Scrapbookpages Blog

October 23, 2014

Was General Patton an anti-Semite? Yes, “the worst, Jerry, the worst”

Filed under: Buchenwald, Holocaust, World War II — furtherglory @ 9:51 am

On my previous post about Bill O’Reilly’s latest book, entitled Killing Patton, I included a photo of the Jewish survivors of Buchenwald attending a religious service. I have pulled that photo out, and placed it on my new post today, instead.

Jewish prisoners a Buchenwald attend a religious service after the camp was liberated

Jewish prisoners at Buchenwald attend a religious service after the camp was liberated

The following quote from this website explains that General Patton was highly critical of the Jews at this religious service:

Patton’s initial impressions of the Jews were not improved when he attended a Jewish religious service at Eisenhower’s insistence. His diary entry for September 17, 1945, reads in part:

“This happened to be the feast of Yom Kippur, so they were all collected in a large, wooden building, which they called a synagogue. It behooved General Eisenhower to make a speech to them. We entered the synagogue, which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. When we got about halfway up, the head rabbi, who was dressed in a fur hat similar to that worn by Henry VIII of England and in a surplice heavily embroidered and very filthy, came down and met the General . . . The smell was so terrible that I almost fainted and actually about three hours later lost my lunch as the result of remembering it.”

These experiences and a great many others firmly convinced Patton that the Jews were an especially unsavory variety of creature and hardly deserving of all the official concern the American government was bestowing on them.

This incident proves that General Patton was an anti-Semite, the worst thing that a person can be:  “the worst, Jerry, the worst.”

Bill O’Reilly’s new book has been condemned by the Jews because it does not point out that General Patton was an anti-Semite.  This review of the book makes it perfectly clear that O’Reilly, who is Catholic, committed a mortal sin by not writing that Patton was a rabid anti-Semite.

This quote from this website confirms that General Patton was definitely an anti-Semite:

Most of the Jews swarming over Germany immediately after the war came from Poland and Russia, and Patton found their personal habits shockingly uncivilized.

He was disgusted by their behavior in the camps for Displaced Persons (DP’s) which the Americans built for them and even more disgusted by the way they behaved when they were housed in German hospitals and private homes. He observed with horror that “these people do not understand toilets and refuse to use them except as repositories for tin cans, garbage, and refuse . . . They decline, where practicable, to use latrines, preferring to relieve themselves on the floor.”

He described in his diary one DP camp,

“where, although room existed, the Jews were crowded together to an appalling extent, and in practically every room there was a pile of garbage in one corner which was also used as a latrine. The Jews were only forced to desist from their nastiness and clean up the mess by the threat of the butt ends of rifles. Of course, I know the expression ‘lost tribes of Israel’ applied to the tribes which disappeared — not to the tribe of Judah from which the current sons of bitches are descended. However, it is my personal opinion that this too is a lost tribe — lost to all decency.”

When I was a child, my family lived next door to a black family, named Patton.  I was always curious about how they had gotten the name Patton.  Did the family of General Patton have slaves?  It’s possible.

On the personal website of Patton at http://www.generalpatton.com I found this quote:

[Patton’s] ancestors had fought in the Revolutionary War, the Mexican War and the Civil War, and he grew up listening to stories of their brave and successful endeavors. He attended the Virginia Military Institute for one year and went on to graduate from the United States Military Academy at West Point on June 11, 1909. He was then commissioned a Second Lieutenant in the 15th cavalry Regiment.

One thing that Bill O’Reilly’s book Killing Patton did not point out is that General Patton was an upper class person, from way back, and this could have caused him to be critical of the behavior of the Jews in the DP camps.

 

 

October 21, 2014

Update on my comments about Bill O’Reilly’s latest book, Killing Patton

Filed under: Buchenwald, Germany, World War II — Tags: , , , , — furtherglory @ 1:34 pm

I have almost finished reading Bill O’Reilly’s new book, entitled Killing Patton.  I previously blogged here about my complaints regarding the book.  I was quite critical in my original post.  After reading the book more thoroughly, I can now understand why there are so many good reviews of the book.

One of the best parts of the book centers around the story of General Anthony McAuliffe saying “Nuts” to the Germans who wanted him to surrender during the fighting around Bastogne.  In the book, there is a photo of General Patton conferring with General McAuliffe.  This was America’s finest hour.

On page 47 in the book Killing Patton, the famous slapping incident is mentioned, although it is not pointed out that the slapped soldier, whose name was Pvt. Charles H. Kuhl, was Jewish. According to the book: “Patton thinks nothing of it. […] In the German army, such men are not slapped. They are forced to their knees and a bullet is shot through their brain.”

Many people believe that Patton was killed by Jews, as revenge for the slapping of a Jewish soldier. You can read about the claim that Patton was killed by Jews on this website: http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=594

Many people who are reading this book, will remember the famous movie about Patton, which begins with Patton making a speech on a stage.  This quote is from this website:  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066206/trivia

In reality, George S. Patton slapped and berated two soldiers in Sicily: Private Charles Kuhl on August 3, 1943 and Private Paul Bennett on August 10. Although it has been suggested Patton was sleep deprived, he wrote an entry in his diary after slapping Kuhl, unrepentant in his actions or opinion that Kuhl was a coward. Patton was ordered by Supreme Commander Eisenhower to apologize privately to the soldiers and hospital staff present. Also, in reality the slapping incidents were kept secret from the public for months before the story was broken by reporter Drew Pearson, causing scandal not only for Patton’s conduct, but accusations of cover-up on the part of the Army.

On page 97 of Killing Patton, we read this startling information: “[Joachim Peiper] was an eye-witness to the first gassing of Jewish civilians, including women and children.”  Unfortunately, the location of the first gassing of Jewish civilians is not mentioned in the book.  I checked with Wikipedia and learned this: “In January 1941, Peiper accompanied Himmler when he inspected Ravensbrück and Dachau concentration camps.[27] In March 1941, together with Karl Wolff and Fritz Bracht, they visited Auschwitz.[28].

According to many Holocaust historians, the first gassing of the Jews took place at the Chelmno camp: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005194

Now, one of my biggest complaints, about O’Reilly’s book, is about the footnotes.  There is a lot of important information in the footnotes, but you cannot find some of this information by looking through the index.

For example, in my original post about the book,  I said that the word Gleiwitz was not in the index.  However, the word Gleiwitz is mentioned on page 180 in a footnote. Why is this important?  Gleiwitz was one of the places to which the Auschwitz prisoners were marched, so that they could be put on trains and taken to camps such as Dachau and Buchenwald.

On page 186 in the book, there is some information about the Germans working on an atomic bomb near the Ohrdruf sub-camp of Buchenwald.  This information is too important to be put into a footnote.

On page 243 in the book, we find this: “Hitler had once dreamed of establishing Berlin as the world’s most cosmopolitan city, even though its citizens have long considered him to be an unsophtisticate bore.  […] To spite its inhabitants, Hitler had planned to rename the city Germania during the postwar rebuilding, thus wiping Berlin off the map forever.”

I wrote a much different story about Germania on this page of my website:  http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Sachsenhausen/ConcentrationCamp/BrickFactory.html

I don’t like the fact that footnotes were used in the book to give important information, and then not included in the index.  For example, there is a footnote on page 252, which includes this information: “An estimated eighty thousand Russians died in the battle of Berlin.  […] …it is estimated that between eighty thousand and one hundred citizens of Berlin were killed.”

In the book, there is way too much attention on the subject of Auschwitz. There are two whole chapters on this subject.  Chapter 15 is about a “German SS guard named Frank Wunsch” who falls in love with a Jewish woman, who is a prisoner in the camp. How is this remotely related to the story of killing Patton?

On page 177 in O’Reilly’s new book, it is mentioned that there were 3 dozen (36) watch towers at Auschwitz?  Could we see a photo of the watch towers please?

I blogged about the watch towers at Auschwitz, which were not there until after the camp was liberated:  https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/new-book-of-photos-shows-auschwitz-then-and-now/

It might have made sense if there were two chapters in the book, telling about the Dachau concentration camp, instead of two chapters about Auschwitz.

At the proceedings against the Waffen-SS soldiers, who were accused of the Malmedy Massacre during the Battle of the Bulge, which were held in a building inside the former SS training camp at Dachau, any mention by the defense that American soldiers had killed German POWs, was ordered stricken from the record by the judges of the American Military Tribunal.  This information is more important than the fact that an SS soldier at Auschwitz fell in love with a Jewish girl.

After the Dachau camp was voluntarily surrendered to American soldiers under a white flag of truce, SS soldiers in the training camp next door to the concentration camp were lined up and shot by the Americans.  When these American soldiers were Court Martialed, General Patton tore up the papers and burned them in his waste basket.

Instead of two chapters on Auschwitz, which have absolutely nothing to do with General Patton, O’Reilly could have included a chapter on Buchenwald, which was one of the camps that Patton visited.  I wrote about Patton’s visit to Buchenwald on April 15, 1945, four days after the camp had been liberated : http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Buchenwald/Liberation8.html

Liberated Jews at Buchenwald relieved themselves on the ground

Liberated Jews at Buchenwald relieved themselves on the ground

After the Buchenwald prisoners were liberated, they were moved from the prisoner’s barracks to the nicer SS barracks, next door to the concentration camp. General Patton was appalled when he saw the Jews relieving themselves on the ground outside the SS barracks.  Is this what caused Patton to turn against the Jews?

Robert Abzug wrote about the reaction of the American liberators to the prisoners:

The following quote is from Abzug’s book entitled Inside the Vicious Heart:

Despite what they knew about what their wards had undergone, some Americans never ceased to wonder why, even after food had been made readily abundant, the survivors pushed and shoved their way to the soup kettle or bread basket. Others were appalled to find some indifferent to nudity and personal cleanliness. Nor was it readily understood why many were slow to volunteer for work, even though it might help the condition of the camp.

Prisoner at Buchenwald who was indifferent to nudity

Prisoner at the Buchenwald concentration camp,  who was indifferent to nudity

This quote is from my website page about Patton at Buchenwald:

In his book, General Patton wrote with great insensitivity that “The inmates looked like feebly animated mummies and seemed to be of the same level of intelligence.”

Harry Peters, a Jewish soldier from Chicago, who was with Patton’s Third Army, told his nephew, Phil Cohen, that “Patton was more concerned with saving the Lipizanner Horses in Austria than the Jews left in the camp.” According to Cohen, “Patton had to be ordered to go to the concentration camps because he considered the horses more valuable.” Cohen wrote in an e-mail to me that his uncle, Harry Peters, had told him that “Patton admired the SS because he said they were the real fighting men. When they caught an SS, they were ordered to place them in separate camps as Patton wanted to train them to fight the Russians.” Because he spoke Yiddish, Peters was assigned to interview the Buchenwald survivors about war crimes committed in the camp. Peters lived for only 6 years after the war and had nightmares about the Buchenwald camp each night, according to his nephew, Phil Cohen.

Other critics of the book complain about the fact that O’Reilly did not mention that Patton was anti-Semitic.  For example, this review:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-patton-antisemitism-ignored-1002-20141001-story.html

This quote is from the website, cited above:

It’s fortunate that Bill O’Reilly’s latest book, “Killing Patton,” was written by him and not someone else. If not, O’Reilly would have taken the poor person apart, criticizing the book for its chaotic structure, its considerable padding and its repellent admiration of a war-loving martinet who fought the Nazis and really never understood why.

George S. Patton stood almost shoulder to shoulder with them in his anti-Semitism — not that O’Reilly seems to have noticed or, for that matter, mentioned it in his book.

In his book, O’Reilly mentioned Miklós Horthy on page 324.  He mentioned that Horthy was freed on May 5, 1945.  Everyone knows that Dachau was liberated on April 29, 1945.  So why was Horthy not freed until May 5th?  Horthy was one of the prominent Dachau prisoners who were taken to the South Tyrol, for their own safety before the camp was liberated. You can read the whole story on Wikipedia here.

At the very end of the book, sources for the book are given, including the Topography of Terror Museum in Berlin.  I never got to see this museum because it was not opened until May 2010.  I did take a photo of the future location of the Museum, which is shown below.

The location of the future Topography of Terror Museum

The location of the future Topography of Terror Museum

The photo above shows the site of the former Gestapo building, which is now the location of the Topography of Terror exhibit. The building in the background is Goering’s Luftfahrtministerium. On the left side, in the background, notice the mound of grass-covered rubble left by the bombing of Berlin in World War II.

The visit to the Topography of Terror museum might be the source of all the incorrect information on Auschwitz, which is included in the book.

On page 256 of the book, O’Reilly describes the death of Eva Braun, who killed herself in Hitler’s Berlin bunker. O’Reilly can’t help himself:  he has to bring in the Nazi gas chambers one more time.  He wrote this about Eva Braun’s death: “Sadly, it is a death far quicker than that suffered by millions of Jews her new husband sent to the gas chambers.”

Could we have some proof of the existence of gas chambers in the Nazi camps, please?  This is a book about Patton, entitled “Killing Patton” but it should be entitled “Killing Jews”.

P.S.  Before I started watching Bill O’Reilly on his show called “The Factor,” I was watching him on a TV show called “Inside Edition,” which was on from 1989 to 1995.  The first episode of the Seinfeld show was on July 5, 1989.  I saw this first episode because it followed the Inside Edition show. I immediately became a fan of the Seinfeld show, and I still watch re-runs of the show.  I have also been a fan of Bill O’Reilly since 1989.  I’m sorry to be so critical of his latest book.

 

October 15, 2014

My comments on Bill O’Reilly’s book “Killing Patton”

I am not using the word “review” in my blog post about Bill O’Reilly’s latest book, which is entitled Killing Patton, because this is not a review, but rather a complaint. I am a big fan of Bill O’Reilly’s TV show; I have watched the show faithfully every night, since the show started many year ago. I previously blogged about Bill O’Reilly at https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2011/01/26/keith-olbermann-vs-bill-oreilly-on-the-malmedy-massacre/

I was very disappointed in O’Reilly’s book, which has gotten mostly good reviews, as far as I know. However, one review, which you can read at http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/02/historians-rip-oreillys-new-patton-book/200986 claims that Patton was not killed by the Soviets, but died from his injuries in a vehicle accident.

I received my copy of the book last night, delivered to my front door by UPS, at around 5 p.m., a day early.  I eagerly tore open the box and started thumbing through the book, looking for the most interesting parts.  The book starts off with the details of Patton’s death, which I already know.  I skipped over to Chapter 14 which is about Auschwitz.

Why is there a detailed section about Auschwitz in a book about General Patton?  Did Patton ever go to visit any of the three Auschwitz camps?  Not that I know of.  The only camps that Patton ever visited were Buchenwald and Ohrdruf, a sub-camp of Buchenwald.

I wrote about Patton’s visit to Ohrdruf  on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/general-dwight-d-eisenhower-the-things-i-saw-beggar-description/

On the blog post, cited above, I wrote that the reason that Eisenhower went to visit the Ohrdruf camp, and no other, is because there were rumors that the Germans had tested an atomic bomb near the camp.  The testing of an atomic bomb near Ohrdruf was only briefly mentioned in O’Reilly’s new book.

In the book Killing Patton, the section about Auschwitz is very large, too large for a book about Patton, who had absolutely nothing to do with Auschwitz. I know that O’Reilly is not Jewish, but what about Martin Dugard?  I had to do an extensive search on him before I decided that he is also not Jewish.  So why the huge, detailed section about Auschwitz? The Holocaust and Auschwitz are covered in 20 pages in two chapters, yet important information is left out.

The part about Auschwitz starts on page 173 with these words:

January 26, 1945, 1 a.m.

The earth convulses as Krema V explodes.

How many of O’Reilly’s readers will know what Krema V was? Krema is the German word for crematorium. How many of O’Reilly’s readers will know that Krema V was one of the two above-ground crematorium buildings at Auschwitz-Birkenau which had shower rooms that were allegedly gas chambers in disguise?  Holocaust deniers claim that Krema V was a crematorium which had shower rooms for the prisoners, not gas chambers.

The alleged gassing of the Jews in Krema V had stopped in October 1944, and the prisoners had been marched out of the camp on January 18, 1945.  Yet someone was blowing up Krema V on January 26, the day before the Soviet soldiers arrived to liberate those prisoners who had stayed behind.  According to the book Killing Patton, the prisoners were not marched out of the camp until January 26, the day before the Soviets arrived.

The first words in Chapter 14, about Auschwitz-Birkenau, continue with this quote:

Tongues of flame turn the coal-black winter sky bright red. Nazi guards watch the inferno intently, but only for a long as it takes to know that the destruction is complete, and there will be no need to place another round of dynamite charges.  The grisly evidence is now destroyed.

This implies that the SS men at Auschwitz waited, until 8 days after the prisoners had marched out of the camp, to blow up the evidence of gassing.  Isn’t that just like the German people?  Never planning in advance, but instead, waiting until the last minute to do something that was so important.

Ruins of Krema V at Auchwitz-Birkenau

Ruins of Krema V at Auschwitz-Birkenau

Krema IV at Auschwitz was similar in design to Krema V

Krema IV at Auschwitz was similar in design to Krema V

Before starting to read the book, I went to Amazon.com and read some of the 721 reviews of the book.

I used the Find feature to find out what the readers had said about “Auschwitz.” Not one of the 721 reviews had mentioned the word Auschwitz.

I skimmed through the text to find the word Gleiwitz. Prisoners from the Auschwitz III (Monowitz) camp were marched toward Gleiwitz, but Gleiwitz was not mentioned in the text of O’Reilly’s book. Prisoners from Auschwitz-Birkenau were marched towards Wodzislaw, which is also not mentioned in the book.

This quote is from my own website:

On January 18, 1945, the three Auschwitz camps, called Auschwitz I, II and III, and the 40 satellite camps were abandoned by the Germans. The gassing of the Jews at Auschwitz II, also known as Birkenau, had stopped at the end of October 1944. The evacuation of the Birkenau survivors to other concentration camps in the West had already begun in early October. Anne Frank and her sister Margo were on one of the first transports out of Auschwitz, which took them to Bergen-Belsen, where they both died of typhus. Aerial photos taken by the Allies showed that the roofs of crematoria buildings Krema II and Krema III at Birkenau had been removed in November 1944, so that the cremation ovens could be removed by cranes. […]

According to Danuta Czech, who wrote a book entitled Auschwitz Kalendarium, the total count from the last roll call on January 17, 1945 was 67,012 prisoners in all three Auschwitz camps.

According to Otto Frank, the father of Anne Frank, the prisoners were given a choice between staying in the camps until the Soviet troops arrived or going on a 50-kilometer fast hike through two feet of snow to the border of the old German Reich where they would be put on trains and taken to camps in Germany. This was a “death march” with those who couldn’t keep up being shot and left alongside the road, including SS guards, according to a survivor. Those who were too young, too old or too sick to march were left behind. The VIP prisoners, a group of famous scientists and intellectuals, were also left behind.

Elie Wiesel, the most famous survivor of the Holocaust, was in a hospital at Monowitz, recovering from an operation on his foot, when he chose to join the march out of the camp, and eventually ended up at the Buchenwald camp.

In his book entitled Night, Elie Wiesel wrote the following regarding his decision to join the Germans on the march out of Auschwitz:

Begin quote:  The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him (his father) entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. “Well, what shall we do, father?” He was silent. “Let’s be evacuated with the others,” I told him.  End quote

Around 60,000 prisoners chose to go with the Germans and many of them didn’t survive the march. Those who couldn’t keep up were shot and their bodies were left in the snow. Many more died on the trains taking them to Dachau, Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen or Mauthausen. Otto Frank chose to stay in the camp and he survived.

There were 611 children in the Birkenau camp who stayed behind when the camp was evacuated on January 18, 1945. According to Danuta Czech, the evacuation began in the early morning hours when 500 women with children were escorted out of the camp by SS guards. They reached Wodzislaw on January 21st. The men arrived the next day and all were loaded onto open box cars and taken to Germany.

The prisoners at Monowitz and all the prisoners in the sub-camps marched to the four concentration camps at Gleiwitz near the German border, arriving on January 21st. They were then taken on trains to Buchenwald, Dachau, Sachsenhausen or Mauthausen.

There were 4,428 women and girls and 169 boys who stayed behind. Around 2,000 prisoners were left behind in the men’s camp at Birkenau; there were around 1250 men in the main camp who did not join the march out of the camp and 850 who chose to stay behind at Monowitz.

This quote from Killing Patton is on page 173:

The [Auschwitz-Birkenau] prisoners are ordered to march. Their destination is unclear, but the road soon takes them past the train station [in the town of Auschwitz] where they first entered this hellhole, and then on to the commandant’s lavish house.  They are leaving Birkenau, though they know not why.

Wait a minute! The prisoners don’t know why they are leaving Auschwitz?  The Soviet liberators were on their way, but the prisoners have not been told this?  They have not been told that they have a choice: they can join the march out of the camp, or stay put until the Soviet soldiers arrive.

Why were the prisoners being taken to the Commandant’s “lavish house” which was located just outside the Auschwitz I main camp? Did the Commandant want to wave goodbye to them? No, Commandant Rudolf Hoess was at Birkenau, organizing the march out of the camp.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the Commandant’s lavish house would have been seen by the marching prisoners BEFORE they saw the train station, which was farther away from the Birkenau camp.

The photo below shows the “lavish house” where Commandant Hoess lived with his family, just outside the main Auschwitz camp.

hoesshouse01

This quote from Killing Patton indicates that the prisoners were marched from the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp to the main camp, aka Auschwitz I:

Now, as the SS men prod the prisoners through the snow, moving them to another section […] those child prisoners unwilling or unable to walk the mile from the Birkenau section of the camp to the main camp are immediately shot dead.

Actually, it was more than a mile from the Birkenau camp to the main camp, but this is only a minor error. The important point is that child prisoners were allegedly shot if they couldn’t walk to the main camp.  Why did they have to walk to the main camp? The way I heard it, the prisoners marched out of the Birkenau camp to the German border where they were put on trains and taken to camps in Germany.  German soldiers led the way, tramping down the snow for the women and children.  Many survivors mention the fact that German soldiers were leading the way, and that there was a sag wagon for the women and children to ride for awhile if they became too tired to walk.

On the next page of the book, there is a photo which has the caption: “The entrance to Auschwitz.”

Photo of the alleged entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau

Photo of the alleged entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau

Survivors leaving the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp after being liberated

Survivors leaving the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp after being liberated

Compare the two photos above.  The first photo, which is shown in O’Reilly’s book, has the pedestrian gate on the right hand side, but the photo of the prisoners leaving the camp shows the pedestrian gate on the left hand side.  This is because the first photo does NOT show the ENTRANCE into the Birkenau camp, but rather the INSIDE of the camp.   This mistake is frequently made, but O’Reilly should have had some fact checkers reviewing the book before it was published.

My 2005 photo of the entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau

My 2005 photo of the entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau shows the pedestrian gate on the left side

I wrote about the location of the Commandant’s house, just outside the main Auschwitz camp, on  this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/the-grandson-of-rudolf-hoess-is-still-bothered-by-the-shame-associated-with-his-family-name/

Moving right along to page 175, we find this quote from O’Reilly’s book:

But even now, when their thoughts are filled with plans to escape, the SS cannot stop themselves from killing.  It has become a way of life for them over the past few years, as routine as eating breakfast. They have shot thousands by lining them up against the notorious “Black Wall,” as the firing squad barrier next to the medical experiments building is known.

Do the authors of this book think that no one will bother to look up the term “Black Wall” on the Internet?  If anyone does a search on the “Black Wall” they might find this quote from this page of  my website http://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScrapbook/Tour/Auschwitz1/Auschwitz05.html

It was in front of this black wall that political prisoners, mostly Polish resistance fighters, who had been convicted by the Gestapo Summary Court, were executed. These prisoners were brought to the Auschwitz I camp, but were not registered as inmates; they were housed in dormitory rooms on the first and second floors of Block 11 while they awaited trial in a courtroom set up in the building. After they were convicted, the prisoners were taken to a small washroom in the building where they were ordered to strip naked, after which they were marched to the wall in groups of three and executed with one shot to the neck at close range. Some of the prisoners, who were sent here, were Czech resistance fighters from the Gestapo prison at the Small Fortress in Theresienstadt.

A photo of a painting of the “Black Wall” is shown below.

The "Black Wall" at the Auschwitz main camp where convicted crimals were execute after a trial

The “Black Wall” at the Auschwitz main camp where convicted criminals were execute after a trial

On page 208 of the book, we find the photo below.

Photo of General Patton on page 208 of O'Reilly's book.

Photo of Patton on page 208 of O’Reilly’s book.

I have the same photo on my website at http://www.scrapbookpages.com/EasternGermany/Buchenwald/GeneralPatton.html

I purchased an original copy of this photo in an antique shop several years ago. The un-cropped photo was in a frame that was 11 by 14 inches. The photo included more of the picture, which is not shown in my photo, nor in the cropped version in O’Reilly’s book.

I took the photo, which I had purchased, to a photo shop, where I had it reprinted in a sepia tone, and cropped to show only the important part. I can tell you that the original photo was not taken at close range, but from a distance.  The photo that O’Reilly used has also been cropped.

The version of the photo, in O’Reilly’s book, has no photo credit, but the same cropped photo, that he used in the book, is advertised for sale on e-bay for $2,500.  There might be a problem here, since O’Reilly did not give a photo credit.

O.K., that’s it for me.  I have been totaled out.

Page 175 goes on to tell about Eva Moses and her twin sister, who stayed behind when the prisoners were marched out.  Be sure to read the footnote on page 175 which tells about Dr. Mengele sewing together two twins back to back to create Siamese twins.

I wrote about Dr. Mengele and the Siamese twins experiment on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/dr-josef-mengele-dont-it-make-my-brown-eyes-blue/

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 11, 2014

General Patton and his attitude toward the Jews

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , , — furtherglory @ 3:21 pm

Today, I did a google search on “Why do so many people hate the Jews?” and I found this article in the search results: http://listovative.com/top-10-major-reasons-why-people-hate-jews/

The title of the article is Top Ten Reasons Why People Hate Jews?

Number 10 in the list of Top Ten Reasons, which is shown first, is Racial Cleansing. It is not clear to me whether Jews are hated because the Jews cleanse other races, or whether the Jews are cleansed because other people hate the Jews.

Underneath the headline “Racial Cleansing” is the photo below. (Click on the photo to see it in a larger size)

Bodies of prisoners who died at Ohrdruf

Men from the town of Ohrdruf were forced to view the bodies of prisoners who had died from typhus

I recognized the photo above because I have the same photo on this page of my website scrapbookpages.com:   http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Ohrdruf/Ohrdruf01.html

The photo shows German civilians being forced to view the dead bodies of prisoners, who had died at the Ohrdruf sub-camp of Buchenwald during the last days of World War II.  The photo does NOT show the bodies of Jews who were “racially cleansed” because of hatred of the Jews.

These are the bodies of prisoners who had died of typhus and other natural causes, not the bodies of Jews who had been “racially cleansed.”  To me, this is a new low in the misuse of photos.

German civilians in the town of Ohrdruf were forced to view dead bodies in the barracks at Ohrdruf

German civilians in the town of Ohrdruf were forced to view dead bodies in the barracks at Ohrdruf

Regarding the Ohrdruf-Nord labor camp, which was a sub-camp of Buchenwald, General Patton wrote the following in his diary:

“It was the most appalling sight imaginable. In a shed . . . was a pile of about 40 completely naked human bodies in the last stages of emaciation. These bodies were lightly sprinkled with lime, not for the purposes of destroying them, but for the purpose of removing the stench.

When the shed was full–I presume its capacity to be about 200, the bodies were taken to a pit a mile from the camp where they were buried. The inmates claimed that 3,000 men, who had been either shot in the head or who had died of starvation, had been so buried since the 1st of January.”

Dead bodies in a shed at Ohrdruf labor camp

Dead bodies in a shed at Ohrdruf labor camp

A typhus epidemic had started in Germany in December 1944 and had quickly spread to all the camps as prisoners were transferred from one camp to another. Half of all the prisoners, who died in the German camps, died between December 1944 and the end of June 1945. Yet the survivors of Ohrdruf claimed that all the bodies found at the camp were those of prisoners who had been deliberately killed or starved to death.

General Eisenhower and General Patton view bodies at Ohrdruf

General Eisenhower and General Patton view bodies at Ohrdruf, which were deliberately left out for weeks

It would be hard to find a German town, however small or obscure, that is completely lacking in historic or cultural importance. After describing the crimes of the Germans in his autobiography, General Patton went on to tell about how the Americans wantonly destroyed every village and hamlet in their path.

On the same page of his book, in which he describes the atrocities of the Germans, Patton wrote the following:

“We developed later a system known as the ‘Third Army War Memorial Project’ by which we always fired a few salvos into every town we approached, before even asking for surrender. The object of this was to let the inhabitants have something to show to future generations of Germans by way of proof that the Third Army had passed that way.”

The photo below shows General Eisenhower and General Patton viewing the gallows at Ohrdruf after the camp had been abandoned by the Germans.

General Eisenhower and General Patton at Ohrdruf

General Eisenhower and General Patton at Ohrdruf

In the photo above, the man on the far left, wearing a jacket and a scarf, is one of the survivors who served as a guide for General Eisenhower and his entourage. The next day the guide was “killed by some of the inmates,” General Patton wrote in his memoirs, explaining that the guide “was not a prisoner at all, but one of the executioners.”

A. C. Boyd, a soldier in the 89th Infantry Division was at Ohrdruf on the day that this man was killed. In a news article in The Gadsden Times, Jimmy Smothers wrote the following:

Boyd said he saw a Nazi guard, who had not fled with the others, trying to exit the camp. One of the prisoners, who still had a little strength, ran to a truck, got a tire iron and killed him.

“I witnessed that and saw that no one tried to stop him,” Boyd said.

In a letter dated April 15, 1945, addressed to Ike (General Dwight D. Eisenhower), Patton wrote the following regarding the man who had served as their guide at Ohrdruf:

“It may interest you to know that the very talkative, alleged former member of the murder camp was recognized by a Russian prisoner as a former guard. The prisoner beat his brains out with a rock.”

This prisoner was probably one of the Kapos in the camp whose job it had been to assist the German guards; it is doubtful that an SS soldier would have remained behind when the camp was evacuated, knowing that the prisoners would exact revenge as soon as the Americans arrived.

Note that General Patton referred to Ohrdruf as a “murder camp” in his letter. It is clear from Patton’s letters and his memoir that he did not have a clear understanding of the purpose of the concentration camps and labor camps because he believed everything that the prisoners had told him.

I wrote about General Patton’s visit to the Buchenwald main camp on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/the-myth-that-general-eisenhower-ordered-german-civilians-to-visit-buchenwald/

The First World War for Oil 1914-1918: Similarities with the 2014 Oil Wars 100 Years Later

Filed under: Germany, World War II — furtherglory @ 8:17 am

furtherglory:

Today, I am reblogging this excellent article. The article is quite long, so for those who don’t have the patience to read it to the end, here is a quote from near the end:

Begin quote:

As you can see on the map, if Hitler had won in Stalingrad, he would have marched to Baku, and he would have secured oil reserves for his army. Today we can easily go to a gas station and get fuels, so it is difficult to imagine that an army can actually run out of fuel. And yet it was very often the case for whole army divisions to run out of fuels in the Great Wars. And it was the allies that were controlling both the Caspian and the Middle East oil.

If Hitler had taken control of Baku, he would have oil supplies to launch a Panzer attack to the Middle East. And if he had won the English in the Middle East, the war in Europe and North Africa would be over. This is the reason that the battle of Stalingrad is considered as one of the most decisive battles of WWII.

It seems strange that Hitler turned against Stalin and the Soviet Union, his former ally in 1941, since until then it was the Communists who were supplying the Germans with the oil and minerals they badly needed. As you can read in section “Later Events and Total Trade”, of the following Wikipedia link, the Communists supplied the Nazis with 900.000 tons of oil in the period 1940-1941, that is before the Nazi attack on Russia.

[…]

Today, 100 years after the First World War for oil in 1914, we see the oil and natural gas wars in Syria and Iraq, in Ukraine and in Libya, and we can assume that nothing has changed. The wars in Libya, Ukraine, Iraq and Syria, are the first flames of the Third World War for oil, and of course everybody hopes that these first flames will not become a big fire like it happened in the previous World Wars for oil. However since the current wars take place in three continents, i.e. Ukraine in Europe, Iraq and Syria in Asia, and Libya in Africa, we can assume that we are already in a mini World War for oil.

End Quote

Originally posted on iakovos alhadeff:

Note: The document is very long and you are advised to download a pdf, mobi or epub version from Smashwords at the following address:

https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/483774

However if you decide to read the document for WordPress, note that you can click on the maps to make them larger.

Iakovos Alhadeff

Introduction

With this essay I want to provide a summary of why oil was the main cause of the First World War (1914-1918), which could be also called the First World War for oil, and also compare this oil war with the oil wars of 2014 one hundred years later. The main alliances of WW1 were England, France and Russia on one side, known as the ‘allies’, and Germany, Austro-Hungary and Italy on the other side, known as the “central powers”. See the following, very rough, map.

Picture 1 Alliances

The British and German Empires

At the beginning of the 20th century (1900)…

View original 6,654 more words

October 10, 2014

Why do people deny the Holocaust, the most documented event in the history of the world?

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , , — furtherglory @ 10:13 am

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC has a website, which has a page on Holocaust Denial, with this headline: COMBATING HOLOCAUST DENIAL: ORIGINS OF HOLOCAUST DENIAL

This quote is from the USHMM website page about Holocaust Denial:

The Holocaust was a state secret in Nazi Germany. The Germans wrote down as little as possible. Most of the killing orders were verbal, particularly at the highest levels. Hitler’s order to kill Jews was issued only on a need-to-know basis. The Nazi leaders generally avoided detailed planning of killing operations, preferring to proceed in a systematic but often improvised manner. The Germans destroyed most documentation that did exist before the end of the war. The documents that survived and related directly to the killing program were virtually all classified and stamped “Geheime Reichssache” (Top Secret), requiring special handling and destruction to prevent capture by the enemy. Heinrich Himmler, Reich Leader of the SS and Chief of the German Police, said in a secret speech to SS generals in Posen in 1943 that the mass murder of the European Jews was a secret, never to be recorded. 

Oops, Himmler has been cut off in mid-Sentence again.  I previously blogged here about the Posen speech which is routinely cut off in mid-sentence by the Holohoaxers.

The USHMM article on Holocaust Denial continues with this statement:

In order to hide the killing operation as much as possible from the uninitiated, Hitler ordered that the killings not be spoken of directly in German documentation or in public statements. Instead, the Germans used codenames and neutral-sounding terms for the killing process. In Nazi parlance, for example, “action” (Aktion) referred to a violent operation against Jewish (or other) civilians by German security forces; “resettlement to the East” (Umsiedlung nach dem Osten) referred to the forced deportation of Jewish civilians to killing centers in German-occupied Poland; and “special treatment” (Sonderbehandlung) meant killing.

So it turns out that the Nazis had planned the current “Holocaust Denial” from the very beginning.

There is a Holocaust Museum at the house in Wannsee, 50 miles from Berlin, where the Nazis planned the Holocaust. The dining room of the house, where the conference was held is shown in the photo below.   The minutes of the meeting were not found until many years later.

The dining room in the Wannsee house where the genocide of the Jews was planned

The dining room in the Wannsee house where the genocide of the Jews was planned

An excerpt from Heinrich Himmler’s famous speech at Posen on October 4, 1943 is quoted in the museum display:

…”The Jewish people are being exterminated.” every party member says. “Of course, it’s in our program, elimination of the Jews, extermination, we’ll do it all right.” Among all those who talk like this, no one has witnessed it, no one has seen it through. Most of you will know, however, what it means to see 100 corpses lying together, or 500, or 1,000. To have stuck it out and at the same time to have remained decent – aside from a few exceptions succumbing to human weakness – that has made us tough. This is a page of glory in our history, unwritten and never to be written…

As quoted by the museum, Himmler’s speech is cut off in mid sentence. According to Holocaust historian Martin Gilbert, the full sentence from Himmler’s speech is as follows:

This is an unwritten and never-to-be-written page of glory in our history, for we know how difficult it would be for us if today under bombing raids and the hardships and deprivations of war – if we were still to have the Jews in every city as secret saboteurs, agitators, and inciters. If the Jews were still lodged in the body of the German nation, we would probably by now have reached the stage of 1917-18.”

The last part of the sentence is a reference to 1917-18 during World War I when the Jewish labor leaders called a strike of ammunition workers in 1917 and the Jewish Social Democrats overthrew the established government and declared a Republic in Germany in 1918. The Nazis believed that the Jews were responsible for their defeat in World War I because Jewish Social Democrats had signed the Armistice and the Treaty of Versailles. The part of the sentence, that the museum display cut out, explains why the Nazis made the decision to “transport the Jews to the east” six months after they attacked the Soviet Union.

October 9, 2014

Documentary, about a child suvivor of 5 Nazi camps, nominated for an Emmy

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust, movies, World War II — Tags: , , , , — furtherglory @ 11:27 am

This news article tells about a Jewish child who survived 5 concentration camps during the course of nearly 3 years while World War II, and the Holocaust, were going on.

This quote is from the news article, cited above:

“Misa’s Fugue,” the documentary based on the true story of Frank “Misa” Grunwald’s almost three years in Nazi concentration camps as a child, has exceeded [Jennifer] Goss’ expectations in pretty much every way.

So when Goss, along with her husband, and Grunwald, the film’s director, Sean Gaston, and other important players in the making of the documentary found themselves at the Mid-Atlantic Emmy Awards in Philadelphia on September 20, they knew all the late nights, and trips were worth it.

I know what you are going to say: How could a child survive FIVE concentration camps, during the genocide of the Jews, aka the Holocaust, when everyone knows that children under the age of 15 were immediately gassed.

Note that the article calls Terezin a “death camp.”  Why send children from one death camp to another, and then let them survive? Was it because the Nazis wanted survivors to tell the story in documentaries 70 years later?

According to the article:

[Framk ”Misa”] Grunwald was born in Czechoslovakia in September of 1932. Four months later, Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany. “Misa’s Fugue” centers around Grunwald’s journey through Terezin [Theresienstadt], Auschwitz, Mauthausen, Melk and Gunskirchen concentration camps.

Nearly 1.5 million children were murdered during the Holocaust between 1933 and 1945. Grunwald, now 82, was one of the less than 300 children who survived the Nazi death-camp at Terezin in the Czech Republic. For the next two years Grunwald found himself in various camps, in various countries, often getting there by death marches.

So Frank Grunwald spent a year, as a little boy, at Theresienstadt (now called Terezin) before he was hauled off to Auschwitz.  According to the article, Terezin was a “death-camp.”

Grunwald was probably taken to the Auschwitz II camp, aka Auschwitz-Birkenau, where children under the age of 15 were immediately gassed.

Yet somehow, Grunwald was not gassed at Auschwitz, but instead, he was transferred to Mauthausen, a Class III camp for convicted criminals and “Return Unwanted” prisoners, where he was again not killed in the gas chamber, but was transferred to the Melk sub-camp and then to the Gunskirchen subcamp of Mauthausen. Records show that Gunskirchen had only 450 prisoners.

Why did the stupid Nazis keep moving Grunwald around like that?  Did they want a child to survive to the age of 82, so that he could tell his “Holocaust survivor” story in a documentary?

I suspect that Frank “Misa” Grunwald was on the “death march” out of Auschwitz when the camp had to be abandoned because the Soviet liberators were on their way.

According to some Holocaust experts, the purpose of a “death march” was to kill the prisoners before the Soviets could save them.  Some of the survivors of these death marches were sent to Mauthausen in Austria because this was as far away as they could get from the liberators who were coming to save the children.

Melk and Gunskirchen were both sub-camps of Mauthausen where prisoners were working in underground factories which were building Messerschmidtt airplanes.

The Gunskirchen camp was not set up until very late in the war, so there is not much information about it on the Internet.

Ebensee is much better known than Gunskirchen, and I have a page about it on my scrapbookpages website.

The photo below is an old photo which was taken at Ebensee. This photo proves that there were very young children taken to Austria near the end of the war.

Young children at the Ebensee camp in Austria

Young children at the Ebensee camp in Austria

Notice that one of the young children has no shoes, although the older boy has a nice pair of boots.

You can see some old photos of Gunskirchen, taken by the American liberators of the camp, on this website: http://www.remember.org/mooney/images/thumbnails/index.html

The photo below shows the Melk sub-camp, which was in the same area of Austria as Gunskirchen.

Melk, a sub-camp of Mauthausen where Jews worked in factories

Melk, a sub-camp of Mauthausen where Jews worked in factories

Survivors of Ebensee sub-camp of Mauthausen greet their liberators

Survivors of Ebensee sub-camp of Mauthausen greet their liberators

Ebensee sub-camp of Mauthausen

Ebensee sub-camp of Mauthausen

The prisoners at Ebensee, shown in the photo above, worked in underground factories which manufactured Messerschmitt airplanes. German engineers and civilians also worked in these factories. The site was chosen because there were natural caves which could be enlarged into tunnels so that the munitions factories could be protected from Allied bombing raids.

Of course, some of the prisoners in these camps died, in spite of the fact that the Nazis tried to keep them alive so that they could work as slave laborers in the factories.

The photo below shows dead bodies at the Gusen sub-camp of Mauthausen.

Dead bodies found in the Gusen sub-camp of Mauthausen

Dead bodies found in the Gusen sub-camp of Mauthausen

After World War II ended, the Allies accused the Nazis of taking prisoners to Mauthausen to kill them in the tunnels of the sub-camps.  I wrote about Ernst Kaltenbrunner’s defense to this charge at the Nuremberg IMT, on this blog post: https://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/the-testimony-of-dr-ernst-kaltenbrunner-at-the-nuremberg-imt/

On my website, I wrote about the alleged order given by Ernst Kaltenbrunner to kill all the prisoners at Mauthausen and its sub-camps: http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Mauthausen/KZMauthausen/ZiereisDeath.html

 

October 8, 2014

After reading a bad review of “Killing Patton,” I ordered the book

Bill O’Reilly’s new book has been out for several weeks, but I have delayed ordering it because I thought I would probably not like it.

This morning I read a bad review of the book here.  In reading this bad review, I learned that the book is rich in detail and “meanders” off the track a lot.  That’s what I like when I read books.

I want to know that the tablecloth at the Potsdam Conference was red. I already know about Hitler’s diet, but I might learn more details about his diet from O’Reilly’s book.  Call me crazy, but I want to know the details.  Readers of my blog and my website know that I dote on the details.

General Patton pees into the river as he crosses the Rhine in March 1943

General Patton pees into the river as he crosses the Rhine into Germany in March 1943

This quote is from Patton’s book:

“I drove to the Rhine River and went across on the pontoon bridge. I stopped in the middle to take a piss and then picked up some dirt on the far side in emulation of William the Conqueror.” General George S. Patton, March 1945

I wrote about Patton on my website section on Buchenwald at

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Buchenwald/Liberation8.html

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. This quote is from the review of “Killing Patton”:

Soon, though, Patton would become the commanding officer in Southern Germany and, with the end of the war, be responsible for the so-called Displaced Persons camps in Bavaria and elsewhere. Many of these displaced persons were Holocaust survivors. Patton had contempt for them. He called them “animals” and, in letters to his wife and in diary entries, made his anti-Semitism as plain as could be. Here, in reference to a critical report on the condition of the DPs by an official named Earl G. Harrison, is a sample diary entry: “Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to Jews who are lower than animals.”

[…]

But how is it possible to write over 300 pages on Patton and not once mention his rancid Jew-hatred? How is it possible to mention the flower beds at the Potsdam Conference and not pause to cite Patton’s mistreatment of people who, just a short time before, had been in Auschwitz? How is it possible not to mention that Patton ran his camps in such a manner that President Harry Truman, in a letter to Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, said, “As matters now stand, we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis treated them except that we do not exterminate them.” Golly, gee, Bill, isn’t that colorful enough for you?

O’Reilly, like Patton, forgets why World War II was fought in the first place – to combat the evils of Nazism. Foremost among the evils was anti-Semitism, which provided the rationale for the Holocaust. O’Reilly could easily have mentioned Patton’s repellent anti-Semitism, but it clearly was not all that important to him. He didn’t have a tight narrative. He has a narrow mind.

As soon as I receive my copy of O’Reilly’s book in the mail, I will search for any mention of the famous slapping incident when Patton slapped a Jewish soldier. In my humble opinion, this incident angered the Jews to the point that his death was inevitable.

This quote from this source is about the slapping incident:

Patton also created controversy when he visited the 15th Evacuation Hospital on 3rd August 1943. In the hospital he encountered Private Charles H. Kuhl, who had been admitted suffering from shellshock. When Patton asked him why he had been admitted, Kuhl told him “I guess I can’t take it.” According to one eyewitness Patton “slapped his face with a glove, raised him to his feet by the collar of his shirt and pushed him out of the tent with a kick in the rear.” Kuhl was later to claim that he thought Patton, as well as himself, was suffering from combat fatigue.

As for Bill O’Reilly’s failure to call General Patton an anti-Semite, this is excusable because everyone, who is not Jewish, is now an anti-Semite.  The word has lost all meaning.  Originally, it meant a person who wanted the Jews to have their own country, rather than living in ghettos in every country in Europe, where the Jews had everything that a person would normally have in a separate country.

This quote, regarding anti-Semitism, is from Wikipedia:

In the aftermath of the Kristallnacht pogrom in 1938, German propaganda minister Goebbels announced: “The German people is anti-Semitic. It has no desire to have its rights restricted or to be provoked in the future by parasites of the Jewish race.”[31]

After the 1945 victory of the Allies over Nazi Germany, and particularly after the extent of the Nazi genocide of Jews became known, the term “anti-Semitism” acquired pejorative connotations. This marked a full circle shift in usage, from an era just decades earlier when “Jew” was used as a pejorative term.[32][33] Yehuda Bauer wrote in 1984: “There are no anti-Semites in the world… Nobody says, ‘I am anti-Semitic.'” You cannot, after Hitler. The word has gone out of fashion.”[34]

September 27, 2014

New book mentions Blessed Titus Brandsma, a Catholic priest who was killed at Dachau

A new book, entitled Principalities and Powers: Spiritual Combat 1942 – 1943, mentions a Dutch Carmelite priest named Father Titus Brandsma who has the title of “Blessed” because he has been canonized as a saint in the Catholic Church.

Father Titus Brandsma was a prisoner at Dachau

Father Titus Brandsma was a prisoner at Dachau

This quote is from the news article about the book and it’s author Father George William Rutler:

Fr Rutler, a parish priest in Manhattan, New York and a well-known essayist, has taken his title from the famous quotation in St Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians. This is in part because of he wishes to show the larger forces at work during WWII and also because an old friend and fellow priest had bequeathed to him a pile of newspapers, journals and radio transcripts for this particular year. Growing up after the war, Rutler sees his book as “a feeble act of thanks from my generation” for the previous one that had endured so many sacrifices on behalf of future ones. -
According to an article which you can read in full here, the author of the book, George William Rutler, “is fascinated by the way large historical events interweave with humbler but no less significant spiritual occurrences, relating that on the day of the British defeat in the first battle of El Alamein, Fr Titus Brandsma, a Dutch Carmelite, died in Dachau after giving his Rosary to the SS functionary who gave him a lethal injection.

This quote is from the article about the new book:

WWII “can rightly be understood and probably only fully appreciated as a holy war fought for multiple and mixed motives, but in its deepest meaning as a campaign against evil by defenders, consciously or obliviously, of the good.” Doubtless, secular historians such as Andrew Roberts or Sir Max Hastings, who has researched the “multiple and mixed motives” of the war in detail in his own books, would not demur from this conclusion. Certainly Churchill, not a conventional Christian believer but with a deep sense of what a Christian civilization signified, would have agreed with it.

It seems that Father Titus Brandsma was a martyr in the “holy war” now known as World War II. But why was he singled out to be killed?

Dachau was the concentration camp where 2,720 clergymen were sent, including 2,579 Catholic priests. The priests at Dachau were separated from the other prisoners and housed together in several barrack buildings in the rear of the camp. There were 1,780 Polish priests and 447 German priests at Dachau. Of the 1,034 priests who died in the camp, 868 were Polish and 94 were German. Most of them died as a result of the typhus epidemic in the camp.

Other clergymen at Dachau included 109 Protestant ministers, 22 Greek Orthodox, 2 Muslims and 8 men who were classified as “Old Catholic and Mariaists.”

One of the most famous Catholic priests, who was imprisoned at Dachau, was Blessed Father Titus Brandsma, a 61 year old Dutch priest, who was at Dachau for only five months before he was killed by an injection in the camp hospital on July 26, 1942; he was killed by injection because he was suffering from terminal kidney failure.

According to the accounts of his fellow priests, Father Brandsma was beaten and kicked daily even though he was already sick when he arrived in the camp on June 19, 1942. At first, Father Brandsma refused to enter the camp infirmary, and when he did finally consent, Father Brandsma was allegedly forced to participate in medical experiments.

Father Titus Brandsma had been arrested by the Nazis on January 19, 1942 in the Netherlands, which had been under German occupation since May 1940.

On January 15, 1942 the Nazis had sent articles to all the Catholic newspapers with orders that they be published the following day. All of the editors refused because on December 31, 1941, Father Brandsma had drawn up a letter to the 30 Catholic newspapers, urging all the Catholic editors in the Netherlands to violate the laws of the German occupation by not publishing any Nazi propaganda.

Father Brandsma had previously written a Pastoral Letter, read in all Catholic parishes in July 1941, in which the Dutch Roman Catholic bishops officially condemned the anti-Semitic laws of the Nazis and their treatment of the Jews. Dutch Catholics were informed by this letter that they would be denied the Sacraments of the Catholic church if they supported the Nazi party.

Father Brandsma had been very vocal in his opposition to the Nazi ideology ever since Hitler came to power in 1933. He was a prolific writer who had articles published in 80 different publications.

On January 21, 1942, Father Brandsma was put on trial and quickly convicted of treason because he refused to cooperate with the German occupation. Blessed Titus Brandsma died a martyr for the right of freedom of the press in an occupied country.

Pope John Paul II beatified Titus Brandsma in 1985, giving him the title of Blessed Titus Brandsma.

Father Titus Brandsma was a professor of Philosophy and Mysticism at the University of Nijmegan in the Netherlands. He belonged to The Order of the Brothers of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, a religious order that is believed to have been founded in the 12th century on Mount Carmel. The Carmelite priests were dedicated to the worship of Mary, the mother of God.

Entrance into the Carmelite Chapel at Dachau

Entrance into the Carmelite Chapel at Dachau

At the Dachau Memorial Site, there is a Carmelite convent which was built in 1963 just outside the former camp.  The entrance to the convent is through one of the former guard towers, which is shown in the photo above. The convent was built on the site of the gravel pit where prisoners had been assigned to work as punishment for breaking the rules in the camp.

Catholic priests were not sent to Dachau just because they were priests. Catholics and Protestants alike were arrested as “enemies of the state” but only if they preached against the Nazi government.

An important policy of the Nazi party in Germany was called Gleichschaltung, a term that was coined in 1933 to mean that all German culture, religious practice, politics, and daily life should conform with Nazi ideology. This policy meant total control of thought, belief, and practice and it was used to systematically eradicate all anti-Nazi elements after Hitler came to power.

There were around 20 million Catholics and 20,000 priests in Nazi Germany. The vast majority of the German clergymen and the German people, including the 40 million Protestants, went along with Hitler’s ideology and were not persecuted by the Nazis.

The first clergymen to arrive at Dachau were Polish priests who were sent there in 1939. The Polish priests had been arrested for helping the Polish Resistance after Poland had been conquered in only 28 days.

The largest number of Catholic priests at Dachau were the 1780 priests from Poland. The largest number of deaths of priests at Dachau was 868 from Poland. There were 830 Polish priests at Dachau when the camp was liberated, but 78 priests had already been released.

Bishop Franciszek Korczynski from Wloclawek, Poland published a book in 1957, entitled “Jasne promienie w Dachau” (Bright Beams in Dachau) in which he claimed that the extermination of the Polish clergy was planned by the Nazis as part of the liquidation of the Polish intelligentsia. He wrote that the priests at Dachau were starved and tortured and that the Nazis used the priests for medical experiments.

I got much of the information for my blog post today from a book entitled  “What was it like in the Concentration Camp at Dachau?” written by Dr. Johannes Neuhäusler. I purchased this book at the Dachau Memorial Site on my first visit in 1997.

In his book, Dr. Neuhäusler wrote that, out of the 2720 clergymen imprisoned at Dachau, 314 were released, 1034 died in the camp, 132 were transferred to another camp, and 1240 were still in the camp when it was liberated on April 29, 1945.

The highest number of priests that were released from Dachau was the 208 German priests. Out of the 447 German priests at Dachau, 100 were transferred to other camps and 94 died in the camp; there were only 45 German priests at Dachau when the camp was liberated.

The first German priest to enter Dachau in 1940 was Father Franz Seitz, according to Dr. Neuhäusler’s book. The first priests were put into Block 26, but it soon became over crowded because “practically all the priests interned in the camp at Sachsenhausen-Oranienburg were transferred to Dachau, especially many hundreds of Polish clergymen,” according to Dr. Neuhäusler.

Dr. Neuhäusler wrote that an emergency chapel was set up in Block 26 and on January 20, 1941 the first Mass was celebrated. “Some 200 priests stood enraptured before the altar while one of their comrades, wearing white vestments offered up the Holy Sacrifice.”

In 1940, the German bishops and the Pope had persuaded Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler to concentrate all the priests imprisoned in the various concentration camps into one camp, and to house them all together in separate blocks with a chapel where they could say Mass.

In early December 1940, the priests already in Dachau were put into Barracks Block 26 near the end of the camp street. Within two weeks, they were joined by around 800 to 900 priests from Buchenwald, Mauthausen, Sachsenhausen, Auschwitz and other camps, who were put into Blocks 28 and 30. Block 30 was later converted into an infirmary barrack.

One of the priests at Dachau, Father William J. O’Malley, wrote the following regarding the priests who were arrested and sent to Dachau because they were actively helping the underground Resistance against the German occupation of Europe:

“The 156 French, 63 Dutch, and 46 Belgians were primarily interned for their work in the Underground. If that were a crime, such men as Michel Riquet, S.J., surely had little defense; he was in contact with most of the leaders of the French Resistance and was their chaplain, writing forthright editorials for the underground press, sequestering Jews, POW’s, downed Allied airmen, feeding and clothing them, providing them with counterfeit papers and spiriting them into Spain and North Africa.”

Was Father Brandsma forced to be a subject of medical experiments at Dachau?  He was already 61 years old and he was already sick when he was admitted into the Dachau camp. It is highly unlikely that he was used as a subject of medical experiments.

Dr. Schilling was put on trial at Dachau because he conducted medical experiments on the prisoners

Dr. Schilling was put on trial at Dachau because he had conducted medical experiments

Dr. Klaus Schilling, shown in the photo above as he testified on the witness stand in the post-war trial of the Dachau staff, was put on trial and convicted by the American Military Tribunal because he had conducted medical experiments on inmates at Dachau.

Dr. Schilling was one of the world’s foremost experts on tropical diseases when he was ordered by Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler, the head of all the Nazi concentration camps, to come out of retirement to work on a cure for malaria after German soldiers began dying of the disease in North Africa. Before his retirement, Dr. Schilling had worked at the prestigious Robert Koch Institute in Berlin. He began specializing in tropical diseases after he himself contracted malaria.

After the war, Dr. Schilling was arrested by the American Army and charged with participating in a “common plan” to violate the Laws and Usages of War under the Geneva Convention of 1929 because he had conducted experiments on Dachau prisoners, using various drugs in an effort to find a cure for malaria. Most of his subjects were young Polish priests whom Dr. Schilling infected by means of mosquitoes from the marshes of Italy and the Crimea, according to author Peter Padfield in his book entitled “Himmler.” The priests were chosen for the experiments because they were not required to work, as were the ordinary prisoners at Dachau.

One of the prosecution witnesses at the trial of the German Major War Criminals at the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal was Dr. Franz Blaha, a Czech medical doctor who was a Communist political prisoner at Dachau. An affidavit signed by Dr. Blaha was entered into the main Nuremberg trial. It was marked Document Number 3249-PS, Exhibit USA-663.

His comments in this affidavit about Dr. Schilling are quoted below from the transcript of the Nuremberg trial for January 11, 1946

“3. During my time at Dachau I was familiar with many kinds of medical experiments carried on there on human victims. These persons were never volunteers but were forced to submit to such acts. Malaria experiments on about 1,200 people were conducted by Dr. Klaus Schilling between 1941 and 1945. Schilling was personally ordered by Himmler to conduct these experiments. The victims were either bitten by mosquitoes or given injections of malaria sporozoites taken from mosquitoes. Different kinds of treatment were applied including quinine, pyrifer, neosalvarsan, antipyrin, pyramidon, and a drug called 2516 Behring. I performed autopsies on the bodies of people who died from these malaria experiments. Thirty to 40 died from the malaria itself. Three hundred to four hundred died later from diseases which were fatal because of the physical condition resulting from the malaria attacks. In addition there were deaths resulting from poisoning due to overdoses of neosalvarsan and pyramidon. Dr. Schilling was present at my autopsies on the bodies of his patients.”

The 74-year-old Dr. Schilling was convicted by an American Military Tribunal at Dachau and was hanged. In his final statement to the court, Dr. Schilling pleaded to have the results of his experiments returned to him so they could be published, but his work was confiscated and used by the US military. During his trial, Dr. Schilling tried to justify his crime by saying that his experiments were for the good of mankind.

 

September 14, 2014

Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert, the man who allegedly shot Noor Inayat Khan at Dachau

In 1958, a former prisoner at the Dachau concentration camp came forward and claimed that he had personally watched Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert shoot Noor Inayat Khan in the head at Dachau.

He claimed to have witnessed the execution of Noor Inayat Khan on September 12, 1994 at Dachau. According to his story, he had seen a high-ranking SS officer named Wilhelm Ruppert, whom he mistakenly called a “sadistic guard,” undress Noor and then beat her all over her body until she was a “bloody mess” before personally shooting her in the back of the head. Although the execution spot at Dachau was outside the camp and hidden by trees and bushes, this Dutch prisoner was allowed to get close enough so that he could see everything and hear Noor cry out “Liberté” just before she died.

Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert reads a book in his prison cell while awaiting trial

Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert reads a book in his prison cell while awaiting trial

On September 9, 2014, a documentary film, entitled Enemy of the Reich, the Noor Inayat Khan Story, was shown on PBS. You can read about the documentary here.  In the documentary, it is claimed that Noor was executed at Dachau, although there is no proof of this whatsoever.

Still photo from PBS documentary on Noor Inayat Khan

Still photo from PBS documentary on Noor Inayat Khan

This quote is from the article about the documentary:

Enemy of the Reich: The Noor Inayat Khan Story is the story of one woman’s extraordinary courage, tested in the crucible of Nazi-occupied Paris. With an American mother and Indian Muslim father, Noor Inayat Khan was an extremely unusual British agent, and her life spent growing up in a Sufi center of learning in Paris seemed an unlikely preparation for the dangerous work to come. Yet it was in this place of universal peace and contemplation that her remarkable courage was forged.

In 1940, when the Nazis invaded of France, Noor fled Paris with her family to England, where she trained as a wireless operator in Britain’s Women’s Auxiliary Air Force. In early 1943, she was recruited as a covert operative, into Winston Churchill’s Special Operations Executive (S.O.E). Churchill’s orders were to “Set Europe ablaze” through sabotage of railroads and factories, and support of the French underground’s direct attacks on Nazi units in preparation for the D-Day invasions.

After the betrayal and arrest of her entire network, Noor became the only surviving radio operator linking the British to the French Resistance in Paris, coordinating the air-drop of weapons, explosives and agents, and supporting the rescue of downed allied fliers.

The photo below shows Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert, the man who is standing on the right, as he is identified in the courtroom at Dachau during his trial by the American Military Tribunal at Dachau.

Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert on trial at Dachau

Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert on trial at Dachau

At the time that Ruppert was put on trial, it was not yet known that Noor Inayat Khan had been executed at Dachau, so he was not charged with this crime.

One of the witnesses against Friedrich Wilhelm Ruppert was Rudolf Wolf, a 35-year-old German engraver from Frieberg, who was a prisoner at Dachau from September 1942 until the camp was liberated on April 29, 1945. Wolf testified that he had often seen Ruppert personally beat the prisoners. Wolf said that he had seen Ruppert kick the prisoners and also beat them with a whip so hard that the men became unconscious. According to Wolf’s testimony, Ruppert was a man who could beat people without changing expression; he was like a blacksmith striking cold iron.

You can read about the trial of the men, who allegedly executed four other female British SOE agents at the Natzweiler concentration camp, on this page of my website:  http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Natzweiler/SOEagents.html

One of the witnesses at Natzweiler had identified Noor Inayat Khan as the woman in one of the photos of the victims, which he was shown.

So where was Noor Inayat Khan actually executed?  It’s a long story, which you can read on my website at http://www.scrapbookpages.com/DachauScrapbook/BritishSOEagents.html

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

The Silver is the New Black Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 287 other followers