Spread the love

ARTICLES FRANCAIS A DROITE/DEUTSCHE ARTIKEL RECHTS

* * *

===============FREE SPEECH IN THE GOOD OLD USA

I wrote a French comrade:

In America, the illusion of free speech must be maintained, because guns and speech are our sacred cows of the American Revolution, like your “liberty, equality, fraternity.”

So they arrest us on other pretexts and then do not let letters in. They move the prisoners around constantly (Edgar Steele) and never forward any letters (why NOT????), and they stick them in prisons 2000 miles away (Shaun Walker — from California — sent to a federal prison in Minnesota for six years after a bar fight with a Mexican two years earlier, who was SO BADLY hurt he went skiing on the slopes the next day!!).

I am an expert on this. And I have been for 32 years now…. As a Marine corporal I was almost thrown off the USS Inchon in 1979 at night into the Mediterranean off Toulon by hate-crazed Dutch Marines, enemies of my faith in our race. (I almost wrote just now that I hope some swarthy South Moluccans in Holland, since they love brown-skinned immigrants so much, have raped their girlfriends, but no, I wish that only on THEM, psychopaths, for plotting four-on-one to murder me.)

Below, the USS Inchon, a helicopter carrier, and scene of the almost crime. A Dutch Marine blew the whistle to my gunnery sergeant, which forced my Jewish commanding officer, Philip Gold, to act (he wrote later ‘with great reluctance’), warning me and intervening with the Dutch Marines. One round-faced, gray-green-eyed psychopath of a blond Dutch NCO glared at me when I confronted him: “In the war, we used to kill Nazis with our bare teeth.” (Yeah, right. So why did Holland fall in six days??? http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/german_invasion_of_holland.htm) He also raged at me that the Germans had stolen their bicycles….. Well, if the Germans had won the war, then the Moluccans and Moroccans would not be PUBLICLY slitting the throats of Dutch film makers on their own streets. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/theo_van_gogh/index.html

Here in America you can talk all you want, until they infiltrate, sabotage, bankrupt or simply murder you.

It will take all my 32 years of experience, and God’s blessing, and key men and women stepping forward soon with the money and skills I need, to prevail. Our back is to the wall, but ironically so is the Jew’s. He has never been more hated around the world than right now, because of 1) the Israeli horrors, 2) the Wall-Street-caused global economic decline, and 3) the Internet spreading the truth!

In fact, Canada, for the first time ever, was just denied even a temporary seat on the Security Council of the United Nations — largely because other member nations view it under Stephen Harper correctly as a total tool of Israel and a near-clone nowadays in many areas of the Jewnited Snakes.

Lefties rip into Harper for this humiliation….but for all the wrong reasons. 😉

Scene from my four-hour duel with half-jew Discovery Channel host Olly Steeds. He accused me of inciting racial hatred. I replied that is it perfectly appropriate to hate those exterminating our people.

=============WEST-COAST SOLUTREAN WRITES ABOUT INJUN BLOOD IN AMERICAN WHITES

A comrade and family man wrote me:

* * *

I would like to talk with you more in depth about your ideas of Solutrea, and how we are going to make it happen.

We white folk really have it bad in a way because of the individualism and the fact that we are racially diverse as well. I think I remember even you stating in one of your posts that you may have some small amount of “Native American” (Asian) ancestry on your mother’s side. If I am wrong then please forgive me, but it has been a regular thing in my life for me to meet and befriend the blondest white men and find that they have some grandmother or great-grandmother who was part “Native American”. I would say that most white folks I have met are part-“Indian”.

[JdN: My Canadian step-grandmother from Nova Scotia, married to my father’s father after he had divorced my grandmother Helen Berlin (German) Waddell (Scottish), stated that her late husband (Henry Norman Nugent) had told her he had some distant Narragansett, Rhode Island Indian blood.

Of course, the New England Indians also had white Solutrean blood. In point of fact, most white Americans of early colonial stock have some Indian blood, but this is not surprising when one considers that many Amerindians looked part-white already, and some also accepted Christianity and Western clothing and ideas readily. For example, in the 1600s the Amerindians of what is now Littleton, Massachusetts (I lived in Littleton 1993-1996) converted en masse to Christianity and adopted Western clothing as well.]

Here is an example of a superb white American singer, Patsy Cline (b. 1932, and died 1963 in a plane crash), from the Virginia foothills, who clearly also had Amerindian genes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-wJNpWgss8

And here is an example of someone of Asian origin (a Korean kid) who loves the discipline and grandeur of white and specifically German music, and rocks out to it on his electric guitar. This video got almost ten million hits on YouTube! It kinda fulfills Uncle Adolf’s observation in Mein Kampf that Asians can maintain what Aryans create.

Both whites and Asians have the traits of organization, planning, self-discipline and attention to detail. For me, the key differences are that Aryans are more creative, altruistic and individualistic, and yet, tragically, over and over as we have seen, they never ever have enough children and are overwhelmed by lesser breeds that multiply dangerously in societies run by whites, because whites establish a higher standard of living, and care for the non-whites. This was glaringly true in the old white South Africa, whose apartheid law-and-order enabled a black population explosion.

By the way, I myself am of blood type B, which is an Asian marker, indicating I have Slavic ancestors somewhere way back, possibly through my blond, blue-eyed German great-grandmother Berlin. The three main blood types are A, O and B.

The Japanese are obsessed with blood types and believe they reflect differing character traits. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_types_in_Japanese_culture) I note this for blood type B:

Type B

Best traits Wild, active, doer, creative, passionate, strong 🙂

Worst traits Selfish, irresponsible, unforgiving, unpredictable 🙁

I would say that there is some truth in all of this, and they reflect who I am. (Reincarnation means we make the bodies and blood types that correspond to who we are and who we karmically were, spiritually, and then we are born into the appropriate body, nation, race and period of history, yet also often joining friends from previous lives.)

The aurora borealis, the northern lights, which evoke such wonder in us. We all come from the other side into this material world of struggle and strife, but remember vaguely where we originate. I always quote Alphonse de Lamartine: “MAN IS A FALLEN GOD WHO REMEMBERS THE HEAVENS.”

I certainly am a person wanting to create something bold, strong and new, I am basically totally fearless, and, well, I work on the “worst traits.” 😉

The Amerindians, btw, have no bloodtype B, showing that this gene arose among the Asians sometime after the Siberians left the main group in Asia and moved to the Americas. Perhaps this blood type B — prevalent in Asia — makes me understand better than As and Os that the Western cult of the individual is so exaggerated now (under the influence of Jews, who do NOT practice it themselves) that it is the main thing destroying our race — and that we must have not only, as in the famous story of the Three Musketeers, “all for one” but also “one for all.”

The group must help the individual but the individual must also help the group, and I do not express my individualism to serve myself, but am merely seeking my own path to helping the power, love and health and wealth of our folk.

It is, I believe, my calling to recreate in whites a tribal feeling of unity, now weak and slumbering, and to inspire the actions needed for us to stand together in the extremely dangerous times approaching. When I look back on my Jehovah’s Witness years of 1970-76, for all the oddnesss of some of their doctrines, I see that white people can be highly disciplined, unified, ideologically trained and effective. And now back to this comrade’s email to me….]

Normally this [Indian heritage] would mean nothing, but since the Jews did such a good job of brainwashing everyone after WWII with their Holohoax, I think it is an obstacle to the pan-white movement. Many people with a remote non-white ancestor are thinking they might get holocausted or deported [by WNs] when things finally go our way.

Being part “Native American or American Indian” shouldn’t mean much at all since all of their women may have been as much as half-white or even more I have learned from you. The only way I feel it should be a factor is if the ancestry is in a straight line from men. This we know because the Y chromosome, which makes us male, can only be gifted from the father. Thus a so-called Native American man, whose father’s father back to the 10th generation ago is super likely to have gotten his Y chromosome (like a clone who is likely to have inherited behavoir patterns) from an ancestor who participated in the mass-murder of Solutrean white men and defenseless white boys and then claiming all of our female kindred as their own.

Of course, this may not have been compulsory, but it is for the good of our cause to believe in the honor of our brethren and not to doubt the honor of their women.

I just know that living in the Pacific Northwest, here we have horrible race traitors everywhere are mostly women, yet there have been no laws enacted to barr us from fullfilling the Creator’s Will that we reproduce after our own kind.

When I go to the mall with my wife and our children, with the influx of Third Worlders and Mexicans, usually white children here are outnumbered by the non whites and it is like that in my daughter’s kindergarten as well.

What bothers me though is not the Third Worlders, but the white race traitors who are mostly women. Women are race traitors twice as much as men, in terms of breeding Mulattos and Mestizos. What they seem to not realize is that they just blew their chance of reincarnating as a white person maybe ever again, because if everyone followed their lack of principle then there would be no white people left…except for, ironically, Ashkenazi Jews!

Also there is the natural law of punishment for these people as they see their children born with virtually none of their physical attributes. So if you didn’t know better you would think they were the nanny of these dark children who really belong to someone else. I did see one red-haired blue-eyed man who did have all-white kids, also red-haired (not dyed) and blue-eyed with a Japanese girl. Of course they kind of looked like Bjoerk in the face, but I think she is exotically beautiful and amazing.

[JdN: The Japanese have a huge amount of Ainu blood and the Ainu apparently are an early offshoot of the white race that traveled from Europe over into Asia, as did the Tokharians and others. I have often blogged about how civilized and honorable the Japanese can be, and how the women in the northern half of Japan have skin as white, as or whiter than, any white woman I have ever met:

An “Akita beauty” from the north

Japanese architecture, unlike Chinese, is not full of garish reds and golds — and seems almost northern European.

Back to the email ….]

But just because some turn out okay is no excuse for it though. Usually the kids would never pass for white, and many wouldn’t pass for part-white!

[JdN: Look at Barack Obama, just another black…]

Once again I really enjoy your website, and intend to contribute $10 per month with no foreseeable end to that financial commitment to support you. Also spiritually, I am with you 100%, and my wife supports you as well, and my kids all know you as Uncle John.

I know that was a run-on sentence, but I am feeling emotions here about this. I agree with the Russian Solutrean, that if der Führer did come back that he would be born in the U.S.A. and reach out to Russia in friendship. In the Ramayana, Vishnu comes to earth as Rama to defeat the evil blasphemous emperor of the world Ravana, but he never really is aware while alive that he is Vishnu. Just think of how overwhelming that would be to know.

Also I believe that I learned on a YouTube video that Ghandi believed Adolf Hitler was an incarnation of Vishnu.

88!

Heil John de Nugent!

===============German TV special “Dear Uncle Hitler”

German television just ran a one-hour special show on how much the German people loved Hitler.

Part one of “Lieber Onkel Hitler”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxV1mfF_DII

The TV program ends with Germany being bombed to ruins and raped by the Red Army, with the blatant and barely underlying message:

If you step out of line, and cross the Jews, this is what will happen.

I wish German were still taught in our schools as the number-one foreign language (not French or Spanish), as it was before WWI, when 25% of the country was also of first-, second-, or third-generation German stock.

The video shows an outpouring of love from a teacher and her pupils for this man — seen here again in his inexpensive raincoat that Eva Braun wanted to snatch away and burn. 😉

Thus most Anglo readers today will be unable to understand this documentary, but the video footage itself is very, very impressive. Adolf Hitler was definitely the most popular leader of all times, far more so than even John Kennedy at his peak (whom southerners and conservatives saw correctly as a liberal on race).

Leon Degrelle wrote that by the summer of 1940, after the victories in the battles of western Europe, 90% of the Germans were, if not national socialists, then at least Hitlerites. They loved this man, and he loved them. See for yourself, if only in the body language.

ard-doku-lieber-onkel-hitler-briefe-an-den-fuhrer-14-10-10_54133.html

=======CARLOS PORTER TRANSLATES AND SUMMARIZES REYNOUARD ON THE GESTAPO

I love it when Americans continue to tolerate torture at Guantanamo and Bagram air base in Afghanistan, our cops electrocute peoople to death with repeated taser shocks, and do “rendition” flights to countries that commit the torture for the US government, and this country tolerates a hundred thousand rapes a year in US prisons (many of them black-on-white, sometimes infecting the white prisoner with lethal AIDS) — but then the superpatriotic FOX-watchers and Christian Zionist Naziphobes have the gall to point the finger at the Gestapo and say “they used torture“! Torture has been official US policy, ah, excuse me, “close interrogation” or “harsh questioning methods,” since the Bush administration!

And Israel runs the biggest concentration camp in world history, the million-prisoner Gaza Strip!

Source: http://www.cwporter.com/gestapo1a.htm

Excerpt from Vincent Reynouard Gestapo Articles

Introduction by C.W. Porter

Vincent Reynouard, currently vacationing at Valenciennes [prison], had a brain-storm, one of the smartest revisionist ideas I ever heard of:

He took the trouble to compare the accusations made against the Gestapo at Nuremberg, by the French, with the post-war French trials of the same personnel, involving the same cases, the same victims, the same witnesses. What he found was that the evidence and accusations were not the same: the accusations made at Nuremberg in these same cases were practically forgotten.

His articles constitute some of the best proof I ever saw that the Nuremberg “evidence” was just lies, all lies.

This is just an example.

For alternative introductory remarks, click here.

C.P.

October 7, 2010

Gestapo behaviour towards women and young girls

False nature of the official claims

Despite the evidence, the French prosecutor at Nuremberg dared to declare:

“Those who carried out these measures had every latitude for unleashing their instinct of cruelty and of sadism towards their victims” [IMT V, 401]. Supposing this to be true, these agents are said to have exploited women who fell into their hands. This is untrue.

Of course, in his report, cited above, H. Paucot wrote that, during the interrogations, “The women and young girls were… almost always completely undressed, out of pure sadism” [“Les femmes et les jeunes filles étaient traitées de la même façon [que les hommes] et sadiquement étaient presque toujours complètement dévetues” (doc. F-571, IMT XXXVII, 263) [XXX, same document].

But this is untrue: in the thousands of pages which I had taken the trouble to read, there is no question of undressing [except for one case involving a common-place theft perpetrated by two members of the “Bonny-Lafon gang”. The thieves totured and undressed an old woman and her nurse to force them to reveal the hiding place of their savings. The two victims were then murdered. In this lamentable affair, the individuals were not acting, not as agents in the German service, but as common criminals in search of material gain, etc.] Otherwise, there is no question of rape or even improper gestures or touching.

Mlle Phegnon suffered no humilation

At the “Neuilly Gestapo Trial”, Colette Phegnon, the daughter of the local Resistance leader, described her interrogation; while she claimed to have been beaten or struck (see above), she mentions no undressing, no torture. In this regard, she contented herself with saying: “ [R. Martin] threatened me with the bathtub treatment. But they didn’t go through with it.” (PGN, 5, 96).

No “inappropriate gestures” with regards to Mlle Lelong

Even more clearly, the following is the deposition of Mlle Lelong, who recalled her treatment (fully dressed), but tied to a chair and beaten by Gestapo agent M. Beller:

“THE PRESIDENT. — No inappropriate touching?

Mlle LELONG. — No.

THE PRESIDENT. — I like that better” [PAFG, hearing of 1 March 1947, deposition of Jacqueline Lelong, p. 24].

Mme Memain spoke of “rather correct” police agents …

Two years before, another Resistance member, Mme Memain, was asked a similar question and gave a similar response:

“THE PRESIDENT. — […] Did those were in the lodge act appropriately towards yourself, Mlle Genet and others?

Mme MEMAIN. — They were rather correct” [PGG, dossier 10, p. 117.]

Mme Thierry speaks of “correct” agents as well

At the Bonny-Lafon trial, a woman whom he had already questioned, F. Thierry, was also questioned as to the manner in which she had been interrogated:

“Me DELAUNEY. – […] you were released, after an interrogation, which was courteous, I believe?

THE WITNESS. – It was correct“ [PLB, 6, p. 167, deposition of Françoise Thierry].

Treatment of pregnant women

The prosecution spoke of pregnant women beaten until they suffered miscarriages…

At Nuremberg, the French prosecution produced a terrible written declaration by Major Pierre Loranger. After investigating the acts of the German police services in France under the occupation, he wrote:

“To the physical torments, the sadism of their torturers added the particularly painful moral torment for a woman or young girl of being undressed and stripped naked by her torturers. The condition of pregnancy did not protect them from blows and when the brutalities entailed the expulsion of the product of conception, they were left without care, exposed to all the accidents and complications of this criminal abortion.”

[“Aux supplices physiques, le sadisme de leurs tortionnaires ajoutait le supplice moral particulièrement pénible pour une femme ou une jeune fille d’être dévetue et mise a nu par ses bourreaux: L’état de grossesse ne les présérvait pas des coups et lorsque les brutalités entrainaient l’expulsion du produit de conception, elles étaient laissées sans soins, exposées à tous les accidents et toutes les complications de ce criminel avortement” [IMT, XXXVII, 297]; [see also IMT XXX, same document]:

These accusations are not confirmed by any testimony whatever

The following are three written testimonies from women and one from a man, but concerning his wife. One expects to find four terrible tales of forced nudity, inhuman torments inflicted upon pregnant women and resulting miscarriages. But we find nothing of the kind: no nudity, no humiliation, no miscarriages due to beatings, etc:

– Lucienne Krasnoploski was not mistreated at all; employed for two months as a cleaning lady at the Kommandantur of Valenciennes, she would have seen people beaten and tortured (Ibid., pp. 299-300).

– Madame Carton, a barmaid who failed to serve the Germans fast enough, received a hard slap which perforated her ear drum (pp. 297-8).

– Madame Hazard, whose husband was “the head of a Resistance group” is said to have been beaten with a whip “with extreme violence” [“avec la dernière violence”], but without causing any fractures, which “stupefied” the physician (p. 298).

It should be noted that these women were not pregnant. The only one who was pregnant, was named Gilberte Sindemans. She was a young Resistance member, aged 22. On 24 February 1944, she was arrested in a hotel in Paris. A search permitted the discovery of the affair of the stamps from the Kommandatur, “laissez-passer” cards [a sort of internal passport], German worker identification cards (stolen the evening before) as well as box of cartridges and three revolvers (IMT, XXXVII, 298). She was obviously a major activist! The following is what she writes:

“They immediately put me in handcuffs and took me away for interrogation. As I did not answer, they slapped me right across the face with such force that I fell off my chair. They whipped with a rubber whip, right across the face […].

I had to tell them I was three months pregnant.

After my first interrogation, I was taken to the prison of Fresnes and I was thrown into a solitary confinement cell without a mattress, without blankets, with my hands handcuffed behind my back at all times, plus I had chains on my ankles. For 4 days, without anything to eat or drink. On the 4th day, they came for me, to interrogate me. I underwent 24 interrogations and I came back with my face more and more swollen up every time. Since I wouldn’t say anything, they threatened to deport me for execution by shooting. Since I still wouldn’t talk, they put me in a cell for six months, in secrecy.

There came the day of the evacuation of the prison. As I was expecting my baby, I expected to be released, but I received a visit from the commissioner and the chaplain. They told me my last [hour] had come and I had to talk […].

I was taken to the Fort de Romainville and from there to the hospital, where I had my little girl, on 25 August” [IMT, XXXVII, 299].

Of course, her story is quite regrettable. But if one does not wish to be beaten and endanger the life of one’s baby, one should not participate in an illegal war; one should not steal official papers and stamps from the enemy, and one should not deal in weapons under a military occupation. In addition, I must stress that G. Sindemans was never undressed, and above all, she never received any blows which could have endangered the life of her baby. On the contrary: in the end, she was allowed to give birth to her little girl, alive and apparently healthy. Proof that, although she detained in secrecy, she received no other mistreatment.

Consequently, these four testimonies in no way prove the allegations made by Major Loranger. Now, it is obvious that if the French prosecuting authorities in these post-war trials had really been in a position to produce any such testimony, even in one single case, they certainly would have done so.

Today, thus, it is permissible to conclude that Major Loranger’s allegations have no reliable basis in fact.

The dishonesty of the Nuremberg prosecution

It is also interesting to note that, at Nuremberg, the assistant prosecutor C. Dubost read the declaration of Major Loranger’s written statement, and went on to quote the deposition of this same G. Sidemans (since the other three prosecutors offered no evidence). Dubost took great pains, however, to delete the end of that same deposition, reading only the first three lines [IMT VI-171], and stopping just after the words “I must tell you that I was three months pregnant at that time”.

In other words, Dubost concealed the fact that G. Sindemans was permitted to give birth to a little girl in the end (IMT, VI, 179-180) — thus giving the Tribunal – and the world – the impression that this courageous Resistance member had — like so many others — lost her child as a result of German mistreatment… It is hard to be more dishonest than that… [see also XXX, “IMT VI, 180].

Case of women Resistance members: proof that the Gestapo acted with great restraint, even in serious cases

Having stated the above, let us proceed. Under the Occupation, in visiting people’s homes to arrest suspected members of the Resistance, the Gestapo auxiliaries very often found themselves face to face with the wives of these same, wanted individuals. How did they treat these women? Did they strip them naked? Torture them? Beat them and strike them until they suffered miscarriages?

Not at all.

Case of Mme Lecour

Let us first take the case of Mme Lecour, from Cours-Cheverny. Her husband was a wanted Resistance member. On 30 July 1944, French auxiliaries came to her house. But the man was not there; he had taken refuge elsewhere. At the house, the group found only the wife, then seven months pregnant, with her baby.

What did they do? At their trial, the statement of facts says:

“Mme Lecour, seven months pregnant and alone with a one-year old baby, was at home when Combier and his team appeared. These individuals conducted a search of the house according to the regulations and attempted to obtain information as to Lecour’s whereabouts by threatening her with their weapons. Combier was mean enough to give Mme Lecour a few slaps, despite her condition” [PAFG, statement of facts, p. 20].

At the hearing, the husband appeared as a witness:

“THE PRESIDENT. — What did they do to your wife?

M. LECOUR. — They hit her.

THE PRESIDENT. — They searched the house?

M. LECOUR. — Yes, they did […].

THE PRESIDENT. — Did they hit your wife despite her condition?

M. LECOUR. — Yes.

THE PRESIDENT. — How did they hit her?

M. LECOUR. — They hit her and pulled her hair” [PAFG, hearing of 1 March 1947, deposition of M. Lecour, p. 216].

The wife then testified as follows:

“THE PRESIDENT. — […] Did one of them enter the house and slap you?

Mme LECOUR. — They hit me and pulled my hair” [Ibid., p. 219].

One must, of course, condemn the violence inflicted on this woman. But, if we were to believe Major Loranger and all the other propagandists, these same individuals – Gestapo auxiliaries — should have had recourse to much more terrible means of making her talk: they could have taken her baby and said, “Talk, or we’ll cut one ear off, then the other one, etc” ; they could have abducted the child and told the mother “We’ll give her back when you talk”; they could have stripped her naked, placed the woman on her back, and told her: “Talk, or we’ll stomp on your stomach”.

They did nothing of the kind. They abstained from acting in this manner, and they left without even learning the whereabouts of the wanted man, the very same Resistance member they came to arrest…

Search at M. Buffet

From Cours-Cheverny, now let’s look at Lyon. The members of the “Georgia Gestapo” at Lyon were searching for a very important wanted Resistance member, M. Buffet. Having visited his home and having failed to find him, they conducted a search according to the regulations:

“THE WITNESS [Mme Buffet]. — […] You tipped everything over, my mattresses, everything…

OBERSCHMUCKLER. — You are right.

Reboul. — […] The search was completed?

THE WITNESS. — Yes.

Reboul. — The mattresses were tipped over?

THE WITNESS. — The drawers, everything, on the floor!” [PGG, dossier 8, p. 94]

The agents found nothing capable of revealing the whereabouts of M. Buffet. In the house, however, were his wife and daughter. Not surprisingly, they attempted to extort information from the mother. The statement of facts declares that Oberschmuckler “interrogated her very severely and made numerous threats” (PGG, statment of facts, p. 83).

But did he beat her, torture her? No. The follow-up permits us to answer that question: H. Oberschmuckler, we are informed “backed Mme Buffet up against the wall at pistol point” (Id.). That’s all…

In 1945, moreover, when called as a witness, Mme Buffet never even mentioned any of this inhumane treatment to which she had allegedly been subjected! This is what she declared:

“On 5 February 1944, towards 11 o’clock in the morning, three individuals came to my apartment, produced a pistol, and conducted a search of the premises. They found nothing, of course, and they questioned me about what my husband did, what was going on in his garage. I answered that I didn’t know anything, that I wasn’t aware of any of these things. They then questioned me about a certain Georges, who is now commander Jouneau. I said I didn’t know who this person was, I didn’t know him. Seeing that they weren’t getting anywhere, they remained in the apartment for an hour. They questioned me about my husband’s family, asking me where they lived, and they left. The next day, Sunday morning, three other individuals appeared. They weren’t the same men. They questioned me again. They searched the place again, and then they left” [PGG, dossier 8, p. 86, deposition de Mme Mathilde Vernay, wife of M. Buffet].

Shortly afterwards, the President of the Tribunal interrogated her about any threats made:

“THE PRESIDENT. — You indicate that he [the chief] did not threaten you. Didn’t you indicate that he was the one who threatened you?

THE WITNESS. — He held his pistol against me.

THE PRESIDENT. — He held the pistol?

THE WITNESS. — Yes.

THE PRESIDENT. — It was Oberschmuckler who held the pistol against you and forced you against the wall?

THE WITNESS. — Yes, that’s correct. I didn’t move, by the way. I remained motionless during the entire search and interrogation” [Ibid., p. 88-9].

She was then questioned by Government Commissioner Reboul:

“Reboul. — Weren’t you threatened during the first search?

THE WITNESS. — No. They simply told me to keep calm […] I told them I didn’t know what my husband did. They told me that I could keep silent, but that if they found my husband, his case would be closed” [Ibid., p. 90].

Now, Mme Buffet was perfectly well aware of both her husband’s activities and his whereabouts. During the trial, she mocked Oberschmuckler proudly and openly, right there in the courtroom, saying: “I really took you for a ride!” (Ibid., p. 95).

I think one can safely suppose, however, that if these same of Gestapo agents had undressed her, beaten her severely, burnt the “sensitive” parts of her body, forced splintered matches under her fingernails and set fire to them, or cut her daughter’s ears off, the same woman would have talked. But the point is: they didn’t do it.

It should also be noted that after the search, the members of the “Georgia Gestapo” were actively looking for M. Buffet. They showed photos of him to various people in the neighbourhood asked if they knew him:

“They went walking around the district with enlarged photographs and asked everybody is they knew me” (PGG, dossier 8, p. 66);

“Reboul. — I say that the witness is providing us with a new fact, it is that after this matter, they looked for him everywhere, walking about the area with photographs that they had taken the trouble to enlarge.” (Id.).

In reality, the photos had been enlarged by Mme Buffet eight years before (Ibid., p. 135)].

Now, this Resistance member had a mother and parents-in-law. The Gestapo could therefore have arrested them all and warned M. Buffet that his family would only be released if he turned himself in; they could even have demanded his surrender in the form of an ultimatum. But they didn’t do so; they merely arrested his nephew by mistake, Georges Buffet, because they believed him to be the “Georges” in the Resistance whom they were looking for.

Not only didn’t they torture people, they offered them cash rewards

OK, now let’s talk about “Georges”. This person was really M. Jouneau, “whom Oberschmuckler was actively looking for” (Ibid., p. 84). In accordance with normal procedure, the auxiliaries arrived to search his domicile. Not surprisingly, “Georges” was not there; the search team found only his wife and children. According to the statement of facts read out during the trial on July 1945, H. Oberschmuckler “behaved abominably” (PGG, dossier 1, p. 84).

But what did he do? Did he torture the wife, or torture their children under the mother’s eyes, to make her talk? No. We read:

“He attempted to bribe Mme Jouneau by offering her money and undressed one of the children to be sure which sex it was. He then left after two hours of interrogations and stealing furs and personal effects” [Id].

At the hearing, Oberschmuckler denied this and accused another person:

[Mme Jounaud] is getting me mixed up with Krammer. Krammer, who was present, said to her: if you give me M. Jouneau’s address, I’ll give you a hundred thousand francs; and he showed her a packet of money […] As regards the act of undressing a little girl — a little girl six months old — I would like to point out that the child was lying in a little bed, on top of a leather jacket […] A German lifted the child up, took the leather jacket and stole it. The woman then thought that we had looked at the child — a little girl six months old — but she will [also] confirm that if the German really lifted the child up, it was to steal something” [PGG, dossier 3, p. 98].

Nevertheless, when called as a witness, M. Jouneau accused H. Oberschmuckler, and said:

“ […] the children interested him in particular, especially my older daughter, who was two years old at the time, and looked a little bit like a boy. Boys interested him, this character, and he stated that he had what he needed to keep himself busy [il a precisé qu’il avait ce qu’il fallait pour s’en occuper]. I am very happy that he didn’t have to do it [qu’il n’ait pas eu à le faire].

“ […] This happened at 8 o’clock in the morning, and lasted until 11, when the search was over. Oberschmuckler looked through everything there was, that is, the money, first. He put 100,000 francs on the table, this rascal, as a reward for turning me in. She’s worth more than that, Monsieur Oberschmuckler, you didn’t know the brave spirit that motivates the French Resistance members. You could have offered ten times as much. You would never have mixed them up in your dirty work!” [Applause in the courtroom].

“On the other hand, he had given the order not to move [or remove: enlever] the children. He waited until the search was more nearly complete.

“No need to tell you that my wife is used to this sort of repression: this was the third time. The next day, she moved, without wasting time [PGG, dossier 8, p. 139].

What’s the main point of all this? That to make the woman talk, members of the “Georgia Gestapo” used no violence at all: they didn’t torture the mother; they didn’t strip her naked and beat her; they didn’t torture or molest the children in front of her eyes, to force her to talk. On the contrary. No — they tried to get her to talk by offering her money…

No brutality against Mme Cléret

Let’s get back to Paris and the case of the PTT. The German police were looking for M. Cléret, one of the leading Resistance members, as well as for his men. Members of the “Georgia Gestapo” went to his home and found only his wife. She had gone to take refuge in Seine-et-Oise pour “to avoid arrest, which she felt to be imminent” [PGG, statement of facts, p. 66].

They interrogated the wife, who refused to talk. What happened then? Was she beaten, tortured, electrocuted, burnt with acid? All these accusations, and more, were made at Nuremberg:

“Special mention must be reserved for the more refined tortures […] incisions between the toes upon which they poured a corrosive liquid, cleverly-dosed electrical shocks which caused all the muscles to convulse…

— [“Il faut reserver une mention speciale à des supplices plus raffinés: […] incisions entre les orteils sur lesquels on versait un liquide corrosif, les courants éléctriques bien dosés qui convulsaient tous les muscles” (see the above-mentioned report by H. Paucot, IMT XXXVII, p. 264)] —

“or with a lighted cigar applied to her breasts [“I personally saw a young woman who bore on her breasts the scars from burns inflicted with a lighted cigar”]

— [“J’ai personnellement vu une jeune femme qui portait sur les seins les cicatrices de brûlures faites avec un cigare allumé” (Ibid., p. 265)] —

“given the bathtub treatment…

“immersion in a bath of icy water was a common practice…

— “l’immersion dans un bain d’eau glacée leur état familière” (Ibid., p. 263).

What did they do, in fact? Let’s let her talk, the victim.

On 23 July 1945, Mme KOMAROV, whose married name was Cléret, testified as follows before the High Court:

“Mme KOMAROV. — […] They showed me photographs of people who were Resistance members from the PTT [Post, Telegraph and Telephone] and who had been arrested and they asked me to identify them. Since I refused to do so, and said that I didn’t wish to talk, they took me to Rue des Saussaies to make me talk, then Fresnes.

At Rue des Saussaies, they showed me photographs. They wanted me to admit that I knew these people, that my husband was a dreadful person, a murderer, a whole load of stuff.

An hour and a half later, I was taken to Fresnes. During this time, these men were busy pillaging everything in our home […].

THE PRESIDENT. — You were not brutalised while these men were in your home?

Mme KOMAROV. — No, I was not brutalised. I was insulted” [PGG, dossier 11, pp. 3-4].

The truth of the matter could not possibly be clearer: although this was a rather serious case, Mme Cléret, who refused to talk, was not mistreated, merely insulted.

I should add that, informed of his wife’s arrest, M. Cléret did “everything possible to get her released. Through friends, he succeeded in contacting one of Odicharia’s lieutenants […] who asked M. Cléret for 150,000 Frs for obtaining her release. Cléret handed it over and Mme Cléret was released on 7 August 1944” (PGG, dossier 1 p. 67). At the hearing, M. Cléret confirmed: “I believe it was rather because of the 150,000 francs that she was able to get out of prison” [PGG, dossier 11, p. 9].

The simple ruse against Mme Meley

Let’s us remain with Paris. In connection with the dismantling of a Resistance network, the German police were looking for a certain M. Meley, head of the organisation. But he had fled, leaving his wife alone at home. Auxiliaries of the German police attempted to obtain information from the wife.

Again, did they use torture, the whip, acid, electricity? Once again, no. Instead, they merely tried a trick:

1°) On 20 June1944, G. Collignon passed himself off as a Resistance member wishing to see M. Meley. Mme Meley contented herself with saying “My husband is not there” . G. Collignon withdrew (PGG, dossier 1, p. 67).

2°) Eight days later, Gestapo agents came to the apartment at midnight ” turned the place upside down, searched everywhere” (Ibid., p. 68). They remained for some time, organising surveillance in relays so as to arrest M. Meley when he came back. But he didn’t show up, so they gave up. Mme Meley was not even arrested (Id.).

Same strategme is used against Mme Viard

In the same case, the Gestapo attempted to arrest Georges Viard but he had fled, as well, leaving only his wife. On 28 June1944, two agents appeared at the home and passed themselves off as Resistance members wishing to know Viard’s whereabouts. Mme Viard maintained a cautious silence.

The intruders did not even attempt to conduct a search.“Then they gave me a telephone number […] and asked me to notify them if my husband came back. Mme Viard promised, did nothing, and never saw these two individuals again” .

During the “Georgia Gestapo” trial, one of the accused, Solina, admitted that he had conducted a search at Mme Viard’s, but confirmed this version of the facts:

“Mme Viard simply said that her husband was away. We said: ‘Please tell your husband to telephone M. Totor’. We didn’t even search the house, while we could have gone in all the rooms and checked anything we wanted” (PGG, dossier 3, pp. 59-60.).

The surprising admission of a woman who was not mistreated, either

Let us finish with the case of M. and Mme Marceron, a married couple in the Resistance, who were concealing six cases of explosives in their home. They were betrayed by a woman who talked after being arrested. When agents in the German service arrived, they knew what they ought to find. Not surprisingly, the couple denied everything:

“My husband replied, smiling, that they obviously weren’t the kind of people who kept explosives around the house […]. I answered in the same vein, that I didn’t understand what they were talking about” (PBL, 7, p. 52, deposition of Mme Marceron)].

The woman had her small children with her, aged 2 and a half. The agents, who had no time to waste, could have used either the children or the mother — or both — to force the husband to talk (“Talk, or we’ll shoot the lot of them”).

They did nothing of the kind; they never touched any of them. After searching the house and finding nothing, they announced that they were taking the husband in for questioning (very probably to confront him with the person who had betrayed him”). At trial proces, Mme Marceron recalled:

“ […] I asked him whether they would let him eat a little bit and get dressed. They agreed immediately. My husband then ate breakfast.

These men, accompanied by the Germans, asked if they could eat breakfast with him, telling me they would pay. I said: — If you want to eat, eat with my husband, just help yourselves” [PBL, 7, p. 53].

After eating breakfast, they left with the suspect. A French agent suggested to Mme Marceron that she give him her savings, in return for which, he would arrange to save her husband. ‘If you wish, he said, I’ll take this sum [200,000 F], and leave you with 25,000 F to raise your child. Yes or no?” (Ibid, p. 55, deposition of Mme Marceron). The woman agreed, and kept 30,000 F (p. 56).

A few hours later, M. Merceron returned and declared: “They knew everything. Mme Mesclos told them everything” (p. 57). He was, of course, obliged to reveal the hiding place of the explosives. The Germans deported him to Germany, but they left the mother in liberty and never touched the child…

At trial, moreover, Mme Marceron had the courage to finish her deposition declaring (before being interrupted by the The President of the Tribunal):

“I have nothing against the Germans. Of course, they’re our enemies, that’s obvious. A German defends his country, we defend ours…” [PBL, 7, p. 62, XXX “Merceron confesses”]

Such was the behaviour of the Gestapo towards the wives of Resistance members. This is very far from the image propagated by the official version of these events…