In the Western countries (western europe, the USA, Canada, and Australia) an account of history called "The Holocaust" is repeatedly taught in the schools and depicted over and over again on the televission. Most of the people in these countries are made to think that the jews endured unbelievably cruel suffering and intentional extermination to an extent unprecedented in human history. But the actual historic events and their interrpretation have been become grossly distorted for political and social reasons. There were several other mass killings, quite similar to what the jews experienced, which happened at around the same time period, and with similar magnitudes of death. Yet those in the West are only told about the Jews, and know nothing about the history of the other mass killings. Unfortunately, accounts of history, even those that are not accurate, are made to have political significance in the present. American soldiers committed all sorts of attrocities against german prisoners during the occupation after the war, including against women, children, and civilians. http://www.rense.com/general46/germ.htm http://www.whale.to/b/starvation_of_germans.html One former American soldier, Martin Brech, now a Unitarian-Universalist minister, described what he witnessed during the American occupation of Germany: The Allied prison camps of Sinzig and Remagen, which stretched along the Rhine, would have made Auschwitz and Buchenwald seem like vacation resorts in comparison. Many german prisoners who died in American and British captivity, some in horrid holding camps along the Rhine river, with no shelter and very little food. (there were 116,000 held at one time in Sinzig alone) Others, more fortunate, toiled as slave labor in Allied countries, often for years. Further reading: James Bacque, Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950 (Toronto: Little, Brown and Co., 1997) Ralph Franklin Keeling, Gruesome Harvest: The Allies Postwar War Against the German People (IHR, 1992). Originally published in Chicago in 1947
It comes as no surprise that this kind of information is kept hidden from the American people. Its the American way to cover up its own past crimes and atrocities, while at the same time put out for the world to see the sins of others.
IT SEEMS TRUE -- the evidence is overwhelming . Allied War Crimes 1941-1950 by Rixon Stewart [2008] Eisenhower's Holocaust - His Slaughter Of 1.7 Million Germans .. [1989] Eisenhower's Death Camps. The Last Dirty Secret of World War Two by James Bacque War Crimes: USA by Lt. Col. Gordon "Jack" Mohr, AUS Ret. In 'Eisenhower’s Death Camps': A U.S. Prison Guard Remembers New Book Details Mass Killings and Brutal Mistreatment of Germans at the End of World War Two A Review of James Bacque's "Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation 1944-1950" by Eric Blair [REVIEW] Eisenhower Telegram to the War Department, 18 October 1945 [2000] HOW ALLIES TREATED GERMAN POWs by Michael Walsh In 'Eisenhower’s Death Camps': A U.S. Prison Guard Remembers Books [2007] After the Reich: The Brutal History of Allied Occupation by Giles MacDonogh REVIEW Review [2003] Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation 1944-1950 by James Bacque More than nine million Germans died as a result of deliberate Allied starvation and expulsion policies after the Second World War [1989] Other Losses by James Bacque [1988] Nemesis at Potsdam: The Expulsion of the Germans from the East by Alfred M. de Zayas External Mass Starvation of Germans, 1945-1950 See: Eisenhower Holocaust revisionism Quotes According to Bacque between 1941 and 1950 around one and a half to two million German prisoners of war died, whilst a further five million seven hundred thousand German civilians died between 1946 and 1950, largely, Bacque maintains, as a result of Allied policy. In all Bacques estimates that between nine and half and fourteen million ethnic Germans, German prisoners of war and civilians were to die in these iniquities. Part of the blame for this can be laid at the feet of Josef Stalin who, through his propaganda minister, Ilya Ehrenburg, actually encouraged the rape and degradation of the German civilian population. Allied War Crimes 1941-1950 by Rixon Stewart ..."it is hard to escape the conclusion that Dwight Eisenhower was a war criminal of epic proportions. His (DEF) policy killed more Germans in peace than were killed in the European Theater." [2008] Eisenhower's Holocaust - His Slaughter Of 1.7 Million Germans His best estimate is that some three million Germans, military and civilians, died unnecessarily after the official end of hostilities. A million of these were men who were being held as prisoners of war, most of whom died in Soviet captivity. (Of the 90,000 Germans who surrendered at Stalingrad, for example, only 5,000 ever returned to their homeland.) Less well known is the story of the many thousands of German prisoners who died in American and British captivity, most infamously in horrid holding camps along the Rhine river, with no shelter and very little food. Others, more fortunate, toiled as slave labor in Allied countries, often for years. Most of the two million German civilians who perished after the end of the war were women, children and elderly -- victims of disease, cold, hunger, suicide, and mass murder. Apart from the wide-scale rape of millions of German girls and woman in the Soviet occupation zones, perhaps the most shocking outrage recorded by MacDonogh is the slaughter of a quarter of a million Sudeten Germans by their vengeful Czech compatriots.New Book Details Mass Killings and Brutal Mistreatment of Germans at the End of World War Two According to Bacque, given the extraordinarily harsh conditions imposed upon them by the Allies (i.e., the British, French, Soviets, and Americans), at least 9.3 million and possibly as many as 13.7 million Germans, had, by 1950, needlessly died as a result.A Review of James Bacque's "Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation 1944-1950" by Eric Blair [REVIEW] After the Reich: The Brutal History of Allied Occupation by Giles MacDonogh His best estimate is that some three million Germans, military and civilians, died unnecessarily after the official end of hostilities.....Most of the two million German civilians who perished after the end of the war were women, children and elderly -- victims of disease, cold, hunger, suicide, and mass murder.....perhaps the most shocking outrage recorded by MacDonogh is the slaughter of a quarter of a million Sudeten Germans by their vengeful Czech compatriots......We are ceaselessly reminded of the Third Reich’s wartime concentration camps. But few Americans are aware that such infamous camps as Dachau, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Auschwitz stayed in business after the end of the war, only now packed with German captives, many of whom perished miserably.
IN FAIRNESS , CRITICISMS OF JAMES BAQUES' WORK ARE MANY AND MUST ALSO BE NOTED Source . Wiki , searching under Eisenhower's Holding Camps in Germany Criticisms The New Orleans panel After the publication of Bacque's book, a panel of eight historians gathered for a symposium in the Eisenhower Center for American Studies[41] at the University of New Orleans from December 7–8, 1990 to review Bacque's work.[42] The introduction to a book later published containing each panelists' papers noted that Bacque is a Canadian novelist with no previous historical research or writing experience.[43] The introduction concludes that "Our first conclusion was that Mr. Bacque had made a major historical discovery. There was widespread mistreatment of German prisoners in the spring and summer of 1945. Men were beaten, denied water, forced to live in open camps without shelter, given inadequate food rations and inadequate medical care. Their mail was withheld. In some cases prisoners made a soup of water and grass in order to deal with their hunger. Men did die needlessly and inexcusably. Our second conclusion was that...Other Losses is seriously — nay, spectacularly — flawed in its most fundamental aspects...Nevertheless, Mr. Bacque makes a point that is irrefutable: some American G.I.'s and their officers were capable of acting in almost as brutal a manner as the Nazis."[42] The panel concluded that, among its many problems, Other Losses:[42] misuses documents misreads documents ignores contrary evidence employs a statistical methodology that is hopelessly compromised made no attempt to see the evidence he has gathered in relation to the broader situation made no attempt to perform any comparative context puts words into the mouths of the subjects of his oral history ignores a readily available and absolutely critical source that decisively dealt with his central accusation As a consequence of those and other shortcomings, the book "makes charges that are demonstrably absurd."[42] Panel member Stephen E. Ambrose later wrote in the New York Times: Mr. Bacque is wrong on every major charge and nearly all his minor ones. Eisenhower was not a Hitler, he did not run death camps, German prisoners did not die by the hundreds of thousands, there was a severe food shortage in 1945, there was nothing sinister or secret about the "disarmed enemy forces" designation or about the column "other losses." Mr. Bacque's "missing million" were old men and young boys in the Volkssturm (People's Militia) released without formal discharge and transfers of POWs to other allies control areas. Maj. Ruediger Overmans of the German Office of Military History in Freiburg who wrote the final volume of the official German history of the war estimated that the total death by all causes of German prisoners in American hands could not have been greater than 56,000 approximately 1% of the over 5,000,000 German POWs in Allied hands exclusive of the Soviets. Eisenhower's calculations as to how many people he would be required to feed in occupied Germany in 1945-46 were too low and he had been asking for more food shipments since February 1945. He had badly underestimated the number of German soldiers surrendering to the Western Allies; more than five million, instead of the anticipated three million as German soldiers crossed the Elbe River to escape the Russians. So too with German civilians — about 13 million altogether crossing the Elbe to escape the Russians, and the number of slave laborers and displaced persons liberated was almost 8 million instead of the 5 million expected. In short, Eisenhower faced shortages even before he learned that there were at least 17 million more people to feed in Germany than he had expected not to mention all of the other countries in war ravaged Europe, the Philippines, Okinawa and Japan. All Europe went on rations for the next three years, including Britain, until the food crisis was over.[44] Historians Gunter Bischof and Brian Loring Villa stated that a research report from the panel "soundly refuted the charges of Other Losses, especially Bacque's fanciful handling of statistics."[45] The historians further stated:[45] It is not necessary to review here Bacque's extravagant statistical claims which are the heart of his conspiracy theory. The eight scholars who gathered in New Orleans and contributed to Eisenhower and the German POWs: Facts against Falsehood (1992) refuted Bacque's wily misinterpretations of statistics and oral history evidence in detail. Numerous reviews of the book written by the top talent in the military history profession such as John Keegan and Russel Weigley were persuaded by the findings of the book. These findings have since been further solidified by detailed case studies on individual American POW camps in Germany hastily built at the end of the war like Christof Strauss's exhaustive Heidelberg dissertation on the POW and internment in the Heilbronn camp. The mountain of evidence has been building that Bacque's charge of the "missing million" supposedly perishing in the American (and French) POW camps in Germany and France is based on completely faulty interpretation of statistical data. There was never any serious disagreement that the German POWs were treated badly by the U.S. Army and suffered egregiously in these camps in the first weeks after the end of the war. That the chaos of the war's end would also produce potentially mismatches and errors in record keeping should surprise no one either. But there was NO AMERICAN POLICY to starve them to death as Bacque asserts and NO COVER UP either after the war. No question about it, there were individual American camp guards who took revenge on German POWs based on their hatred of the Nazis. Villa states that "James Bacque's Other Losses illustrates what happens when the context surrounding historical persons and important events is lost. The effect to give known facts a twist that seems dramatically new in important ways, but this is means appearance of originality is a little deceptive. For the most part, Bacque's book is not very original at all. When it seems so, the price is purchased at the price of accuracy."[46] He further stated that "[t]hose parts of Other Losses that might rise above a failing grade in an undergraduate term paper are not new. It has long been known that German prisoners of war suffered terribly at the end of World War II, that they died by the thousands after hostilities ceased in the European theater, and that many were required to work as forced laborers for the victors."[46] The main lines of the story have long been known, written up for example in the extensive German "Maschke Commission" between 1962 and 1975.[46] Villa states that Bacque only adds two "novel" propositions: first, that the number that died was in the hundreds of thousands, and seconds, that these deaths were the result of deliberate extermination on the part of Eisenhower.[46] "The falsity of Bacque's charges can be easily demonstrated once the context, particularly the decision-making environment, is examined."[46] Bischoff concludes that just the application of common sense alone refutes many of the most "fantastical charges" of Bacque, such as asking the question "How could a single man order one million men killed without being caught in the heinous act? How could the bodies disappear without one soldier's coming forward in nearly fifty years to relieve his conscience? How could the Americans (almost one-third of whom are by ethnic background German) conspire for so long to cover up such a vast crime?"[47] In a 1989 Time Magazine book review, Ambrose did, however, apart from his criticisms of the book, concede that "We as Americans can't duck the fact that terrible things happened. And they happened at the end of a war we fought for decency and freedom, and they are not excusable."[48] Other areas of Criticism also exist
While it is true that abuses did occur, we do not know the full extent of these crimes. Unfortunately some records have been suppressed, others altered, and witnesses silenced.
Collection of autrocities committed against Germans and other Gentiles during and after World War 11 http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=141113
Wikileaks is owned by jews and only posts kosher answers to questions. Like all the jewish controlled media it is always biased towards jewish propagenda. The jews even hijacked the Disney chanell the History channel, National Geographic channell and literally won all the Newspapers, News agencies ,Hollywood and control almost all of the internet including facebook.
Gruesome Harvest: The Allied Attempt to Exterminate Germany after 1945 Ralph Franklin Keeling On May 8, 1945 the shooting ended in Europe. But, shockingly, the war against Germany went on. Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill had decreed that the German people must sufferand suffer they did. Driven from their homes, looted of their property, decimated by famine and disease, raped, robbed, and enslaved, millions of Germansmost of them women and childrenbore the brunt of what Time magazine called historys most terrifying peace. Gruesome Harvest was one of the first books in America to sound the alarm against the victors postwar war against the Germans. Bristling with contemporary documentation, burning with humanitarian and patriotic outrage, this informed, riveting classic dares to tell the shameful story of how American and Allied policy makers undertook the political, economic, and social destruction of the German people even as they presumed to instruct them in justice and democracy. Today, as the propaganda war against the Germans wears on in the media and academic life, Gruesome Harvest, written in 1947 by a courageous American, when the decimation of the German race was still official U.S.-Allied policy, tells a vital story, one that must not be suppressed or forgotten.
Establishment his-story-ians deny or make excuses for everything contrary to the party line they are paid to uphold. Furthermore the paid partyline historians don't tell you that Talmud reading President Harry Truman hated Germans and was following Morgenthau's plan to exterminate Germany. The following US Army movie reveals the official hatred of German children...those that survived: [video=youtube;1v5QCGqDYGo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v5QCGqDYGo[/video] And this video also reveals the author's hatred of America as well right at the beginning. Detail:
Heino Erichsen, a German private captured in Tunisia, recalls the trans-Atlantic trip to New York, a nervous affair with his country's U-boats lurking, followed by a train ride from New York to Texas. "It was a long journey," said Erichsen, 87. "Compared to where we had been, Camp Hearne was good. We had clean bunks, good food and things were finely regulated. But it was still a prison." The U.S. Army sought to abide by the Geneva Convention, so non-commissioned officers and those of higher rank didn't have to work. The American Red Cross provided them with implements and tools, and the prisoners built fountains and statues, made woodcarvings, played soccer and staged concerts and plays. They could go to classes and learn English. http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Historians-bringing-long-forgotten-German-POW-3360193.php
I do hope that you realize that your sources for this are people from what we call "historical revisionism". These types of things can be primarily found on metapedia (or other extreme-right-wing sides who pose political views as truth). In this circumstance it's not a new insight these people provide though. I'm a historian myself and I research the second world war primarily - especially the consequences of it. These types of things have no bases I'm afraid. There are a lot of little cruel details which are virtually unknown and not researched yet, but the sources you provided are just false. I could list war-crimes, which were commit by the British and USA, but they're nothing compared to what Nazi-Germany did at that point and time. There is a reason why we research the author first and why the "1.7-million dead Germans after WW2"-link has no author or sources.
What exactly is "historical revisionism"? Is it not possible that the "mainstream" historical account in this case is "revisionism" ? Afterall, the victors write the history. That does not take away from their validity. "Posing political views as truth" goes both ways.
"Historical revisionism" refers to a (usually hobby-historic) community usually outside the historic scientific community who try to change historic facts into something closer to their personal preference. Preferably into something which might sell well. This means that they do not look at the evidence available but rather pick out what would support their claim and dismiss what does not. They evaluate subjectively according to their own political preference. Metapedia is a nice example, because it's a extreme-right-wing (or practically Nazi)-page which would bring you only one (obvious faulty) side of the story. By trying to look like wikipedia they try to provide a known surrounding for people who may not realize what source they are reading in order to convince them of their right wing message. Unless people get full and truthful information they cannot make right evaluations and decisions, therefore there is a great danger of people getting over-flooded with bad information. By reading only "historical revisionism" you get faulty information in most cases. Very rarely it can provide another view on a matter, but usually it is just ridiculous because of the used sources. The most ridiculous things I've seen surpasses this one by far though. One of the worst which comes to mind in recent history, was a book which claimed that historians made an error and that the years from 500 to 700 never happened. Totally ridiculous due to the evidence we have. But it sold well... Maybe Hitlers diaries were worse, I'm not sure. Sold well too. A source of this nature shouldn't be trusted. It doesn't matter whether it comes from the far left or right. A true historian looks at all the evidence objectively (or as objectively as possible since full objectivity cannot be reached) and tries to understand the connections and presents his/her results to the world by listing his/her sources and conclusions in a matter which people can follow and verify. This is very simply put how the work of a historian who wants to be taken serious really works. Since there are a lot of sources out there it's up to you to decide which you trust. Usually it's a good thing if you don't start with the first page of a book but rather by googling the author and the publisher. That way you get a better idea of what you're about to read. Sometimes fiction is sold as fact. It it fascinating that people who are hobby historians get this much credit though. I'm not claiming that my education is superior, but I think people wouldn't do that in other professions. I'd imagine you wouldn't want to have a hobby-doctor diagnosing you or a hobby-architect building your home or a hobby-lawyer defending you. It used to be true that victors did write the story, but this is no longer true. The problem in this case is the lack of full information. Often we historians cannot research everything because we are locked out the archive. For example some WWII content is still classified in Britain. In Germany I as an Austrian citizen have no access to the Nazi-archives, without authorization by the German government and the descendants of the Nazis I'm about to research. This is (to a degree) understandable. After all it's not your fault, if your father or grandfather was a war criminal. My historic research may make you a social outcast, and that is certainly not the point of my research. The archive lock in Austria is 50 years. But some countries still lock down their WWII classified files. The USA classifies 2 million pieces of documents annually. It takes quite a few historians to work through that and check if one of those documents has vital information.