Today’s Gallery

 

tumblr_o1cyhjl3jd1tmsr3yo1_500.jpg

tumblr_o1cyhjl3jd1tmsr3yo2_540.jpg

tumblr_os06m6rUJl1sm9y4po1_400

tumblr_orybpbMeRw1toqeyzo4_500.jpg

tumblr_orybpbMeRw1toqeyzo1_500.jpg

tumblr_orybpbMeRw1toqeyzo3_500.jpg

tumblr_orybpbMeRw1toqeyzo2_400

tumblr_orybpbMeRw1toqeyzo5_500.jpg

Published in: on June 25, 2017 at 5:20 am  Leave a Comment  

Jochen Peiper’s reaction to his death sentence

 

Oh coarse we know this is not how our man  met his fate, but he did not know at this moment, when the verdict was read, that he would avoid the gallows. A truly honorable soldier whom you can see clinches his jaw and pinches his lips but then turns and seems to be holding back a smile.

The trial took place at Dachau from 16 May to 16 July 1946 before a military tribunal of senior American officers, operating under rules established by the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal.

The 74 defendants included SS-Oberstgruppenführer Sepp Dietrich, 6th SS Panzer Army commanding general, his chief of staff SS-Brigadeführer Fritz Krämer, SS-Gruppenführer Hermann Prieß, I SS Panzer Corps commander, and Joachim Peiper, commander of the 1st SS Panzer Regiment (the unit to which the crimes were attributed).

Before the trial, occupation authorities reclassified the defendants from prisoners of war to Civilian Internees. The accusations were mainly based on the sworn and written statements provided by the defendants in Schwäbisch Hall. To counter the evidence given in the men’s sworn statements and by prosecution witnesses, the lead defense attorney, Lieutenant Colonel Willis M. Everett tried to show that the statements had been obtained by inappropriate methods.

Everett called Lieutenant Colonel Hal McCown to testify about Peiper’s troops’ treatment of American prisoners at La Gleize. McCown, who, along with his command, had been captured by Peiper at La Gleize, testified that wounded American soldiers in Peiper’s custody had received equal priority with German wounded in receiving medical treatment. He testified that during his occupation of the town, Peiper had at all times behaved in a professional and honorable manner.

Everett had decided to call only Peiper to testify. However, other defendants, supported by their German lawyers, wanted to testify as well. This would soon prove to be a huge mistake, for when the prosecution cross-examined the defendants, they behaved like “a bunch of drowning rats (…) turning on each other.”According to Everett, these testimonies gave the court enough reason to sentence several of the defendants to death.

The military court was not convinced by Peiper’s testimony about the murder of the POWs under the Kampfgruppe’s control. During the trial, several witnesses testified of at least two instances in which Peiper had ordered the murder of prisoners of war. When questioned by the prosecution, Peiper denied these allegations, stating that the allegations were obtained from witnesses under torture. When questioned about the murder of Belgian civilians, Peiper said they were partisans.  Although the court could not prove that Peiper had ordered the murders, Peiper nonetheless accepted responsibility for his men’s actions.

Together with 42 other defendants, Joachim Peiper was sentenced to death by hanging on 16 July 1946.

The sentences generated significant controversy in some German circles, including the church, leading the commander of the U.S. Army in Germany to commute some of the death sentences to life imprisonment. In addition, the Germans’ defense attorney, U.S. military attorney Lt. Col. Willis M. Everett, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming that the defendants had been found guilty by means of “illegal and fraudulently procured confessions” and were subjects of mock trial. The turmoil raised by this case caused the Secretary of the Army, Kenneth Royall, to create a commission chaired by Judge Gordon A. Simpson of Texas to investigate. The commission was interested in the Malmedy massacre trial and in other cases judged at Dachau.

The commission arrived in Europe on 30 July 1948 and issued its report on 14 September. In this report, it notably recommended that the twelve remaining death sentences be commuted to life imprisonment. The commission confirmed the accuracy of Everett’s accusations regarding mock trials and neither disputed nor denied his charges of torture of the defendants. The commission expressed the opinion that the pre-trial investigation had not been properly conducted and that the members felt that no death sentence should be executed where such a doubt existed.

In response, General Lucius Clay commuted six more death sentences to life imprisonment. But he refused to commute the six remaining death sentences, including Peiper’s, though the executions were postponed. The turmoil caused by the commission report caused the U.S. Senate to investigate the trial.

A popular Wehrmacht ex-general Heinz Guderian actively campaigned for Peiper. For example, he wrote to one of his subordinates in 1951:

At the moment I’m negotiating with General Handy [Heidelberg] because [he] wants to hang the unfortunate Peiper. McCloy is powerless, because the Malmedy trial is being handled by Eucom, and is not subordinate to McCloy. As a result, I have decided to cable President Truman and ask him if he is familiar with this idiocy.

Ultimately the sentences of the Malmedy defendants were commuted to life imprisonment and then to time served. Peiper’s sentence was commuted to 35 years in 1954 and he was released in December 1956, the last of the Malmedy condemned to be freed.He had served 11 and a half years in prison.

HIAG, an organisation of former Waffen-SS members, had already helped Peiper’s wife find a job near the Landsberg Prison. They then worked to achieve the conditional release of Peiper himself. To obtain his release from prison, Peiper had to prove that he could obtain a job. Through the intermediary of Dr. Albert Prinzing, a former SS-Hauptsturmführer in the Sicherheitsdienst, he got a job at the car manufacturer Porsche.

Published in: on June 25, 2017 at 5:12 am  Leave a Comment  

National Socialism Set to Music

truth-wagner17-e1498309306957-800x445.jpg

By

The Bayreuth Festival symbolises Europe’s centuries old struggle for its existence. Richard Wagner, (1813 – 1883) the great German composer, chose Bayreuth for a number of sound reasons. Primarily, the maestro believed that his unique works should not share the same stage with the music of others. The Bayreuth Festival was destined to showcase only Wagnerian epics.

Attracting funding to finance the project was problematic. The Bayreuth Festival was unlikely to be other than an unfulfilled dream. Finally, the almost estranged King Ludwig II of Bavaria stepped in and provided the necessary resources. Bayreuth theatre was finally opened in August 1876 much to the relief of the great German composer and others who shared his vision. The first performance was Das Rheingold.

Artistically the pioneering venture was a fabulous success. It would be difficult to identify a single head of state, let alone accomplished musician, who failed to make the pilgrimage to the Bayreuth Festival. Unfortunately, the annual event fell short of being a box office success. Rescue was at hand; the doyens of great music and culture were generous. The show goes on and on and on.

1200px-Wahnfried_1_db-1024x768.jpg

Wahnfried was the name given by Richard Wagner to his villa in Bayreuth. The name is a German compound of Wahn (delusion, madness) and Fried (e), (peace, freedom). The house fascia reveals Wagner’s motto Hier wo mein Wähnen Frieden fand, Wahnfried, sei dieses Haus von mir benannt. (Here where my delusions have found peace, let this place be named Wahnfried.)

Siegfried Wagner (1869 – 1930) followed in his father’s footsteps and excelled as both composer and conductor. Siegfried served as artistic director of the Bayreuth Festival from 1908 to 1930. The Bayreuth Festival’s orchestral conductor was the maternal grandson of Franz Liszt. From the Hungarian-born German composer Siegfried received some instruction in harmony.

Winifred Williams (1897 – 1980) born in Hastings, England, was destined to marry both Siegfried Wagner and the festival of Bayreuth.

It was an unusual destiny for an English-born orphan. Winifred lost both her parents before she was two-years old. The child was initially raised in a number of homes. When she was eight-years old Winifred was embraced by a distant German relative of her mother, Henrietta Karop; her adoptive mum was married to musician Karl Klindworth: Winifred’s adoptive parents were friends of Richard Wagner.

Siegfried Wagner was 45-years of age when on September 22, 1915 he placed the wedding ring on the finger of his 17-year old bride. The couple were to have four children; two sons and two daughters: Wieland (1917 -–1966), Friedelind (1918 -1991), Wolfgang (1919 – 2010) and Verena (born 1920)

After Siegfried Wagner’s passing on in 1930 Winifred Wagner took over the management of the Bayreuth Festival and she maintained the position until the war’s end. Winifred’s respect and admiration of Adolf Hitler over many years developed into a close relationship that many thought might end in marriage.

hitopera4339420070808214001-1.jpg

The spirit of the Bayreuth Festival infused the National Socialist German Workers Party’s (NSDAP). Symbolic of Europe’s traditions, culture, virtues and struggles, Wagnerian epics encapsulated the divine purpose and enduring nobility of National Socialism.

Of Richard Wagner, Adolf Hitler said; “Whoever wants to understand National Socialist Germany must know Wagner.”

During the 1930s until its military defeat in May 1945 the National Socialist religion was universally acclaimed as a harbinger of peace and a force of salvation from collaborating Capitalism and Communism (Bolshevism). Throughout the world, National Socialism was embraced as a religious phenomenon. Adolf Hitler was perceived by many as evidence of the Second Coming.

The relationship between the Führer, Winifred Wagner and Richard Wagner’s music is intense. The German President and Chancellor from 1933 to 1940 attended all Bayreuth festivals.

fe8da550907598614a41b01039acb09d--historical-photos-wwii.jpg

The German leader stayed on average ten days at each Bayreuth festival. However, on the occasion of the 1940 Festival the Führer said: “This year, unfortunately, due to the demands of the war that England does not want to end, I will only remain in Bayreuth today.” The Führer on another occasion said; “In Bayreuth I have lived some of the most beautiful moments of my life.”

At Wagner’s residence, where he has been received as a guest year after year, the poet, artist and visionary enjoyed authentic family life.

Hitler treated Winifred and Siegfried’s children as family. The siblings knew their mentor and patron as Uncle Adolf. Neither of the Wagner sons would serve in the armed forces. It had already been decided that “Germany could not be allowed to lose Richard Wagner’s heritage on the battlefields.”

August Kubizek was a boyhood friend of Adolf Hitler. Having much in common the teenage idealists were absorbed by great classical music. Their taste however was consumed by the works of the Leipzig born musician, Richard Wagner.

During his short stay in Bayreuth during 1940 the Führer had occasion to meet again his childhood companion. To his friend he entrusted the following words:

“This war is depriving me of my best years. You know how much I still have to do, what I still want to build. You know better than anyone all those plans that kept me busy from my youth. I have only been able to carry out a small fraction of it. I still have a lot of things to do. Who would if not?”

Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels (in box) at Charlottenburg Theatre, Berlin, 1939..jpg

 

The Führer, an idealist, poet and lover of the arts, constantly yearned to create a great German social state. He held the view that the pseudo-democratic plutocracies, envious and fearful of someone demonstrating that things can work otherwise, imposed upon him a war of annihilation.

During their youth the two friends shared rooms on the same student floor in Vienna. It was the Führer who at 18 years of age had convinced Kubizek’s father to let his son go to the city and study in the conservatory. This act of wisdom and true friendship changed the life of August Kubizek and allowed the dreamer to fulfil his dream of becoming orchestra director.

Recommended: Odyssey Adolf Hitler: The Remarkable Life of Europe’s Redeemer.

VIDEO: Documentary about the Wagner family, memoirs of contemporaries about the Führer, documentary chronicle about the Festival in Bayreuth.  (German language but perfectly understandable)

Published in: on June 24, 2017 at 5:05 pm  Leave a Comment  

Published in: on June 23, 2017 at 7:42 am  Leave a Comment  

Sommersonnenwende

tumblr_n7je66StAZ1svb6rio6_1280.jpg

Berlin, HJ feiert Sommersonnenwende

Published in: on June 21, 2017 at 8:53 am  Leave a Comment  

David Irving’s US Speaking Tour

DI_Athens_241005_400dpi.jpg

I am one happy Kamarad as I will be listening to David Irving in Person in a few days. The thought of asking some questions and getting a new autographed book for my collection gives me goosebumps. For a list of events and ticket sales follow the link below.

https://irvingbooks.com/xcart/home.php

Published in: on June 21, 2017 at 7:47 am  Comments (1)  

Today’s Gallery

tumblr_orr2a05AaL1sm9y4po1_540.png

 

tumblr_orr2a05AaL1sm9y4po2_540.jpg

tumblr_orr2a05AaL1sm9y4po3_400.jpg

tumblr_orr2a05AaL1sm9y4po4_540.jpg

tumblr_orr2a05AaL1sm9y4po5_540

Gone but not forgotten for the struggle continues.

werewolf1.jpg

tumblr_oraphrRcP31w9jutao1_1280.jpg

Published in: on June 20, 2017 at 8:25 am  Leave a Comment  

“Would be King” Meets Hitler

tumblr_m9uhccgQg61rsde4yo1_540.jpg

tumblr_m9uhccgQg61rsde4yo3_1280

tumblr_m9uhccgQg61rsde4yo4_1280.jpg

In October 1937, the Duke and Duchess visited Germany, against the advice of the British government, and met Adolf Hitler at his Obersalzberg retreat. The visit was much publicised by the German media. During the visit the Duke gave full Nazi salutes. When they left, Hitler said of Simpson: “She would have made a good Queen.” The former King Edward VIII, who became the Duke of Windsor after abdicating in 1936, was sympathetic towards Hitler. Even in 1970 he told one interviewer: “I never thought Hitler was such a bad chap.”

Published in: on June 20, 2017 at 8:12 am  Leave a Comment  

Rauschning’s Phony ‘Conversations With Hitler’

On June 20 1933 Hermann Rauschning became the President of the Senate of Danzig, but his tenure  was short lived and he would soon after become a sinister whore to allied propaganda. In the article below Mark Weber of The Institute For Historic Review explains how.

book cover.jpg

One of the most widely quoted sources of information about Hitler’s personality and secret intentions is the supposed memoir of Hermann Rauschning, the National Socialist President of the Danzig Senate in 1933-1934 who was ousted from the Hitler movement a short time later and then made a new life for himself as a professional anti-Nazi.

In the book known in German as Conversations with Hitler (Gespraeche mit Hitler) and first published in the U.S. in 1940 as The Voice of Destruction, Rauschning presents page after page of what are purported to be Hitler’s most intimate views and plans for the future, allegedly based on dozens of private conversations between 1932 and 1934. After the war the memoir was introduced as Allied prosecution exhibit USSR-378 at the main Nuremberg “war crimes” trial.

Among the damning quotations attributed to Hitler by Rauschning are these memorable statements:

We must be brutal. We must regain a clear conscience about brutality. Only then can we drive out the tenderness from our people … Do I propose to exterminate entire nationalities? Yes, it will add up to that … I naturally have the right to destroy millions of men of inferior races who increase like vermin … Yes, we are barbarians. We want to be barbarians. It is an honorable title.

Hitler is also supposed to have confided to Rauschning, an almost unknown provincial official, fantastic plans for a German world empire that would include Africa, South America, Mexico and, eventually, the United States.

Many prestigious historians, inculding Leon Poliakov, Gerhard Weinberg, Alan Bullock, Joachim Fest, Nora Levin and Robert Payne, used choice quotations from Rauschning’s memoir in their works of history. Poliakov, one of the most prominent Holocaust writers, specifically praised Rauschning for his “exceptional accuracy, while Levin, another widely-read Holocaust historian, called him “one of the most penetrating analysts of the Nazi period.”

But not everyone has been so credulous. Swiss historian Wolfgang Haenel spent five years diligently investigating the memoir before announcing his findings in 1983 at a revisionist history conference in West Germany. The renowned Conversations with Hitler, he declared are a total fraud. The book has no value “except as a document of Allied war propaganda.”

Haenel was able to conclusively establish that Rausching’s claim to have met with Hitler “more than a hundred times” is a lie. The two actually met only four times, and never alone. The words attributed to Hitler, he showed, were simply invented or lifted from many different sources, including writings by Juenger and Friedrich Nietzsche. An account of Hitler hearing voices, waking at night with convulsive shrieks and pointing in terror at an empty corner while shouting “There, there, in the corner!” was taken from a short story by French writer Guy de Maupassant.

The phony memoir was designed to incite public opinion in democratic countries, especially in the United States, in favor of war against Germany. The project was the brainchild of the Hungarian-born journalist Emery Reves, who ran an influential anti-German press and propaganda agency in Paris during the 1930s. Haenel has also found evidence that a prominent British journalist named Henry Wickham-Steele helped to produce the memoir. Wickham-Steele was a right-hand man of Sir Robert Vansittart, perhaps the most vehemently anti-German figure in Britain.

A report about Haenel’s sensational findings appeared in the Fall 1983 issue of The Journal of Historical Review. More recently, West Germany’s most influential weekly periodicals, Die Zeit, and Der Spiegel (7 September 1985), have run lengthy articles about historical hoax. Der Spiegel concluded that Rauschning’s Conversations with Hitler “are a falsification, an historical distortion from the first to the last page … Haenel not only proves the falsification, he also shows how the impressive surrogate was quickly compiled and which ingredients were mixed together.”

There are some valuable lessons to be learned from the story of this sordid hoax, which took more than 40 years to finally unmask: It shows that even the most brazen historical fraud can have a tremendous impact if it serves important interests, that it’s easier to invent a great historical lie than to expose one and finally, that everyone should be extremely wary of even the “authoritative” portrayals of the emotionally-charged Hitler era.

A footnote: Readers interested in an authentic record of Hitler’s personality and private views should look into the fascinating and wide-ranging memoir of Otto Wagener, published in August 1985 by Yale University Press under the title Hitler: Memoirs of a Confidant. Wagener was the first Chief of Staff of the SA (“stormtroopers”) and Director of the Economic-Political Department of the National Socialist Party. He spent hundreds of hours with Hitler between 1929 and 1932, many of them alone.


Published in: on June 20, 2017 at 7:31 am  Leave a Comment  

German Village Church Bell Is Embossed With A SWASTIKA And Praise For Hitler

4164C5A100000578-0-image-a-17_1497371847142

Standing proudly at the center of a tiny village deep in German wine country is the church of St. Jacob and locked away inside its 1,000-year-old tower is a bell emblazoned with a Swastika and the inscription: ‘Everything for the fatherland. Adolf Hitler.’

While the  heirloom has gone largely unnoticed for the last 82 years, a recent report in a local newspaper has brought controversy to the 700-person town of Herxheim am Berg.

Since discovering the tribute, 73-year-old Sigrid Peters, the church organist, is demanding it be removed, saying it is not right that christenings and marriages are marked by ringing a bell celebrating the Nazis(((oy Vey!))).

But pastor Helmut Meinhardt believes the church should keep using the bell, while mayor Ronald Becker told The Local that trying to remove the inscription could alter the sound, and would cost upward of £40,000.

Some, including bell expert Birgit Müller, are even arguing that it should be protected under historic conservation laws – saying there are no other known examples.

4164C9D900000578-0-image-a-18_1497371853154.jpg
4164C3AB00000578-0-image-a-19_1497371858665.jpg
The bell may hang in the church tower, but it actually belongs to the local government – and it will be up to them to decide its fate. Mayor Becker is firmly in favour of it staying in place, saying he has the ‘backing’ of the town.

Published in: on June 18, 2017 at 6:08 pm  Comments (3)