Jew World Order

The Suppressed History of Crimes Committed on German soldiers in WWII

by Wilfried Heink

Published: 2012-03-25

The following essays are based mostly on “Verbrechen der Sieger. Das Schicksal der deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Osteuropa” (Crimes of the Victors: The Fate of German POWs in Eastern Europe, Druffel-Verlag, Leoni am Starnberger See, 1975). It begins with a foreword by Brigadier General Wolfgang Schall, retired, POW in the SU (Soviet Union) from 1945 to 1955, as well as a statement of intent by Wilhelm Anders. No actual author is mentioned; it is a compilation of documents and witness statements by the Verband der Heimkehrer und Bund der Vertriebenen (Organization of Returnees and Organization of the Dispelled). They decided to publish this book in 1975 as preparation for the celebration of the 30th anniversary of Germany’s defeat, and the distortions of history affiliated with that defeat were underway.

Since then, many books have been written defaming German soldiers, portraying them as brutal killers. The latest effort by Sönke Neitzel and Harald Welzer, simply titled “Soldaten” (Soldiers), features a collection of ‘newly discovered‘ British and American wiretaps, allegedly of conversations of German POWs in various camps. And of course there was the 1995-1999 exhibition, “Vernichtungskrieg. Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1994”(War of Annihilation: Crimes of the German armed forces 1941-1945), produced by the Hamburge Institut für Sozialforschung (Hamburg Institute for Social Research), with its many distortions and outright lies, addressed by Walter Post in “Die Verleumdete Armee” (The defamed army, Pour le Mérite, 1999). These are just two of many examples of German scribblers, who call themselves historians, distorting history for jews. But all of them ignore the book under discussion.

POW General Wolfgang Schall writes, on p.7:

“Was die Wissenschaftliche Kommission für deutsche Kriegsgefangenengeschichte in fünfzehn Bänden und mehreren Beiheften an Zeugnissen zusammengetragen hat, ist ein Epos des Grauens und Leidens, das oft jede Phantasie übersteigt. Und doch haben wir es erlebt und sind Zeugen — soweit wir die Heimat wiedersehen durften“.

“The fifteen volumes of testimonies, compiled by the Scientific Commission for Prisoner of War History, tell of an epoch of horror and suffering straining the imagination. But we did experience it and are witnesses – those of us, at least, who were fortunate enough to return home.” 

Mr. Schall tells us that an official body did gather evidence of crimes committed by the victors, consisting of documents as well as testimonies: a fifteen volume endeavor.

Prof. Seidler writes that the Wehrmacht (Third Reich fighting force) investigations documented 8,000 cases, including crimes committed by partisans on German soldiers; the results are contained in 226 folders.

The whole of it was taken to the USA and only returned in 1968, with many of the files missing (Franz W. Seidler, Die Wehrmacht im Partisanenkrieg, Pour le Mérite-Verlag für Militärgeschichte, Selent, Austria 1999, p. 87).

Prof. Seidler also writes that at the end of the war the judeo-Allies were not able to prove that Germans violated that elusive “International Law”; Germans, however, had documented numerous cases of the Allies doing so (Ibid, p. 89).

The President – during the IMT proceedings of May 16, 1946 – prevented the German defense counsel Dr. Laternser from pointing this out, stating:

“We are not trying whether any other powers have committed breaches of international law, or crimes against humanity, or war crimes; we are trying whether these defendants have.” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/05-14-46.asp , p. 521)

Victor’s ‘justice’ at its finest. What happened to this fifteen volume magnum opus? W. Anders writes on p. 9:

“In einem Telegramm an den Bundeskanzler forderte das Präsidium des Verbandes der Heimkehrer die „sofortige Freigabe der unter Verschluß liegenden deutschen Kriegsgefangenen-Dokumentation durch die Bundesregierung”.

“The steering committee of the [abovementioned] organization, in a telegram to the German chancellor, is demanding that the POW documents still under closure be released immediately.”

Why would this material be, to this day, under lock and key? If reconciliation is the aim, or “never again”, is it not of utmost importance that the truth is told and all sides heard? Apparently not, since finger pointing directed solely at the Germans continues unabated.

And this one-sidedness is supposed to be the basis of understanding between peoples? Never!

1. Anders titled his introduction: “Warum dieses Buch geschrieben wurde” (Why this book was written). It starts out with a declaration by the Organization (I will refer to the Verband der Heimkehrer as the Organization), an appeal to Germans for unity:

„Zur Würde eines jeden Menschen gehört sein guter Ruf. Ohne Grund und leichtfertig darf er nicht in Frage gestellt werden. Dies gilt auch für die Deutschen.

Der überwältigende Teil der deutschen Soldaten hat nicht für eine unmenschliche Diktatur, sondern in Erfüllung der Pflichten für Volk und Vaterland gekämpft. Unser Volk darf diese Soldaten nicht als imperialistische Faschisten-Horden beschimpfen lassen. Es ist aufgerufen, sich in Wahrung seiner Selbstachtung dagegen zu wehren.

Wir verschweigen kein Unrecht, das Deutsche begangen haben. Wir wehren uns aber dagegen, daß jede Erwähnung des schweren Unrechts, das an Deutschen begangen wurde, unterdrückt wird. Wir rechnen nichts auf, aber verwahren uns gegen jede Geschichtsklitterung und gegen jede einseitige Dokumentation“.

“Part of everyone’s dignity is a good reputation; it must not be jeopardized. This also applies to Germans.

The overwhelming majority of German soldiers did not fight to protect an inhuman regime, but considered it their duty to fight for their nation. Our people must not be allowed to defame those soldiers as imperialistic fascist hordes. We call upon them to defend them, so as to sustain their own dignity.

We are not interested in covering up injustices committed by Germans. We are however protesting against the cover up of the injustices committed against us Germans. We are not interested in finger pointing, but are against the distortion of history and the one-sided [jewish]  portrayal of history.”

The book was published based on documents and testimony supplied by members of that organization and because the German government refused to publish the material. And also because of the waves of propaganda emanating from the east about “German criminals” alongside portrayals of the Soviet army as the “most humane army in the world”, this according to a TASS release (p. 11). Novosti, a Russian daily, praised the immediate help provided by the Red Army, supplying necessary goods for civilians (Actually they stole everything they could get their hands on; I witnessed some of it. Wilf). The article continued to say that the treatment of German POWs was “beyond reproach” and in compliance with the Geneva Convention, which surprised the POWs (p. 10). Here’s a comment by the Organization, on the same page:

“Dies ist ein Hohn auf die 1,2 Millionen in sowjetischen Lagern umgekommenen deutschen Kriegsgefangenen und Hunderttausender von Heimkehrern, die nach ihrer Entlassung in der Heimat vor Entkräftung verstorben oder heute noch schwer gesundheitsgeschädigt sind“.

“This makes a mockery of the 1.2 million German POWs who died in Soviet captivity, as well as of the hundreds of thousands who died at home as a result of malnutrition or are still suffering from the effects of ill treatment.”

The “Voice of the GRD” (Stimme der DDR) on April 26, 1975 asked why German fathers and sons were killed. Their answer: they were part of a “fascist campaign of conquest” and it is therefore a fact “that every German soldier was a participant in the biggest crime in European history.” This is how every German soldier was branded a “war criminal,” a practice originating from jewish propaganda at that time and now accepted as fact by “historians” and the public. The Czech news agency PAP stated on the same day that “German soldiers were kept a little longer in POW camps because of their dishonorable fighting practices.” This “little longer” meant ten years for many, violating all international agreements regarding treatment of POWs.

But, there appears to have been some concern in the East about the truth emerging. On March 20, 1975 – keep in mind that this hype was all about the 30th anniversary of the defeat of the “German Fascists” and the May 8th celebrations – Radio Moscow raised concerns about “curious news” coming from Bonn (the German capital then), of the pending release of “disreputable (berüchtigte) documents concerning crimes allegedly committed on German soldiers during the war,” and that the publication of this material would be considered a new “provocation.” Radio Moscow continued to say that in this document, “soldiers and partisans of the SU, Poland, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, in fact the whole of the antifascist organizations, are defamed.” A comment by the authors: “Whoever experienced the malicious and devious tactics used by the partisans will have to agree that it is not a defamation, but fact.” (p. 11)

No effort was spared to prevent the publication of the 17 volume documentary, as well as the book under discussion: the eastern paranoia suggesting that details were known and publication was feared.

“The intent was to exonerate the Germans and defame the Red Army”: that according to the eastern mass media. “Izvestia” on March 1, 1975 called the documentary “dirty rubbish” (diesen dreckigen Plunder); Radio Prague talked of a “neofascist provocation”; Radio Moscow informed its listeners that this was “in contrast…to the spirit and contents of the agreements signed with the socialist countries,” referring to the 1975 Helsinki accord then in preparation.

As expected, the German government, no doubt ‘encouraged’ by jewish others, caved in. Government spokesman Bölling declared on February 4, 1975, even before the big push from the East, that although the facts cannot be denied and he has no reason to doubt any of it, he is against publication of the documents because it would nullify all efforts made by German governments. “By our policy we have for years tried to come to an understanding with other countries, to overcome the problems of crimes committed by Germans and on Germans.” And he considers it bad politics that this issue “is pushed to the fore and used by those not interested in conciliation.” (pp. 12, 13)

The authors protest against this interpretation, especially the last sentence. It is not them who are preventing conciliation, but the East that continues to distort facts, portraying German soldiers as criminals and the others as saints. It is not the Organization’s intention to shift the blame, but to present facts to prevent this subject from being used as a “political club.” Soldiers especially are interested in peace, but if one side continually sabotages every effort at coming to an understanding, by distorting facts, peace cannot be achieved.

Wilhelm Anders closed his deliberation by stating that, according to a poll, 55% of Germans are in favor of addressing this issue fairly. He asks, “Are they all “Neofascists, Revanchists or Enemies of Détente?” One has to wonder if 30 years plus later 55% of Germans would still welcome a fair reworking of history. I doubt it; it appears that most Germans today are satisfied with distorted history and are comfortable with their guilty role. This is a disturbing development: the intended jewish “re-education,” or brainwashing, has taken effect.

The next chapter is titled “Soviet Union” (Sowjetunion), and begins with “Morgenröte der Befreiung“ (The dawn of liberation). It is well worth the effort to go into this before continuing with the plight of German POWs, this time in the Soviet Union (SU), for it lays the foundation for what happened to Germans who fell into the hands of the Red Army, soldiers and civilians alike.

To reiterate yet again, the publishing of the book was brought about because of the lies – concerning the conduct of German soldiers – emanating from the judeo-communist countries before the 1975 thirtieth anniversary of the defeat of “Fascism.”

When the Organization of Repatriates (Organisation der Heimkehrer [Organization]) asked the German Chancellor to stop this defamation of the former soldiers, to set the record straight based on the material amassed (see Part I), the Polish news agency PAP wrote on April 26, 1975 that this defamation is an invention by revanchist organizations in an effort to rehabilitate the German armed forces (Verbrechen der Sieger, p. 169). The paper continued to say that the Organization is comprised of officers and soldiers who, because of their conduct in the war – ‘to put it mildly’ – had to remain a little longer in the POW camps. But, so the Organization, those soldiers did not need to be rehabilitated, their conduct was, for the most part, beyond approach. And, most of them, kept under horrendous conditions, were released only because the German government promised the reinstitution of diplomatic ties with Moscow (p. 170).

But nonetheless, in April 1975, “Novosti”, a Russian news service, saw the need to refute “the old stories about atrocities committed on German POWs” by publishing the USSR Decree Concerning Prisoners of War of July 1, 1941. No need to go into this, it promised POWs heaven on earth but was totally ignored by the Russian camp authorities, if they were even aware of it. Same for the POWs, if anyone of them would have known about this Ukase and asked guards to adhere to it, he would most likely have been shot on the spot (p.171). In fact, the publishing of those rules, which were ignored in Toto, was an insult to the 1.1 million German POWs who – under horrendous conditions – perished in Soviet camps. Even the – never published – documentation compiled by Germans could never tell the whole story because Russian archives remain locked, with good reason (p.176).

Russian soldiers were saturated with hatred for Germans. This is of course no excuse for the atrocities committed on POWs and civilians alike, but it was the Soviet authorities that had their commissars and the like preach hatred. The psychotic murderous jew Ilja Ehrenburg was one of them, just one example of what he had to say: “There is nothing as beautiful as a German corpse. Kill the Germans! – your old mother begs you, kill the Germans! –  your child pleads. Germans are not humans, they are wild beasts” (p.177).

In an interview with “Sowjetunion heute“ (Today’s Soviet JUnion), a glossy magazine published by the Soviet Embassy in Bonn, Pantelejemon Ponomarenko, the Red Army general in charge of partisan activities, stated that his partisans killed, wounded or imprisoned 1.5 million German soldiers and support staff (with imprisonment equal to a death sentence in most cases). The general forgot to mention anything about partisan warfare, the butchering by them, the authors refer the reader to a book by the Latvian officer Valdis Redelis “Partisanenkrieg…”, I’ve ordered the book and will follow up on this.

Germans did react to partisan brutalities, but it was the partisans who initiated it and the “Commissar Order”, which in most cases did not even reach the troops, had nothing to do with the reprisal measures taken, they were taken out of necessity (p. 178).

Ponomarenko, in that interview, identified communism as the ‘core’ of the partisan movement, and it is no secret that jews had invented communism. The German leadership knew all of this and no doubt jews were looked at closely in the occupied territories. For good reason, for not only were jews “carriers of the Bolshevik idea”, they were also “leaders of the partisan movement” (R. Aschenauer, Krieg ohne Grenzen, Druffel-Verlag, 1982, p. 252).

“Where there are partisans, there are jews, and where there are jews, there are partisans” (F.W. Seidler, Die Wehrmacht im Partisanenkrieg, Pour le Mérite-Verlag für Militärgeschichte, 1999, p. 124).

“jews in the work camps sabotaged guns and other products they were making for the Germans. Partisans with ammunition blew up thousands of NAZI supply trains, making it harder for the Germans to fight the war. In Lithuania, jewish partisans were responsible for significant damage to NAZI trains… Partisans also destroyed numerous NAZI power plants and factories, and focused their attention on other military and strategic targets, not on civilians.” http://www.jewishpartisans.org/t_switch.php?pageName=what+is+what+2

The thousands of NAZI supply trains part is an exaggeration, left over from the time when jews bragged about their involvement in illegal warfare.

This has now all but disappeared, jews are to be seen as innocent victims.

On June 29, 1941, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the de facto ruling body, issued the order for the organization of partisan units, so-called diversion groups, with Ponomarenko later appointed as commander (p. 179). Stalin publicized this order in his radio address of July 3, 1941. Following this, men who could handle weapons, but also woman were recruited, Children also joined, see Part II (p. 180).

To be successful, and to ensure cooperation, the partisans also terrorized the population. Anyone suspected of collaborating with the Germans was killed, because the population was at first friendly toward the Germans, as those who were part of the eastern campaign know (p.180).

This changed when the partisans unleashed their terror against the populace. When they entered a village they immediately killed the village elder, then they locked the family into the house and burned it down. The villagers fled into the forest, but when discovered by the partisans they were killed. The partisans left mountains of bodies behind, as well as distraught woman and horrendous destruction (p. 181).

And to be sure, all of those killed by the partisans were no doubt also blamed on the Germans. And as attacks by partisans on civilians were carried out with partisans at times doubtlessly wearing German uniforms, hatred towards Germans was the result, which was part of what was intended.

The Ukrainian partisan chief Fjedorov (no first name provided) bragged that they had killed more than 25,000 Germans and derailed 683 trains transporting soldiers and war material. In a radio address he gave instructions as to how to kill a German guard. Sneak up to him and kill him with a strike to the head, using an axe. All of it has to be done quickly to prevent him from crying out. Fedorov published a book, translated into German: “Das illegale Gebietskomitee arbeitet” (The illegal territorial committee at work) (pp. 181-82). That book has also fallen into the black hole.

In another radio address of May 1, 1942, Stalin told his listeners that the partisans have become more brutal, more merciless (p. 183). A competition was initiated between partisan units; each partisan had to kill at least five “fascists” and has to take part in at least three actions per month (p.184). Ponomarenko described – in a book by the English authors Dixon and Heilbrunn “Communist Guerilla Warfare” – the ‘dress code’ of partisans: Whoever observed the Bogdan group could not know what to make of it. More than half of them were dressed in German uniforms, some wear civilian cloth manufactured in Rovno or Lutsk, others Slovakian and Polish uniforms.

In the supply wagon clothing’s for all sorts of partisan activities are carried along: SS uniforms, Italian uniform pants, etc. Ponomarenko admits here that his partisans were bandits, dressed in German and other uniforms and thus not protected by any convention (p. 185).

Now to the ‘liberation’ by the judeo Red Army. In the third edition of “Geschichte der Kommunistischen Partei der Sowjetunion” (History of the communist party in the SU), published in 1970 (1971 in German), we read:

“Die Rote Armee zog als Befreier nach dem Westen. Dem Sowjetvolk, das für seine Freiheit und Unabhängigkeit kämpfte, konnten die Schicksale der anderen Völker, die unter dem Joch des Faschismus schmachteten, nicht gleichgültig sein. Den Ideen des proletarischen Internationalismus treu, ver­wies die Partei während des ganzen Krieges immer wieder auf die historische Befreiermission der sowjetischen Soldaten. Von diesem hohen Ziel beflügelt, brachte die Rote Armee den Völkern Europas die Befreiung von der faschisti­schen Sklaverei… Über den versklavten Völkern Europas leuchtet die Morgenröte der Befreiung auf.” . (Seite 623)

“The Red Army moved westward as a liberator. The people of the SU, who fought for their freedom and independence, could not be indifferent about the fate of others who still suffered under the Fascist joke. True to the ideals of proletarian Internationalism, the party always pointed out the mission of liberation to the Russian soldier. Carried by that lofty idealism, the Red Army liberated the people of Europe from Fascist slavery…The dawn of liberation has broken over the people of Europe; p. 189).”

Reading this I am reminded of my time in the GDR. The same slogans were used year in year out, while reality differed substantially. The Czechs experienced “liberation” in October 1944. The country received a communist regime, Benes, who had returned from exile, was forced to resign in June 1948. On March 9, 1948, foreign minister Masaryk ‘fell’ out of a window, a protest march of 10,000 Prague students was greeted with gunfire (p.191).

Ukraine did not fare any better. According to a report compiled by the Kersten- Committee, published in Germany in 1962, the regime of terror started with the arrival of the Bolsheviks in Kiev. Anyone appearing suspicious was murdered; mass murder became the norm. When the Germans arrived in 1941 they found 6,000 mutilated bodies in the basement of the Lvov prison, and that is just one example (pp. 191-92).

Now to the Baltic’s: here also, when the Soviets first occupied the countries, the terror began. In 1941 – 10,000 Estonian men, woman and children were deported to Siberia, 34,000 from Latvia, among them 1,877 school children and 1,188 children under six years old, 34,260 from Lithuania. All of it as ordered by the butcher Serov. What was started then was completed in 1944 following the ‘liberation’: From 1945 to 1949, about 150,000 Estonians were taken to the SU, as well as 290,000 Latvians. The number of Lithuanians taken is not known. Those suspected of collaboration with Germans were executed (p. 194).

Poland also did not do so well during the “liberation.” As long as the Polish resistance fought along side the Red Army they were tolerated, but when the fighting stopped the officers were separated from the men and shot or taken to camps. Between July 1944 and 1945, 50,000 Polish resistance fighters were arrested, 20 commanders executed because of their expressed loyalty to the government in exile in London. Show trials were conducted and death sentences handed out. 40,000-resistance fighters were sent to Siberia, according to Mikolayczyk, head of the government in exile (p. 196).

Romania: Of the 3,331 priests and clergyman still around in 1945, by 1953 — 1,462 had been killed, 250 were missing, and 400-500 were jailed. 40 concentration camps still existed in 1955; in 1954 about 230,000 Romanian POWs were still held in Russian work camps, and 100,000 ethnic Germans were deported by the judeo Red Army. Between 1940 and 1941 and after 1945, some 850,000 Rumanians from Bessarabia and Bukovina (Germans?) were taken to the SU. 30,000 men and woman were forced to help build the Black Sea-Danube Canal, among them priests, professors, farmers, workers and students. The Russian guards took women to be interrogated; they later returned beaten up and many of them had been raped. Those who became pregnant often died. 

When the camps were closed, the inmates were loaded into cattle cars and driven around for weeks, aimlessly. The majority died, because no real food was provided and no water (pp. 198-99). This was taken from testimony given before a UN commission; the US had sent Mark F. Ethridge to investigate. But here, too, one wonders if the part about transports in cattle cars without water was not later adopted by jews.

Many more details provided, too many to list here, but nothing of it mentioned at the IMT, Russians acting as judges and prosecutors, the Red Army portrayed as liberators – as the most humane army in the world. And Germans are blamed for anyone missing, no doubt in those cases as well. East Germans were of course also hit hard by the “liberation.” Not just in the eastern part of Germany proper but also while trying to flee their ancestral homes in East Prussia, Silesia, etc., with Russian tanks plowing through refugee convoys consisting of women, children and old people for the most part. Hubertus Knabe wrote about it, in “Tag der Befreiung?” (Day of Liberation?, Propyläen Verlag, Berlin 2005), but that book will have to be discussed another time.

Russian officers told their troops that they are allowed to plunder and rape with impunity, and that they did. Official historiography wants us to believe that the conquest of Silesia and finally Berlin was delayed by two to three month because of stiff German resistance. Not so. It was the propaganda – and orders – hammered into the Russian soldiers that, when they entered Germany, they had now stepped into the “cave of the Fascist animal” (Höhle des faschistischen Tieres), and should take revenge however they please. The logical consequence was that the troops refused to follow orders, quasi deserting.

Following the war Marshals Shukov and Chuikov openly debated if the war could not have ended three month sooner. Der Spiegel, a German magazine, wrote about it on July 14, 1965:

„Eine historische Sicht des ,Wunders an der Oder’, die von den Erinnerun­gen der beiden Marschälle erheblich abweicht, gab einer ihrer damaligen Untergebenen: Exhauptmann Boris Olschanski, der jetzt in Argentinien lebt. In seinem Buch ,Wir kommen vom Osten’ nennt der ehemalige Mathe­matikdozent die Gründe, die seiner Ansicht nach für den Abbruch der russischen Berlin-Offensive im Februar 1945 maßgebend waren: Auf der Jagd nach Frauen, Beute und Schnaps hätten sich ganze Teile der Roten Armee in den ostdeutschen Weiten verflüchtigt. Vergebens hätten die höheren Stäbe versucht, die plündernde, mordende und sengende Truppe wieder in die Gewalt zu bekommen. Fluchend habe sich der Chef der 5. Stoß­armee, Generalleutnant Bersarin (später der erste Stadtkommandant von Berlin) auf den Weg gemacht, um mit vorgehaltener Pistole die Befolgung seiner Befehle zu erzwingen. Doch auch Bersarin resignierte: ,Man kann nicht zwei Hasen auf einmal fangen: rächen und kämpfen. Die Armee hat sich aufgelöst, hol’s der Teufel!’”

“A former subordinate of the two Marshals, Captain Boris Olshanski who now lives in Argentine, provided an account of the ‘miracle on the Oder’ which differs from that of the two Marshals. In his book “We are arriving from the east” the former professor of mathematics gives his view of the reasons for the abandonment of the Berlin offensive in February 1945: In their hunt for woman, loot and booze whole segments of the Red Army vanished into the vast expanses of eastern Germany. The commanders tried in vain to regain control over the plundering, murdering and scorching troops. Lieutenant General Bersarin, swearing and with his gun pointing tried to have his orders adhered to. But he also resigned: ‘Impossible to catch two rabbits at the same time: revenge and fighting. The army has disintegrated, to hell with it!’; pp. 206-07.”

I experienced some of it, our home only about 50km from the Oder/Neiße. And although by then Russian officers had regained some control, raping and pillaging still went on for days. On the other hand, German soldiers were severely punished if caught looting; some were shot (p. 207). Even the burning down of villages — which housed partisans and the villagers supporting them — was prohibited (p. 188).

It was not only the likes of the murderous psychotic jew Ilja Ehrenburg who urged Russian soldiers to kill Germans at will. In the Soviet Union no actions by individuals were tolerated, one can thus be certain that this incitement for hatred, the call to murder, was officially sanctioned. The so-called Kommissars played a large role in it, spreading communist ideology, i.e., hatred for Germans. They also positioned themselves behind the lines and ‘urged’ their soldiers on, discouraging any attempt to surrender with machine gun volleys into the formations of their own soldiers (Victor Suvorov, Marschall Schukow. Lebensweg über Leichen, Pour le Mérite, Verlag für Militärgeschichte, Selent, 2002, p. 262f). Hitler was aware of the commissars and issued the so-called ‘Commissar Order’, that order was also largely ignored by German officers, and thus ineffective, to the detriment of German POWs.

The actions by commissars not only resulted in spreading hatred of anything German but also made for a desperate type of warfare on the part of Russian soldiers. Afraid to move back, even in hopeless situations, out of fear of getting shot by the NKVD troops stationed behind the lines and commanded by commissars, they moved forward, resulting in what can only be called massacres.

Suvorov describes this in the book mentioned above, but former German soldiers have also told me this. One of them, a former officer, told me that some of his soldiers became violently ill, vomiting, but had to continue firing into the onrushing Russian soldiers, who were often drunk, surrender would have been suicide. I fully understand that I am repeating hearsay, but these people had no reason to lie and Suvorov confirms what they told me.

Right at the start of the war, German soldiers who had been ambushed were found with their eyes gorged out and mutilated in the most horrendous fashion. One was found with his arms tied backward around a tree, his hands nailed to it, his eyes gorged out and his tongue cut out, some of them had their genitals cut off (pp. 208-09). During the fight near Selisharova in November 1941 a field hospital with 30 to 40 wounded fell into the hands of the Russians. When the Germans recaptured the area they found only charred remains. The Russians had piled the wounded into a stack, poured gasoline over them and burned them. Woman also participated in the atrocities, slitting the wounded open. Here also pages upon pages of this and that the reason the Soviets are trying to prevent this from being published (pp. 208-13).

The numbers of those killed, unless found by Germans, will never be known, even if Russian archives should be opened, for the Russians did not keep records (p.176). The same goes for those German soldiers who died in captivity. Estimates of those captured range from 3.2 to 3.5 million, with about 1.1 million of them dying while held prisoner.

As for the treatment of POWs we have a repeat of what happened to them in Yugoslav captivity. It also started with Todesmärsche und Todestransporte (death marches and transports), the caption of a chapter (pp.219ff).

The intent of the marches was to impress the population, German POWs displayed as trophies. It started with Stalingrad, bodies of German POWs covered with snow lining the marching routes. The temporary camp Beketova held 50,000 to 60,000 prisoners, 42,000 of them died of hunger and diseases.

And as was the norm, German POWs were stripped clean, anything of any value, perceived or real, taken from them. During drunken parties Russian soldiers adorned themselves with the rings, watches and medals they had stolen (p. 220). About one quarter of the marchers died, either just collapsed or were shot as stragglers or while trying to reach drinking water.

Those transported by train did not fare better, the numbers of dead as high as those from the marches (p. 224). Of the about two million Germans taken prisoner outside the territorial SU, 250,000 died before they reached POW camps (p. 225). One of the harassments consisted of feeding the transported with salted herrings, but not supplying any drinking water.

Life in the camps was not better, with the Soviets making an effort to curtail the activities of the IRC; East-Berlin RC officials were taken to the SU and interned (p. 229). Bugs, fleas and rats were steady companions. In one of the camps with 5,000 inmates the toilet consisted of 4 holes dug into the ground, 15 small bowls for washing, and the death rate about one per hour (p. 234). And here also, the list goes on and on.

As in the Yugoslav camps, in Soviet camps German communists also formed Antifa (anti fascist) committees, supposedly organized to look after the welfare of the POWs. But they were traitors of the worst kind, setting work norms so high that many of the POWs died trying to fulfill them. They also participated in torture, pointing out victims to the officials. Those ‘confessions’ were later also used to convict in the show trials (pp. 237-245). Efforts were made by Antifa members to plant distrust between officers and men, successful to some extend, for rewards were offered (pp. 246-252).

Hunger was also a steady companion, making willing participants out of some to just have the ration increased if only for a day. To understand the actions of those a Russian proverb is offered: Someone with a full stomach will never understand the hungry. And they did not just go hungry for a few weeks, but for years (p. 253). The German commission formed to investigate the plight of POWs concerned themselves with rations, the details filling one of the 15, as of now unpublished, volumes. An average daily rations consisted of 400-600 grams bread, vegetables only in soups with traces of meat in them but mostly just water with clover or some corn in it. The consequence was dystrophy and diarrhea, with death the final solution in most cases. Packages send from home were opened, but still at times they were virtual life savers (p. 254). A few details: 60% of the bread consisted of water which was dispersed at 1:00 in the morning; the ‘bread’ was served hot in an almost liquid form, but the hunger forced it down (p. 256). Frozen potatoes were used and when spring arrived, the stench emanating from them was overpowering, causing many to vomit; unable to eat the ‘soup’. Regardless, the full, required, calorie count was recorded every day (p. 257).

And it must not be forgotten that the POWs were forced to work under those conditions, hard work in many cases, mining or work in the forest, with death bringing in a rich harvest. “Those who died did so in spite of all the efforts by Russian doctors”, or so “Sowjetunion heute” has it. True, some doctors tried but it was the inhuman communist system that was not interested in their survival. And all efforts made to reach an understanding must address this also (pp. 333-34).

Reading this is not easy for me, having experienced some of the effects of ‘liberation’ by the Red Army. Also, following the war, those soldiers lucky enough to have survived the Soviet POW camps talked openly about it; I heard many a horror story. But that side of it has now disappeared. German soldiers are now portrayed as criminals, with the other side fighting the ‘good war’. And historians participate in this distortion, willingly. One can only hope that there is a higher justice.

The last two chapters of Verbrechen der Sieger are titled “Polen” (Poland) and “Tschechoslowakei” (Czechoslovakia).

Poland was defeated and therefore did not have any legitimate armed forces and as a consequence not able to capture “Prisoners of War”. About 800,000 German POWs were concentrated in the area of East/Germany-Poland, among them 7,500 POWs discharged by Americans and delivered to the Poles (p.342).

Nobody knows how many Germans were given to the Poles by the Russians, for one because both the Russians as well as the Poles refuse to allow access to the archives. And two, because the Poles did not label their camps ‘POW camps’ but ‘work camps’, and with this managing to get around the bothersome legalities concerning Prisoners of War. These camps also housed civilians, impossible therefore to come up with precise POW numbers. The closes estimate is 70,000; employed in a variety of slave labor positions, from mines to farm work (pp.228/39).

The Poles claimed that they had a right to employ German POWs, as part of reparations for damage done by the Germans. The fact that they received huge chunks of German territory was ignored. It is estimated that Germans worked a combined total of 61,393,060 days from 1945 to 1950: 70% of them in mines, 15% on farms and 15% rebuilding Warsaw. The average workday in Warsaw, for instance, started at 6 AM and lasted to 8 PM, 14 hr. days with a one-hour lunch break. In the winter they worked less hours, of course, because of the shorter days. As a doctor testified, Sunday was a workday as any other, although only 8 hours, there were no holidays (p.339). They received no pay and were wholly dependant on the rations provided to them by the camp commanders. Starting in 1948 they were to receive pay, a laborer 25 Zloty a day, a tradesman 50 and an engineer 75. That is what was on paper, in reality most received nothing, or 10% of what was due to them. The price for one kg of bread was 35 Zloty, one kg of butter 700, one pound of bacon 300 and 20 cigarettes 60 Zloty. Clothing was unaffordable; most POWs were dressed in rags. An IRC report states that in Warsaw camps there is a severe shortage of coats, shirts/pants, underwear, shoes and personal hygiene articles (p.340).

From 1947 on things improved – but took a turn for the worst again in 1949 when large contingents of them were released. The clothing of those to be discharged was stored, only handed to them at the last moment so as to have them appear fairly well dressed when arriving home.

German POWs were humiliated whenever and wherever possible. Those working in mines were treated worst of all, forced to walk around in rags in public, their heads shaven, with a number on their backs, often accompanied by a swastika. Officers were treated the same, everything possible stolen from them by civilians during the long “atonement/show” marches. Reports of ill treatment abound, driving some of them insane (p.341).

Train transports were as inhumane as the marches, 80 men forced into a freight car. For a three day journey 2kg of bread provided for 4 men, at the arrival they were sent straight into the mines. The guards shot those showing signs of exhaustion. And if anyone of them still had a coat, it was taken away when they entered camp. Even those discharged had no assurance that they would get home, and, only those too sick to be of any use were let go, they were not considered to be humans but waste (Schrott) which had to be disposed of. From a transport of 700 men, leaving Lodz on December 18, 1945 for Berlin, only 360 arrived still alive, and that is only one example (pp.343/44).

The IRC did their best, but were powerless because the authorities were unwilling to cooperate, refusing to provide the locations of all the camps. POWs were forced to sleep in huts with cracks in the walls, on straw infested with any bug imaginable. To sleep outside in summer, to get away from the bugs, was forbidden (p.345). And, they had to work 14 hrs. a day, undernourished and deprived of sleep because of the bug problem, scores of them dying as a consequence (p.346). The physicians among the POW’s did their best, but even if they could identify the problem, there was no medicine to treat anyone. In some camps Polish students of medicine were supposed to care for the inmates, one for 1,000 inmates, they only spoke Polish and medicine, as well as any other equipment, was missing almost completely (p.347).

And as was the norm, no records of those who had died were kept, the bodies buried in unmarked graves. It is therefore easy for Polish authorities to fudge the numbers, anyone recording anything was punished and the records taken away.

In one of the mine camps, Beirut, two thirds of the 600 men died from October 1945 to March 1947. Conditions in the “extermination” camp Karsten-Centrum were even worse, some 480 died during a period of two and a half month. Mass graves were dug, up to 500 buried in one of them. Some of the graves were/are close to the camps, but there is no interest in launching an investigating (true right up to this day). Some were buried in single graves, the name on a cross, but in 1948 all the names were changed into Polish sounding names, making any attempt at identification impossible. Typhoid epidemics broke out, claiming hundreds of lives (p.349).

All of this is hushed up. Throughout that time the IRC was prevented from conducting proper investigations. Only in 1947 were they allowed to visit an SS-camp in the district of Jaworzno, the inmates isolated to then, not able to send any letters home. The IRC was unaware that two more camps existed in that vicinity, camp Chrusty and Libiaz. It is impossible to know how many other camps were kept hidden, this explains why the veil of uncertainty still hides the fate of many of the POWs captured by the Poles. And this veil will probably never be lifted (354).

Czechoslovakia.   

On September 25, 1974, the parliamentarian Windelein asked secretary of state Gerhard Baum during a session of the Bundestag (German parliament) if it would not be advisable to compile the information on crimes committed by Germans and on Germans in a white book, to allow the younger generation to come up with an appropriate assessment of the worst period in European history. The reason for this request was the upcoming 30th memorial of the end of the war. Baum answered that the young generation is sufficiently informed. When asked if that is the case also for crimes committed on Germans, Baum claimed that all of this is known, but pointed out that a summary of all the crimes committed on Germans would be impossible to come up with, because of the unreliability of the sources, forgetting to mention that the judeo-communist countries to this day refuse to open their archives. Baum then quoted foreign secretary Brandt who had stated that:

“…mit einer massierten Publizierung des Materials werde politische Absicht verfolgt und eine Diskussion des Inlandes oder gar des Auslandes provoziert”.

“…that by publishing the material a political agenda would be pursued, provoking a discussion in Germany and even abroad.”

And, he continued, this would only open old wounds in all involved and would be counter to the efforts by the government to come to an understanding.

And indeed a storm of protest erupted in Czechoslovakia when even the intent of publishing documents on crimes committed on Germans was discussed.

Rude Pravo, a Czech paper, in an article of March 10, 1975, talked of a “cynical demand for the publication of crimes committed during relocation” and an “immoral campaign”. Radio Prague already announced on February 17 that this was “an obvious and provocative attempt to falsify the history of WWI and to incite hatred”. When a few German papers did publish some documents, the same radio station dismissed it as “mendacious drivel”(erlogenes Geschreibsel), aimed at young people who had “no knowledge of history, or at best only an fragmented and distorted account of it”. And how would a person in the BRD, the broadcast continued, be able to ascertain if what is published is the truth? By publishing this the seed of mistrust is planted.

Two issues here: Baum is wrong when stating that the young generation is informed as to what really happened, and two, it is the communist authors who distort history. By publishing this book the intent is to break through the wall of lies and to inform Germans and the world – so an honest attempt can be made to find closure (pp.357-59).

The next subchapter is captioned: “So gerieten sie in tschechoslowakische Hand” (This is how they ended up in the hands of the Czechoslovaks).

Since Czechoslovakia was not one of the countries at war with Germany they also could not take any “Prisoners Of War”, but 25,000 German soldiers still ended up in their camps. And just as in other countries, here too exact figures are impossible to establish, no records were kept, the numbers of those dying in captivity unrecorded, the graves never found. To those perishing in captivity the numbers of civilians murdered during the campaigns of hatred against Germans, Austrians and Hungarians must be added. But as was done in Poland, here also civilians were interned in the same camps as POWs, 167 camps have been identified; the majority of them in the coal mining region of Moravia-Ostrava, with the uranium mine of Joachimsthal a special case, to be addressed later (p.359).

All the soldiers interned in Czechoslovakia were POWs who had either surrendered or were captured by the judeo Red Army; about one million of them in the territory of Czechoslovakia-Saxony.

This figure includes 135,000 soldiers handed over by the Americans, former citizens of Czechoslovakia before the breakup of the country. The Americans used treachery to identify them, as testified to by one of the affected. In one of their camps, Remagen, they announced over the loudspeakers that former Czechoslovak citizens are to report to the authorities, for early release. About 20,000 responded in that camp alone, among them German citizens, former officials of the Protectorate. The POWs were transported into Czechoslovakia in open cattle cars. Some of the soldiers captured in Czechoslovakia by the Americans were registered by them and then handed over to the Russians. Older POWs, as well as the sick were left for the Czechs; the rest marched to Russia, many of them perishing during the forced marches/transports (pp.359-362).

The motto was: “All Germans must perish” (Alle Deutschen müssen krepieren), maltreatment and torture the norm, verbal abuse the mildest form. Beatings with wooden sticks were the preferred method, but rubber truncheons and cables were also used (p.363). Former German citizens of the state of Czechoslovakia, created after WWI, were of course singled out for revenge. A transport of Sudeten-Germans, released from Russian captivity in September 1945, was made to stop in Tetschen-Bodenbach, the passengers taken to camp Böhmisch-Kamnitz, describes as an extermination camp. Every day several of them were beaten to death, among them invalids who had lost a leg or an arm. After six weeks the rest were marched to the mining camp of Dux, whoever straggled was shot.

Members of the remnants of the partisan units or revolutionary guards, who now represented the Czech army –which never existed until May 1945 –, were the worst perpetrators. They beat the prisoners when they entered the camp, the inmate’s hair was shaven, they were beaten again and then made to stand for hours in the hot sun (Here again I am reminded of the tales told by jews). Beatings occurred day and night, the Czechs entering the camps at night, inmates were taken from their bunks and beaten unconscious, or until they were dead (pp.366/67). Many, many more details are provided here also, too many to list.

The IRC tried their best, but were prevented from entering the camps in many cases, if they were even aware of their existence. IRC officials pointed out that even though Germany had surrendered unconditionally, the soldiers had not lost their status as a POW – to no avail, they were powerless. The IRC issued a memorandum on July 2, 1946, followed by a second on November 28, 1947, stating in the latter that the war had ended two years ago and that therefore the continued incarceration of POWs can not be justified. This also fell on deaf ears, the beatings continued into the fall of 1947 (pp.369/70).

Hygienic conditions were atrocious, medical care almost non existent. From fall 1946 on, no resident doctors were assigned to any of the camps, casualties impossible to ascertain but it is estimated that 20% of the inmates perished. From the 5,000 to 6,000 POWs passing through Camp Prag-Motol, a transit camp, about 1,600 died between August 1945 and March 1946 (374/75). Food was also at a premium. The British Member of Parliament, R.R. Stokes, published a letter in the Manchester Guardian in October 1945. He had visited 51 camps and had informed the Czech ministry of the interior about the conditions. In one camp for instance, on September 3, 1945, 550 pounds of bread, 750 pounds of potatoes, 80 pounds of sugar, 30 pounds of coffee, as well as 18 pounds of butter or margarine and some 70 pounds of vegetables were made available for 912 inmates, adding up to 750 calories per man. And they were forced to work very hard, making the inmates feel like slaves. Stokes made a surprise visit to one of the camps at 5:30 am, and was astonished that at 6:00 o’clock the first cars and trucks appeared, the drivers picking out ‘their’ slaves, a short time later the camp was empty. Anyone refusing to go was beaten mercilessly (pp.377/78). Young people and women were not exempt from the beatings and killings (pp.382ff).

Just a little about the Joachimsthal mine.  Because of the uranium deposits in that mine the Soviets had come to a secret agreement with the Czech government in exile already during the war, allowing the Soviets to mine the uranium for a period of 99 years. The whole area around the mine was hermetically sealed off, 300 German POWs working the mine at first but when it was fully developed in 1947/48, 7,000 POWs were taken to Joachimsthal. The hard work and the absence of even basic safety equipment made for treacherous conditions, one needs to add to that the exposure to radioactive material. The men worked crawling around on all four, the mineshafts extremely low and narrow to save costs. Cave-ins were the norm, the men suffered from shortage of air, pain in the lungs because of the mine dust, but no regular medical checkups were ordered. The food rations were also inadequate, many of the POWs, aware of their dangerous occupation, tried to flee, most of them caught and punished, some shot. In 1950 the survivors were finally released, the fate of them unknown (pp.389-394).

Thus ends the book. Some of the Joachimsthal miners continued to work in the uranium mines in Aue, East Germany. They probably knew that they were walking dead because of the exposure to radioactive rays and work in that mine earned them and their families the best ration cards. I saw one of them, paraded as an example, for he always fulfilled his work norm, exceeding the norm. He was a walking skeleton.

No need to add any more to this, many of the details were left out but I tried to give an overall account. It has not been easy for me to read this book; it brought back memories I did not know existed any longer. The sad part is that all of this has been forgotten, German soldiers who fought in WWII and were made to suffer and killed after the fighting had stopped are now on top of it – to add insult to injury – depicted as criminals by modern ‘historians.’ The fifteen-volume documentary compiled by that scientific commission still not published, archives in Russia et al still locked. Some authors addressed the issues, Joachim Hoffmann one of them in his Stalins Vernichtungskrieg (Stalin’s war of destruction; Verlag für Wehrwissenschften, München 1996, pp.215-250). He was threatened with a lawsuit, his book ignored by system whores, pardon, ‘historians’.

Armes Deutschland.

Source