Dave Emory’s entire lifetime of work is available on a flash drive that can be obtained here. The new drive is a 32-gigabyte drive that is current as of the programs and articles posted by late spring of 2015. The new drive (available for a tax-deductible contribution of $65.00 or more) contains FTR #850.
WFMU-FM is podcasting For The Record–You can subscribe to the podcast HERE.
You can subscribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE.
You can subscribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.
You can subscribe to the comments made on programs and posts–an excellent source of information in, and of, itself HERE.
This program was recorded in one, 60-minute segment.
Introduction: Supplementing previous discussions with Peter Levenda about his landmark book The Hitler Legacy, we once again speak with Peter about his work, focusing primarily on his “prequel,” Ratline.
Immigration has dominated the news recently, with the flood of refugees from the wars in the Middle East overwhelming European infrastructure as the phenomenon dominates political debate and Donald Trump capitalizes on anti-immigrant xenophobia to lead the field of presumptive GOP Presidential candidates. In The Hitler Legacy, Peter noted anti-immigrant sentiment and xenophobia as part of “The Hitler Legacy.”
Fear of “the other” has been a staple of fascist thought and is dominating much of the political discourse on both sides of the Atlantic.
Turning to what might be described as the “prequel” to The Hitler Legacy, we highlight Ratline. Dealing with the story of the mysterious Dr. Anton Poch, we analyze the disappearance of Adolf Hitler.
When one discusses Hitler’s escape at the end of the war, one is generally viewed as aberrant–a conspiracy nut. Peter highlights the curious behavior of the Soviets with regard to Hitler’s corpse–burying and reburying “Hitler’s remains” time and again in the months following V‑E Day.
Eventually, the remains were scientifically proved NOT to be those of Hitler, which calls into question the motive for Soviet behavior and the behavior of the Allies in the aftermath of the war.
The official version of Hitler’s death is The Last Days of Hitler by Hugh Trevor-Roper. Trevor-Roper was an agent for MI6 (British intelligence) at the time and the writing and publication of his book was, in and of itself, an intelligence operation–a “psy-op” called Operation Nursery.
This sets the background against which the mysterious Dr. Anton Poch’s situation must be evaluated. (We discuss Poch in FTR #‘s 845, 846.)
It was crafted to counteract Soviet charges that Hitler was alive and had gone over to the West, an allegation buttressed by information in Grey Wolf: The Escape of Adolf Hitler.
Program Highlights Include:
- Analysis of the flight of the mysterious Dr. Poch.
- Review of Father Draganovic and the significance of his presence in the journal of Dr. Poch.
- Comparison of Operation Nursery with the Warren Report.
- Discussion of Paul Leverkuhn, a Nazi spy who was the head of the European Union when he attended the first Bilderberg meeting.
- Mr. Emory’s discussion of the term “migrant” to describe the desperate political refugees flooding into Europe. It is xenophobic, as though some sort of wandering parasites were being described, not people fleeing for their lives.
1. Immigration has dominated the news recently, with the flood of refugees from the wars in the Middle East overwhelming European infrastructure as the phenomenon dominates political debate and Donald Trump capitalizes on anti-immigrant xenophobia to lead the field of presumptive GOP Presidential candidates.
In The Hitler Legacy, Peter noted anti-immigrant sentiment and xenophobia as part of “The Hitler Legacy.”
. . . Xenophobia is at an all-time high in Europe and increasingly in America. The Internet has provided new and improved means of communication. . . .
As the political life of every country becomes more and more polarized between “right” and “left,” the men of ODESSA can only laugh at our discomfort. . . .
2. Underscoring the Nazi roots of the EU and EMU, we review the presence of Third Reich alumnus and spy Paul Leverkuhn, who became head of the EU in the early 1950’s.
. . . . Paul Leverkuhn (1893–1960)–a lifelong diplomat, spy, and banker, Leverkuhn was also a devoted Nazi who joined the Party before the war began and who held various important posts in Germany during both World Wars. He had an extensive background running Abwehr operations in Turkey, and according to the CIA report referenced above he also ran a spy network after the war “based on Lebanon and extending into the Middle East.” Leverkuhn for the benefit of those with a conspiratorial frame of mind, was also in attendance at the very first Bilderberger meeting in 1954, as president of the European Union [!–D.E.]. It should be pointed out that this meeting took place four years before the CIA report was written claiming that Leverkuhn was running agents in the Middle East. . . .
3. Next, Peter reviews the bizarre handling of “Hitler’s corpse” by the Soviet security services over the years and the proof that the remains were NOT those of Hitler.
4. Before delving into the substance of Ratline, we briefly touch on the working hypothesis of “Grey Wolf,” the focal point of FTR #791. The authors posit that the key players in the realization of Aktion Feurland–the code-name for the operation facilitating Hitler’s escape–were Allen Dulles on the Allied side and Martin Bormann for the Third Reich. Centered on a quid pro quo arrangement, the authors hypothesize that Aktion Feurland involved the transfer of Nazi technology to the U.S. and the West (known as Project Paperclip) and the saving of priceless works of art from destruction.
In that context, we note that thousands of documents on both sides of the Atlantic dealing with Hitler’s postwar whereabouts are still classified!
. . . . During this period [the late 1940’s], the FBI was taking reports of Hitler being in Latin America very seriously. Thousands of documents pertaining to Hitler from these years are still classified as Top Secret on both sides of the Atlantic; nevertheless, and despite the very heavy censorship of the few files released into the public domain, some information can be gleaned. . . .
It was crafted to counteract Soviet charges that Hitler was alive and had gone over to the West (the possibility that Soviet intelligence may have known of Aktion Feurland is something to be contemplated.
A British intelligence officer, Hugh ˇTrevor-Roper (1914–2003) crafted the narrative concerning Hitler’s ultimate fate, beginning in September 1945 on a mission–called Operation Nursery–from the Secret Intelligence Service, or MI6. This intelligence operation is the source of the story we have all been told since then. It is the authoritative version. It is based on a handful of interviews with former members of Hitler’s personal staff, only some of whom served in the bunker up until the fall of Berlin in May, 1945. This eventually became Trevor-Roper’s best-selling book entitled The Last Days of Hitler. It stands today as the definitive account of Hitler’s alleged suicide, even though there are barely thirty-live pages in the original edition that deal directly with the death itself. The reason for this is simple: there was no forensic evidence to work from. There were only statements of eyewitnesses, all of whom were Nazis and most of whom were in the SS. . . .
. . . . If one were to take all the testimony of all of the witnesses who have since written books or who have left behind transcripts of their interrogations by British, American and Russian intelligence officers, and compared them to each other we would soon begin to realize that there is virtually no consensus on critical points of the story. . . .
. . . . Whom to believe? Which version is really authoritative?
That depends on the agenda you wish to promote. History was being written by the victors to satisfy intelligence objectives and not to illuminate this dark matter of defeat and violent death. This was war, and the Allied forces were themselves about to discover that their respective agendas did not match. The Soviets had one set of goals in mind at the end of the conflict, and the Americans another. And the British another still. . . .
. . . . The choice of Trevor-Roper for the politically-sensitive task of determining Hitler’s fate would seem curious if not for the fact that his superior, Brigadier Dick White (later to become director of MI6), intended that a narrative be crafted that would counter the effects of Soviet insistence that Hitler was still alive. What was required was not the services of a lawyer or a scientist building a legal case from evidence but the services of someone who could build a historical text from odd bits of documents and dubious testimony, hobbled together with an eye towards presenting a single point of view. In other words, the mission objective of Trevor-Roper in Operation Nursery was a foregone one: to disprove Soviet statements that Hitler was still alive. Thus, it had to begin with the premise (presented as fact) that Hitler was dead and had committed suicide in the bunker on April 30, 1945, and then be worked backward from there. No other interpretation or presentation was acceptable. All he had to do was to collect enough “eyewitness” testimony–in German, a language he did not understand–that supported (or at least did not contradict) this version of evens, and compile them into a neat story that tied together all the loose ends that then would stand as the official version. The official British version. . . .
6. We briefly note a comparison of “Operation Nursery” with the Warren Report and the Commission that crafted it (Allen Dulles and John J. McCloy being part of the commission. CORRECTION: Winnacker did not write the Warren Report, apparently.
7. Returning to a subject covered in FTR #‘s 845, 846, we briefly review the flight of the “Pochs” and the remarkable occurrences that transpired in Indonesia surrounding Poch/Hitler.
Following Croatia’s declaration that it could no longer take any refugees last week, the government is now demanding that Greece stop allowing “migrants” (who just happen to be fleeing for their lives) to leave Greece’s refugee camps that Greece already can’t afford. It’s the latest unpleasant, if unsurprising, development in this mega-disaster. The longer you play twisted games, like ‘refugee hot potato’, the more everyone’s tempers flare...:
So Croatia has moved solidly into the “get off my lawn!” camp as Europe and the world continues flailing in the face of one of the most highly predictable humanitarian crises we’ve seen in years. How this gets resolved is unclear, but it’s worth noting that even if Greece had the resources to prevent the refugees from leaving Greece, that probably wouldn’t be a good or humane idea unless Greece was also given the resources to build them refugee camps that aren’t horribly under-resourced and over-crowded on islands not nearly large enough to hold them all and only a short boat ride from the 2 million Syrian refugees in Turkey:
As we can see, Greece isn’t exactly in a great position to deal with the tens of thousands of refugees already overflowing its islands, let alone the 2 million Syrian refugees in Turkey. And unless it gets some very serious EU aid, it’s very unclear how Greece is going to be able to anything other than the emergency management it’s already doing.
And as the article below points out, that EU assistance might be coming. But it may not be the kind of assistance Greece wants, as it has a rather ‘Troikan’ ring to it: Greece will get help form the EU managing its boarders possibly by handing its border responsibilities over to the EU:
Could Greece, and maybe Italy, cede some border controls while the EU sets up a new coast guard? And is this going to start applying to all EU members? We’ll see but plans are certainly in the works but another round of emergency pooling of national sovereignty might be about to take place for the EU. It will probably be too little, too late given the urgency of the situation, but since this crisis doesn’t look like it’s going to end soon we could still see some sort of plan for a new EU coast guard in the Mediterranean emerge eventually.
In related news, the Egyptian billionaire, Naguib Sawiris, has his “refugee nation” Greek island already picked out and if you want to own stock in his new island refugee nation, feel free to make a donation:
“Anyone who will donate will get share in the company, thus becoming a partner in the island and in the project...This way, any money put in will not be completely lost, as the asset (the island) will remain.”
One of the biggest questions raised by all of the new fiscal constraints, like the Fiscal Compact, that the eurozone and larger EU has imposed on itself as part of the collective response to Europe’s financial/debt crisis is how flexible will the budget rules actually be in the face of a serious humanitarian emergency that requires a violation of those budget rules.
Considering that the austerity-driven responses to the eurozone crisis have, themselves, created all sort of domestic humanitarian crises with little sympathy from the pro-austerity governments, it might be tempting to assume that budget constraints with win out over humanitarian needs. But in the case of the current Syrian refugee crisis which is far more severe, deprioritizing humanitarian concerns may not be so easy. The world is watching. At the same, this is the New Europe we’re talking about here, so where urgent humanitarian needs fall within the hierarchy of New Europe’s priorities is sort of an open question at this point:
“We are facing a historic challenge that we won’t do justice to with bean-counting,” SPD General Secretary Yasmin Fahimi told Der Spiegel Online. But as we just saw, her counterparts in the CDU may not share her priorities, especially if they end up deprioritizing the much cherished (and irresponsible, given the circumstance) balanced budget.
So what’s going to win? Doing justice in the face of a historic challenge? The prized ‘schwarze Null’? Or how about a new round of budget-cutting ‘mini-austerity’ that allows for both additional spending on refugees and the ‘schwarze Null’? Yes, the SPD has already dismissed that last option, but when you listen to what the German finance ministry on this top, a new round of ‘mini-austerity’ is basically the only option left because, at least based on the ministry’s statements, the refugees will indeed be given budgetary priority. But that’s not going to stop a balanced budget:
Yes, the ‘schwarze Null’ is apparently non-negotiable, but, according to the finance ministry, coping with the flood of refugees is the main priority of the government, and ministers must subordinate any additional spending wishes to that.
And so, the reasoning goes, in order to deal with unexpected challenges like a refugee crisis, Germany needs very solid finances and therefore balancing Germany’s budget next year is important if Germany is going to be able to deal with unexpected crises...despite the fact that the refugee crisis is no longer “unexpected” but actually happening now and with no end in sight and despite the fact that Germany is set to hit a record trade surplus this year. Don’t think about it too hard:
According to a recent poll, 41 percent of Americans support building a wall with Mexico...and Canada:
“It’s not all the foreigners that bother me...It’s the foreigners that get in the welfare line and the ones that hate America. They get in the welfare line and say we owe them everything and if you don’t agree with me you need to have your head chopped off.”
It sounds like the “Welfare Queen” myth is in the process of getting updated to include murderous intent for the contemporary undocumented immigrant national freak out (Well, ok, sort of updated).
A new EU poll across seven member states (UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Italy, and Denmark) was just conducted on public attitudes on what the EU should be doing to help the refugees. The good news is that there’s strong support for doing something to help the refugees. The bad news, especially for the refugees, is that the support appears to be mostly for doing things to help the refugees that doesn’t actually involve giving them refuge:
“Aid and stabilising the region was the only measure among those tested that was listed by a majority in all countries surveyed.”
Well, at least it sounds like a majority of voters in Germany and Spain are continuing to back the idea of taking in refugees. Let’s hope that welcoming spirit endures. Especially in Germany because, as the article below points out, Germany has three state elections coming up in March and Angela Merkel is facing an anti-refugee conservative revolt:
“Her global view will have to return to local politics as Merkel’s party gears up for three state elections next March, a precursor to 2017 national elections and a possible bid for a fourth term for the chancellor. For that, she’ll have to engage with voters whose welcome is wearing thin.”
Yikes. So, at this point, it remains increasingly unclear what the EU’s response it going to be, but what is clear is that as the crisis continues, patience among the populace is probably going to wane as ‘crisis fatigue’ continues to grow. Of course, since ‘crisis fatigue’ is nothing compared to the actual fatigue experienced by the refugees, the question of what exactly the EU is going to do remains very unclear since no one seems to be willing to give the refugees refuge but the obvious alternative to giving refuge is sending them back into war zones.
So let’s hope the EU (and the rest of the world) can converge on some sort of humane solution. Soon. And let’s hope it’s actually a realistic solution because, as the article below makes clear, wildly unrealistic solutions to questions of where to place people in Europe might be taken seriously. For decades:
Atlantropa “was seen as a fairly reasonable plan until the 1950s”. And yet...
Yes, in draining the Mediterranean creating a new land for European migrants, the creation of Atlantropa might have actually triggered catastrophic climate change and created even more refugees, which is more than a little ironic. But it’s a reminder that highly ambitious plans that could take 150 years to complete and reshape the world are also possible. At least decades of consideration is possible, even if the plan isn’t really feasible. So you have to wonder what highly ambitious plans (that don’t result in a climate catastrophe) are even available for not just the EU but the whole world in terms of preparing for a future where refugee crises are going to be increasingly the norm. Well, Alexis Tsipras may have recently hinted at such a big, bold idea. An idea that could take 150 years to complete, but could also yield positive results almost immediately. And it’s pretty simple too and doesn’t require draining a sea: Don’t just help the refugees. Stop hating them for existing too and consider actually liking them as fellow human beings:
“These are hypocritical and crocodile tears, which are being shed for the dead children. Dead children always incite sorrow. But what about the children that are alive, who come in thousands and are stacked on the streets? Nobody likes them”
That certainly appears to be the case. So how about, as part of both the short and long-term solutions to the refugee crises, we do a big push, globally, to actually try to like refugees (a stranger is just a friend you haven’t met, right?) and stop viewing them as “not in my tribe, so I don’t care” people. Is that even possible? If so, great! Let’s do it. And if not, uh oh, because tribalist “us vs them” attitudes aren’t just impeding a resolution to the refugee crisis. It’s creating refugee crises.
Here’s another interesting outcome from Europe’s refugee crisis response: Donald Tusk, Poland’s former Prime Minister who is currently the president of the European Council, just called on Germany to take a leadership role in securing the EU’s borders:
“But for Germany, European leadership responsibility also means controlling Europe’s external borders decisively if necessary, in accordance with pan-European unity.”
So that’s happening. Along with a row in Germany over whether or not to only grant “subsidiary protection” with restricted rights to bring their families:
Keep in mind that one of the reason so many refugees are young men is that they’re making the trip first to find a safe host country before their wife and kids comes. So this is potentially a policy shift that will be leaving the wives and kids behind in many cases. Also keep in mind that over half of the Syrian refugees worldwide are children, which makes the proposed policy shift quite a complication in terms of getting those kids the aid they need.
This is also going to be a complication:
“I think it’s a necessary decision and I’m very much in favor that we agree on this in the coalition”
So Schaueble is fully behind the “subsidiary protection” restriction. That’s definitely going to complicate things.
Also this:
“However, the European Commission data also reveals that beyond the logistical challenges, a “large number of member states has yet to meet financial commitments” and “too few member states” have responded to calls to help Serbia, Slovenia and Croatia; among the most used routes by asylum seekers, with essential resources such as beds and blankets.”
So the calls for for beds, blankets and cash haven’t gone well. We spaces for a refugee in need of relocation. We’ll see if the border patrol pleas garner of different level of response. It might.
The President of the European Council has a message to the EU over its handling of the refugee crisis: First, more solidarity is needed. Also, it’s pretty much up to Berlin to figure out how to solve this:
“Indeed, whether Europe survives as a continent of freedom, the rule of law, respect for an individual, and the security of its inhabitants will depend to a great extent on Germans.”
Wow. That’s some bold leadership from the European Council. But given the fact that Germany really is the de facto paymaster for the EU, and therefore its de facto leader (since that’s how the EU rolls), it’s hard to deny that Tusk wasn’t making a valid, if unfortunate point. Berlin basically calls the shots in Europe these days.
So it’s going to be interesting to see what, if any, collective action Berlin can successfully achieve as the crisis continues to unfold. Although keep in mind that the collective action might mostly involve deporting refugees from the non-border EU states like Germany to the border EU states like Italy:
Well, that doesn’t exactly seem like a solution to...well, anything. But as far as leadership in the EU goes, that’s about as good as it’s going to get. And that means we should probably expect a lot more stories like this:
“Germany warned it could start sending Syrian refugees back to other EU states from which they came, prompting Hungary to insist it would take none, while Sweden’s neighbor Denmark said it was tightening immigration rules and Slovenia began to emulate Budapest in erecting new border fences.”
Yep, that all happened while Sweden closed its borders too. And at this point it’s unclear why even more borders aren’t going to be closed since the entire EU appears to be engaged in a game of refugee Hot Potato and the current style leadership coming from Berlin involves reinstating a rule to let non-border states toss those Hot Potatoes back to the EU border states.
So let’s hope Sweden gets all the heated tents it needs. Or, actually, let’s hope Sweden gets substantially more heated tents than its needs and then decides to share those tents with the rest of its EU neighbors. Because all those Hot Potatoes fleeing for their lives and traveling north to countries like Sweden and Germany might end up hitting a closed border with no where to go are going to turn into frozen potatoes fleeing for their lives in a few months:
“The European Union must do everything to avoid a catastrophe as winter closes in...We cannot let people die from the cold in the Balkans.”
That’s a great sentiment, and hopefully catastrophe will indeed be avoided before winter. But it’s worth noting that, contrary to the assertion that the EU cannot let people die from the cold, it really can. All that has to happen is for not enough to happen:
“Either we take this big step and adapt … or yes, we do have a major crisis. I would say even an identity crisis.”
Note that there’s already an identity crisis. At this point it’s mostly a question of how the identity crisis ends up getting resolved.
Der Speigel has a piece on how the refugee crisis is creating changes to Germany’s foreign policy that, in many cases, would have been unthinkable just a few months ago. In particular, it’s looking like there’s going to a significant change in Germany’s willingness to engage in military action under the idea that solving the crises in the countries producing large numbers of refugees is the best solution to stemming the low of refugees, particularly via the creation of safe-haven areas in the countries producing refugees:
“Whereas a majority of Germans used to be critical of sending soldiers abroad, acceptance for more robust military measures has recently risen.”
Will the growing public acceptance of foreign military action be sustainable over time or is this a temporary blip? Well, if ‘solving the conflict there so the refugees don’t come here’ is the new master plan, we’re going to find out.
More recent events show a possibility that right wing extremism is gaining political suppport in Germany. An article in Britain’s Daily Mail had some interesting comments including:
Germany’s domestic intelligence chief, Hans-Georg Maassen, says: ‘What we’re seeing is the street mobilisation of Right-wing extremists, but also of some Left-wing extremists who oppose those anti-immigration groups.’
Below are excepts from an article showing how Germany’s liberal Syrian Immigration policy is bringing out a strong Nationalist anti-immigrant reatction that the police do not believe they can counteract.
Frontex, the European border agency, and Western intelligence services have sounded a second alarm. They warn that Islamic State jihadists are exploiting the refugee influx to slip into Europe.
Demographers at the Bavarian Association of Municipalities say Germany faces a population time bomb. As migrants bring in wives and children, they warn that the number of Muslims could rise from 5.8 million to 20 million by 2020, threatening the culture of this once fiercely Christian nation.
A respected TV station, N24, has reported that many new arrivals have already vanished under the radar since entering the country. On three occasions in September, groups of young male migrants, thought to be non-Syrians trying to escape the attention of immigration or security services, have pulled the emergency brakes to stop trains taking them to camps for registration, then jumped out and vanished. Meanwhile, German police say they are investigating 60 cases in which Islamic extremists, some posing as charity workers, have infiltrated migrant camps to recruit migrants to jihad.
It is bitterly ironic that postwar Germany, still battling with national guilt over the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews in the Holocaust, is importing so many people who are avowedly anti-Semitic.
‘We are importing Islamic extremism, Arab anti-Semitism, national and ethnic conflicts of other peoples, as well as a different understanding of society and law.’
Those views were echoed by Josef Schuster, president of the Central Council of German Jews, this week. In a careful statement, he said: ‘Many flee from Islamic State terror to live in peace and freedom. At the same time they come from cultures in which a hatred of Jews and intolerance is a fixed element. Don’t only think of Jews, think of the equality of woman and man or dealings with homosexuals.’
Meanwhile, Jurgen Mannke, director of the Teachers’ Association of Saxony-Anhalt, in central Germany, has said girls must be warned against consorting with Muslim migrants. He wrote in a magazine: ‘It is our human duty to help people who are facing existential distress due to war and political persecution. ‘But it is extremely difficult to distinguish who comes to our country for purely economic or even criminal motives. From our ethical and moral perspective, women are not treated equally or with dignity in Muslim countries. Already, we hear . . . about sexual harassment on public transport and in supermarkets.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3337002/Migrant-blunder-splitting-Germany-two-Weeks-ago-Merkel-threw-open-Germany-s-doors-Today-amid-fears-s-importing-anti-Semitism-worry-way-life-threat.html#ixzz3sjuxq8jn
In another article, the new Riot Police’s helmets in Bavaria, Germany have been styled to retain a Nazi character to them. Is this a coincidence, or does it symbolize a political force of Nazism beginning to take hold in Germany? See article which makes light of the issue by comparing it to Darth Vader’s helmet:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336727/It-s-police-FORCE-German-riot-officers-mocked-new-uniform-s-helmets-make-look-like-Darth-Vader.html
With the EU reaching a deal with Turkey where Turkey receives 3 billion euros in EU aid and political concessions in exchange for Turkey agreeing to slow the flow of refugees, it’s worth noting that Amnesty International just issued a report warning of an alarming new trend in Turkey’s handling of refugees that appears to have begun in recent months and would indeed help Turkey make good on its pledge to stem the refugee flow: Sending them back to the war zones:
“By engaging Turkey as a gatekeeper for Europe in the refugee crisis, the EU is in danger of ignoring and now encouraging serious human rights violations”
Yep. And it’s not just the EU:
“They only [leave the area] if they have no other options, no more food and end up on the streets”
You have to wonder how a quiet new “go back to the war zone” policy from Turkey is going to impact Europe’s refugee crisis. And if Turkey isn’t able to slow the flow down enough to stem Europe’s refugee panic, you have to wonder what’s next on the agenda.