Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Adolf Hitler's Nazi Deputy Rudolf Hess ‘Murdered By British Agents’ To Stop Him Spilling Wartime Secrets

Recommended Posts

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/adolf-hitlers-nazi-deputy-rudolf-hess-murdered-by-british-agents-to-stop-him-spilling-wartime-secrets-8802603.html

Scotland Yard was given the names of British agents who allegedly murdered the Nazi Rudolf Hess in the infamous Spandau Prison but was advised by prosecutors not to pursue its investigations, according to a newly-released police report.

Written two years after Hess’s death in 1987, the classified document outlines a highly-sensitive inquiry into the claims of a British surgeon who had once treated Adolf Hitler’s deputy that, rather than taking his own life, the elderly Nazi was killed on British orders to preserve wartime secrets.

Released under the Freedom of Information Act, the partially-redacted report by Detective Chief Superintendent Howard Jones revealed that the surgeon - Hugh Thomas - had supplied him with the names of two suspects provided by a “government employee” responsible for training secret agents.

Withheld for nearly 25 years, the report has been released by the Yard’s counter-terrorism command following consultation with “other Government and foreign government departments”.

The death of Hess in Berlin at the age of 93 after he apparently hung himself with a wire flex in a summer house in the grounds of Spandau has long been controversial with claims that he was too infirm to commit suicide and a farewell note to his family had in fact been written 20 years earlier.

..

Mr Jones wrote: “[Mr Thomas] had received information that two assassins had been ordered on behalf of the British Government to kill Hess in order that he should not be released and free to expose secrets concerning the plot to overthrow the Churchill government.”

The officer found there was not “much substance” to Mr Thomas’s claims of murder but suggested that efforts should be made to trace and interview the alleged killers along with other witnesses to ensure the matter could be “comprehensively adjudged” to have been fully investigated.

Could we at least have a better plot to go with this conspiracy theory. There must be more to it, but having been imprisoned for over 40 years it's hard to believe he could have said anything that was going to embarrass anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a plot to overthrow Churchill's govt with rumours of it involving some of the richest and powerful of the upper classes. Whether this was why Hess flew to the UK is something that I doubt we will ever find out. By his trial in Nuremburg Hess acted as if he was mad so goodness knows how he was some 50 years later.

Lots of the British etablishment admired Hitler including one ex King.

For all his many faults Churchill was a case of cometh the hour cometh the man. But he was hated by those who wanted the UK to get into bed with the Nazis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/adolf-hitlers-nazi-deputy-rudolf-hess-murdered-by-british-agents-to-stop-him-spilling-wartime-secrets-8802603.html

Could we at least have a better plot to go with this conspiracy theory. There must be more to it, but having been imprisoned for over 40 years it's hard to believe he could have said anything that was going to embarrass anyone.

Sure.

Hugh Thomas wrote a book claiming that the Hess that had been murdered was not the real Hess but a double - the switch happening sometime after his flight and before the end of the war.

Here's the book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hess-Tale-Murders-Hugh-Thomas/dp/0340488697/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1378572974&sr=1-1&keywords=hugh+thomas+rudolf+hess

And another coming to similar conclusions:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Double-Standards-Rudolf-Hess-Cover-Up/dp/0751532207/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1378572943&sr=1-1&keywords=double+standards+the+rudolph+hess+cover+up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure.

Hugh Thomas wrote a book claiming that the Hess that had been murdered was not the real Hess but a double - the switch happening sometime after his flight and before the end of the war.

Here's the book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hess-Tale-Murders-Hugh-Thomas/dp/0340488697/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1378572974&sr=1-1&keywords=hugh+thomas+rudolf+hess

And another coming to similar conclusions:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Double-Standards-Rudolf-Hess-Cover-Up/dp/0751532207/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1378572943&sr=1-1&keywords=double+standards+the+rudolph+hess+cover+up

Taken from the 2nd Amazon customer review on the book 'Double Standards' linked above:

The authors of Double Standards" devote several pages to a discussion of the tragedies on all sides that could have been avoided if Hess` mission had been a success. With a marvellously tongue-in-cheek attitude they also consider, side by side, the kind of Europe that, in 1941, would have resulted from a reasonable peace, and the political structure we see emerging today in the same geographical area, finding little to choose between the two.

Hehehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best thing about these sort of stories for authors is that as the person in question is dead and never actually 'spilled' any secrets. This means they can simply make up any old rubbish surround it with tendentious or circumstantial evidence and then flog the results to all the mugs out there. Personally I think the reason Hess was rubbed out was to prevent the world from knowing that it was really his voice on those early Elvis Presley records.The British agents were actually working for Colonel Tom Parker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely true.

Definitely not true.

Maybe.

Who knows.

Next.

How can you be so sure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we at least have a better plot to go with this conspiracy theory. There must be more to it, but having been imprisoned for over 40 years it's hard to believe he could have said anything that was going to embarrass anyone.

There are reasonable reasons to believe Hess maybe couldn't have finished himself off the way he was supposed to have.

Double or not, he was ancient and had already been there for donkey's years. So, the notion that he was being silenced does strike me as a bit silly.

Being short of a plausible reason for his murder doesn't discount the physical evidence that suggests possible murder. The motive could be completely off the wall and impossible to fathom. It is possible that it could have been something to do with the peculiar management arrangements at Spandau Prison, with the Soviets entitled to send a team into West Berlin to manage the prison every fourth month. For the last twenty years of his life Speer/ His Doppelganger was the only inmate. After he died Spandau was knocked down and (eventually) turned into an Aldi. No more Soviets.

Whichever way you slice it, the deputy Fuhrer flying solo across the North Sea and parachuting into Scotland, immediately before the invasion of Russia, is fecking weird. There's clearly an untold story there and very possibly a bizarre one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hehehe

wiki: Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War

Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World, is a paleoconservative history book by Pat Buchanan, published in May 2008. In it, Buchanan argues that both world wars were unnecessary, and that Britain's decision to fight in them was disastrous for the world. One of Buchanan's express purposes is to undermine what he describes as a "Churchill cult" amongst America's elite[1], and therefore he focuses particularly on the role of Sir Winston Churchill in involving Britain in wars with Germany in 1914 and again in 1939.

Playing Devil's advocate...

Hitler expressed no interest in fighting Britain, had written and spoken about his admiration and support for the British and their Empire, sought peace on numerous occasions, even offering the assistance of German troops if the Empire was ever attacked, and passed up on crushing the BEF at Dunkirk when he had a chance.

Instead, the British fought the war allied with Stalin, an ideological enemy of Britain, responsible for the death of tens of millions. The war finished with more countries under oppressive foreign occupation than at the start, including the country the British went to war in support of in the first place.

At the end of which Britain, even though it had 'won', was stuffed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wiki: Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War

Playing Devil's advocate...

Hitler expressed no interest in fighting Britain, had written and spoken about his admiration and support for the British and their Empire, sought peace on numerous occasions, even offering the assistance of German troops if the Empire was ever attacked, and passed up on crushing the BEF at Dunkirk when he had a chance.

Instead, the British fought the war allied with Stalin, an ideological enemy of Britain, responsible for the death of tens of millions. The war finished with more countries under oppressive foreign occupation than at the start, including the country the British went to war in support of in the first place.

At the end of which Britain, even though it had 'won', was stuffed.

Yeah, I've read it. An excellent and fascinating book.

Although, the general sentiment of the book wasn't a shocker for me as my parents told me about Churchill bringing in troops to take on striking miners, Churchill being largely responsible for the Dardenelles disaster, Churchill being authoritarian during the general strike and Churchill sticking to the Gold Standard at a price that was far too high. They weren't fans of the man.

There are all sorts of interesting stuff in that book they didn't tell me about. Such as how we made an unnecessary enemy of Japan who had been our ally in WWI thanks to pressure from the USA for which we received nothing and by doing so exposed Australia and NZ, the most loyal of the dominions, to mortal danger.

As for the devils advocate stuff, if you ever get the chance to play Hearts of Iron (WWII simulation game) play Poland and when the Germans ask for access to Danzig, give it to them. Its the most boring game you can have coz the sodding war never starts!

Edit: miners not minors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wiki: Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War

Playing Devil's advocate...

Hitler expressed no interest in fighting Britain, had written and spoken about his admiration and support for the British and their Empire, sought peace on numerous occasions, even offering the assistance of German troops if the Empire was ever attacked, and passed up on crushing the BEF at Dunkirk when he had a chance.

Instead, the British fought the war allied with Stalin, an ideological enemy of Britain, responsible for the death of tens of millions. The war finished with more countries under oppressive foreign occupation than at the start, including the country the British went to war in support of in the first place.

At the end of which Britain, even though it had 'won', was stuffed.

It may be coincidence but Britain's rise to World Power was linked to a policy of alliance with Prussia.

The moment that was abandoned everything imploded

To my simple mind three factors were key

First, the Kaisar was half British and had an obsession with Germany becoming an imperial naval power even though none of his predecessors had shown any interest in such a policy. It was in part inspired by the Kaisers dislike for his English mother whom he blamed for the withered arm with which he had been born. This single fact put Britain and Germany on a collision course with disastrous consequences for both countries

Second. the French after their humiliation at Sedan in the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 were desperate never to have to take on Germany alone again in any military confrontation. As a consequence they plotted to drag the British and Russians into any future conflict on their side. Unfortunately, Edward VII who hated his domineering German father was only to happy to oblige with the Entente Cordiale

Third, once war had broken out Britain did not have the manufacturing resources or the oil necessary to defeat the Germans so basically had to start to pawn the family silver to the US to obtain the munitions necessary to fight a European land war. Churchill who doted on his American mother was very keen from the start to get the US involved in the conflict.

Britain's victories in both world wars were Pyrrhic since the cost meant it had to liquidate its world wide empire simply to survive.

And if you want to know who is responsible then blame the parents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be coincidence but Britain's rise to World Power was linked to a policy of alliance with Prussia.

The moment that was abandoned everything imploded

To my simple mind three factors were key

First, the Kaisar was half British and had an obsession with Germany becoming an imperial naval power even though none of his predecessors had shown any interest in such a policy. It was in part inspired by the Kaisers dislike for his English mother whom he blamed for the withered arm with which he had been born. This single fact put Britain and Germany on a collision course with disastrous consequences for both countries

Second. the French after their humiliation at Sedan in the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 were desperate never to have to take on Germany alone again in any military confrontation. As a consequence they plotted to drag the British and Russians into any future conflict on their side. Unfortunately, Edward VII who hated his domineering German father was only to happy to oblige with the Entente Cordiale

Third, once war had broken out Britain did not have the manufacturing resources or the oil necessary to defeat the Germans so basically had to start to pawn the family silver to the US to obtain the munitions necessary to fight a European land war. Churchill who doted on his American mother was very keen from the start to get the US involved in the conflict.

Britain's victories in both world wars were Pyrrhic since the cost meant it had to liquidate its world wide empire simply to survive.

And if you want to know who is responsible then blame the parents

According to Pat Buchanan's book mentioned above, The Germans started to build their fleet after a couple of German vessels were boarded by the Royal Navy during the Boer War. We were trying to stop smuggling to the Boers, the Germans viewed our actions as acts of piracy and pressure began to build the German fleet. Buchanan thinks that the Germans were very open to cutting a deal with us, limiting the size of their fleet in return for non aggression pact type stuff. The German Naval build up was the main reason we joined the tripe entente. So we could have sat out WWI eating popcorn watching the Germans, Russians and French beat the hell out of eachother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Pat Buchanan's book mentioned above, The Germans started to build their fleet after a couple of German vessels were boarded by the Royal Navy during the Boer War. We were trying to stop smuggling to the Boers, the Germans viewed our actions as acts of piracy and pressure began to build the German fleet. Buchanan thinks that the Germans were very open to cutting a deal with us, limiting the size of their fleet in return for non aggression pact type stuff. The German Naval build up was the main reason we joined the tripe entente. So we could have sat out WWI eating popcorn watching the Germans, Russians and French beat the hell out of eachother.

If the Germans had spent the money building submarines rather than battleships they might have won the First World War

As for Britain its great misfortune in the 20th Century was to have France and the USA as allies

Between them they ensured that winning wars was almost as bad as losing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I thought it was only me who shared these thoughts.

These thoughts are still extremely relevant to the here and now, including the proposed attack on Syria.

If you listen to the war-makers it's always 1938 and any reluctance to initiate war is pitched as another 'Munich'. The next head of state/ rival crime boss to get whacked is always the New Hitler*.

If people buy into the cult it's virtually carte blanche for endless preemptive war-making

Even if you take the debatable view that making war on Germany was inevitable and morally necessary, what was so wrong about appeasement anyway?

If Britain and France had declared war on Germany in 1938 rather than 1939 there's not much reason to believe they would have fared any better. There are good grounds to believe Britain would have been less well-armed and fared worse.

edit: * Never, for some reason, the New Hirohito

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Pat Buchanan's book mentioned above, The Germans started to build their fleet after a couple of German vessels were boarded by the Royal Navy during the Boer War. We were trying to stop smuggling to the Boers, the Germans viewed our actions as acts of piracy and pressure began to build the German fleet. Buchanan thinks that the Germans were very open to cutting a deal with us, limiting the size of their fleet in return for non aggression pact type stuff. The German Naval build up was the main reason we joined the tripe entente. So we could have sat out WWI eating popcorn watching the Germans, Russians and French beat the hell out of eachother.

HPc Tightwad alternative to actually shelling out for Buchanan's book...

CSpan: Book Discussion on Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

edit: the appeal of theses like Buchanan's is not that they may be 100% correct but that they offer a glimpse of a more complex, less of a comic book style, view of global events which just seems more in keeping with personal experience of the world (impo) than the Black Hat vs White Hat stuff most of us have been fed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   204 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.