090214-FN1

Churchill's totalist ravings were shocking even to his own government members who seemed more comfortable with the equally murderous but less colourful techno-jargon byTrenchard, Lindeman and Portal. Each of these made masterful use of the conjunction "and" which -- when used to conjoin two entirely different species of a thing, lulls the mind into applying the attributes of the first to the second; as in "military and civilian installations" or "terrorists and criminals."

But no amount of raving could ever equal the actual outrage of what the Allies did to ordinary Germans. They did not just bomb, but they used incendiary and phosphorus bombs, and they waited until the meteorgological conditions would "enhance" the effect. Temperatures reached 1000 degrees and created tornados of fire, which in Hamburg's case reached 3 miles into the air, sucking cows, people, and exploding cars into its incendiary vortex. In places the fire sucked up all the oxygen for three meters above ground causing mass asphyxiation. In other places, particularly in shelters, people were literally fused together. In Hamburg, the police went about shooting people who had taken refuge in fountains or in the ocean because when phosphorus stuck to the skin, it never came off and would begin burning once re-exposed to air. By bombing hospitals and fire-stations and railways, the Allies also intended to make it impossible for the survivors to cope with the effects of the bombing. Needless to say, the victorious allies have always tended to downplay these horrors. But once they are known, the palavering sophistries of Taylor and like ilk are truly disgusting.


.

090214-FN2

What became known as the Morgenthau Plan was actually the brainchild of Harry Dexter White, the anglicized name of a Jewish Lithuanian who worked as a science advisor in the Roosevelt administration. The policy underwent several iterations, but as ultimately formulated it called for permanent effacement of Germany.

What survived of industry was to be dismantled and sold for scrap. All educational institutions of higher learning were to closed for the foreseeable future. Germany was to be turned into a literal cow pasture. Germans were to be conscripted for "forced labor outside Germany".

None of this was a metaphor. It was taken seriously enough to be opposed by the State Department. Morgenthau was furious and ultimately succeeded in getting Roosevelt and Churchill to approve the plan at their Quebec Conference in late 1944.

Herbert Hoover, who was appointed by Truman to oversee humanitarian relief in Germany after the war, argued that Germany could not actually be reduced to a pastoral state without exterminating or deporting 25 million Germans. (John Dietrich. (2002) The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy.)

It would appear than the Morgenthau faction had no problem with that. Allied occupation of Germany was hardly benign. It is estimated (and again we are left with polemics and estimates) that a million Germans died in POW or reeducation camps of typhus and malnutrition. Germans in general were left to fend for themselves as best they could in the rubble. Another million died of exposure and starvation in the terrible winter of 1945-1946.

By 1947 conditions in Germany were worse than they had been in 1945 or 1946 and a U.S. congressional report stated that if conditions were allowed to continue they would result in the “liquidation” of Germans. (John Dietrich. op. cit.)

It is an interesting question how much Morgenthau or White knew of the actual conditions of Nazi occupation and genocide. As of 1944, much of the details we take for fact were unknown or known only uncertainly; but there is a striking resemblance between Morgenthau's plan and Himmler's plans for post-war Russia.

It was alleged, after the war that White was in fact a Soviet mole. A Congressional inquiry was initiated but White died of a heart attack shortly before it began. Perhaps Putin will open the achives.

.

090214-FN-ChurchMemo

090205-FN3/Slander & Blackmail Against Pope

The unilateral actions of Jewish organizations in “cutting off” contacts need not be recited. The reference to His Holiness, by Shimon Samuels of Simon Wiesenthal Center, as a “man who has known the Nazi regime in his own flesh” was an unmistakable and appalling allusion that the “political cost” would be the dredging up of the vicious canard that our Pope “was” a Nazi.
.

090205-FN2/Slander&Blackmail Against Pope

The unilateral actions of Jewish organizations in “cutting off” contacts need not be recited. The reference to His Holiness, by Shimon Samuels of Simon Wiesenthal Center, as a “man who has known the Nazi regime in his own flesh” was an unmistakable and appalling allusion that the “political cost” would be the dredging up of the vicious canard that our Pope “was” a Nazi.

090205-FN2/Accusing Williamson

The accusations against Bishop Williamson, as reported in the world press, was that he had the temerity to “deny that six million Jews died in Nazi gas chambers”(NewYorkTimes (1/25/09) [http://www.nytimes.com /2009/01/25/ world/europe/25pope. html].) However, no reputable historian or legal tribunal has ever claimed that six million Jews were gassed. Subsequent reports have since back-pedalled from their own absurdist assertions and have fallen to parsing and re-parsing the bishop’s statements -- in the most culpable light possible. This process suffers from the viciousness inherent in all prosecutions for thought crime whether carried out by the Spanish Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, or Nazi and Stalinist tribunals. Bishop Williamson holds to some idiosyncratic opinions and can assert no immunity for criticism on the merits. But that is not what this campaign is about.
.

090205-FN1/Revising History

To illustrate with two pertinent examples. The gross estimates of “six million” Jewish fatalities from all causes accepted at Nuremberg on the basis of hearsay evidence have since been revised both upward and downward. (N.W.C.Tr., Opinion, Judge Parker [http://avalon.law.yale.edu /imt /judwarcr.asp#persecution]) The Jewish historian, Raul Hilberg has stated that the calculation of absolute deaths and deaths attributable to a policy of genocide are difficult and complex. His last calculation yielded a total of 5.1 million fatalities although others have calculated less.

Calculating the bare numbers at issue is only the starting point. The ensuing question must focus on the mode and intent of those casualties. Under either a legal or sociological definition, mass homicide is not “genocide” unless the motivating intent is to eradicate a definable target group as such. (1948 Convention on the Prevention of Genocide, Art. II; see also, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, (Rafael Lemkin 1944) [http://www.preventgenocide.org/lemkin/AxisRule1944-1.html].) Whether a singular genocidal policy existed as starting point or arose ad hoc as an end result is subject to a variety of analytical interpretations as can be found discussed on the official German Wansee Museum web site. ([http://www.ghwk.de/engl/kopfengl.htm])

Obviously, the modality of a killing bears on the intent which is why the existence of gas chambers has become an issue in dispute, notwithstanding the assertion of some that the issue is beyond dispute. In the case of Irving v. Lipstadt, (Q.B., April 2000, Case No. 1996 -I- 113), after an exhaustive review, Justice Gray acknowledged that the documentary and testimonial evidence yielded “little clear” or unimpeachable “evidence of the existence of gas chambers designed to kill humans” at Auschwitz. (Opinion § 13.73, 13.74.) He nevertheless, accepted a circumstantial theory of “convergence” that led him to an inferential conclusion that “Jews were killed in large numbers in the gas chambers at Auschwitz” (§ 13.78.) His inference may certainly be reasonable but it is elementary that an inference is not a fact, but an interpretation of subsidiary facts.

These two salient examples illustrate that the entire subject of German war crimes and Axis occupation policies is an extremely vast, complex and difficult area of inquiry involving not a singular fact but an immensity of subsidiary facts, circumstances and inferences.
.