Wednesday, May 11, 2016

The Worst Sinking Ever Was the Wilhelm Gustoff

Always with the Nazis. Pure evil, you know.

Not exactly. The Russian Communists (Communism was originally called "Jewish Bolshevism") were much, much worse than the Nazis and killed tens of millions of more people.

And that brings me to the Wilhelm Gustloff, the worst single-ship disaster ever.

Everyone knows about the Titanic, but the Gustoff? Nope.

The Russian sub that sank the ship almost failed since a torpedo got stuck in a launch tube. The crew was able to clear it. As far as I'm concerned, too bad.

We saved the Communist regime with money and material and then they stabbed us in the back. Patton wanted to team up with the Germans and wipe out the Communists since he saw what was coming. We should have aided the Germans against the Communists of instead of aiding the Communists - which lead to Korea and Vietnam.

Now Russia is in collapse in all ways, which is what is also happening to Communist China. They're probably going to end up in a huge war not too far off - and all because we aided Russia against Germany.

In those days there were smart Americas saying, "Stay out of the war! Don't aid Russia!" They were ignored by the cretins in the government.


The biggest single-ship disaster in history took place on a freezing night in January 1945, when Russian torpedoes hit and sank the German cruise ship “Wilhelm Gustloff.” The liner was unarmed and unescorted, and carrying thousands of German women and children rushing to the coast of East Prussia in an attempt to escape by sea the approaching Red Army. Nine thousand people died that night, six times more than in the “Titanic” and nine times more than in the “Lusitania.” Many of those on board were wounded German soldiers who never had a chance. Twelve hundred people survived, including 100 children.

Only one book has been written about the tragedy, by an Englishman, and even that sank without a trace. Some of the survivors are still alive, and because of the publication of a novel by Gunter Grass, they suddenly find themselves in the news. The consensus is that all this years after the event, they still have nightmares remembering the screams of the children, or the looks of resignation on the faces of the wounded on deck. In the closing days of the war, the victims of the sea tragedy were largely ignored, just as those old men, women and children, 70,000-plus, who were incinerated in Dresden, a city of absolutely no military importance, were.

Germany’s literary elite and historians ignored the victims of the “Wilhelm,” just as they largely ignored innocent German sufferers of the war. In fact, it was seen as politically incorrect to portray any German as victim long before the term was popularized. No longer. Gunter Grass, a left-winger and Nobel Prize winner, published a novel, In Retrogression, that deals with the forcible removal of nearly seven million Germans from lands in East Prussia and the Sudetenland, which had been settled by their ancestors during the Middle Ages.

Grass, who wrote The Tin Drum more than 40 years ago, an account of the rise of Nazism in Danzig, has now broken the wall of silence. The irony is that the expulsion of Germans from the eastern territories was one of the greatest taboos of postwar history, while the left, led by Gunter Grass, emphasized only German remorse. Better late than never, as they say, although it cannot be much comfort to those still alive.

The reason these forcible evictions and massacres – 1.7 million German prisoners of war died or were murdered in the Soviet Union alone, whereas close to three million civilians died immediately following the German surrender – have not gone down in history as major crimes against humanity is obvious. Set against the horrors of Auschwitz and Treblinka, they sort of pale by comparison. But a crime is a crime, and a German mother cries as bitterly as a Jewish one, or a Palestinian for that matter.

“Der Spiegel” recently ran stories of human tragedy concerning the sinking of the “Wilhelm Gustloff.” It related the story of a boy who was born in the ship’s hospital one day before the liner went down. His mother had been fleeing homeward in an attempt to find her fiance before giving birth. After the three torpedoes hit the ship, she ran on deck, holding her baby tightly. The infant was covered in a green jacket and cap. As she struggled to hold onto a rope ladder leading to a lifeboat, a soldier took the baby and told her, "Once in the boat I’ll pass it down to you." But a wave swept the lifeboat away.

But this one has a happy ending. When a rescue ship, “Lion,” picked her up, a stranger handed her a bundle. The one-day-old boy was safe and sound, but she never found out what happened to the soldier.

In Grass’ novel, the heroine is based on this woman. Grass, now 74, has apparently seen the light and wants to commemorate those Germans who died as a result of Allied bombing and in the mass flight from the east.

Which brings me to the point I wish to make. Those who died in the “Wilhelm” and during the bombing died while there was a war on. The later and far larger expulsions took place after the Potsdam agreement, after the war in Europe was over. Hundreds of thousands were raped, murdered and robbed, without a single American, British or French protest. The Germans, in fact, had become the new “untermenschen.” Nobody has ever atoned for these dead, and no one has ever publicly regretted their fate. Acknowledging these sins now simply serves the consciences of those who tried so hard in the past to keep the victims as invisible as possible.

So I have an idea. As the list of sacred days mounts up, why not add one more: a memorial day for the millions of victims of that festival of slaughter by the Red Army. And it can coincide with the memorial day for all the victims of communism in Russia, China and throughout the world. March 5 would be appropriate, the day Joe Stalin croaked. One thing is for sure. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for it to happen.

17 comments:

LosAngelesKing said...

"Patton wanted to team up with the Germans and wipe out the Communists since he saw what was coming. We should have aided the Germans against the Communists of instead of aiding the Communists - which lead to Korea and Vietnam."

Patton's idea was bang on, since America foolishly got into the war to begin with. I've said for decades that all the Allies had to do was wait out the war until the leftist Nazis went to war against the worst leftist Communists. The results would have been the Allies dominating Europe. Smart Americans and Brits understood this, alas the Roosevelt administration was infested with Communist spies. Joseph McCarthy was right with his "witch hunts", even if leftist "historians" wish to tell us otherwise.

But since the Allies just had to go war, they shouldn't have prolonged the war to aid the advance into Eastern Europe. They used a far greater tyrant to defeat a lesser one. Why wage a Titanic war to save Europe from tyranny, just to hand it over to a much more ruthless and blood-thirsty one? And Patton was right, he saw first hand what the Red terrorists were capable of. His sensible proposed alliance with the Germans reminds me of the poem by Hillaire Belloc, The Modern Traveller.

"Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim gun, and they have not."

Just paraphrase that to "Whatever happens, we have got the Atomic Bomb, and they have not." The Japanese shouldn't have been nuked, they were already suing for peace, they simply wanted to keep their emperor. They ended up keeping their emperor, so why drag it out? To flex their muscles against Stalin. Those bombs should have been dropped on Russia instead.

That would have been a guarantee that Stalin would exited Europe pronto.

LosAngelesKing said...

"In Retrogression, that deals with the forcible removal of nearly seven million Germans from lands in East Prussia and the Sudetenland, which had been settled by their ancestors during the Middle Ages."

Oh, you forgot to mention the forced eviction at gunpoint of millions of Volga Germans by the Communists. 4 to 6 million were said to have died in this slaughter too Bob. We can also mention the napalming of Dresden and Hamburg for no other reason than the blood-thirsty Churchill could demonstrate his hatred of Germans to "Uncle Joe."

Twarog said...

That whole business about rounding up entire ethnic groups into cattle cars and systematically exterminating them? Hitler stole those ideas from Stalin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_transfer_in_the_Soviet_Union
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi%E2%80%93Soviet_population_transfers

Bob, I think you've talked before about how "birds of a bad feather flock together"- how evil people seem to instinctively find each other in a crowd and display mutual admiration of one another's wickedness. The weird bromance/frenmity between Hitler and Stalin is a great example. Ideologically they were natural enemies, but they personally adored and deeply trusted each other, practically right up until the launch of Operation Barbarossa.

Anonymous said...

"... we have got the Atomic Bomb, and they have not."'

No, they don't - and we don't either.

Nuclear weapons do NOT exist, and neither do intercontinental ballistic missiles:

http://www.big-lies.org

http://www.big-lies.org/NUKE-LIES/www.nukelies.com/forum/index.html

http://heiwaco.tripod.com

Dusty Meckelford said...

Jesus Christ, LAK, you are a dumb ass.

"Patton's idea was bang on, since America foolishly got into the war to begin with."

You do realize that American trade would have been significantly disrupted had the nation let Germany and Russia duke it out.

"I've said for decades that all the Allies had to do was wait out the war until the leftist Nazis went to war against the worst leftist Communists."

Nazism was conservative, not liberal, ideology. Hitler espoused patriotism and a strong military, which are attributed to conservatives. Moreover, in HIS own words...

Yes, how often did they not turn up in huge numbers, those supporters of the Red Flag, all previously instructed to smash up everything once and for all and put an end to these meetings. More often than not everything hung on a mere thread, and only the chairman’s ruthless determination and the rough handling by our ushers baffled our adversaries’ intentions. And indeed they had every reason for being irritated.

The fact that we had chosen red as the colour for our posters sufficed to attract them to our meetings. The ordinary bourgeoisie were very shocked to see that, we had also chosen the symbolic red of Bolshevism and they regarded this as something ambiguously significant.

The suspicion was whispered in German Nationalist circles that we also were merely another variety of Marxism, perhaps even Marxists suitably disguised, or better still, Socialists. The actual difference between Socialism and Marxism still remains a mystery to these people up to this day. The charge of Marxism was conclusively proved when it was discovered that at our meetings we deliberately substituted the words ‘Fellow-countrymen and Women’ for ‘Ladies and Gentlemen’ and addressed each other as ‘Party Comrade’. We used to roar with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeoisie and their efforts to puzzle out our origin, our intentions and our aims.

We chose red for our posters after particular and careful deliberation, our intention being to IRRITATE THE LEFT, so as to arouse their attention and tempt them to come to our meetings – if only in order to break them up – so that in this way we got a chance of talking to the people.

"The results would have been the Allies dominating Europe."

Would have been, huh. Yet you don't even leave an explanation how and why. Not surprising.

"Joseph McCarthy was right with his "witch hunts", even if leftist "historians" wish to tell us otherwise."

He used the same tactics as Nazis and Communists to purge their opponents. He was decidedly wrong.

"But since the Allies just had to go war, they shouldn't have prolonged the war to aid the advance into Eastern Europe."

Keep pissing on the graves of American World War II veterans.

LosAngelesKing said...

Touched a nerve, didn't I Cheechy Boy? Good, you just proved beyond all possible doubt that you are a fool, and I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with you beyond this post. I clearly pointed out in my comment that 2 LEFTIST countries went to war with each other, and it was not our business. How would we have been dominating Europe after Stalin and Hitler destroyed each other? Simple, just provide Stalin with just enough aid to fight a long draining war of attrition with Hitler. There were many active plots to assassinate Hitler, and there would have been against Stalin if millions more were to die in a war he helped to start. Stalin didn't die of natural causes or a stroke. He was murdered by Lavrenti Beria for plotting to start another World War.

Nazism was leftist, just not as leftist as Communism. Leftist is leftist, period.
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.ca/2015/03/were-nazis-national-socialists-socialist.html
Read that link if you're even capable of reading past a kindergarten level, and tell if the Nazis were "conservative." While you're at it, read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg for further information. Yes, he's a cuckservative, which I'm sure you can appreciate, but even a broken clock is entitled to tell correct time at least once in a while.

"He used the same tactics as Nazis and Communists to purge their opponents. He was decidedly wrong."

Some Hollyood bigwigs lose their jobs is not the same as being sent to a gulag to be frozen/worked to death in a gulag or murdered in a gas chamber. Only a bloodthirsty leftist like you can't tell the difference.

https://www.amazon.ca/Stalins-Secret-Agents-Subversion-Roosevelts/dp/1439147701. This book conclusively proved that Roosevelt's administration from his inner circle to the State Department to the Manhattan Project were infested with Communist spies. Being a member of the Communist party meant one was a security risk to the nation especially if they possessed access to classified data/secrets.

Roosevelt/Churchill should not have aided the advance of the Soviet Union into Eastern Europe, it was a sellout of more epic proportions than Munich. The politicians start and bungle wars, and the send the common man to go and fight them. But according to your twisted moral compass, that's "pissing on the graves" of American war veterans. Refusing to deify the criminal politicians who sent young soldiers to pave the way for the worst murderers in human history to take over half of Europe is telling the truth. You'll probably try and say "waah, that wasn't the intention", but it doesn't matter intentions. Results are what matter. And those results are untold economic devastation, millions more dead, and the world being on the brink of nuclear for nearly 5 decades.

Bob Wallace said...

"2 LEFTIST countries went to war with each other, and it was not our business."

Nazism and Communism were leftist, and history has shown the Soviet Union was far, far worse than then Nazis. And we supported them against the Germans?

LosAngelesKing said...

"Nazism and Communism were leftist, and history has shown the Soviet Union was far, far worse than then Nazis."

I remember reading the works of Professor Robert Conquest when I started high school, and it left a huge impression on me. His works were far more informative than the swill and the brainwashing they were trying to force on us young students.

One of my history teachers tried to rationalize our collaboration, er sorry "alliance" with the Genghis Khan with tanks by saying that half of Europe was payment for Russia's 20 million war dead. My response was that Stalin didn't give a damn about his war dead.

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is merely a statistic." was what Stalin said. And his war dead came about as a result of a war that he helped to start. And the truly outrageous thing about supporting Stalin was the world knew about his genocide in Ukraine, and said and did nothing. Stalin even told Churchill that he liquidated 10 million Ukrainians. Though Professor Conquest estimated the total to be 14.5 million dead.

Dusty Meckelford said...

“and I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with you beyond this post.”

Of course not, because Nazism sought to preserve a civilization and held on to traditional German attitudes about race and culture—conservative principles in action!

Oxford dictionary: "The term Fascism was first used of the totalitarian right-wing nationalist regime of Mussolini in Italy (1922–43), and the regimes of the Nazis in Germany and Franco in Spain were also fascist. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach”.

“I clearly pointed out in my comment that 2 LEFTIST countries went to war with each other, and it was not our business.”

Except one was LEFTIST and one was RIGHTEST.

“How would we have been dominating Europe after Stalin and Hitler destroyed each other?”

Assuming that each nation would have obliterated the other.

“Simple, just provide Stalin with just enough aid to fight a long draining war of attrition with Hitler.”

So, then the United States WOULD have become involved, even though you just stated our nation should have remain out of the action. Are you that dense?

“He was murdered by Lavrenti Beria for plotting to start another World War.”

Sources?

“Nazism was leftist, just not as leftist as Communism. Leftist is leftist, period.”
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.ca/2015/03/were-nazis-national-socialists-socialist.html

As one of the commenters astutely pointed out, “The Nazis' relation to big business wasn't straightforward. They denounced profiteering when they thought it harmed (what in their opinion was) vital German national interest, but gladly allowed select corporations to benefit from cronyism as long as they'd play ball with the objectives of the Nazi state. That's classical Mussolinian fascist economic policy right there.”

"He used the same tactics as Nazis and Communists to purge their opponents. He was decidedly wrong."

“Some Hollyood bigwigs lose their jobs is not the same as being sent to a gulag to be frozen/worked to death in a gulag or murdered in a gas chamber.”

Except McCarthy murdered people’s reputations and the Constitution in the process. You fail to comprehend that blood need not be shed in war.

https://www.amazon.ca/Stalins-Secret-Agents-Subversion-Roosevelts/dp/1439147701

“This book conclusively proved that Roosevelt's administration from his inner circle to the State Department to the Manhattan Project were infested with Communist spies. Being a member of the Communist party meant one was a security risk to the nation especially if they possessed access to classified data/secrets.”



Actually, the authors stated the overall picture is still far from being complete, since so many original documents were destroyed, sanitized or manipulated. In other words, it will take many more years to get the real and full picture of the role that intelligence played in this war, and they are only speculating prospective ties.

Bob Wallace said...

"Except one was LEFTIST and one was RIGHTEST"

Both Nazism and Communism are leftist.

"Nazi" means National Socialist.

Hitler said there was no difference between a Nazi and a Communist and ordered that all former Communists were to be immediately admitted to the Nazi party.

Dusty Meckelford said...

"Hitler said there was no difference between a Nazi and a Communist and ordered that all former Communists were to be immediately admitted to the Nazi party."

Don't know what your smoking, Bobby.

Hitler hated communists. He listed in his tome "Mein Kampf" justifications for his contempt--which I even submitted evidence expressing his sentiment--viewing Stalin and his minions as the scourge of the world, a cancer to be cut out of the world. It is evident in his orders to the troops he sent into Russia that he intended the complete and utter destruction of the communist regime. The truce between Hitler and Stalin was based mostly on their mutual desires to take parts of Poland, which they came at from different directions, and Hitler's secret desire to improve his military supply lines for the eventual invasion of the U.S.S.R.

Bob Wallace said...

"Hitler hated communists. He listed in his tome "Mein Kampf" justifications for his contempt."

What he said and what he did are two different things. He gave orders that all former Communists were to be immediately admitted to the Nazi party, because there is no difference between the personality of a Nazi and a Communist. Both are leftist.

Omega man said...

One of the great victories of the left was to disown National Socialism and claim that it was a right wing political movement.

If however you examine the ideologies from the point of view of group rights over individual rights, then the artificial categorization of which ideology is leftist and which is rightist, falls apart.

The Nazis championed the rights of the Volk, i.e. the people over the rights of the individual. The Communists championed the rights of the Proletariat over the rights of the individual.

For the Nazis the bogey man was the rich Jew who exploited the Volk. For the Communists the bogey man was the Bourgoise who exploited the Proletariat.

Both Nazis and Communists suppressed dissent. Both controlled the press and both had a secret police force. Both groups ran concentration camps where millions died.

The one major difference was that the Communists owned the means of production while the Nazis controlled the means of production in their society. It is this last point which is used by the left to claim that Nazis were not left wing at all, but right wing extremists.

A real right winger, celebrates the rights of the individual, the rule of law and equal opportunity for all.

Dusty Meckelford said...

"The Nazis championed the rights of the Volk, i.e. the people over the rights of the individual. The Communists championed the rights of the Proletariat over the rights of the individual."

The Nazis championed the right of the state over the rights of the individual. The Communists championed the rights of the working class over the rights of the monied elite.

"The one major difference was that the Communists owned the means of production while the Nazis controlled the means of production in their society. It is this last point which is used by the left to claim that Nazis were not left wing at all, but right wing extremists."

The Communists provided ownership of the means of the production to the working classes over the monied elite while the Nazis, through government intervention , controlled the means of production for its citizens.

Omega man said...

@Dusty

Now you're splitting hairs. For the Nazis, the embodiment of the Volk was the state and through the state, the rights of the Volk as a group were supreme. The Communists likewise championed the rights of the Proletariot as a group. In Communist societies, the state was supreme as well. Neither the Communists nor Nazis paid heed to the rights of the individual, and in fact it was rather dangerous to attempt to express your rights as an individual if those rights were deemed to be contrary or in conflict with the rights of the group.

Communism and Nazism are merely branches of the same tree and that tree has deep socialist roots!

Dusty Meckelford said...

"Neither the Communists nor Nazis paid heed to the rights of the individual, and in fact it was rather dangerous to attempt to express your rights as an individual if those rights were deemed to be contrary or in conflict with the rights of the group."

Listen, LosAngelesKing, I mean Omega man, this statement only serves as evidence that Nazism is RIGHTIST because citizens had no fundamental say in how their government ought to be organized or managed, nor how to personally live their life, akin to an absolute monarchy.

Remember, Hitler and company were seeking to PRESERVE their way of life, desiring to PURGE those groups that would challenge the status quo.

They promoted a socially conservative view of life--persecution of "degenerate art", rejection of "sexual vice", anti-intellectualism, discouragement of smoking and drinking. They fought for a return to the glorious past.

Conservative principles. RIGHTIST.

Again, focus on Hitler's words that HE wrote...

The suspicion was whispered in German Nationalist circles that we also were merely another variety of Marxism, perhaps even Marxists suitably disguised, or better still, Socialists. The actual difference between Socialism and Marxism still remains a mystery to these people up to this day. The charge of Marxism was conclusively proved when it was discovered that at our meetings we deliberately substituted the words ‘Fellow-countrymen and Women’ for ‘Ladies and Gentlemen’ and addressed each other as ‘Party Comrade’. We used to roar with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeoisie and their efforts to puzzle out our origin, our intentions and our aims.

We chose red for our posters after particular and careful deliberation, our intention being to IRRITATE THE LEFT, so as to arouse their attention and tempt them to come to our meetings – if only in order to break them up – so that in this way we got a chance of talking to the people.

Bob Wallace said...

Nazism ("National SOCIALISM") is leftist. "Socialist"? Leftist.