’s stripped of Geneva Convention rights so he could murder them in his death camps, a crime which he and his jewish cronies promptly projected onto Germany in histories most disgusting sham trials at Nuremburg.

    Meanwhile, throughout 2 world wars Germany, like the South in the war of Northern Aggression, or the Boers, had steadfastly stuck to the accepted rules of war, only to watch as the Zionist puppet states escalated their war crimes as their victory approached, knowing from centuries of jewish deception that all the satanic evil could not only be easily covered up in the mayhem after victory, but that the active participation of anglozionists in the blood letting orgy made them malleable and easy to control puppets after the victory.

    Unz barely touched on the extensive dehumanizing war time propaganda of the Allies (It would be great if someone made a post comparing German to Allied side to side), but a lot of it still sticks to Germans and Germany, but not to the anglozionists. Just read German_reader’s comments on this thread, laced with guilt even today.

    One of the most incredible aspects of the German heritage, that was a prime target for destruction by the zionists, was German prowess at science, technology and manufacturing deriving from many places. After the war, German patents, machinery, documentation and even scientists were stolen and taken to the allies. Even today, German industry is firmly under anglozionist control, for example VW fined $19b. DB fined $10b. Meanwhile Bayer and Monsanto are merging to make a gigantic GMO /Food/Pharma/poison conglomerate, controlled by jews with virtual certainty.

    Airbus, eurofighter, or that AS400 transport are good example of anglo-germans together, or NOT.

    Germany doesn’t need the anglos. It was the dying, jew polluted anglos that needed the Germans. And as we all know, they won.

    Read More
    • Agree: Them Guys
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Lauri Törni
    Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control.



    .... and this is why all so called 'in-depth' articles regarding WW2 and Germany are extremely biased.

    "Nazi-crimes" don't even begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of Allied - Soviet Union included.

    Even prominent Jews have arrogantly boasted, that the 'concentration camps' and the 'killed' German Jews perfectly served their purpose. 250.000 German Jews lived in Nazi-Germany, but the international Jewish community kept on increasing the number of 'killed' Jews in Germany up to 6 million.

    When people continue referring to Hitler's "horrid deeds" - in order to justify their own deeds - they 'forgive' their own actions and act as if they never happened and they use the same old scapegoat: Germany and Hitler.

    Mannerheim was a man of honesty and integrity, "The Last European Knight" as the historians call him.

    President Mannerheim's Letter to the Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler, Sept. 2, 1944

    In this hour of hard decisions I am impelled to inform you, that I have arrived at the conviction, that the salvation of my nation makes it my duty to find a means of ending the war.

    The general development of total war, greatly restricts Germany's ability to send us sufficient help at the right time and in the difficult situations, which can be expected.

    It is my sincere belief, however, that Germany wishes to offer us this assistance. But the dispatch of a single German division to Finland requires such a long time, that our resistance against the overwhelming superiority of the enemy might break down before its arrival. I also fully understand, that the situation does not permit a sufficient number of German divisions being kept permanently in readiness in Finland. The experiences of the past summer confirm this.

    The judgment of the war situation, which I have just given, is shared by a growing majority of the representatives of the Finnish people. Even should my opinion be other than it is, it would not be possible for me, having regard to our constitution, to ignore the plainly shown wishes of the majority of the nation.

    When Field-Marshal Keitel recently visited me, he insisted that the people of Greater Germany could doubtless continue the war for another ten years if necessary.

    I replied, that even if one might hope that this be true of a nation of ninety millions, it was equally true, that we Finns were physically incapable of continuing the war. The Russians' great assaults in June exhausted our reserves. We cannot expose ourselves to another such blood-letting, without the whole future of the small Finnish nation being jeopardized.

    I wish especially to emphasize, that Germany will live on, even if fate should not crown your arms with victory.

    Nobody could give such an assurance regarding Finland. If that nation of barely four millions be militarily defeated, there can be little doubt, that it will be driven into exile or exterminated. I cannot expose my people to such a fate.

    Even though I can hardly hope, that my opinions and reasons will be accepted by you, I wish to send you these lines before the hour of decision.

    Our roads will probably soon part, but the memory of our German brothers-in-arms will live on.

    In Finland, the Germans have certainly not been the representatives of a foreign usurper, but helpers and brothers-in-arms, but even though that be the case, the position of foreigners is bound to be a very difficult one.

    I can assure you, that during the past years nothing whatever has happened, which could cause us to regard the German troops as oppressors or invaders.

    The conduct of the German Army in Northern Finland towards the local population and the local authorities will, I think, stand out in our history as an almost unique example of correct and friendly relations in similar conditions.

    I regard it as my duty to lead my people out of the war.

    The arms, which you have generously given us, I will never of my own accord turn against Germans.

    I cherish the hope that, even though you may take exception to my letter, you will share my wish and the wish of all Finns, that the change in our relations may not give rise to animosity.

    Source: The Memoirs of Marshal Mannerheim. Cassell & Co., London, 1953.
    https://histdoc.net/history/1941-1948/mannerheim1944-09-02.html

    ****

    When Germans retreated and took part in the 'pretend-war', i.e. Finns shot in the air and Germans pretendend to flee the Finnish troops, everything was fine.

    Until the Russian troops swooped in and massacred Finns and burned down villages in Northern Finland. Finns were forced to say, that it was the Germans who did it, although it wasn't true.

    I'm sick and tired of sugar-coating and blurring facts, so that they fit in the official narrative.

    Finnish Jews fought beside Germans against Soviet troops. Not one incident of indecent behavior was reported. They got along and they were brothers-in-arms.

    Finnish Jews fought for Finland and they did it voluntarily.

    Finland didn't have a "Jewish question" unlike Germany had. Had Hitler called them by their codename - Communists - things might have been different.

    During the Continuation War Finland was also forced to put up concentration camps, all Finnish communists were put there, because they allied with the aggressor, Soviet Union.

    When Hitler did the same, put Communists (mostly Jews) in concentration camps, so that they could not wage war against Germans and Germany, it enraged the international secret Communist system as well as the international Jewish community. And they turned the international community against Germany - and Finland also, since Finland did not have a Jewish (read: Communist) question.

    To be honest, I am extremely proud of the fact, that Finns shared the defeat of WW2 with Germans!

    Rather a war criminal together with Germany, than a victor together with the Allied. Our conscience is clear.

    But the rest of the countries, who either stood by as spectators or participated with the bullies, they should do some honest soul-searching - instead of continuning with the passé blaming game.

    When the whole world ganged up on tiny Finland, Germany was THE ONLY ONE, who took our side. Like in a school yard, where one big bully beats a small boy and others stand by - on the bully's side - without lifting a finger for the small boy. Then one of the big bullies - Germany - goes to the small boy laying on the ground, promises to fight with him, and also gets beaten.

    I raised my son to ALWAYS go between a fight and ALWAYS take the weaker one's side. NEVER stand by as a passive specator (aka enabler), but to take ACTION.

    All the nations are busy washing their bloody hands - with blood - instead of standing up and admitting their guilt.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDN7zhtCLRM

    Irrelevant perhaps to your interesting expression of a Finnish perspective but where do you get the figure of 250,000 Jews in Nazi Germany – and do you regard the figure as of any importance? My understanding is that in 1933 the figure was close to 600,000 though, come to think of it, I am not sure whose criteria applied and I believe that intermarriage was at least 33 per cent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lauri Törni
    From Harold Wallace Rosenthal's interview in 1976 - who was by the way 'mysteriously' murdered by 'Palestinian terrorists' after the interview... As for intermarriages again: My friend's Aunt fell in love with a German soldier in Finland. He brought her to Germany to marry her. "Adolf" didn't allow them to get married until her DNA was tested. Once it was clear that she was a Non-Jew, they got married.

    Here is the interveiw:

    The Harold Wallace Rosenthal Interview 1976


    Q:. The story about the six million Jews supposedly cremated or murdered by the Nazis.

    R. What about it?

    Q. Do you know who or what Jewish organization created that big lie?

    R. No, I don't know anything about its authenticity. I don't think it's too important anyway.

    Q. Mr. Rosenthal, you know better than that, What about the younger generation who is growing up believing this big lie? And you say it's not important!!

    R. It was an outgrowth of the war and we all know that Hitler hated the Jews so someone, somewhere, thought of exaggerating the number. We know that many, many Jews were killed by the Nazis.

    Q. I'm sure you know, that when World War II broke out there were less than a quarter of a million Jews in ALL of Germany. Many thousands had already left Germany.

    R. So what? As I said before, the Jewish people are the cleverest people in the world. So somebody thought up a big number and perhaps it grew until now the number of Jews killed is six million. We have control of the news media and that is the great difference. Otherwise your people could tell YOUR big lie.




    https://rense.com/general66/rosen.htm





    Erkki Hautamäki's upcoming book deals with Post-WW2 based upon secret documents.

    Some excerpts are already posted online:


    He raises questions about:

    - Allied's bombed Dresden civilians
    - Why the concentration camps were re-named
    - Why Unicef, the organization founded to help all children, who had suffered in European wars, except German children, who were excluded from Unicef's program, children who starved to death - due to "humanitarian" solutions?


    He also writes in a very respectful manner about the German POWs and German civilians, who were murdered in millions.

    He reminds, that despite the propaganda, 1,7 million Russian POWs died, because the maintenance crashed and they were already starving after the battles. The biggest reason for their deaths was the Red Army's strategy to schorch the earth. Almost all deaths took place in the beginning of the war-chaos - and far away from Germany, when there was suddenly millions of Russian POWs.

    But the German civilians were murdered after the war. Millions were murdered, almost 10 million German civilians.

    According to his researches and documents, only hundreds of thousands died in the holocaust, but Sionists from United States and Soviet Union murdered millions of Germans.

    He also points out, that deaths in the holocaust haven't even been confrimed as deliberate, whereas the war was started for the destruction of German people."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @utu

    There’s certainly a need for some WW2 revisionism, but some of the stuff here is so extreme it will be counter-productive.
     
    Perhaps you should come with a list of what is extreme and what is not. What is permitted to be revised and what is not. One has to take risks. Find some courage.

    I don’t have a list. What one would have to do would be painstaking, detailed research about possible Allied war crimes, to see what’s true and what isn’t.
    E.g. some time ago I read about Soviet/Polish war crimes in East Saxony in 1945. There was a documented incident in a place called Niederkaina near Bautzen in April 1945 where Soviet troops (SMERSH according to some, Poles according to others) put about 200 German Volkssturm men in a barn and burned them alive, machine-gunning some who tried to escape. In the GDR this was of course covered up, and one wasn’t allowed to talk about it. But the son of one of those killed there investigated in the 1990s and wrote a book about war crimes committed in East Saxony in April/May 1945 (Theodor Seidel, Kriegsverbrechen in Ostsachsen), based on documentary sources and interviews with witnesses (who are mostly dead now of course, so something like this would be much more difficult today).
    I only heard of that because there was a commemorative tablet for that massacre in Niederkaina…which was demolished by Antifa thugs a few months ago.
    Anyway, my point is, I just don’t find the kind of revisionism one reads here credible, imo it’s counter-productive because it veers off far too much into conspiracy theorising. If you think that makes me a self-hating cuck or whatever, fine, I don’t care. I’m out of here, bye!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. ivan says:
    @Seraphim
    What's really interesting about these 'interesting ideas' is that they are the pure truth. The Church had to fight the Judaizers from the very beginning. Christian-Zionism is the metastases of the Judaizing cancer which gnawed at the Churchs' body for centuries. Anglo-Saxons have been the most thoroughly infected by it (in England Reformation went hand in hand with the theft of Church properties - and the communal ones - by the minions of the great reformer Henry VIII). In America it offered the ideological justification for the theft of natives' lands and of Spanish colonies.
    The attempts at Judaizing the Russian Church failed. The Orthodox Church was a much stronger barrier that the Roman-Catholic (weakened by an early onset of the disease) and that explains the ferocity visited upon the Orthodox Church and the relentless barrage of filth and calumnies thrown at her by Jews and Judaizers.

    In the book The Other Slavery by Andres Resendez, chronicling the enslavement of the Amerindians, the authour takes some pain to point out both Isabella and Ferdinand, regarded the Amerindians as their subjects and were watchful to prevent their enslavement at the hands of the agents of the Spanish enterprises. But you won’t hear any of that over the cacophony of the Proddies always at the ready to bring out the red rag of the Inquisition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Cleburne says:
    @Jake
    Which interesting ideas? That Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy? That was very openly discussed during the Tudor age and proved central to the absurd assertion that Anglicanism was the perfect ideal between the equally extreme poles of Catholicism and radical Reformationism, which in England was Puritanism. In fact, the centrality of Judaizing heresy to the entire Reformation was a major discussion from very early in Martin Luther's career as 'reformer.' For example, Luther chose to use the Pharisaic/Talmudic Bible as the Protestant Old Testament rather than the Catholic Old Testament, which means he asserted that Jews who opposed Christ had the authority to declare what is and is not Scripture even some 60 years or so post-Crucifixion and Resurrection (which was when the Pharisees finally decided which books were and were not Jewish Bible.

    And that marks Luther as a Judaizer, for he made Jews superior to Christ's Church and its authority.

    But Anglo-Saxon Judaizing was of another sort: it featured a growing faith that the Anglo-Saxon race was the Jewish race for the Christian age. That led to two things of great importance. One is utter insanity of belief that Anglo-Saxons are literally 'children of Israel, ' as in The Lost Tribes. That nonsense crops up over and over in English-speaking Protestantism. The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God's chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God's chosen master race does God's will.

    That Puritan problem did not begin after 1800 in America. It was in America as soon as Anglo-Saxon Puritans arrived. It is indeed much easier to see when you read an Abolitionist declaring that if God were not an Abolitionist then chains should be put on God. But it was planted in New England even before 1630.

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted 'baptists,' and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.

    Because this is all derived from heresy, from perversion of theology and attendant moral philosophy, there is no political solution. The only solution is conversion and repentance.

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted ‘baptists,’ and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.

    Jake, I’m in agreement with much of what you’ve written there. Again, though — I think you really need to distinguish between the American Puritans and the English. The English Puritans did not “murderously” persecute Baptists and if anything tended toward a sort of universalism. Cromwell’s Eastern Association Horse was known as a hotbed of Puritan pluralism, which deeply offended your pals the Celtic Scots.

    The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God’s chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God’s chosen master race does God’s will.

    I don’t mean to be completely dismissive of your arguments — I completely agree that the Yankee has crowned himself as Lord of This World and means to drag the rest of humanity to it, kicking and screaming — but didn’t some version of this appear among the Germans and French as well? And I’m not sure that was the central focus of Cromwell’s foreign policy. Did it become the ideological first mover of the New Englanders after the Civil War, assisted by the social gospel and the progressive movement? Indeed it did, but you should really consider the German/Hegelian roots of that whole mess. You jump from 1630 to 1850 with no account for the intervening years, and read 1630 through the shares of 1850. That’s just wrong, from the point of view of intellectual history.

    Far as your point about Luther. I’ll have to run it down, but didn’t Jerome use the Pharisee version of the Old Testament for the Vulgate? I think Margaret Barker discussed this in “Temple Mysticism.” I don’t see how that makes Luther, who famously did not care for Jews, an early Christian Zionist, who are indeed vile people.

    Also, “judaizing heresy” (to me, and I think to many real scholars) means the adoption of the Jewish law as a pre-requisite for salvation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seraphim
    This is precisely what the 'judaizing heresy' was. Adoption of Jewish Law is not a pre-requisite of salvation. Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. dfordoom says: • Website
    @German_reader
    I tend to agree, though there are problems with that, German crimes during the Nazi era can't be denied, and Germany needs to find some kind of mutually acceptable relationship with her neighbours and Russia...excessive revisionism could harm that.
    Germans really need to realize one thing though...the English-speaking world isn't our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.

    Germans really need to realize one thing though…the English-speaking world isn’t our friend, and any sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain need to go.

    Agreed. In fact it’s a terrible mistake for any nation to harbour sentimental friendly feelings towards the US or Britain. Two remarkably treacherous nations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. froggie says:

    Just a comment about german occupation troops in france : there was a significant difference in behaviour between units. Some of my relatives were living at the time in Gerardmer (small town in the northeast of France). The local troops were mostly older guys from middle class background, and fairly decent peoples. They were housed in the family house, and sort of conscripted his mother to cook for them as their army cook was les than good. In return they provided food for the family.

    Toward the end of the ward, they were sayign things like ‘hoe this ends soon so we can come back home’.

    But when they got he order to retreat, they warmed his family to hide, telling them that teh coming german troops were filth and advised them to hide teh women. Inthe end, the whole town ended up burned to te hground – though there wasn’t wholesale but – though a signifcant part of the men were deproted to germany.

    For mthis i conclude war crime weren’t a standard policy (at least in the western front), but at least some german units did commit them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  179. sarz says:

    First, Ron it is really good to see your media empire shaping up. I noticed the other day that Brother Nathanael Kapner’s videos are getting stored here as well. Hope you don’t end up paying for everything out of your own pocket. Maybe you could set up a foundation to which others could also contribute.

    Your informative article refers to Eisenhower as of German-American ancestry. His West Point yearbook refers to him as a “terrible Swedish Jew.” I understand his father was a Jew and mother Christian. I have a faint memory of his brother Milton, the president of Johns Hopkins being converted to Christianity late in life by someone like Billy Graham. Dwight’s hatred of Germans is legendary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  180. Tim Jones says:

    I see on a daily basis the strong anti-Nazi stuff in the media in the US. This being almost 70 years after the war ended. What I have wondered is why?

    Think about the following:

    Nazi Germany did not attack the US unlike Japan. Yes, Germany did declare war on the US after Pearl Harbor.

    Even though its known that the US pretty much goaded Japan into an attack via embargoes and a number of other things I never see the fervent anti-Japanese stuff that you see with the Nazis. Meanwhile Roosevelt did a lot of things to provoke the Germans – Lend Lease, etc… But no matter what he did the war did not happen.

    Than you read about allied atrocities against both German civilians and soldiers.

    So it makes you wonder – what exactly did Germany do that made the US so anti-German? What did they do that was so bad that the allies burned cities to the ground? I am of aware of anti-German propaganda prior to WW2 via Hollywood, newspapers and the radio.

    But the question you have to ask is why?

    WW2 if you think about it makes absolutely no sense. Why would the US care about what Germany is doing in Europe? 70 years later they are still babbling about it.

    As for the treatment of POWs again it makes no sense unless you have some kind of vendetta. This can be rested squarely on the shoulders of Eisenhower and others. Eisenhower whom was a nobody with no combat experience was promoted over many other generals and admirals. Next thing you know he is the supreme allied commander? How exactly does that work?

    Eisenhower was supposed of German ethnicity. You do this to your own people? Why?

    As I said earlier, WW2 makes no sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    The sense of WWII is FDR's lust for world power
    I often wondered how world history would have been had he not had polio
    , @jacques sheete

    As I said earlier, WW2 makes no sense.
     
    Y0u are correct, and any real historian would agree. Churchill himself even admitted that it was unnecessary. Pat Buchanan wrote a pretty decent book titled, Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War"


    https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168


    Kudos once again to RU who presents us with another fine article. Unfortunately I have no time currently to add anything of substance other than to say that the standard versions of history are all pretty much ridiculous recapitulations of naked war time propaganda; in other words, what's taught in skoolz and repeated on da toob is smelly BS.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Ron Unz

    It’s nonsense. Those open air Rheinwiesen pow camps were certainly very unpleasant, and the Americans were rather vindictive in 1945 (they also turned large numbers of German pows they had captured in what was then central Germany over to the Soviets, as a gesture of American-Soviet friendship). But there’s no way 1 million German pows starved to death there. The only ones in Germany claiming this are NPD people (i.e. actual neonazis).

    It’s unfortunate that Ron Unz falls for this and some other exaggerated claims since on some topics revisionism would be justified
     
    Well, that's certainly possible---I wasn't there myself, and can't really say for sure. But I found Bacque's evidence and analysis quite persuasive, and the attempted rebuttal by Ambrose et. al. much less so.

    Based on the angry statements by the distinguished international human rights lawyer Alfred de Zayas, anyone in Germany these days who takes that sort of position gets thrown into prison, so I doubt it's subject to much ongoing historical discussion.

    Ambrose called a conference of historians from various countries to discuss Bacque’s charges. They concluded there WAS widespread mistreatment of German POWS after WW II. They went into the reasons why. The European food shortage all over the continent. They also concluded some Americans “acted as brutally as the Nazis.”

    Bacque’s numbers were inflated and a German post-war commission on the subject had accounted for the POWs fate. Still, Ambrose said Bacque deserved thanks for raising the subject.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @utu
    John Sack’s book “An Eye For An Eye"

    Yes, it is a very good book. I liked the parts about Jewish communist perpetrators of horrible crimes who enjoy living in NY, NJ and CA while complaining about anti-Semites in Poland and Russia.

    I always wondered what were the origins of the book, i.e., how John Sack got on the project? Did somebody sponsor him? I suspected that something bad was happening to him but I did not know that he became "non-person." Do you know more about him?

    There is pdf of the book somewhere on line. Perhaps also Ron Unz could make it available.

    There is pdf of the book somewhere on line.

    Le voilà:

    http://www.solargeneral.org/wp-content/uploads/library/eye-for-an-eye-john-sack.pdf

    I always wondered what were the origins of the book, i.e., how John Sack got on the project?

    He talks about this in the preface.

    Once again, I felt that I was confronting something too big for one little three-pound brain, for I was learning that, yes, the Holocaust happened, the Germans killed Jews, but that a second atrocity happened that the Jews who committed it covered up: one where the Jews killed Germans. God knows the Jews were provoked, but I learned that in 1945 they killed a great number of Germans: not Nazis, not Hider’s trigger men, but German civilians, German men, women, children, babies, whose “crime” was just to be Germans. Through the wrath of Jews, however understandable, the Germans lost more civilians than at Dresden, more than, or just as many as, the Japanese at Hiroshima, the Americans at Pearl Harbor, the British in the Battle of Britain, or the Jews themselves in Poland’s occasional pogroms: so I now learned, and I was aghast to learn it. This was no Holocaust of the moral equivalent of the Holocaust, but I knew that if I reported it, I’d be exhibiting, well, call it chutzpah, for I could guess what the world would say, but I felt I’d be doing the righteous thing both as a reporter and as a man who’s a Jew.

    I’m not a Biblical scholar, but I went to Saturday school (I was voted the “most religious”) and I knew that the Torah tells us to bear honest witness, tells us, indeed, that if someone sins and we know it and don’t report it, then we’re guilty too. The men (and the woman, a scholar says) who wrote the Torah didn’t cover up Jewish misdeeds. Even when Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, sinned — God told him to go to Israel, but he went to Egypt instead — the Torah reported it. It reported that Judah, whose name is the source of “Jew,” made love to a harlot, and it reported that Moses, even Moses, trespassed against the Lord, who then didn’t let him into the Promised Land. The people who wrote the Torah (or according to Orthodox Jews, the God who wrote it) believed that we Jews couldn’t proclaim, “Thou shalt not cover,” “Thou shalt not steal,” “Thou shalt not kill,” if we ourselves did it and covered it up, and I, as a Jew doing research in Europe, felt that I must report what the Jewish commandants did if Jews were to keep any moral authority. I suspected that some Jews would ask me, “How could a Jew write this book?” and I knew that my answer must be “No, how could a Jew not write it?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seraphim
    The 'Jewish' people are the descendants of Judah, son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham. So Abraham is the great-grand-father of the 'Jewish' people.
    , @Seraphim
    But was Moses a 'Jew'? He was not from the tribe of Judah, but of the tribe of Levi, who had special religious duties, responsible for the care and maintenance of the tabernacle and later of the temple and were separated from the rest of the tribes. A number of prophets arose from their ranks: Miriam 'the Prophetess' (actually the sister of Moses), Samuel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Malachi, John the Baptist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. JackOH says:
    @Ron Unz

    You get in trouble for Holocaust denial and anything else that looks like denying Nazi crimes or mocking victims of the Nazis.
     
    Well, what do I know---I don't live in Germany. But Alfred de Zayas seems like a highly regarded international figure, and in his Foreword to the 2007 edition of Bacque's second book, he basically said that the laws recently passed in Germany will send you to jail if you question Official Truth, by e.g. arguing that the Americans deliberately starved to death a million POWs or turned all of Germany into a gigantic concentration camp during 1945-50, causing the deaths of maybe 10 million German civilians.

    And on p. 45 and especially p. 134 n. 67 of his second book, Bacque describes how someone who started investigating the apparent site of one of the mass graves of the POWs was threatened with a 250,000 DM fine by the government and ordered to stop. If there aren't any mass graves, why would the German government do that?

    Look, I found Bacque's book quite persuasive, but maybe you won't. If you're correct that nobody in Germany gets thrown into prison on this issue, why not buy and read them, then decide for yourself?

    Ron, I read Bacque’s first book and several of de Zayas’s books. Their motives seem to me pristine, unassailable. Neither has ethnic German skin in the game. Neither was fronting for a faction, an ideology, a lobby, a think tank, a grant proposal. Neither had the Zeitgeist, the weight of post-WWII verbiage, favoring them.

    Both had alternate paths that were immediately available to them. Bacque could have continued with the book he’d planned on writing before he was distracted by stories of unusual cruelty against Germans in American POW/”disarmed enemy forces” camps. De Zayas, a very upmarket guy, had, I think, a corporate law career open to him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Heros says:
    @Lauri Törni
    Such excesses were obviously unfortunate, but wars and liberations often unleash considerable brutality, and these spectacles of public humiliation obviously did not begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of the years of Nazi control.



    .... and this is why all so called 'in-depth' articles regarding WW2 and Germany are extremely biased.

    "Nazi-crimes" don't even begin to compare with the vicious bloodshed of Allied - Soviet Union included.

    Even prominent Jews have arrogantly boasted, that the 'concentration camps' and the 'killed' German Jews perfectly served their purpose. 250.000 German Jews lived in Nazi-Germany, but the international Jewish community kept on increasing the number of 'killed' Jews in Germany up to 6 million.

    When people continue referring to Hitler's "horrid deeds" - in order to justify their own deeds - they 'forgive' their own actions and act as if they never happened and they use the same old scapegoat: Germany and Hitler.

    Mannerheim was a man of honesty and integrity, "The Last European Knight" as the historians call him.

    President Mannerheim's Letter to the Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler, Sept. 2, 1944

    In this hour of hard decisions I am impelled to inform you, that I have arrived at the conviction, that the salvation of my nation makes it my duty to find a means of ending the war.

    The general development of total war, greatly restricts Germany's ability to send us sufficient help at the right time and in the difficult situations, which can be expected.

    It is my sincere belief, however, that Germany wishes to offer us this assistance. But the dispatch of a single German division to Finland requires such a long time, that our resistance against the overwhelming superiority of the enemy might break down before its arrival. I also fully understand, that the situation does not permit a sufficient number of German divisions being kept permanently in readiness in Finland. The experiences of the past summer confirm this.

    The judgment of the war situation, which I have just given, is shared by a growing majority of the representatives of the Finnish people. Even should my opinion be other than it is, it would not be possible for me, having regard to our constitution, to ignore the plainly shown wishes of the majority of the nation.

    When Field-Marshal Keitel recently visited me, he insisted that the people of Greater Germany could doubtless continue the war for another ten years if necessary.

    I replied, that even if one might hope that this be true of a nation of ninety millions, it was equally true, that we Finns were physically incapable of continuing the war. The Russians' great assaults in June exhausted our reserves. We cannot expose ourselves to another such blood-letting, without the whole future of the small Finnish nation being jeopardized.

    I wish especially to emphasize, that Germany will live on, even if fate should not crown your arms with victory.

    Nobody could give such an assurance regarding Finland. If that nation of barely four millions be militarily defeated, there can be little doubt, that it will be driven into exile or exterminated. I cannot expose my people to such a fate.

    Even though I can hardly hope, that my opinions and reasons will be accepted by you, I wish to send you these lines before the hour of decision.

    Our roads will probably soon part, but the memory of our German brothers-in-arms will live on.

    In Finland, the Germans have certainly not been the representatives of a foreign usurper, but helpers and brothers-in-arms, but even though that be the case, the position of foreigners is bound to be a very difficult one.

    I can assure you, that during the past years nothing whatever has happened, which could cause us to regard the German troops as oppressors or invaders.

    The conduct of the German Army in Northern Finland towards the local population and the local authorities will, I think, stand out in our history as an almost unique example of correct and friendly relations in similar conditions.

    I regard it as my duty to lead my people out of the war.

    The arms, which you have generously given us, I will never of my own accord turn against Germans.

    I cherish the hope that, even though you may take exception to my letter, you will share my wish and the wish of all Finns, that the change in our relations may not give rise to animosity.

    Source: The Memoirs of Marshal Mannerheim. Cassell & Co., London, 1953.
    https://histdoc.net/history/1941-1948/mannerheim1944-09-02.html

    ****

    When Germans retreated and took part in the 'pretend-war', i.e. Finns shot in the air and Germans pretendend to flee the Finnish troops, everything was fine.

    Until the Russian troops swooped in and massacred Finns and burned down villages in Northern Finland. Finns were forced to say, that it was the Germans who did it, although it wasn't true.

    I'm sick and tired of sugar-coating and blurring facts, so that they fit in the official narrative.

    Finnish Jews fought beside Germans against Soviet troops. Not one incident of indecent behavior was reported. They got along and they were brothers-in-arms.

    Finnish Jews fought for Finland and they did it voluntarily.

    Finland didn't have a "Jewish question" unlike Germany had. Had Hitler called them by their codename - Communists - things might have been different.

    During the Continuation War Finland was also forced to put up concentration camps, all Finnish communists were put there, because they allied with the aggressor, Soviet Union.

    When Hitler did the same, put Communists (mostly Jews) in concentration camps, so that they could not wage war against Germans and Germany, it enraged the international secret Communist system as well as the international Jewish community. And they turned the international community against Germany - and Finland also, since Finland did not have a Jewish (read: Communist) question.

    To be honest, I am extremely proud of the fact, that Finns shared the defeat of WW2 with Germans!

    Rather a war criminal together with Germany, than a victor together with the Allied. Our conscience is clear.

    But the rest of the countries, who either stood by as spectators or participated with the bullies, they should do some honest soul-searching - instead of continuning with the passé blaming game.

    When the whole world ganged up on tiny Finland, Germany was THE ONLY ONE, who took our side. Like in a school yard, where one big bully beats a small boy and others stand by - on the bully's side - without lifting a finger for the small boy. Then one of the big bullies - Germany - goes to the small boy laying on the ground, promises to fight with him, and also gets beaten.

    I raised my son to ALWAYS go between a fight and ALWAYS take the weaker one's side. NEVER stand by as a passive specator (aka enabler), but to take ACTION.

    All the nations are busy washing their bloody hands - with blood - instead of standing up and admitting their guilt.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDN7zhtCLRM

    “Finnish Jews fought for Finland and they did it voluntarily.

    Finland didn’t have a “Jewish question” unlike Germany had. Had Hitler called them by their codename – Communists – things might have been different.

    During the Continuation War Finland was also forced to put up concentration camps, all Finnish communists were put there, because they allied with the aggressor, Soviet Union.

    When Hitler did the same, put Communists (mostly Jews) in concentration camps, so that they could not wage war against Germans and Germany, it enraged the international secret Communist system as well as the international Jewish community.”

    I think you have identified the problem but have it backwards. Communism is a jewish plot. Zionism is a jewish plot. Oligarchic jewish banksterism is a jewish plot. Feminism and globohomoism are now too, but they came later.

    Jews are perfectly willing to fight among themselves and sacrifice millions of goyim lives in order to achieve hegemony. However, when the Rabbi calls and says that some action is bad for the jews, then all the jews band together. This is illustrated by the degree of violence in jewish no-snitch retribution (Seth Rich). Or in jewish reaction to any accusations approaching blood libel, where an instantaneous jewish nuclear barrage is released on any goyim stupid enough to bring proof this age old, likely continuing, jewish trait into modern times.

    There is also another age old global secret society conspiring against the goyim, known as the craft, or masonry. Masons have sworn oaths to each other and higher powers, and Hitler famously banned them. So all these secret groups, the masons, the zionists, the communists, the jewish banking monopoly were talking to each other in secret for decades. These agreements were made at a level transcending communism or zionism, where all international jews were working for international jewery for the destruction of Christianity and the ethnic genocide of its followers.

    The communism/zionism/judaism confusion can be seen in this thread in the discussion of Hiss and White and the other spies. The narrative may dance around some of the “communists” being jews, but it will never discuss how a jewish run operation in the US developed the bomb using goy resources, then those jews traitorously transferred technology, material, plant, and likely complete war heads clandestinely to jewish scientists in Israel and the USSR. Stalin was receiving nuclear materials, technology, and plant stolen by jews in the US during lend lease long before the war was even over. This wasn’t communists in the US passing war secrets to the USSR, it was jewish people screwing goyim. Trying to discuss the depth and depravity with vocabulary like “communist” while forbidding all mention of jew or Israel is the fruitless exercise that has been going on in the west since the end of the genocide being pawned off as a world war.

    So we have jews and masons and who knows else all communicating secretly and conspiring to fulfill century old agendas directly counter to the interests of the stupid goyim. Those families of the jewish persuasion causing this would love to have us all fighting whether the group we are fighting is Zionist, Masonic, Illuminati, Communist, Capitalist, Anarchist, Orthodox, or Feminist or something else.

    To me it is the jews. I can deal with a jew on a personal basis and judge him by myself alone based on his character, but as a group they will always be jews with the centuries of baggage that comes with it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Druid
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @iffen
    But, but what about the Marshall Plan?

    “But, what about the Marshall Plan?”

    And the Berlin Airlift. BTW I am well aware the Germans were treated harshly after WW II.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Seraphim says:
    @Andrew Gilbert
    Here’s what I don’t get about this piece, Ron. The horrific account of systemic mistreatment of German POWs, a US war crime, is genuinely shocking. I recall reading brief accounts of this is the past, but not that responsibility lay with Eisenhower or that it was a direct result of deliberate US policy. If true, this should temper the story the US tells itself about WW2 as “the Good War” and all the “greatest generation” balderdash. But you conflate this admittedly all-too-terrible account with the tragedy of ethnic cleansing of Germans in the post-war period, which seems like a major misjudgment.

    I haven’t read widely on the subject, but I’ve been familiar with the sad story since I was an undergrad. From what I understand, the vast majority of Germans expelled from their homes lived in territories occupied by the Soviets. Is this incorrect? If not, what should the US have done to prevent it? Why doesn’t responsibility for those deaths fall mainly on Stalin? Maybe the US should have done more to prevent Germans from being victimized, but would the US public have supported a confrontation with the Soviets over the treatment of German civilians? American ignorance about history is surely vast, but I don’t think the ethnic cleansing of Germans is as widely unknown as you state. Rather, I think people under-react to it because there’s the sense that German started the worst war in history and reaped the whirlwind, bringing disaster down on the German people rather than turning Eastern and Central Europe in a 1000 year Reich.

    There was also a sense of vengeance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. Seraphim says:
    @Cleburne

    And it is NOT restricted by genetics. People of any actual ethnicity may embrace it. One way to help see that is to note the extreme move of the Southern Baptist Convention over the past 50 years from being anything but focused on white-washing Israel and serving Jewish interests to Christian Zionism. That move went hand in hand with the SBC positioning itself as the main heir of the old Puritans of colonial America. SBC members with any learning in, say, 1900 knew that in both America and England Anglo-Saxon Puritans murderously persecuted ‘baptists,’ and that Yankee Puritans were responsible for the scorched earth policy of Union armies, as well as for reconstruction, as well as for the utter liberal polluting of all Northern Protestantism.
     
    Jake, I'm in agreement with much of what you've written there. Again, though -- I think you really need to distinguish between the American Puritans and the English. The English Puritans did not "murderously" persecute Baptists and if anything tended toward a sort of universalism. Cromwell's Eastern Association Horse was known as a hotbed of Puritan pluralism, which deeply offended your pals the Celtic Scots.

    The other is the belief in Anglo-Saxon as God’s chosen master race to rule the world, which means that whatever is done to reach that pinnacle is moral, because God’s chosen master race does God’s will.
     
    I don't mean to be completely dismissive of your arguments -- I completely agree that the Yankee has crowned himself as Lord of This World and means to drag the rest of humanity to it, kicking and screaming -- but didn't some version of this appear among the Germans and French as well? And I'm not sure that was the central focus of Cromwell's foreign policy. Did it become the ideological first mover of the New Englanders after the Civil War, assisted by the social gospel and the progressive movement? Indeed it did, but you should really consider the German/Hegelian roots of that whole mess. You jump from 1630 to 1850 with no account for the intervening years, and read 1630 through the shares of 1850. That's just wrong, from the point of view of intellectual history.

    Far as your point about Luther. I'll have to run it down, but didn't Jerome use the Pharisee version of the Old Testament for the Vulgate? I think Margaret Barker discussed this in "Temple Mysticism." I don't see how that makes Luther, who famously did not care for Jews, an early Christian Zionist, who are indeed vile people.

    Also, "judaizing heresy" (to me, and I think to many real scholars) means the adoption of the Jewish law as a pre-requisite for salvation.

    This is precisely what the ‘judaizing heresy’ was. Adoption of Jewish Law is not a pre-requisite of salvation. Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @Ron Unz

    Speaking of pure propaganda, about Harry Dexter White, later revealed to be a Soviet agent. You really need to fall off that hobby horse or it’s going to embarrass you. There is no probative evidence for it at all.
     
    Well, until about a dozen years ago I'm not even sure I'd ever heard of Harry Dexter White. But his name came up here and there, along with the Venona Decrypts that I'd sometimes read about, so maybe around seven years ago, I sat down and read three or four of the Venona books, and found them very, very persuasive, and scrupulous in their scholarly quality. The evidence they provided against White, Alger Hiss, and many dozens of other individuals seemed pretty conclusive to me, proving that they were Soviet agents of various sorts. Obviously, there's no way to be absolutely sure about anything, but I found the Venona evidence very, very persuasive.

    I should also point out that after White and various other apparent Soviet agents came under sharp suspicion and the government planned to prosecute them for perjury and then use the threat of heavy prison time to get them to reveal the rest of their network, they suddenly all died under somewhat mysterious circumstances, as I discussed in my last article. That sort of thing tends to happen to spies who get caught much more frequently than to innocent people.

    The controversy begins with disjunct worldviews, I think. For the Roosevelt administration, White was a New Dealer preoccupied with capitalist failure in the depression and groping for a way to recoup. That is what made him look Bolshy, at least to the right. He also valued the abiding internationalist principle of friendly relations between nations. Dulles’ ultras at the CIA tried to criminalize that (as CIA is trying again now with Trump.)

    But at Bretton Woods White was working for the bankers. Bretton Woods was Wall Street’s attempt to end-run ECOSOC. Russia did, and still does, take more interest in the ECOSOC alternative. One of the very odd things about CIA is, they think you have to spy on diplomacy. The point of diplomacy is you don’t need to skulk around spying on it, you just go and ask the envoys what they think. It’s a very silly example of going around with your hammer looking for nails to pound.

    As for VENONA, there’s a reason why secret evidence used to be frowned upon. It’s often full of craps. Even assuming that it’s not fabricated, nothing in it could have proven White’s guilt in a functioning court of the time. VENONA emerged as secret evidence, corroborating Chambers and Bentley, who had proved unconvincing. White was considered to have vindicated himself when he died. VENONA wasn’t even used to put Hiss away. The cornier, crowd-pleasing pumpkin papers did that. There’s more detail in the comments to the previous Pravda.

    A thousand thanks for cutting a little chink in the Iron Curtain to let the common knowledge of the outside world seep into your country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Heros
    Major Jordan, author of Major Jordans Diaries, a colorful WWI Seargent and WWII Major who was in charge of requisitions for Lend Lease in the early 1940's had this to say about White and Hiss:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83eghJoUguk&t=38m42s

    Executive order l-208 in October 1942 stopped all gold production in the US. According to Jordan, this was instigated by White and Hiss. Because of this action 252 companies sued the US and 9000 goldmines were forced to close.

    What is fascinating is that Major Jordan describes how (((White))) and (((Hiss))) had thousands of tons of gold mining equipment from the mines they had forced to shut down shipped to the USSR during the middle of the war.

    Other things Jordan mentions that were shipped to USSR:
    - Copper wire
    - Vodka
    - Plates for post war Dmarks, over $350m printed by USSR during partition.
    - Tons and tons of copies of secret US patents
    - Even more non-secret US patents
    - Turbines worth $240m in 1943 to replace those blown up by the USSR to prevent them falling into German hands
    - Over 36000 airplanes. He says USSR was ordering Catalinas and junking them just for their motors.
    - Most damming of all, nuclear material and machinery.

    So here we have it: While stupid goyim were dying by the millions, the jews really in charge of the USA (White, Hiss, Morgentau, Brandeis, Frakfurter, Baruch, etc.) were passing war patents, war material, war material manufacturing plant, vodka, who knows what else to the jews in charge of the USSR. Of more importance to judaism, they were passing nuclear material, secrets and patents, the gold mining equipment to create real money, and printing plates for creating unlimited fake money. It is important to note that at this time there was no Israel, so passing it to the USSR would have guaranteed it stayed in jewish hands.

    It is a story almost too incredible to believe. But then we have the ritual sacrifice of 9/11 and most sacred of all, the perverse inverted Holohoax.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. T. Weed says:

    A very readable book is Lothrop Stoddard’s Into the Darkness, his 4 month stay in “Nazi” Germany in 1939-49, during the “phony war”. The “darkness” refers to the nightly blackouts, for fear of English bombs, although that hadn’t started yet. Very informative about life in Germany, among ordinary folk and leaders, even an interview with Hitler. Stoddard (Harvard educated) spoke German and was well-traveled. This book was seen by those agitating for war with Germany as “sympathetic to the Nazis”, and Stoddard’s reputation suffered accordingly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  190. Seraphim says:
    @for-the-record
    There is pdf of the book somewhere on line.

    Le voilà:

    http://www.solargeneral.org/wp-content/uploads/library/eye-for-an-eye-john-sack.pdf


    I always wondered what were the origins of the book, i.e., how John Sack got on the project?

    He talks about this in the preface.

    Once again, I felt that I was confronting something too big for one little three-pound brain, for I was learning that, yes, the Holocaust happened, the Germans killed Jews, but that a second atrocity happened that the Jews who committed it covered up: one where the Jews killed Germans. God knows the Jews were provoked, but I learned that in 1945 they killed a great number of Germans: not Nazis, not Hider's trigger men, but German civilians, German men, women, children, babies, whose "crime" was just to be Germans. Through the wrath of Jews, however understandable, the Germans lost more civilians than at Dresden, more than, or just as many as, the Japanese at Hiroshima, the Americans at Pearl Harbor, the British in the Battle of Britain, or the Jews themselves in Poland's occasional pogroms: so I now learned, and I was aghast to learn it. This was no Holocaust of the moral equivalent of the Holocaust, but I knew that if I reported it, I’d be exhibiting, well, call it chutzpah, for I could guess what the world would say, but I felt I’d be doing the righteous thing both as a reporter and as a man who's a Jew.

    I'm not a Biblical scholar, but I went to Saturday school (I was voted the “most religious") and I knew that the Torah tells us to bear honest witness, tells us, indeed, that if someone sins and we know it and don’t report it, then we're guilty too. The men (and the woman, a scholar says) who wrote the Torah didn’t cover up Jewish misdeeds. Even when Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, sinned — God told him to go to Israel, but he went to Egypt instead — the Torah reported it. It reported that Judah, whose name is the source of "Jew," made love to a harlot, and it reported that Moses, even Moses, trespassed against the Lord, who then didn't let him into the Promised Land. The people who wrote the Torah (or according to Orthodox Jews, the God who wrote it) believed that we Jews couldn’t proclaim, "Thou shalt not cover," "Thou shalt not steal," "Thou shalt not kill," if we ourselves did it and covered it up, and I, as a Jew doing research in Europe, felt that I must report what the Jewish commandants did if Jews were to keep any moral authority. I suspected that some Jews would ask me, "How could a Jew write this book?" and I knew that my answer must be "No, how could a Jew not write it?"
     

    The ‘Jewish’ people are the descendants of Judah, son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham. So Abraham is the great-grand-father of the ‘Jewish’ people.</