France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

All aspects including lead-in to hostilities and results.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
phdnm
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 12:11 pm

France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby phdnm » 4 years 4 months ago (Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:37 am)

New evidence prompts investigation into Nazi World War II massacre

German prosecutors have opened another investigation into a World War II massacre at a French town after uncovering new evidence on possible suspects.

On June 10, 1944, 642 residents of Oradour-sur-Glane were killed by SS troops. Women and children in the town were herded into a church, which was attacked with hand grenades before being set on fire, while men were shot inside a barn that was later set ablaze.

The investigators suspect that six soldiers, who were aged 18 and 19 during the war, may have been involved in the attack, based on evidence in the archived files of East Germany’s Stasi secret police, the BBC reports. Authorities believe they are still alive, according to the BBC.

Prosecutors are at the town to interview witnesses and survivors and hope to open a new legal process.

In the 1950s, 20 of around 60 soldiers were convicted for the attack after being brought to trial, but all were later released, the BBC reports.


http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/01/30 ... -evidence/




Persecution in France for "The Waffen-SS: Innocent at Oradour"

By Vincent Reynouard


On June 9, 2004, the appeal court in Limoges sentenced me to two years in prison (whereof 18 months on probation) and a fine of 3000 Euro for the crime of "approving a war crime." It also declared the confiscation of parts of my archive, which was seized in 2001, to be lawful. The reason for this sentence was my research into the SS "massacre" in the French village of Oradour 60 years ago.

It all began in 1989, when I spoke with a friend about the Waffen-SS and he told me that the official history of "the Oradour massacre" was being questioned by a number of people. At that point I still believed – as almost all French do – in the official historical version. I believed, that members of the Waffen-SS on June 10, 1944, had destroyed the village of Oradour and annihilated its inhabitants. I also believed that they had burned several hundreds of women and children alive in the local church.

In the case of Oradour we are not dealing with a few dozen dead, but with the cold-blooded murder of 642 people, whereof about 500 defenseless women, children, and infants. Faced with such a dire allegation and harboring doubts about it, it is completely reasonable if one visits the site of the crime in order to observe with one" s own eyes that which is held as fact.

Read more:




User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9012
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby Hannover » 4 years 4 months ago (Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:58 pm)

The Oradour-sur-Glane story is a classic case of the types of misinformation that was / is spread about the Germans in WWII. But like the rest, this one too falls apart when exposed to sunlight.

- Hannover

from:
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Oradour-s ... davit.html

The Story of Oradour-sur-Glane
Sworn Affidavit of Eberhard Matthes

Quoted below is a sworn affidavit made by retired German Army Lieutenant Eberhard Matthes, signed 16 November 1980, which makes some startling claims about what really happened at Oradour-sur-Glane on 10 June 1944 when 642 men, women and children were massacred and every building in the town was set on fire by Waffen-SS soldiers of the 3rd Company of Der Führer Regiment, Das Reich Division.

This affidavit was quoted in the original German by Herbert Taege in a book entitled "Wo ist Kain? - Enthüllungen and Dokumente zum Komplex Tulle und Oradour," published in 1981. Otto Weidinger quoted the affidavit from Taege's book in a small booklet, entitled "Tulle and Oradour - eine deutsch-französische Tragödie," which he published in 1985. Weidinger's book was translated into English by Colin B. Newberry. The following text of the affidavit is from the English version of Weidinger's book:

"In addition to numerous private and official visits, in November and December of 1963 I was at the French training area of La Courtine in my official capacity as an officer of the Bundeswehr, and in the summer of 1964 I spent some time with my family in southwest France (Massif Central).

As a former participant in the war and regional chairman of the association of repatriated soldiers I was interested in all matters that had to do with reprisals and the shooting of hostages and so on, and consequently I visited Oradour-sur-Glane on both occasions.

Upon my first visit in December 1963, in German Bundeswehr uniform and in a Bundeswehr jeep with a driver, my experiences were as follows:

1) The part of the village that had been destroyed in 1944 had been turned into a kind of open-air museum with a kiosk selling drinks, cigarettes, etc. as well as brochures telling of the happenings in Oradour in June 1944, the latter at an astonishingly low price.

2) Immediately after my arrival the jeep was surrounded by children and also by, for the most part, elderly inhabitants and we were warmly welcomed.

3) When these older inhabitants - in 1963 they would have been between 50 and 60 years old - saw me reading one of the brochures, some of them said I should not believe everything I read. A lot of what had occurred had been different to what the brochures said. I was naturally somewhat perplexed and said that it was bad enough if German soldiers had fired upon women and children in the church that they had set fire to or whilst they were attempting to escape from it.

The answer to this was quite clear and unequivocal: the church had not been set fire to by the Germans in the first place. On the contrary, SS soldiers had risked their own lives to save several women and children from the burning church. Two women in the group around me even said that they themselves had been rescued by German soldiers, otherwise they would not be standing there that day.

4) In the meantime the mayor had arrived, who introduced himself and welcomed me very warmly: I was the first German soldier in uniform to visit Oradour since the war. He was very pleased about this. Politically he was a left-winger, but France and the FRG were allies and friends. One had to accept the past and learn the right lessons from it. And in the war wrong had been done everywhere. I immediately confronted him with what I had heard beforehand from the inhabitants, to which he replied that the Maquis had also done a lot of wrong to German soldiers at that time, for which reason none of the accused Germans in the Oradour trial had been condemned to death and almost all of those who were imprisoned had been released.

5) I can remember one episode very clearly. Near the ruins of the church there was, among other things, an old child's pram with a sign saying this pram had burnt out with a child in it during the massacre. I believe it was the mayor himself who, upon seeing it, smiled and said that the remains of a pram had indeed been found on that spot, but now that Oradour had become a kind of place of pilgrimage, and the village also profited from the visitors financially, such things had to be renewed every few years.

6) Understandably I had now become very much interested in the Oradour incident. I had an opportunity of talking to French officers, with whom we had a very open and comradly relationship and without any reservations. One high-ranking French officer answered my questions as follows:

'One of the major reasons for the actions of the Germans in Oradour in June 1944 was no doubt the fact that the advancing Germans had found a burning or already burnt-out German ambulance right in front of the village. All six persons in the ambulance must have been burnt alive. The driver and the person beside him were tied to the steering wheel. This was undoubtedly a deed perpetrated by the Maquis. Entwined with this was the mysterious and agonizing killing, in the same area and at about the same time, of a high-ranking German officer who had fallen into the hands of the Maquis. In the same situation French troops would also have had to take reprisals, possibly involving the shooting of hostages, as provided for in the laws and customs for war on land from 1939 through 1945. For these reasons there are many French soldiers and officers who do not visit Oradour in an official role. And for the same reasons (as far as the officer knew) no official military ceremonies are held in Oradour.'

7) Upon my second - private - visit to Oradour in the summer of 1964 I found further confirmation of what I had been told in that the owner of the kiosk or attendant (also an elderly man), from whom we bought something to drink, answered as follows to my remarks about the brochures: There were a number of witnesses who knew exactly how everything had actually happened in 1944. They had either not been heard at all during the trial, however, or they had to limit themselves to irrelevant details. The accused Germans had also received prison sentences and been released soon afterwards, instead of being sentenced to death, because otherwise some of the witnesses would no doubt have 'spilled the beans' and told what really had happened.

The explosion in the church was actually set off by a civilian. This individual is even believed to have shot a civilian while escaping from the church via the vestry, after setting a fuse. Speculation is that a member of the Maquis, perhaps not even a Frenchman, committed the deed in so that the Germans would be blamed. This would presumably cause even more civilians to join the resistance. Instead, the deaths at Tulle and Oradour ended Maquis activity in the Dordogne through the German withdrawal in August."

The following quote is from "Tulle and Oradour - a Franco-German Tragedy" by Otto Weidinger

On 13 April 1981 retired Lieutenant Eberhard Matthes added to his sworn affidavit of 16 November 1980 by stating that in December 1963 the women who had claimed to have been rescued from the burning church by soldiers in German uniform had also told him, among other things, that the firing outside the church had not begun until the church interior had started to burn following an explosion. From this one can conclude that the explosion in the church may have been the real reason for shooting of the male population. When elderly women in Oradour say such things to an officer of the German Bundeswehr, the whole Oradour complex appears in a new light. The responsibity for burning down the church with the women and children trapped inside it is thus removed from Diekmann's shoulders.

The destruction of the church of Oradour can be blamed neither on the regiment DF, nor on Das Reich Division, nor any other German command.

The fact that two French civilians had drawn Diekmann's attention to this village in particular also poses the question of whether he was purposely drawn in the direction of Oradour for the purpose of provoking harsh measures by the Germans against the civilian population, but not in anticipation of such rigorous actions as actually occurred.

From the questioning of then Obersturmführer Gerlach the following facts are clear:

1) Oradour-sur-Glane was in the hands of the Maquisards,

2) the majority of the population was on the side of the Maquisards,

3) women also appeared as active members of the Maquis, dressed in leather jackets with steel helmets.

4) the village was the command centre of a high-ranking Maquis staff body,

5) confusion of Oradour-sur-Glane with another place of the same name could not have been possible.

During a conversation between the author and the then Maquis chief in the Dordogne-Jugie (called 'Gao') in Paris in 1969, the latter freely admitted that weapons and ammunition had of course been stashed in all houses in Oradour at that time; it had been their job to supply weapons and ammunition to the towns and villages in the Dordogne.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9012
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby Hannover » 4 years 4 months ago (Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:50 pm)

The investigators suspect that six soldiers, who were aged 18 and 19 during the war, may have been involved in the attack, based on evidence in the archived files of East Germany’s Stasi secret police, the BBC reports. Authorities believe they are still alive, according to the BBC.

Right. The communist Stasis were set up by the communist Soviets after the war and it's claimed there is "evidence", which, BTW, is not shown. It's a simple case of communists who were covering for their fellow communist Maquisards. This is about as far from impartial that one can get. Yet the BBC buys this nonsense? That says a lot about the BBC. It was the Maquisards who were really responsible for the Oradour 'massacre'.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
Nüziders
Member
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:34 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby Nüziders » 4 years 4 months ago (Sat Feb 02, 2013 1:32 pm)

Hannover wrote:
The investigators suspect that six soldiers, who were aged 18 and 19 during the war, may have been involved in the attack, based on evidence in the archived files of East Germany’s Stasi secret police, the BBC reports. Authorities believe they are still alive, according to the BBC.

Right. The communist Stasis were set up by the communist Soviets after the war and it's claimed there is "evidence", which, BTW, is not shown. It's a simple case of communists who were covering for their fellow communist Maquisards. This is about as far from impartial that one can get. Yet the BBC buys this nonsense? That says a lot about the BBC. It was the Maquisards who were really responsible for the Oradour 'massacre'.

- Hannover


Does the fact that they were communists make a difference for whether theyre telling the truth or not?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9012
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby Hannover » 4 years 4 months ago (Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:30 pm)

Does the fact that they were communists make a difference for whether theyre telling the truth or not?

Given communism's lies in all regards, they simply cannot be trusted for valid, unbiased information. And in this particular example, which Nueziders apparently didn't read, we have the Stasi (forced agents for brutal Soviet communism) and their archives as a claimed source of evidence, which is nowhere to be seen. That's laughable, a huge portion of the East German population was archived in the communist Soviet / Stasi files. It's called credibility, Nueziders.

I note that Nueziders has no proof for the fraudulent accusations made against the Germans at Oradour. Nor does he rebut what has been posted here. Well, he does have claims of something which cannot be seen in the communist Soviet / Stasi archives. :roll:

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
Nüziders
Member
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:34 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby Nüziders » 4 years 4 months ago (Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:24 am)

I made no implication of believing what was alleged by the Stasi.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby borjastick » 3 years 8 months ago (Thu Oct 24, 2013 10:16 am)

I will be making a visit to Oradour sur Glane in the next few weeks. If there is anything people would like checked out or info required, pictures taken please PM me or respond here and I will endeavour to get what is wanted.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2050
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby hermod » 3 years 8 months ago (Thu Oct 24, 2013 6:12 pm)

borjastick wrote:I will be making a visit to Oradour sur Glane in the next few weeks. If there is anything people would like checked out or info required, pictures taken please PM me or respond here and I will endeavour to get what is wanted.


Pictures of mutilated children and women with intact clothes and shoes are devastating for the official version claiming they died because the Germans set the Church on fire. If they dare display such pictures, don't hesitate to photograph them.
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915

User avatar
diaz52
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:07 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-

Postby diaz52 » 3 years 1 week ago (Sun Jun 15, 2014 4:44 am)

borjastick wrote:I will be making a visit to Oradour sur Glane in the next few weeks. If there is anything people would like checked out or info required, pictures taken please PM me or respond here and I will endeavour to get what is wanted.


Borjastick I'd be interested to know about your trip to OsG and what you learned there about the alleged massacre.
-You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
-The establishment can't control the web, and the control of information through all means but one, is no control at all.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 968
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby Werd » 1 year 3 months ago (Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:13 am)

This page summarizes and critiques a few parts of Reynouard's claims.
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Oradour-s ... ouard.html
In his most ridiculous statement, Reynouard claims that Madame Rouffanche, the lone survivor of the church, could not have jumped out of a window in the church because it was a 12 foot drop and then another 7.5 feet from the top of the retaining wall to the road where she was shot 5 times by the Waffen-SS soldiers. Reynouard points out that Madame Rouffanche was 47 years old, implying that a woman that age could not have jumped out of a window from that height. If he had carefully studied the testimony of Madame Rouffanche, he would have known that she didn't jump down to the road from the top of the retaining wall, but rather crawled around the church to the garden behind the presbyterie after she was shot 4 times in the legs and once in the shoulder as she stood on the ground underneath the window. His measurements are all wrong: the window is less than 12 feet from the ground, and the retaining wall is around 10 feet high.

So let's jump to her testimony which is quoted on another part of the scrapbookpages website. So if this website is correct in summarizing Reynouard's views, he would in fact have made a big mistake.
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Oradour-s ... anche.html
"Shoved together in the holy place, we became more and more worried as we awaited the end of the preparations being made for us. At about 4 p.m. some soldiers, about 20 years old placed a sort of bulky box in the nave, near the choir, from which strings were lit and the flames passed to the apparatus which suddenly produced a strong explosion with dense, black, suffocating smoke billowing out. The women and children, half choked and screaming with fright rushed towards the parts of the church where the air was still breathable. The door of the sacristy was then broken in by the violent thrust of one horrified group. I followed in after but gave up and sat on a stair. My daughter came and sat down with me. When the Germans noticed that this room had been broken into they savagely shot down those who had tried to find shelter there. My daughter was killed near me by a bullet fired from outside. I owe my life to the idea I had to shut my eyes and pretend to be dead.

Firing burst out in the church then straw, faggots and chairs were thrown pele-mele onto bodies lying on the stone slabs. I had escaped from the killing and was without injury so I made use of a smoke cloud to slip behind the altar. In this part of the church there are three windows. I made for the widest one in the middle and with the help of a stool used to light the candles, I tried to reach it. I don't know how but my strength was multiplied. I heaved myself up to it as best I could and threw myself out of the opening that was offered to me through the already shattered window. I jumped about nine feet down.

When I looked up I saw I had been followed in my climb by a woman holding out her baby to me. She fell down next to me but the Germans, alerted by the cries of the baby, machine-gunned us. The woman and the mite were killed and I too was injured as I made it to a neighboring garden and hid among some rows of peas and waited anxiously for someone to come to help me. That wasn't until the following day at 5 p.m."

So not only does she say she jumped about 9 feet down, but apparently, the Germans put some sort of smoke bomb inside the church. Apparently Germans also fired bullets into the church, one of the victims being Madame Rouffanche's daughter. And some Germans also killed a woman and her baby who escaped the church. Again if Madame Rouffanche is telling the truth, that's pretty savage of the Germans. Makes me wonder if maybe some Germans did in fact do things like smash babies against brick buildings in Ukraine.
Legitimate Nazi Atrocities
Post by Werd » 1 year 11 months ago (Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:09 am)

I was just watching this documentary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEuwS9mEfVE

Case in point, the woman's testimony about what she saw starting at the 27:10 mark. She and her dad witnessed a truck driven by Germans with a tarp on the back hatch hiding what was on the truck bed. It was a bunch of Jews with two Germans sitting on the truck bed. The truck stopped and the driver said why is the child crying? The guards said because it is a baby. He ordered the baby (2 or 3 months this woman testifies on video) be given to him. It was and he grabbed it by the legs and smashed it against a wall and threw the corpse back into the truck. The mother screamed and was hysterical of course. I don't think it is absurd to believe things like that happened. While not every German soldier was a devil, not every German soldier was an angel. But cases like this of baby killing or shooting Jewish civilians in the Ukraine I doubt was the norm or was offical policy designated by Berlin. It has already been stated that William Shirer had to admit in some cases the shockingly correct behaviour of many German soldiers, especially in France

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 968
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby Werd » 1 year 3 months ago (Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:25 am)

Continuing on with Reynouard's alleged errors...
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Oradour-s ... ouard.html
He points out that Madame Rouffanche testified that there was no explosion inside the church the whole time she was there, although other witnesses stated that they heard several loud explosions. Reynouard accuses Madame Rouffanche of giving false testimony at the military tribunal held in Bordeaux in 1953. Reynouard doesn't believe that Madame Rouffanche was even in the church. He claims that she gave conflicting statements over the years about a crate or box that was brought into the church by two SS soldiers. This was the "smoke bomb" that was allegedly set off by means of lighting a fuse.

Who are the witnesses?
Reynouard claims that, with the help of an attorney, he studied the trial testimony which was taken down in shorthand by the court reporter during the war crimes trial held in Bordeaux in 1953. From these shorthand notes, he learned that Mrs. Renaud testified that "there was a large explosion in the church." Mr. Petit testified during the trial that he had entered the church briefly after the tragedy and "it was a terrible picture. There was no intact body. Some had been torn into two pieces." Some of the Waffen-SS soldiers had also testified during the trial about an explosion in the church, according to the notes taken by the court reporter.

[...]

As proof that there was an explosion in the church, Reynouard points out in his article that the roof was blown off, but there does not seem to be much damage caused by a fire inside the church. The wooden confessional did not burn, for example. A brass ball on the roof of the tower did not melt, according to Reynouard, indicating that the roof was blown off, rather than burned. An engraved inscription on the melted bronze bells can still be seen. This proves that the fire in the tower did not burn very long, according to Reynouard. The implication is that a flash fire caused by an explosion partially melted the bells. A Waffen-SS soldier was killed by a stone falling from the church, which is further proof of an explosion in Reynouard's opinion.

So if Reynouard can point to testimony from Madame Rouffanche that there was no explosion in the church (the whole time she was there), and yet he produces evidence that indicates there was an explosion, is that why he thinks she may not have been in the church after all? So is she making something up about jumping to safety, then once landing, taking a baby from a mother also escaping out the same window and all three of them getting shot by Germans? If Madame Rouffanche says there was no explosion in the church, then what is she talking about back here?
At about 4 p.m. some soldiers, about 20 years old placed a sort of bulky box in the nave, near the choir, from which strings were lit and the flames passed to the apparatus which suddenly produced a strong explosion with dense, black, suffocating smoke billowing out.

Perhaps she is making a difference between an explosion and a simple smoke bomb because she DOES know the difference. Here are a couple more interesting quotes:
Reynouard wrote that he became interested in the Oradour tragedy in 1989. In August 1990, he met Mr. Renaud, one of the survivors of the village and the husband of the woman who testified in court about an explosion in the church. Mr. Renaud told him that he had witnessed an explosion in the church tower and felt the shock waves. Reynouard also claims that he spoke with Maurice Beaubreuil, a survivor who hid with his aunt in a house near the church; Beaubreuil told him about hearing a strong explosion. Today these two men deny that they ever spoke with Reynouard. Reynouard claims that he took notes in a small red notebook in 1990, but it was confiscated and he could not prove in court that he had spoken with Renaud and Beaubreuil.

I'm sure they do deny it. Can't have their names tarnished by associating with a revisionist now can they?
Reynouard points out that in Oradour-sur-Glane, there were refugees who were Spanish soldiers that had fought against Franco in the Civil War in Spain. He claims that these soldiers would have recruited the villagers to fight along with them in the French Résistance. He points out that the Spanish refugees are never mentioned in the official story. On the contrary, the 26 Spaniards who had been living in Oradour-sur-Glane since 1939, when the Spanish Civil War ended, were most certainly mentioned in the official stories that I read.

Another mistake by Reynouard?
The official transcripts from the trial in Bordeaux have been sealed until 2053. Without having any proof, Reynouard has concocted a scenario in which he theorizes that some of the partisans in Oradour-sur-Glane hid inside the church when they saw the SS men enter the village. When the women and children were taken to the church, the SS soldiers discovered the partisans hiding there, and possibly there was an exchange of gunfire which caused the ammunition hidden in the church to explode.

Reynouard speculates that not all the women and children died in the church as a consequence of the disaster, since parts of the church were not destroyed. He thinks that the women and children who were in the proximity of the wooden confessional and the silk flowers must have survived the drama and that Mrs. Rouffanche was not the only survivor of the church.

In support of his theory, Reynouard mentions the story told by a German soldier, Eberhard Matthes, who visited the ruined village in 1963 and spoke with two women who claimed to have survived the destruction in the church. Why didn't these two women testify during the trial in Bordeaux in 1953? Maybe they did, but we won't know until 2053 when the court records will be open to the public. Until then, Reynouard has no proof of his revisionist claims.

What are they afraid of? Jumping back a bit to scrapbookpages...
The wooden confessional did not burn, for example. A brass ball on the roof of the tower did not melt, according to Reynouard, indicating that the roof was blown off, rather than burned. An engraved inscription on the melted bronze bells can still be seen. This proves that the fire in the tower did not burn very long, according to Reynouard. The implication is that a flash fire caused by an explosion partially melted the bells.

At this link, there is an affidavit from a German man who went to France in the 1960's. If truthful, even some French people doubted the anti German slant of the Oradour story.
http://www.oradour.info/appendix/rikmen01.htm
Tulle and Oradour, the German view (presented by Marc Rikmenspoel)

The document shown below has been prepared by Marc Rikmenspoel from the sources quoted at its end and has been placed on this website as he wrote it, without any comment or corrections. The text has been written so as to present one of the alternative points of view about these tragic cases.

[...]

It is worth mentioning that 3./DF was a normal panzergrenadier truck-borne infantry company. It did not possess specialized weapons for demolition work, and, in light of its expected mission, was not assigned any from regimental units. The Limousin Society for the Study of History and Architecture made a survey of the church in 1924. It recorded the solid, stone construction of the building. (3, 4)

The bronze bell of the church melted. Fire is not sufficient for this. Wood burns at 200-400 degrees centigrade, while bronze will not melt at less than 1250 degrees. There was obviously something else at work. Also, the destruction in the church is principally within a circular area under the bell tower. There is damage elsewhere, but the obvious conclusion is that explosives under the bell turned it into a massive hollow charge. After this, fire spread to some other flammable items in the church. Naturally, stone doesn’t burn, and this supports the idea that the destruction must have come from an explosion. (3, 7-11)

The Germans could not have simply set the church on fire, as was later claimed. As mentioned previously, the 3./DF had no specialized weapons available. So why did the explosion occur? Some answers seem to come in the affidavit sworn by retired Bundeswehr Oberstleutnant Eberhard Matthes on November 16, 1980.

[...]

Upon my first visit in December 1963, in German Bundeswehr uniform and in a Bundeswehr jeep with a driver, my experiences were as follows:

1) The part of the village that had been destroyed in 1944 had been turned into a kind of open-air museum with a kiosk selling drinks, cigarettes, etc. as well as brochures telling of the happenings in Oradour in June 1944, the latter at an astonishingly low price.


[...]

7) Upon my second - private - visit to Oradour in the summer of 1964 I found further confirmation of what I had been told in that the owner of the kiosk or attendant (also an elderly man), from whom we bought something to drink, answered as follows to my remarks about the brochures: There were a number of witnesses who knew exactly how everything had actually happened in 1944. They had either not been heard at all during the trial, however, or they had to limit themselves to irrelevant details. The accused Germans had also received prison sentences and been released soon afterwards, instead of being sentenced to death, because otherwise some of the witnesses would no doubt have ‘spilled the beans’ and told what really had happened" (1, 38-41)

The explosion in the church was actually set off by a civilian. This individual is even believed to have shot a civilian while escaping from the church via the vestry, after setting a fuse. (3, 10) Speculation is that a member of the Maquis, perhaps not even a Frenchman, committed the deed in so that the Germans would be blamed. This would presumably cause even more civilians to join the resistance. Instead, the deaths at Tulle and Oradour ended Maquis activity in the Dordogne through the German withdrawal in August. (1, 32 & 47)


[...]

Many works dealing with Tulle and Oradour were consulted in preparing this piece. Three sources were noted in the text, they appear below in the order in which they were referred:

1) Tulle and Oradour: A Franco-German Tragedy, by Otto Weidinger, translated by Colin B. Newberry. Privately published, 1985.

2) Oradour-sur-Glane: A "Clear-cut" Atrocity?, by Richard Landwehr, in Siegrunen Magazine, vol. IV, #3 (21 overall), September 1980.

3) Stonecry, The Scream of the Stones: Research in the ruins of the church in Oradour-sur-Glane to verify a war crime, by Pierre Moreau, translated from the French. Privately published, no date.

So some civilian who is not French may have sparked this tragedy for political gain? Interesting. Let's jump back a bit for a possible clue.
Reynouard points out that in Oradour-sur-Glane, there were refugees who were Spanish soldiers that had fought against Franco in the Civil War in Spain. He claims that these soldiers would have recruited the villagers to fight along with them in the French Résistance. He points out that the Spanish refugees are never mentioned in the official story. On the contrary, the 26 Spaniards who had been living in Oradour-sur-Glane since 1939, when the Spanish Civil War ended, were most certainly mentioned in the official stories that I read.

Reynouard only claims Spaniards were not mentioned in official stories, but he affirms their existence and presence. Could it be one of those non Frenchmen who could have set off an explosion in the church?

avatar
Review
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 2:53 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby Review » 1 year 2 months ago (Sat Apr 16, 2016 5:14 pm)

Werd wrote:Continuing on with Reynouard's alleged errors...
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Oradour-s ... ouard.html

....


Great, an anonymous "debunking" article claiming Reynouard wrote this and that, without giving any references :?

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 968
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby Werd » 1 year 2 months ago (Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:38 pm)

What were his two alleged errors? If you can't even answer that simple question (which I am not going to spoonfeed you over), it's clear you have no intention of actually reading what was posted and therefore have nothing constructive to offer. Perhaps if you actually read my two last posts, you will still see him ending up vindicated for his revisionist position overall. :lol:

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 968
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby Werd » 1 year 2 months ago (Sat Apr 23, 2016 2:20 am)

Inside this book translated by Carlos Porter,
Image
The article about Oradour begins on page 173 and is nothing more than an English translation of subtitles to a youtube video here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSfDKCKUs2c
It even gives out this youtube link right on page 173 where the article about Oradour beings.

I also understand Reynouard wrote an entire book on Oradour as seen by Amazon link here to a German translation running 448 pages.
http://www.amazon.de/Wahrheit-%C3%BCber ... 3806111324

Perhaps it is from either this youtube video, or this German book that scrapbookpages is summarizing their views of Reynouard's arguments about how high a woman had to jump, or whether or not Spanish refugees were mentioned or not in any official accounts. Oops. I just gave it away what the two points of contention were above.

Edit:
Let's look at scrapbookpages again, despite your apparent aversion to doing so.
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Oradour-s ... ouard.html
Reynouard wrote an article which was published in German on this web site, which has since been taken down:

http://www.deutsche-stimme.com/Ausgaben ... adour.html

In the article, Reynouard claims...

Wow. There's the clue RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU. Here's a web archive shot of that page.
http://web.archive.org/web/200412162036 ... adour.html
Back to scrapbookspages...
In his Internet article, Reynouard said that he wrote, in his revisionist book about Oradour-sur-Glane, that he had checked the government archives and had found that partisans were...

Once again, scrapbookpages tells us where they are summarizing Reynouard's claims from that they end up disputing.
In his most ridiculous statement, Reynouard claims that Madame Rouffanche, the lone survivor of the church, could not have jumped out of a window in the church because it was a 12 foot drop and then another 7.5 feet from the top of the retaining wall to the road where she was shot 5 times by the Waffen-SS soldiers.

I will admit it is vague as to where this comes from: the book or the internet article. Here it is translated into English.
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... adour.html

If it's not in there, it's likely in the book.

Problem solved for you? I hope so. I really doubt this scrapbooks article would be arguing against any strawman if it takes the time to point to an article and his main book that exists about oradour, which is essentially a dare to double check it. One can engage in conspiracy theories if they want about this dare being a cover to trick lazy people or those who can't read French or German editions of his Oradour book, but whatever. That's not my problem. The main TWO POINTS of contention I could find worth my time in that scrapbooks article are not damaging to Reynouard's overall revisionist thesis about Oradour. That would be obvious to anyone who actually reads my two posts in a row where I take scrapbooks pages to task.

avatar
Review
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 2:53 pm

Re: France: New evidence prompts investigation (Oradour-sur-Glan

Postby Review » 1 year 2 months ago (Mon Apr 25, 2016 10:14 am)

Werd wrote:What were his two alleged errors? If you can't even answer that simple question (which I am not going to spoonfeed you over), it's clear you have no intention of actually reading what was posted and therefore have nothing constructive to offer. Perhaps if you actually read my two last posts, you will still see him ending up vindicated for his revisionist position overall. :lol:


I don't know, but I think the Scrapbookpage article is horribly written if they are trying to make an explicit argument.. (ok, one point was the church window)

I was just reacting to the empty reference, thanks.


Return to “WWII Europe / Atlantic Theater Revisionist Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest