WWII - Did King Edward VIII Actually Start the Blitz?

[blackbear]

The lies of Hiroshima live on, props in the war crimes of the 20th century....John Pilger

The 1945 attack was murder on an epic scale. In its victims' names, we must not allow a nuclear repeat in the Middle EastAll .

When I first went to Hiroshima in 1967, the shadow on the steps was still there. It was an almost perfect impression of a human being at ease: legs splayed, back bent, one hand by her side as she sat waiting for a bank to open. At a quarter past eight on the morning of August 6, 1945, she and her silhouette were burned into the granite. I stared at the shadow for an hour or more, then walked down to the river and met a man called Yukio, whose chest was still etched with the pattern of the shirt he was wearing when the atomic bomb was dropped.

He and his family still lived in a shack thrown up in the dust of an atomic desert. He described a huge flash over the city, "a bluish light, something like an electrical short", after which wind blew like a tornado and black rain fell. "I was thrown on the ground and noticed only the stalks of my flowers were left. Everything was still and quiet, and when I got up, there were people naked, not saying anything. Some of them had no skin or hair. I was certain I was dead." Nine years later, when I returned to look for him, he was dead from leukaemia.

In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb's blast. It was the first big lie. "No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin" said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. "I write this as a warning to the world," reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called "an atomic plague". For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared - and vindicated.

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate "good war", whose "ethical bath", as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.

The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. "Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that ... Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including "capitulation even if the terms were hard". Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was "fearful" that the US air force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon would not be able "to show its strength". He later admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb". His foreign policy colleagues were eager "to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip". General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: "There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis." The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the "overwhelming success" of "the experiment".

Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus "war on terror", the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make "pre-emptive" nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current "threat". But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK - just as the lies about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington.

The role of western journalism in erecting this straw man is critical. That America's Defence Intelligence Estimate says "with high confidence" that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has been consigned to the memory hole. That Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never threatened to "wipe Israel off the map" is of no interest. But such has been the mantra of this media "fact" that in his recent, obsequious performance before the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown alluded to it as he threatened Iran, yet again.

This progression of lies has brought us to one of the most dangerous nuclear crises since 1945, because the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. The heroic Mordechai Vanunu tried to warn the world in 1986 when he smuggled out evidence that Israel was building as many as 200 nuclear warheads. In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, fearful that a new American administration might, just might, conduct genuine negotiations with a nation the west has defiled since Britain and America overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953.

In the New York Times on July 18, the Israeli historian Benny Morris, once considered a liberal and now a consultant to his country's political and military establishment, threatened "an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland". This would be mass murder. For a Jew, the irony cries out.

The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that "we did not know"? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called "a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence"? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer.

Comments: 736

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/06/secondworldwar.war crimes

Pilger’s Bilge

http://www.hurryupharry.org/.......

The lies of Hiroshima live on, props in the war crimes of the 20th century
The 1945 attack was murder on an epic scale. In its victims’ names, we must not allow a nuclear repeat in the Middle East

So argues John Pilger at Comment Is Free…

Perhaps we should just have surrendered to the Japanese. Wasn’t that the unexplored option? At least we wouldn’t have had blood on our hands. War is bad, m’kay.

It can’t be long before a writer at CiF characterises the US response to Pearl Harbour as a racist, Imperialist war of aggression against a nation they’d dehumanised as “yellow people” calculated to further American industrial interests in the Pacific…

Comments: 267
..

Hiroshima son amour

http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2008/08/hiroshima-son-amour.html

....Finally, while Ahmadinejad, president (no less) of a certain large country, apparently threatens nothing, Benny Morris on the other hand, a professor at Ben-Gurion University, he really does threaten: according to Pilger, he threatens 'an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland'. 'For a Jew', Pilger says, 'the irony cries out.'..........

Pilger on war crimes

.........A quarter of a century later, Pilger is still peddling an ahistorical and insupportable thesis by means of a quotation that he knows to be spurious. Think about that. Few are likely to mistake Pilger as an authority on twentieth-century history; but there are still some who regard him as a voice of integrity and a teller of uncomfortable truths. He is in fact, and knowingly, a retailer of ideologically congenial falsehoods.....

http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2008/08/pilger-on-war-crimes.html

.....I hope people will notice that the Zionazis are out in force....
.....

[blackcat]

[gruts]

[blackbear]

The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany.

The Economic Boycott of 1933...

http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles   /jdecwar.html

[Dogsmilk]

[gruts]

[TonyGosling]

Edward VIII was a Nazi sympathiser who WANTED Britain to be bombed into submission by Hitler, claims historian
UK-based Nazi expert Karina Urbach said Edward blamed Jews for WW2
He allegedly wanted Germany to emerge victorious from the conflict
Suggested 'effective' bombing of England could bring peace to Europe
Less than a month later the Nazis started their deadly air raids on Britain
By JOHN HALL FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 16:17, 9 June 2015 | UPDATED: 16:49, 9 June 2015
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3116989/Edward-VIII-Nazi-symp athiser-WANTED-Britain-bombed-submission-Hitler-claims-historian.html

Edward VIII was a secret Nazi who blamed Jews for the Second World War and wanted Britain to be bombed into submission by Adolf Hitler's Luftwaffe, a German historian has claimed.

UK-based Nazi expert Karina Urbach said the former King - who famously abdicated the throne in December 1936 - was extremely anti-Semitic and hoped the conflict would be won by Germany.

Edward, known as the Duke of Windsor after giving up the crown, was known to be sympathetic to the Nazis having been photographed meeting Hitler and giving full Nazi salutes during the 1930s.

But Urbach claimed that 'the extent of his betrayal could never be fully verified' thanks to the secrecy of the Royal archives, adding she had only be able to reveal it thanks to a decade of painstaking research on the Nazi party's links to a number of European aristocrats.

Greeting: Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, by then known as the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, meet Adolf Hitler in October 1937, defying government advice not to go on their controversial trip to Nazi Germany +5
Greeting: Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, by then known as the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, meet Adolf Hitler in October 1937, defying government advice not to go on their controversial trip to Nazi Germany

Smiles: Edward VIII, known as the Duke of Windsor after giving up the crown, was known to be sympathetic to the Nazis having been photographed meeting Hitler and giving full Nazi salutes during the 1930s +5
Smiles: Edward VIII, known as the Duke of Windsor after giving up the crown, was known to be sympathetic to the Nazis having been photographed meeting Hitler and giving full Nazi salutes during the 1930s

Urbach was writing on The Conversation website ahead of the official release of her new book, Go-Betweens for Hitler, which examines how European aristocrats worked to keep the despot in power.

ADVERTISING

'The Royal Archives have always ensured that letters from German relatives of the royal family in the run up to World War II remain closed... Naturally, such censorship has led to endless conspiracy theories,' she was quoted as saying by Russia Today.

RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next

The shy and retiring suburban pensioner who left behind some...

Grandson of Hiroshima pilot who dropped world’s first...

How American soldiers looted $50m of Nazi gold: Coins hidden...

Chaos at Calais as builders unearth two WWII RAF bombs and...
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Share
55 shares
However the Duke's conversations with his dear friend, the Spanish diplomat Don Javier Bermejillo, have now revealed that he had blamed 'the Jews, the Reds and the Foreign Office' for the ratcheting up of tensions in Europe in the run up to the Second World War.

Urbach claimed the former king had expressed a desire to see politicians such as the then Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden 'up against a wall'.

Ramping up the betrayal ever further, Urbach said the king had told Bermejillo that a resolution to the conflict must be found 'at any price', adding that the Duke had expressly told the diplomat that 'if one bombed England effectively this could bring peace'.

Betrayal: A month after the former Edward VIII expressed a desire to see Britain bombed into submission, the Nazi's began carrying out a series of deadly air raids that would go on to be known as the Blitz +5
Betrayal: A month after the former Edward VIII expressed a desire to see Britain bombed into submission, the Nazi's began carrying out a series of deadly air raids that would go on to be known as the Blitz

+5
+5
Anger: Historian Karina Urbach claims former king Edward VIII (pictured right) expressed a desire to see politicians such as the then Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden (left) 'up against a wall'

According to Urbach, the Duke's conversation with Bermejillo on the matter of bombing Britain into submission took place on on June 25, 1940.

The details are said to have been immediately released to Spain's General Franco who in turn passed them on the Nazis. The Luftwaffe air raids in Britain started less than a month later.

It has been widely speculated that Edward III, who died in 1972 aged 77, was a Nazi sympathiser, with the rumours beginning after he a his wife Wallis Simpson travelled to Germany to meet Hitler in October 1937, defying government advice.


The Duke was seen giving full Nazi salutes during the visit and, having settled in France shortly before the Second World War, refused to return to Britain when Germany invaded - instead moving first to the south of the country, then to Spain and finally on to Portugal.

In the country the Duke and Mrs Simpson were known to have stayed at the Lisbon home of a banker with both British and Nazi links.

Eventually Prime Minister Winston Churchill threatened the former King with a court martial if he didn't return to Britain and eventually had him installed as Governor of the Bahamas where it was thought he would have less impact on the war effort.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Whichever way you look at it Adolf was an Allied asset from 1941 on. If 'A Man Called Intrepid' is to be believed the Allies could read encrypted German traffic right from the start and knew about plans to invade the Soviet Union six or nine months before it happened. Some even say the British Theosophists, through Alfred Rosenberg's cranky myths ed German supremacy, chose Hitler to lead their occult reich deliberately...



28 AUG 2017 - 4:04PM
A brief history of the British Royals and their alleged Nazi connections
https://www.sbs.com.au/guide/article/2017/08/28/brief-history-british- royals-and-their-alleged-nazi-connections

A lot of dirt has been dug up over the years - and there are even more secrets yet to be revealed.
By Jim Mitchell
28 AUG 2017 - 2:29 PM UPDATED 28 AUG 2017 - 4:04 PM
The British Royal Family have never been able to escape the spectre of their unsavoury historical Nazi connections – Nazi sympathisers the Duke and Duchess of Windsor (whose relationship is explored in SBS documentary Spying on the Royals), alleged WWII plots to install a pro-Nazi government and that controversial footage of Queen Elizabeth apparently making the Nazi salute as a child.

Now the question remains: just how far reaching were their Nazi connections? With the Royal Family refusing to release historical documents that would bring greater clarity to the issue, alternate evidence has come to light and theories abate.



The Nazi sympathisers: the Duke and Duchess of Windsor
The Windsors

Source: SBS

The Windsors – former monarch Edward VIII and his American love, Wallis Simpson, for whom he abdicated the throne – were a pesky thorn in the Royals’ side, not least because they were thought to be Nazi sympathisers. Intelligence given to the FBI claimed the Nazis were using the Duke and Duchess to glean information that would scuttle the war effort of the allies.

"He was certainly sympathetic,” says royal biographer Andrew Morton, author of 17 Carnations: The Royals, the Nazis, and the Biggest Cover-Up in History, of the duke. “Even after the war he thought Hitler was a good fellow and that he'd done a good job in Germany, and he was also anti-Semitic, before, during and after the war."

Edward was at the centre of an alleged plot to overthrow the Winston Churchill government in favour of a pro-Nazi one. The Fuhrer and his key advisers were no doubt rubbing their hands together at the prospect of pulling the strings of a “puppet king” if their wish for Edward to be reinstalled was realised.

Dr Karina Urbach of the Institute of Historical Research at the University of London (and author of book Go-Betweens for Hitler) uncovered evidence of just how deep the duke’s collusion with the Nazis went. She details a report from June 25, 1940 by Spanish diplomat and friend of the duke Don Javier Bermejillo of a conversation where Edward went so far as to argue that the bombing of England could bring WWII to an end. Dr Urbach claims the report was passed on to Spain’s military dictator, General Francisco Franco, and then to Germany. Britain was first bombed by the Germans on July 10, 1940.

Simpson was also alleged to have deep Nazi links, with rumours that prior to marrying Edward she was the lover of Nazi foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop.



The Nazi cousin: “Charlie Coburg”
The Duke of Coburg
The Duke of Coburg.
Source: Wikimedia Commons

The Windsors’ Nazi-supporting German relatives also proved a fly in the ointment, although one, for a period, was a welcome visitor to Buckingham Palace. Former British prince Carl Eduard (Charles Edward), the Duke of Coburg, also known as “Charlie Coburg”, was Queen Victoria’s grandson, first cousin to King George V and confidant to the Duke of Windsor.

Coburg was employed by the Fuhrer as a go-between for the German government to exploit the Royal Family’s pro-German leanings. The Times, via The Weekend Australian, reports that Coburg wrote in his diary of often visiting the royals at Buckingham and Sandringham Palace.

His value as a key asset to Hitler was laid out in a telegram sent from the Nazi leader’s bunker in April 1945:

“The Fuhrer attaches importance to the Duke of Coburg on no account falling into enemy hands."



Another traitorous prince?
Prince George, Duke of Kent, c1936.
Prince George, Duke of Kent, c. 1936.
Source: Getty

A pair of historians believe Edward VIII wasn’t the only son of King George V to conspire with the Nazis to create a WWII Anglo-German alliance. John Harris and Richard Wilbourn, authors of Rudolf Hess: Treachery and Deception, assert that Prince George, the Duke of Kent and uncle to Queen Elizabeth II, played a key part in planning a coup d’état with Hitler’s deputy, Hess, to remove Prime Minister Winston Churchill and forge a treaty with the Fuhrer.

One of the most enduring mysteries of WWII is why Hess parachuted into Scotland in 1941. Harris and Wilbourn, after sifting through over 10,000 documents, believe the evidence “very strongly points” to an Anglo-German conspiracy. (Intriguingly Prince George, who served in the RAF, is said to have been in Scotland when Hess arrived.)

“Having weighed up all the evidence, and in light of recent discoveries we have made, we now believe that it was, in fact, a coup attempt centred around Prince George,” says Harris. “The aristocracy had the most to lose from Churchill staying in power. All they knew was that Germany was bombing Britain nightly, softening the country up prior to an invasion, which would surely cost them their wealth, their status and their lives.”

The prince died in action on August 25, 1942.



Queen Elizabeth II’s Nazi salute

There’s much debate on its context, but 20 seconds of footage obtained by The Sun, released in 2015 and thought to be shot in 1933 or 1934, appears to show Queen Elizabeth II as a girl performing the Nazi salute, as coached by her Nazi sympathiser uncle, Edward. The Queen Mother appears to be making the salute also. Of course, if the Queen was making the gesture, she couldn’t have known it at the time.

“The video is pretty shocking,” says Dr Urbach. “She was a child when this film was shot, long before the atrocities of the Nazis became widely known. But Edward was already welcoming the regime as Prince of Wales in 1933 and remained pro-Nazi after war broke out in 1939.

“He could well be teaching the Queen and Princess Margaret how to do the salute. The film involves our monarch and is an important historical document that asks serious questions of the Royal Family.”



A royal cover-up?
Royal archives
Historians have called for sealed archives that would reveal the extent of the Royals' links to the Third Reich to be made public.
Source: The Guardian

The footage of the Queen’s alleged Nazi salute is an anomaly, with the remainder of the Royal Archives, housed in Windsor Castle’s Round Tower, that deal with any relationship between the Windsors and the Nazis sealed. They include correspondence between the British Royal Family and their German relatives that would reveal the full extent of the family’s connections to the Third Reich in the lead-up to WWII. So what exactly are they trying to cover up?

“We know that after ’45 there was a big cleanup operation,” says Urbach. “The royals were very worried about correspondence resurfacing and so it was destroyed.”

Churchill employed a top-secret team called “the weeders”, sent to Berlin to find and conceal anything that documented the duke’s interactions with Hitler and Nazi officials, to protect the Royal Family’s reputation.

One theory is the archives could include incriminating evidence retrieved by Anthony Blunt, the “Weeder-in-Chief” who was revealed to be a Soviet spy. Historians and MPs have called for the archives to become public.

“The Royal Family can’t suppress their own history forever,” says Urbach.



Watch Spying on the Royals tonight and tomorrow at 7:30pm on SBS.


MORE ON THE GUIDE

Princess Diana died 20 years ago. Why should we care?
SBS channel manager Ben Nguyen examines the enduring fascination with the British Monarchy.

Go behind the palace gates with this collection of fascinating royal docos
It's a Royals Week of programming that reflects and explores our fascination with British royalty.