Allied atrocities during the Second World War >>MOD WARNING POST 80<<

getz

Shredder66 wrote: »

Exactly correct, but if I were a German, who decided to make a movie showing the Germans are the heroes and the allies as even mildly evil we know what the public outcry would be like, especially from brainwashed members of Boards.ie who are incapable of forming opinions of their own, it would be deafening I tells you, and that's the double standard

quote.take as many photos as you can ,because someone somewhere one day will deny this ever happened..... how did he know ?

gobnaitolunacy

Shredder66 wrote: »

Exactly correct, but if I were a German, who decided to make a movie showing the Germans are the heroes ....

Er, Das Boot?

Shredder66

It's no use people like Fratton Fred coming on making irrelevant points, naming random events that may of may not have occurred. I've heard them all before but with very little evidence and a few eyewitness reports only I wont believe them all.

My point is, history is unfairly written by the victor. There is an uneven amount of blame heaped on the Germans. There is a LOT of hypocrisy in the world. I'm asking all open minded people to just look at both sides of the arguement and draw your conclusion only after you have examined both sides carefully and with an open mind, with a questioning mind.

The truth keeps coming out, their stories keep changing (the bars of soap made from human corpses for example). The truth will be revealed someday and when it does wouldn't it be nice to say "I studied both sides and didn't believe the rubbish forced on me like the other sheep". Up until recently it was believed the katyn Massacre was carried out by the Germans, we all know that was wrong now but the suggestion of that a few years ago would have resulted in a lot finger pointing similar to what's goinmg on now. Think for yourselves.

Reekwind

Shredder66 wrote: »

Exactly correct, but if I were a German, who decided to make a movie showing the Germans are the heroes and the allies as even mildly evil we know what the public outcry would be like...

Well yes. That would be because you'd chosen to represent a brutal dictatorship whose genocidal ambitions killed millions (and would have claimed countless more in victory) as 'heroic'. With those who were fighting to stop this mad programme of genocide and conquest as villains. Now I wonder why people might have a problem with that...?

Incidentally, German war films have tended to be anti-war (Das Boot, Stalingrad, Downfall, The Bridge, etc) not because of some namby-pamby liberalism but because Germans tend to know better than insisting that one side play the heroes

...especially from brainwashed members of Boards.ie who are incapable of forming opinions of their own, it would be deafening I tells you, and that's the double standard

Again, we get the assertion that Nazi apologists have somehow a monopoly on the truth and historical investigation whereas everyone else is "brainwashed". Funny that

Everyone with even half a brain knows knows why Britain and France backed the USSR, I won't say because it's too politically incorrect and I'm afraid I'll make many people here cry and scream bloody murder. it doesn't take too much investigation, just ask why, why would they help? why would the US want to enter the war? Why did the Japs atack Pearl Harbor, was it unprovoked and a surprise? Even further back why did the yanks enter the first world war. The answer is not hard to find if you scratch a little bit below the surface. It was in the interest of a certain group of people.

Yeah, I'm going to call you out on this <Mod Snip>. It didn't take you too long to reveal your true colours. I wonder if the usual suspects will have the guts to thank that post

Anyone who thinks that the entire war was arranged "in the interest of a certain group of people" is lacking even "half a brain". And yes, we all know who you are referring to. We also all know that you're not going to try to substantiate that claim because:

1. You Nazi apologists don't do facts or reason. You're not capable of arguing about the thrust of Japanese imperialism or the Anglo-Soviet negotiations of 1939
2. Your core thesis is nonsense that doesn't stand up to even the slightest historical scrutiny. Hence the reluctance to bring anything amounting to logic to the table

Instead you're going to yammer away about the "unfairness" of blaming the Nazis (note: not Germans) for a war that was started by the world Jewry. then whine, construct strawmen and ignore responses. And you'll do it while claiming to be "open minded". Sickening

It's no use people like Fratton Fred coming on making irrelevant points, naming random events that may of may not have occurred. I've heard them all before but with very little evidence and a few eyewitness reports only I wont believe them all.

Just to be clear: this is Holocaust denial, isn't it?

getz

Shredder66 wrote: »

It's no use people like Fratton Fred coming on making irrelevant points, naming random events that may of may not have occurred. I've heard them all before but with very little evidence and a few eyewitness reports only I wont believe them all.

My point is, history is unfairly written by the victor. There is an uneven amount of blame heaped on the Germans. There is a LOT of hypocrisy in the world. I'm asking all open minded people to just look at both sides of the arguement and draw your conclusion only after you have examined both sides carefully and with an open mind, with a questioning mind.

The truth keeps coming out, their stories keep changing (the bars of soap made from human corpses for example). The truth will be revealed someday and when it does wouldn't it be nice to say "I studied both sides and didn't believe the rubbish forced on me like the other sheep". Up until recently it was believed the katyn Massacre was carried out by the Germans, we all know that was wrong now but the suggestion of that a few years ago would have resulted in a lot finger pointing similar to what's goinmg on now. Think for yourselves.

poor fred and he is not even posting

Fratton Fred

Shredder66 wrote: »

It's no use people like Fratton Fred coming on making irrelevant points, naming random events that may of may not have occurred. I've heard them all before but with very little evidence and a few eyewitness reports only I wont believe them all.

My point is, history is unfairly written by the victor. There is an uneven amount of blame heaped on the Germans. There is a LOT of hypocrisy in the world. I'm asking all open minded people to just look at both sides of the arguement and draw your conclusion only after you have examined both sides carefully and with an open mind, with a questioning mind.

The truth keeps coming out, their stories keep changing (the bars of soap made from human corpses for example). The truth will be revealed someday and when it does wouldn't it be nice to say "I studied both sides and didn't believe the rubbish forced on me like the other sheep". Up until recently it was believed the katyn Massacre was carried out by the Germans, we all know that was wrong now but the suggestion of that a few years ago would have resulted in a lot finger pointing similar to what's goinmg on now. Think for yourselves.

random events like what? The holocaust?

Any chance you could let us in on your secrets that will make us all cry?

It wasn't those pesky lizardmen again was it?

jonniebgood1

Shredder66 wrote: »

It's no use people like Fratton Fred coming on making irrelevant points, naming random events that may of may not have occurred. I've heard them all before but with very little evidence and a few eyewitness reports only I wont believe them all.

If you have a problem with a post you can either report it or preferably argue against it. A commentary on another poster (Fred in this case) is against charter. Thus infraction.

Shredder66 wrote: »

Everyone with even half a brain knows knows why Britain and France backed the USSR, I won't say because it's too politically incorrect and I'm afraid I'll make many people here cry and scream bloody murder. it doesn't take too much investigation, just ask why, why would they help? why would the US want to enter the war? Why did the Japs atack Pearl Harbor, was it unprovoked and a surprise? Even further back why did the yanks enter the first world war. The answer is not hard to find if you scratch a little bit below the surface. It was in the interest of a certain group of people.

In this case post no. 80 was directed at you referencing the forum charter in one instance as well as asking you to substantiate your posts, particularly given it was you who started the thread. As stated previously there is no problem with the premise of the thread- the problem is the lack of facts being used to back up opinions. Vague veiled descriptions such as the above without any reference to fact expressed as their basis are not for this forum. In any case if your not going to back your opinions up as required here then they dont mean anything apart from annoyance to people who ant to deal in fact. There is a conspiracy theory forum for those who want to dabble in opinions only.

Moderator.

tac foley

Seanchai wrote: »

Not like you Brits would go around claiming places that don't belong to them? Jesus, no. Never. That whole "British Empire" malarkey was just an accident... that went on for centuries and centuries. It does not indicate any imperialist fanaticism at the heart of British society and British political and cultural identity. Nope. Lovely people, the Brits, going around the world helping the poor benighted natives. Of course.

The. Most. Nationalist. People. In. All. Europe. Bar. None. TÁL.

Well, I'm at least half Irish, but only 1/8th British from my half English/half French grandmother. The rest of me is unashamably Canadian and French. But as with many people of my métis ancestry, I was brought up with tales of my da's derring-do as a young man fighting the Black & Tans, and rather less of his time in the FSA during the Civil War fighting his older brother, so my heritage is one of a rather interested bystander than your average rabid Brit.

However, it is more than obvious that you, Sir you, on the other hand, have your own agenda of waging unrelenting hatred, vituperation, calumny and many other ten-cent words more suited to the foaming-mouth brigade than a rational interchange of views.

I wish you well of your hatred, sure in the knowledge that one day it will come back and bite you in the ass.

tac

tac foley

golden lane wrote: »

in fact....most of them are believed to have been executed......

do you think they should have worked with the germans...????

There was even a movie made about the mass execution of Russian POWs by the Soviet Army in late 1945. All former Russian-occupied POW camps in Austria were under control of the Allies, and Austria was a shared responsiblity of the four Allies. The Soviets demanded the return of their nationals, who were then put on trucks by the thousand, driven into the Soviet-occupied zone of Austria, and slaughtered.

There was even a movie made about it [Before Winter comes - 1969], starring the Israeli actor Chaim Topol as a multi-lingual interpreter, who was found to be a Russian deserter. So he put on a truck with all the others. The movie ended with him being driven away and a few minutes later, the sound of a machine gun.

tac

golden lane

tac foley wrote: »

There was even a movie made about the mass execution of Russian POWs by the Soviet Army in late 1945. All former Russian-occupied POW camps in Austria were under control of the Allies, and Austria was a shared responsiblity of the four Allies. The Soviets demanded the return of their nationals, who were then put on trucks by the thousand, driven into the Soviet-occupied zone of Austria, and slaughtered.

There was even a movie made about it, starring the Israeli actor Chaim Topol as an interpreter, who was put on a truck with all the others. The movie ended with him being driven away and a few minutes later, the sound of a machine gun.

tac

thanks for that tac...in that instance....were they not russians who mainly fought on the german side......

of course we class ukranians etc as russians in those days.......

tac foley

golden lane wrote: »

thanks for that tac...in that instance....were they not russians who mainly fought on the german side......

of course we class ukranians etc as russians in those days.......

You many well not be incorrect.

However, in handing that back to you, I offer you in exchange not one, but TWO well-documented German atrocities -

1. The massacre of an entire Italian Army Division - the Acqui Division - by the Gebirgsjaeger of the Nazi Wehrmacht - about 5000 disarmed Italian soldiers slaughtered in Greece by the retreating German Army. Also made into a movie - Captain Corelli's Mandolin.

2. The 1944 massacre at the Ardeatine Caves - 350 Italian 'partisans' and five 'innocents' slaughtered by the German army just outside Rome.

No doubt there are folks on this forum who would argue that having an unarmed Italian Army division behind you was as effective as having an armed one in front of you, and that they were somewhat superlfuous in the scheme of things as a result. But in reparation they somehow conspired with the Germans to arrange for their mass execution by way of apology for their country's surrender to the invading allies. Meanwhile, over in Italy, those Italian partisans who knelt down and shot themselves in the back of the head, some of them with their sons in their embrace, who then blew up the entrances to the caves post mortem, were also fully complicit in their own deaths.

This thread is not only getting tedious in the extreme, but gaining a Kafta-esque life of its own that, to my mind, does this forum no favours.

I'm out.

tac

Shredder66

gobnaitolunacy wrote: »

Er, Das Boot?

Eh, were the allies the sadistic villans in that equal to the German villans in other films?

Shredder66

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

If you have a problem with a post you can either report it or preferably argue against it. A commentary on another poster (Fred in this case) is against charter. Thus infraction.


In this case post no. 80 was directed at you referencing the forum charter in one instance as well as asking you to substantiate your posts, particularly given it was you who started the thread. As stated previously there is no problem with the premise of the thread- the problem is the lack of facts being used to back up opinions. Vague veiled descriptions such as the above without any reference to fact expressed as their basis are not for this forum. In any case if your not going to back your opinions up as required here then they dont mean anything apart from annoyance to people who ant to deal in fact. There is a conspiracy theory forum for those who want to dabble in opinions only.

Moderator.

I see exactly what's going on here, you are trying to restrict what I'm saying and are taking sides. I never got personal or insulted anyone, I merely took him as an example. In my opening statement I gave various examples of war crimes, others came back with personal remarks but you said nothing to them, one individual calling me a "troll" but I say one thing and you're making all the threats. Just be honest and tell the truth, that you disagree completely and want to single me out. You are biased and on that note i will not contribute to this forum any further and will look into complaining about you further as you as a moderator are not impartial.

jonniebgood1

tac foley wrote: »

.....
Sir you, on the other hand, have your own agenda of waging unrelenting hatred, vituperation, calumny and many other ten-cent words more suited to the foaming-mouth brigade than a rational interchange of views.

I wish you well of your hatred, sure in the knowledge that one day it will come back and bite you in the ass.

tac

If you have a problem with a post you can either report it or preferably argue against it. A commentary on another poster in this personalised manner is against charter. Thus warning.

jonniebgood1

Shredder66 wrote: »

I see exactly what's going on here, you are trying to restrict what I'm saying and are taking sides. I never got personal or insulted anyone, I merely took him as an example. In my opening statement I gave various examples of war crimes, others came back with personal remarks but you said nothing to them, one individual calling me a "troll" but I say one thing and you're making all the threats. Just be honest and tell the truth, that you disagree completely and want to single me out. You are biased and on that note i will not contribute to this forum any further and will look into complaining about you further as you as a moderator are not impartial.

As I said to you already "If you have a problem with a post you can either report it or preferably argue against it. A commentary on another poster is against charter." This was what your infraction was for. It follows from this that if you had a problem with a certain post you should report it. You have not done this AFAIK.

You had already been requested to follow the forums generally accepted charter (see post 80) which you chose to ignore. If you think that this need for historical fact is restricting you then you probably have no place on the history forum in the first place.

If you wish to complain about me you can either have a thread in feedback to discuss this matter. Alternatively there is a disputes resolution board that you can use or maybe PM some of the category moderators to get them to review the situation.
I would suggest that if you feel the need to continue your complaint that you do this by one of the aforementioned means as any discussion of it further will not be allowed here (its off topic you see) plus I am in this instance quite likely to be biased in my own favour.

Reekwind

tac foley wrote: »

There was even a movie made about the mass execution of Russian POWs by the Soviet Army in late 1945. All former Russian-occupied POW camps in Austria were under control of the Allies, and Austria was a shared responsiblity of the four Allies. The Soviets demanded the return of their nationals, who were then put on trucks by the thousand, driven into the Soviet-occupied zone of Austria, and slaughtered.

There was even a movie made about it [Before Winter comes - 1969], starring the Israeli actor Chaim Topol as a multi-lingual interpreter, who was found to be a Russian deserter. So he put on a truck with all the others. The movie ended with him being driven away and a few minutes later, the sound of a machine gun

This may be a dramatisation but, either way, it's worth making a distinction here. There were generally three categories of POWs in the post-war USSR. In descending order of severity these were:

• German POWs and civilian labour. These were sent to special camps, not initially part of the GULAG system. Mortality rates were significantly higher in these camps: a product of the weakened state of the prisoners, typhus epidemic in 1945 and the criminal neglect of some commandants. It varied from camp to camp but in general were the worst of the NKVD forced labour network. Pretty grim places
  
  
• Soviet citizens (the label 'Russian' is inaccurate) who had chosen to fight with the Nazis. Includes the likes of the Cossacks and Vlasov's men. They were treated as traitors; their officers executed and the enlisted men sent to the standard labour camps. There was, AFAIK, no mass execution of 'traitors' below officer rank
  
  
• Soviet POWs captured by the Nazis. These were received with suspicion at home and I've seen conflicting reports as to their fate. The impression that I have is that, again excepting officers, the vast majority of the soldiers repatriated were returned home, albeit under a cloud of suspicion and perhaps mild administrative sanctions, or re-drafted into the army. Those that were detained would likely have been sent to the labour colonies rather than the camps proper

This is not an area that's been particularly well mapped out in history (the Germans aside) but certainly a statistical perspective would seem to rule out a sudden swelling of the numbers in NKVD custody by many millions. The total forced labour population rose from 3.2m in 1944 to 4.7m in 1947, an increase that can be largely attributable to the first two categories above plus renewed domestic repression. Which would suggest that the vast majority of the 2+ million Soviet POWs who returned post-war weren't sent to the camps

tac foley

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

If you have a problem with a post you can either report it or preferably argue against it. A commentary on another poster in this personalised manner is against charter. Thus warning.

I apologise for causing any offence, having publicly suffered being offended by one poster.

tac

Grizzly 45

juan.kerr wrote: »

There is a conspiracy theory that it was dropped as a warning to the Soviets, I have never been convinced, although I think Truman was less forgiving of Stalin that Roosevelt.

The first Soviet test was 4 years later. Even if the US only had 1 weapon in 1945, they were clearly years ahead in R & D and had actually successfully dropped one, so worst case would have had a second one within a year.

Given that the Soviets managed to get their hands on blueprints in 1945 I would assume they knew enough about the program to know the US had more than one weapon.

Or of course it is quite possible it was looted GERMAN technology!!There is a large amount of irritating inconvient bits of historical documentation that suggests that Nazi Germany already had a working A bomb,but no way of delivering it to a target of value.EG London or New York or Moscow.
Factually tthe documentation on the Manhattan project suggests that there was no way that the US could have had enough fissble material to build three bombs by Aug 1945.Yet they tested the Fat Man,[fission bomb]and then drop two COMPETELY DIFFERENT bombs in design on Hiroshma and Nagasaki.The famous U boat that was caught bring equipment and devices from the 3rd Reich in May 1945,was stuffed full of Kryton switches and technology relating to a nuke bomb.Stuff that was years ahead of the New Mexico plans.Would make you think that maybe the stars and stripes was just painted over a former swastika painted device..

Grizzly 45

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Why should Ireland have backed Germany?

You are either

A) happy for all Irish Jews, homosexuals and those with disabilities to be carted off to concentration/death camps
an idiot
C) a troll.

My moneys on C.

Er Fred.
1] We werent too keen on having Jews coming into Ireland as refugees back in the heyday of Holy catholic Ireland in 1939/40/41.Think we took like somthing along 40 fammiles.:rolleyes: Not to mind we here in Ireland were quite dab hands at the aul rasicism ourselves..1911 in Limerick is a goood start for some Jew baiting in Ireland.

2] Hitler had IRISH relations from his half brothers side,and Adolf always expressed an admiration of the hardy and brave Irish people,which were considerd under the crazy eugenics policy as Germano Celtic with nordic influences.Not quite blonde blue eyed Aryans,but good enough not to be killed off.

Shalom

Reekwind

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Or of course it is quite possible it was looted GERMAN technology!!There is a large amount of irritating inconvient bits of historical documentation that suggests that Nazi Germany already had a working A bomb,but no way of delivering it to a target of value.EG London or New York or Moscow

That's funny because almost every history I've read on the subject suggests that the Nazi programme never made it past the laboratory stage, was not considered a priority by the Nazi leadership and that the Farm Hall scientists were genuinely flabbergasted at the news of the successful detonations in Japan

Now you're telling me that those same scientists (who couldn't figure out how the Americans had succeeded) actually produced a number of working nuclear weapons in some secret facility and then smuggled them across the Atlantic in U-Boats before being flown across the Pacific to be dropped on Japan?

I'd like to see this "large amount of historical documentation", although it's probably a discussion for the Conspiracy Theory forum

Grizzly 45

Gladly...
First off google U boat U234 then maybe its cargo manifests..and final voyage

The cargo included technical drawings, examples of the newest electric torpedoes, one crated Me 262 jet aircraft, a Henschel Hs 293 glide bomb and what was listed on the US Unloading Manifest as 560 kg of uranium oxide. As evidenced by Hirschfeld and Brooks in the 1997 book Hirschfeld, Wolfgang Hirschfeld reportedly watched the loading into the boat's cylindrical mine shafts of about 50 lead cubes with nine inch (230 mm) sides, and "U-235" painted on each. According to cable messages sent from the dockyard, these containers held "U-powder". Author and historian Joseph M. Scalia, stated that he discovered a formerly secret cable at Portsmouth Navy Yard, the uranium oxide had been stored in gold-lined cylinders; this document is discussed in Hitler's Terror Weapons. The exact characteristics of the uranium remain unknown; it has been suggested by Scalia, and historians Carl Boyd and Akihiko Yoshida that it may not have been weapons-grade material and was instead intended for use as a catalyst in the production of synthetic methanol for aviation fuel

Now you're telling me that those same scientists (who couldn't figure out how the Americans had succeeded) actually produced a number of working nuclear weapons in some secret facility and then smuggled them across the Atlantic in U-Boats before being flown across the Pacific to be dropped on Japan?

Well,you obviously dont have as much knowledge than as you think Sir.Who said they were flying it??the only people who flew anything were the americans over Hiiroshma and Nagasaki,which incidentially were also "military targets" .

There were apprently TWO versions of the Nazi nuke programme.One being the Stone Hall group which is the accepted face of the Nazi atomic bomb project and the second being run under the deep cover of the Reichspostamt/I]Literally the Reich post office service[I.

It was a perfect cover for swallowing large amounts of money for black projects which would have come under the auspices of the SS.Who were a secret state within the Nazi state and could pretty much do as they liked,and had control of any kreigs entscheind [war decisive] projects.Be it energy drinks or V2 rockets The Americans and Allies stole out of the German reich patent offices over 12 goods train wagon loads of patents in 1945.Everything from reflectors on bike pedals[SS patent] to syntetic gasoline and artifical blood plasma.
Getting back to the Americans not being in a position to produce the A bombs.I suggest you have a look at both designs of both Fat Man and Little Boy and note the difference as plain as chalk and cheese.One is an uranium bomb,the other is a plutonioum bomb.There was no way by Aug 1945 that the Manhattan project could by its own documentation refine enough ploutonium for one bomb let alone two bombs.Est time was about May 1946..Yet they drop two plutonioum bombs on Japan...Where did they come from???

Google then Rugen island atomic bomb test.There are documented and witnessed effects of an atomic blast of some kind on the island of Rugen in the Baltic,which was an enclosed "Area51" of the 3rd Reich..You can go around the suposed "blast site " with a Geiger counter and see that it is still as hot as the Alamagordo site in New Mexico....And has the same burnt and glassified stones.That apprently happened in Oct 1944!!!

Until 2005 few people seriously questioned the accepted historical account that Nazi Germany failed to produce an Atomic Bomb, but with the publishing of Hitler's Bombe, (2005), by author Rainer Karlsh, this accepted account of history is now widely challenged.

Karlsh astonished the world when he revealed evidence from various witnesses of a nuclear test on the Baltic Island of Rugen in October 1944, including press correspondent Luigi Romersa who only passed away in 2007.


Further on this point
Karlsch claimed these tests in October 1944 were followed by two more nuclear tests at Ohrdruf Concentration Camp in March 1945. He produced Kremlin archives to prove that Soviet intelligence reported the Ohrdruf tests to Stalin. Karlsh also produced the account of then still living witness Claere Werner custodian in 1945 of Wachtel Castle near Arnstadt, whose interview is available on Youtube.[2]

A 1943 OSS report found in the Woods Memorandum to US secretary of State Cordell Hull also refers to a series of nuclear tests in the Schwabian Alps near Bisingen in July 1943. These tests are corroborated by seismic records.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4598955.stm

Intresting too.

As I said quite abit of annoying factual evidence that the Nazis were much further ahead than we have been taught.

What is History,but lies of the victor!!
Napoleon Bonaparte

Reekwind

Mods, these few posts should probably be moved to the Conspiracy Theory forum

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Gladly...
First off google U boat U234 then maybe its cargo manifests..and final voyage

This would be the same U234 intended for Japan and which surrendered in May 1945? Quite an impressive feat by the Americans to turn any material into a working atomic bomb in two months. But then I guess that that's what a massive and costly nuclear programme gets you

Although I fail to see anything in that wiki passage that you posted that suggests that U234 contained anything resembling advanced nuclear technology. I'm sure that you're aware that uranium oxide is not of use in building a nuclear weapon? (Although I understand that the Reich did manage to enrich small quantities of U235)

Nor does anything else in your account convince. A secret government black hole that left no trace of its existence but its very absence? Nazi Germany had no trouble documenting every other Wunderwaffe it embarked on... but not this one apparently. Or rather, it documented a rather diverse, small and feeble effort of around 100 scientists while deliberately hiding the real, and presumably vastly larger, programme? How cunning of them to put all their best nuclear physicists on the dummy effort!

I'll regret this but what other "black projects" were the SS hiding and that modern historians are so reluctant to uncover?

Getting back to the Americans not being in a position to produce the A bombs.I suggest you have a look at both designs of both Fat Man and Little Boy and note the difference as plain as chalk and cheese.One is an uranium bomb,the other is a plutonioum bomb

How bizarre. It's almost as if the US programme was unsure of the design of this new weapons and selected three different designs to be the basis of future bombs. One of which (Thin Man) proved to be unworkable and thus abandoned. The use of different materials being, of course, a product of the different firing mechanisms employed. Now to me this seems like a reasonable design choice (particularly given the new technology and the lack of modern simulation tools) but clearly I've been lied to by the US government and successive historians

There was no way by Aug 1945 that the Manhattan project could by its own documentation refine enough ploutonium for one bomb let alone two bombs

Why? What were the US plutonium stocks and how much was required to build the Fat Man?

Google then Rugen island atomic bomb test.There are documented and witnessed effects of an atomic blast of some kind on the island of Rugen in the Baltic,which was an enclosed "Area51" of the 3rd Reich..You can go around the suposed "blast site " with a Geiger counter and see that it is still as hot as the Alamagordo site in New Mexico....And has the same burnt and glassified stones.That apprently happened in Oct 1944!!!

Until 2005 few people seriously questioned the accepted historical account that Nazi Germany failed to produce an Atomic Bomb, but with the publishing of Hitler's Bombe, (2005), by author Rainer Karlsh, this accepted account of history is now widely challenged.

Except that it's not. Sorry to burst the bubble but you are not on the vanguard of some new revisionist wave. Karlsh's account remains highly controversial, at best, and has been generally dismissed by historians and scientists. I remember a particularly cutting rebuttal in the Times a few years back. To suggest that his views are challenging orthodoxy is a gross overstatement

Karlsh astonished the world when he revealed evidence from various witnesses of a nuclear test on the Baltic Island of Rugen in October 1944, including press correspondent Luigi Romersa who only passed away in 2007.

Out of curiosity, where did you copy that from?

As I said quite abit of annoying factual evidence that the Nazis were much further ahead than we have been taught

This is typical conspiracy theory nonsense: putting some conjecture and a few misinterpreted incidents beside a mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise and then claiming that you've proven something

Where are the witnesses to this nuclear blast in the Baltic? Where is the documentation of this secret SS-run nuclear programme? Where is the vast infrastructure you'd need to process nuclear material? Where is the Nazi Hanford?

Wibbs

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Not to mind we here in Ireland were quite dab hands at the aul rasicism ourselves..1911 in Limerick is a goood start for some Jew baiting in Ireland.

To be fair, anti Semitism never seemed to have the widespread hold here that it did in many countries in mainland Europe. O’Connell as well as campaigning for Catholic emancipation also(and unusually for the time) campaigned for similar rights for Irish Jews. He successfully campaigned against an ancient British law* that stated Jews had to wear distinctive dress. Indeed the Limerick pogram(kicked off by a fcukwit priest) showed support elsewhere for the Jewish people. Many fleeing that incident ended up in Cork intending to go to the US. The locals were very supportive, opened their homes to help etc to the degree that many Jews stayed because of this support. It went both ways too, during the Famine, Irish Jews were very involved with help for those afflicted. Many Irish Jews have also been voted into office too. These two islands off the coast of Europe while having some dodgy incidents and attitudes towards Jews in the past, were pretty good overall.

That said history shows how quickly that can change. German Jews were among the most integrated in Europe. The Nazi "blood laws" showed this. A very large number of Germans had Jewish ancestry and relatives. If you read the minutes of the Wannasee(sp) conference discussing the Final Solution much of it is bogged down in discussion over how you constitute a "Jew".

2] Hitler had IRISH relations from his half brothers side,

True.

and Adolf always expressed an admiration of the hardy and brave Irish people,which were considerd under the crazy eugenics policy as Germano Celtic with nordic influences.Not quite blonde blue eyed Aryans,but good enough not to be killed off.

I've heard/read this claim a fair bit, but personally can find no record of it. I've read of him discussing the Irish in very genera terms, mostly around their position around the battle of Britain times. He mentioned "coming to our aid if invited" Yea Hitler invites didn't require RSVP's too often. Any links to more?





*a common enough law throughout Europe over the centuries, Hitler just copied the practice later. He copied nearly all of his anti Jewish practices from previous laws. His only "innovation" was the final solution.

Grizzly 45

[

QUOTE=Reekwind;79912994]Mods, these few posts should probably be moved to the Conspiracy Theory forum

Oh dear reekwind,I seem to have upset you a little bit and you have aLL the answers????? Sure you do..
First off if you wnt to move the post become a Mod yourself,and dont be so obnoxious...

This would be the same U234 intended for Japan and which surrendered in May 1945? Quite an impressive feat by the Americans to turn any material into a working atomic bomb in two months. But then I guess that that's what a massive and costly nuclear programme gets you

Obviously you miss your own contradiction..That the fact Los Alamos was alive and well and advancing on their own project,might it not have been possible that they simply helped themselves to the technology to speed up the project of the US Atomic bomb..After all where would the US have been in the space race without Werner Von Braun and the V2???

Although I fail to see anything in that wiki passage that you posted that suggests that U234 contained anything resembling advanced nuclear technology. I'm sure that you're aware that uranium oxide is not of use in building a nuclear weapon? (Although I understand that the Reich did manage to enrich small quantities of U235)

Well I'm sure you can find the oriiginal cargo manifest lists in the Libary of Congress if you want to persue it further,it gives a listing of all items seized..Kryton switches wouldnt be in your book then advanced nuke technology...Wonder why those Nazi scientists with no nuke programme built them then..

Nor does anything else in your account convince. A secret government black hole that left no trace of its existence but its very absence? Nazi Germany had no trouble documenting every other Wunderwaffe it embarked on... but not this one apparently. Or rather, it documented a rather diverse, small and feeble effort of around 100 scientists while deliberately hiding the real, and presumably vastly larger, programme? How cunning of them to put all their best nuclear physicists on the dummy effort!

I'll regret this but what other "black projects" were the SS hiding and that modern historians are so reluctant to uncover?

Synthetic oil,gasoline,manmade blood plasma,penecillin substitutes,

How bizarre. It's almost as if the US programme was unsure of the design of this new weapons and selected three different designs to be the basis of future bombs. One of which (Thin Man) proved to be unworkable and thus abandoned. The use of different materials being, of course, a product of the different firing mechanisms employed. Now to me this seems like a reasonable design choice (particularly given the new technology and the lack of modern simulation tools) but clearly I've been lied to by the US government and successive historians

Why? What were the US plutonium stocks and how much was required to build the Fat Man?

Google then Rugen island atomic bomb test.There are documented and witnessed effects of an atomic blast of some kind on the island of Rugen in the Baltic,which was an enclosed "Area51" of the 3rd Reich..You can go around the suposed "blast site " with a Geiger counter and see that it is still as hot as the Alamagordo site in New Mexico....And has the same burnt and glassified stones.That apprently happened in Oct 1944!!!

Except that it's not. Sorry to burst the bubble but you are not on the vanguard of some new revisionist wave. Karlsh's account remains highly controversial, at best, and has been generally dismissed by historians and scientists. I remember a particularly cutting rebuttal in the Times a few years back. To suggest that his views are challenging orthodoxy is a gross overstatement

Well, these scientists and learned men still FAIL to give a valid explanation of what exactly happened on Rugen.The evidence is there,if anyone wants to go and look at it.
Why dont you put up the times rebuttal????

Out of curiosity, where did you copy that from?

If you think this is all bunk why would you be intrested????

This is typical conspiracy theory nonsense: putting some conjecture and a few misinterpreted incidents beside a mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise and then claiming that you've proven something

I am not claiming anything,or professing to be in any vangaurrd and dont need words put in my mouth by the likes of you!!!
I am stating that there is documented evidence in the hands of the allies that does not fit into our precived notions of a cut and dried historical package of lies,myths and truths forced on us by a victorious west.
So please delve into your Mountain of evidence and explain why this is all conjecture and fantasy???Or actually lets hear your explanation as to what it was???

Where are the witnesses to this nuclear blast in the Baltic? Where is the documentation of this secret SS-run nuclear programme? Where is the vast infrastructure you'd need to process nuclear material? Where is the Nazi Hanford?

From what I gather somplace in an area of the Czech republic around the Jonas tal,and quite possibly the Auschwitz /Birkenau military industrial complex.Which was somthing like five square miles of industries like IG Farben,Buna, Siemens shukert,etc as well as the death camp..but of course you know that already??

There was a Luigi Romersa,envoy of Mussolini to the rugen test
Defensa 76.77 1984 article Gestern nachricht,Heute Geschichte die Geheimwaffen von Hitler etwas mehr als Fantasie.

Wibbs

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

[After all where would the US have been in the space race without Werner Von Braun and the V2???

Yep but that was after the war and after operation Paperclip. A lot of stuff sprang from WW2, that doesn't mean it was running during the war.

Synthetic oil,gasoline,manmade blood plasma,penecillin substitutes,

Plus synthetic rubber and a host of other compounds. However, Germany before the war was one of the(if not the) foremost chemical innovators on the planet. Their nuclear stuff wasn't nearly so developed. Indeed much of their physics concentrated on other areas. A lot of the nuclear research was considered "Jewish" science after the party took over, hence the flight of such experts. Indeed other conspiracy types have suggested that the Germans may have cottoned on to antigravity effects because they were taking a different tack, namely in the quantum arena.

On the German atom bomb front I've recently finished "Stuka Pilot" by Hans Rudel(first edition. Your'e dealing with class here lads. None of your paperbacks for this muppet. :DPublished in 1952 in Dublin by a certain Mr Mosley no less). Interesting book(dodgy translation at times). As a hero of the Reich and much loved and respected Nazi(and an incredibly brave and capable warrior regardless of his affiliations) he had regular meetings with Hitler. In these meetings he mentions that Hitler took him into his confidence about various tactical things. From a meeting in 1944 he says;

Rudel wrote:

We have tea together and chat for an hour or two. New technical weapons, the strategic situation, and history are the staple of our conversation. He specially explains to me the V weapons which have recently been tried out. For the present, he says, it would be a mistake to overestimate their effectiveness because the accuracy of these weapons is still very small, adding that this is not so important, as he is now hopeful of producing flying rockets which will be absolutely infallible. Later on we should not rely as at present on the normal high explosives, but on something quite different which will be so powerful that once we begin to use them they should end the war decisively. He tells me that their development is already well advanced and that their final completion may be expected very soon. For me this is entirely virgin ground, and I cannot yet imagine it. Later I learn that the explosive effect of these new rockets is supposed to be based on atomic energy

Is this post war wishful thinking, hero worship of oul Adolf(he defo had that) or were the Nazis more advanced along the road than they're given credit for in the public mind? Hard to say. Rudel was a major believer, so gilding of his memory is more than possible, however in everything else he comes across as honest, even joylessly so in many ways. Not exactly the life and soul was he*. Did they get to the point of a testable and fireable weapon? That's a longer shot. Much longer. I don't care how long ago it is, you light the blue touch paper on even a small yield tactical nuke (apparently in Europe remember) then people, lots of people will kinda notice and it wouldn't be easy to hide. Especially given the area claimed was much closer to a highly mobile front than most places. Indeed why not test fire it against the Bolshevik hordes? Game over, fcuk off Stalin time. I don't buy it myself.





*I've read and seen interviews with some who flew with him and the general consensus was he was a milk drinking puritan, stiffer than a bishop in a whorehouse and a bit of a killjoy. They even made up a song ribbing him about his penchant for milk. In that at least he could take slagging as he mentions it without rancour in the book.

Grizzly 45

Wibbs wrote: »

To be fair, anti Semitism never seemed to have the widespread hold here that it did in many countries in mainland Europe. O’Connell as well as campaigning for Catholic emancipation also(and unusually for the time) campaigned for similar rights for Irish Jews. He successfully campaigned against an ancient British law* that stated Jews had to wear distinctive dress. Indeed the Limerick pogram(kicked off by a fcukwit priest) showed support elsewhere for the Jewish people. Many fleeing that incident ended up in Cork intending to go to the US. The locals were very supportive, opened their homes to help etc to the degree that many Jews stayed because of this support. It went both ways too, during the Famine, Irish Jews were very involved with help for those afflicted. Many Irish Jews have also been voted into office too. These two islands off the coast of Europe while having some dodgy incidents and attitudes towards Jews in the past, were pretty good overall.

Indeed and I am not doubting that at all,but I am saying like any race of people we do have inbuilt rascism that however is proably alot more tolerant than most as we never really had in our insular history a massive influx of another religion.And as you said the Jews were obviously looked upon here as a underdog by the Irish too if O Connell was fighting for them too.Never knew that actually myself:)
Be that as it may,we could have done alot more in taking in Jewish refugees in the early 1940s when they were fleeing the occupied countries,and there does seem to have been a block put on refugees by the Irish Govt,and egged on by the Catholic church here.

That said history shows how quickly that can change. German Jews were among the most integrated in Europe. The Nazi "blood laws" showed this. A very large number of Germans had Jewish ancestry and relatives. If you read the minutes of the Wannasee(sp) conference discussing the Final Solution much of it is bogged down in discussion over how you constitute a "Jew".

Well integrated,might be too good a word ...Tolerated might be better.
There always been a latent dislike of the Jewish race throughout Europe from London to Moscow thru the last millenia for whatever multiple reasons. TBH Wannsee was the culmination of it all,but this question of race profiling has long roots back into the 19th century of Eugenics,mixed int with a huge amount of the totally incomprehensible philosophy of the master race.It was a convient scapegoat for the nazi party to offer up a long time folks enemy,and to play on a peoples fear.Which is a natural human reaction to find blame.
We see it again today here post Celtic Tiger,we are lashing around for somone to blame for own stupidity and we blame bankers and ultimately the German banks for reckless lending to us.

True. I've heard/read this claim a fair bit, but personally can find no record of it. I've read of him discussing the Irish in very genera terms, mostly around their position around the battle of Britain times. He mentioned "coming to our aid if invited" Yea Hitler invites didn't require RSVP's too often. Any links to more?

Of which one??Hitlers Irish relatives or him considering the Irish a acceptable quasi aryan race??

The Irish relative side is well documented.It was his half brother Alois Hitler,who eloped with a Bridget Dowling in 1912,while he was working as a waiter in the Gresham hotel[?] in Dublin .They fled to Liverpool and bRidget lived there after Alois did a midnite flit back to Germany after she was pregnant with Willim Patrick Hitler,Adolf's nephew.Alois opened a resturant in Berlin or Munich called Willies.The greeting apprently was to the owner "Heil Hitler,Herr Hitler."

Willam Patrick was a bit of a rake and wild boy,and didnt impress uncle Adolf by his carry on in Berlin in the 1930s when he came to visit.Adolf offered to pay him to go to America as he was a total embarrassment to the good family name of Hitler.William duely obliged and embarrassed uncle Adolf even further in 1941 by joining the US Navy and starring in a few anti Nazi propaganda newsreels.Apprently he died in Florida in the 1950s[?] without any children

Bridget meantime lived and was bombed out in Liverpool during the Blitz.After the war she wrote an unpublished manuscript titled "My Brother in law Adolf Hitler."She claims that Adolf came over to visit them in Liverpool pre ww1 and that he stayed for a month or so and was fasinated by the British shipping and culture,and that she met Adolf in pre war Berlin where she and William were presumeably feted.Unfortunatly,there isnt a shred of evidence that Adolf ever set foot in Liverpool or the UK.

However it might be that he was influenced by Alois 's travelling tales of how wonderful the Irish and the UK admiration came from??

A good link and more detailed story
http://www.dowlingfamily.info/zOLD/i1910hit.htm

Grizzly 45

[

QUOTE=Wibbs;79917208]Yep but that was after the war and after operation Paperclip. A lot of stuff sprang from WW2, that doesn't mean it was running during the war.

The V1 ,V2 and Jets,certainly the 1st gen TV/radar guided glide bombs were all developed alive and running in the actual conflict.Albeit way too late too matter.TBH they already had TV up and running covering the Berlin Olympic games in 1936.The sets were of course extremely rare and horrendously expensive,but they were already transmitting TV six hours a day,while we were still conceiving and messing around with two signals in the BBC and managing two hours on alternative days.

Plus synthetic rubber and a host of other compounds. However, Germany before the war was one of the(if not the) foremost chemical innovators on the planet.

But moreso during the war when it became a survival issue,especially after the loss of the oilfields in Bulgaria/Rumania.

Their nuclear stuff wasn't nearly so developed. Indeed much of their physics concentrated on other areas. A lot of the nuclear research was considered "Jewish" science after the party took over, hence the flight of such experts.

TBH how many German scientists did actually flee apart from the well known Einstein?? Otto Hahn,Heisenberg,Diebner,Gerlach et all were still in place in the Reich.Yes the Stonehall tapes are always quoted as the be all and end all of the German nuke arguement.Intrestingly they were declassified only in1992,[why so long if they were so inept??] And even a proper read of those transcripts just adds more credibility to the German nuke arguement.Heisenberg gave a lecture to the other scientists on the hiroshma bomb literally a week after it exploded.....intresting,for somone who apprently couldnt put together one in six years he knew alot about a top secret Allied weapon???He was amazed that the Allies had made it so small,as he was estimating in the hundreds of kilos of plotonioum for that bomb effect.

Of course if the Germans werent building a nuke somthing or other..It seems silly that the British spent a load of time and effort and manpower trying to blow up a Heavy water plant in Norway in a place called Telemark??Or that the Germans would go to any lengths to secure a heavy water plant in the first place??

Indeed other conspiracy types have suggested that the Germans may have cottoned on to antigravity effects because they were taking a different tack, namely in the quantum arena.

Things like "the Bell" ,time travel,zero point energy and anti gravity UFOs??:)TBH that IS most definately stretching credibility.:) However that is not to say it was not looked at in some shape or form.The thing is people dont realise ,or choose to ignore on this whole issue is the fact that the SS did do alot of research into war winning projects or into anything that would lead to the final victory,and they literally were a state within the nazi state,and had 100% free hand in development of projects or shutting them down,or control of who or whom.

Any of the projects that became viable financially were registerd as SS patent nr,and literally any or all monies of that went back to the SS section of the Reichsbank,pre war as the Reichspostamt was another SS controlled institution that literally ate billions of Reichmarks...Hardly on paying postmen and stamps!
The SS had control of the German oilfields up near Hamburg,and were getting a cut of every litre of oil and petrol produced in the Reich.

In modern day terms think of US black projects in the "Skunkworks".Eats billions of dollars and drops out things like B2s stealth technology and God alone knows what else.Even the US Congress doesnt get to know where monies goes on a lot of US research and dev of weapons systems,and thats a democracy..So how difficult would it be to prove or disprove somthing in a secret state in a dictatorship,seventy years ago??

For the sake of an academic discussion,lets say that there was a sucessful Nazi nuke research and they have managed to put together a bomb of some type,along with other fanciful war winners.You as a winning Allied govt find this stuff somwhere in the ruins and discover how far advanced they were on somthing you knew they might be working on,but you thought you had the jump on them.

Are you going to announce post war.."Well folks we almost had it built in Alamagordo and thought we were the first.But the Krauts actually had duped us and built one six months before us,but didnt have a proper delivery system to hit New York or DC with it.."

I dont think so..You are proably going to bury it deep top secret and tear it apart and study it and build your better version before your next enemy ,your former ally the Sovs build theirs.

On the German atom bomb front I've recently finished "Stuka Pilot" by Hans Rudel(first edition. Your'e dealing with class here lads. None of your paperbacks for this muppet. :DPublished in 1952 in Dublin by a certain Mr Mosley no less). Interesting book(dodgy translation at times). As a hero of the Reich and much loved and respected Nazi(and an incredibly brave and capable warrior regardless of his affiliations) he had regular meetings with Hitler. In these meetings he mentions that Hitler took him into his confidence about various tactical things. From a meeting in 1944 he says

;

Is this post war wishful thinking, hero worship of oul Adolf(he defo had that) or were the Nazis more advanced along the road than they're given credit for in the public mind? Hard to say. Rudel was a major believer, so gilding of his memory is more than possible, however in everything else he comes across as honest, even joylessly so in many ways. Not exactly the life and soul was he*.

Did they get to the point of a testable and fireable weapon? That's a longer shot. Much longer. I don't care how long ago it is, you light the blue touch paper on even a small yield tactical nuke (apparently in Europe remember) then people, lots of people will kinda notice and it wouldn't be easy to hide.

Especially given the area claimed was much closer to a highly mobile front than most places. Indeed why not test fire it against the Bolshevik hordes? Game over, fcuk off Stalin time. I don't buy it myself.

Oct 1944 ??Hmm the Reds arent even near East Prussia yet.Fighting is still in East Poland or Warsaw .Rugen is still within the Reich,close enough to the somwhat functioning Peenemunde R&D base.Well off limits to most people,big enough to test possibly a tac nuke without too many people being upset??Why not use it??If it existed ,[and there is evidence that somthing happened there,as I have yet to hear or see a plausible denial or explanation to explain radioactive glassified rocks and a circular blast pattern from any experts on this Island..The evidence is there anyone can go and look at it themselves on Rugen,its a non military civil island.]

Against massed Russian divisions,that could afford to lose a few hundred tanks a day and how many thousands of men??As Stalin said "the death of thousands are a mere statistic".
What would it have achived??Knock out a division possibly and the reds have another one in place by next week?
If it was a strategic nuke how are you going to deliver it to somplace that is of value?EG London,Moscow, New York. There wasnt anything in the Luftwaffe bombers that could do this flight with the payload at that time.The "Amerika bomber"was not going to happen as the prototypes were destroyed in early 44 in a air raid. The V2s cant carry the tonnage to London,hence the work on the C3 "Wasserfall"[the first two stage misssile].Intercontinental jet bombers wont be a flyable reality until maybe late 1946 early 47.Even a conventional attack to the West is out.The Allies have air superiority over Western Europe for anything to survive for long in the skies of a bomber,and your airfields that could handle somthing like this are a craterd mess.
In short you can have magic bullets ,but if you havent got a gun to fire them they are useless.And by 45 the Reich had run out of time,space,materials and manpower to do anything with these projects.

Reading David Irwings exellent Rise and fall of the Luftwaffe.
Luftwaffe General Milich states that the crucial year was 43 if the projects werent operational by late 43 that could have won the war,they would never be,and so it happened because of infighting,Hitlers meddling,and the oneupmanship and pet projects and technological dead ends that ate away vital war materials.[The V2 being one of those material eaters ,it gave a poor return for its development costs] .
So is it quite possible that this "tactical nuke" was just stymied by costs and a non workable delivery system.

Too conclude..People here will belive what they want or produce evidence pro and contra.I like to keep an open mind on things and not dismiss them out of hand.if there is documentation to prove either point weigh it up and draw your own conclusions.Of course it will be harder to prove that there might have possibly been a sucessful German A bomb nine months before Alamagordo,as this would require a major historical rewrite not very favourable to the given historical "facts" of the last 70 plus years.The unfortunate label of Revisionist is usually bandied about now ,but TBH history is about revisionism every day it is studied.

If there isnt "proof" in missing German documents ,there is certainly disquiting and niggling facts in the declassified Allied documents of the US,the UK and now Russia that suggests that alot of what we accept as history is not what it seems .
Belive what ye want .I'll belive what I want and until somone shows me proof to the contary ,then I'll change my mind.
Bowing out now ,as this could go on for months and its going off thread of who was badder the Allies or the Nazis.

To be honest at this stage who cares and does it matter??Both sides cannot claim moral justification as being better.A Hiroshma Vs a Dresden,A Jewish girl killed in a gas chamber or a German girl raped multiple times by Soviet troops.A British merchantman or a German Uboot Kommandant.
A US GI looting German property or a Japanese bushido soilder raping a Chinese girl in Nanking.4500 German civillians drowned on a refugee ship the Whilhelm Gustlow,torpedoed by a Sov sub.1500 civillians torpedoed and drowned on the Lusitania in ww1 by a german sub.What is worse??Did either drown any quicker or with less fear??
The 80 million of the last war are all equal.THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!
DEAD because of mankinds own inbuilt stupidity,ignorance and intolerance and superiority complexes of his fellow man.
WAR IS HELL,and it makes monsters of the most civilised man.

Sincerely
Grizzly45

Reekwind

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Obviously you miss your own contradiction..That the fact Los Alamos was alive and well and advancing on their own project,might it not have been possible that they simply helped themselves to the technology to speed up the project of the US Atomic bomb

Except that the design and testing of these bomb models had begun back in March 1944...

Seriously, think about what you are saying. According to the submarine manifest, which you referenced, the only relevant item that the vessel was carrying was uranium oxide. Probably not even U235. That's it. Yet you have spun this into some hi-tech ark that provided the US with highly advanced technology (that they'd already possessed for years) which allowed them to produce these new (better) bombs in the space of two months?

Because obviously the largest and most lavishly funded industrial research programme in history, staffed with the brightest collection of physicists in history, needed help from a shadowy SS research programme, of whose existence you have no proof. Yes, that makes sense

Looking at what you've written, above and below, at no point have you established:

• a) That the US needed advanced German technology to complete its weapons programme. My question as to plutonium stocks went unanswered and, as noted above, the bomb designs were well in development by summer 1945
  
• b) That Germany supplied the US with advanced nuclear technology. The only reference you have is a shipping manifest which apparently exists but you are unable to produce. The one reference you have provided (Wiki) makes no mention of this. A quick Google search turns up nothing
  
• c) That Germany could supply the US with such technology. At best, and this I still doubt for reasons noted in my above post, Nazi Germany produced a weak fission explosion. This flies against everything we know about the Nazi programme but is conceivably possible. Certainly there was nothing of the scale of the Trinity Test – that explosion was felt (and seen) hundreds of kilometres away while Rugen is just a few kilometres from Germany and a short distance from Denmark/Sweden

Instead you argue:

• d) That the Nazis had developed this technology through a secret SS programme of which there is no documentary or material evidence of whatsoever. This was based in the East (but nothing remains of the facility), it left no records and didn't involve any of Nazi Germany's foremost nuclear physicists
  
• e) That the latter (Heisenberg et al) weren't involved is because they were working on a dummy project which was presumably intended, along with the hidden nature of the real programme, to fool future historian
  
• f) That there has since been a concerted Allied conspiracy to deceive the public by claiming that the massive and expensive Manhattan Project was able to actually build a bomb on its own

I'm going to leave it to anyone else reading this to draw their own conclusions. But let's be clear: if you think that this amounts to a coherent and evidence based historical theory then... well, I'll also leave that to the readers to decide

After all where would the US have been in the space race without Werner Von Braun and the V2???

Another common trait of conspiracy theorists: throw enough irrelevancies at the wall in the case that something will stick through association

Let me kill this one now. There is no question about the role that Nazi scientists played in the US space programme. There has never been any question or cover up about this. This is however entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand. We are discussing nuclear physics, not rocket science. Different fields and different cases

Well I'm sure you can find the oriiginal cargo manifest lists in the Libary of Congress if you want to persue it further,it gives a listing of all items seized

The burden of proof is squarely on you. I'm not going to start digging through manifest lists (if it even is available online) while you copy/paste Wikipedia articles

Synthetic oil,gasoline,manmade blood plasma,penecillin substitutes

I don't think you understood my question. Which was, to repeat, what other "black projects" were the SS hiding and that modern historians are so reluctant to uncover?

Now while I can't comment on the 'manmade plasma', the likes of the synthetic fuel programmes are quite well known to historians and were indeed often publicised by the Nazi regime itself*. We can reconstruct in some detail the contributions of, say, IG Farben to the Nazi economy and indeed the internal records of the various Nazi economic empires themselves. Certainly I've yet to come across anything so bizarre as "black projects"; the entire concept seems silly given that the Nazis had no need to 'clean' the books. They were not, after, exposed to democratic oversight in the same way that conspiracy theorists charge the CIA, for example, is today

To repeat: there is no secret here regarding Nazi efforts to produce synthetic oil or gas

*Although that does lead to the question: why did the Nazis not publicise their apparently successful development of a new superweapon, the most powerful bomb ever created? Were they also in on the conspiracy of silence?

From what I gather somplace in an area of the Czech republic around the Jonas tal,and quite possibly the Auschwitz /Birkenau military industrial complex.Which was somthing like five square miles of industries like IG Farben,Buna, Siemens shukert,etc as well as the death camp..but of course you know that already??

Of course. What is new to me is the idea that amongst these camps and refineries there was actually a massive nuclear complex that remains hidden to this day. That's not something I've seen in Western, German or Soviet accounts of the war. Who would have thought that a major nuclear processing site (presumably much larger or more advanced than its US counterpart) would be so easy to miss?

Let me guess though: the Soviets dismantled it and carried it back to the USSR without leaving any sort documentation in the archives, ie anything akin to the orders/accounts of their seizure of the many other complexes and scientists of the 'dummy' programme. Since then it's been suppressed by an unholy alliance of the CIA and the lizardfolk. How unfortunate

If you think this is all bunk why would you be intrested????

As I said, I'm curious. Maybe I want to learn more. Maybe I think you're pulling this from a conspiracy theorist site or one with spinning swastikas in the background. I don't see why you'd get so defensive about it