Lemminkäinen 2012-10-27, 10:46
Jhulst, thank you for this video links. It was new for me. Some short comments after watching it. The lecturer told that Mannerheim referred to many secret agreements between Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt in his personal diaries, but Manneheim said also that he had to lie in his after war memoirs for political reasons and M. was very sorry about it. The lecturer referred to these personal diaries.
What was interesting in his presentation, was names of high status Russian and German sources forwarding information for Finns before and during the war. Finns had high level secret friends in Russia and Germany and Finns were able to combine top secret information from both these sources. So Finns were aware of the game behind them, but of course it didnt give us million soldiers more.
Here is the youtube link. It is in Finnish of course.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDF4PnH ... pFogJuL5oq
What I would like to know is what was lied about. Especially after seeing this debate at axisthistory forum. Erkki Hautamäki
Sven-Eric » 23 Jul 2005, 15:10
I am curious to know if any of the Finnish members have read Erkki Hautamäkis book "Kansio S-32". In that book he claims that Stalin and the Western allies were in alliance already in October 1939.
Sven-Eric » 25 Jul 2005, 11:28
Hautamäki bases his work on a folder by Mannerheim, "S-32" and also on a book by Viljo Tahvanainen released in 1971.
It is said that on 15 October 1939 the Soviets concluded a secret agreement with the Western powers signed by Churchill. In this agreement the Western allies accepted a Soviet occupation of Finland and the Baltic states in exchange for themselves to occupy Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The end purpose was then a mutual attack on Germany in the summer of 1940. The military help offered by the Allies to Finland during the Winter war was just a cover to make the occupation of Norway and Sweden easier and to take control of the Swedish ore fields, but also to establish contact with the Red Army and force Hitler to counteractions.
The purpose for the Allies was to keep the Swedish troops busy so they could not help Finland which at the same time would be occupied by the Soviets. According to Hautamäki found out about these plans in February 1940 when a Soviet aircraft on a secret mission to London on its way back to Moscow was forced to land on German territory and the Germans captured documents about these plans.
Personally I find this a bit too thick. Hitler and the Germans would most certainly have mentioned this after the outbreak of Barbarossa and it would have been essential in his war propaganda against the Allies. What do you people think?
Mikko H. » 27 Jul 2005, 13:24
For me it's enough that Hautamäki bases his work on Tahvanainen's fantasies, which have been thoroughly discredited.
Juha Tompuri » 04 Nov 2005, 21:26
Erkki Hautamäki wrote:
"- Punaisena lankana ovat Vilho Tahvanaisen Mannerheimin S-32-kansion sähkeistä ja raporteista tekemät kopiot, jotka olen käynyt läpi kronologisessa järjestyksessä. Sieltä löytyy totuus. Näiden asiakirjojen rinnalle olen kerännyt lisätietoa maailmankirjallisuudesta."
("The red line has been the copies of the telegrams and reports Vilho Tahvanainen has made from the Mannerheim's file S-32, of which I have read thru at chronogical order. The truth is found there. In addition to these documents I have gathered information from the world literature.") http://www.promerit.net/
http://www.prokarelia.net/en/?x=article ... &author=10
The book ... is based on the contents of the so-called file S-32 of Marshal Mannerheim and is copied from there by the Marshal’s secret agent Vilho Tahvanainen
Erkki Hautamäki wrote:"Kotoisempi salattu asia on Rovaniemen palon todellinen aiheuttaja lokakuussa 1944. Palonhan aiheutti suomalaisen tiedustelupartion räjäyttämä ammusjuna."
("Secret issue more domestic, is the true cause of the burn of Rovaniemi at October 1944. The burn was caused by a ammunition train, blown up by a Finnish recce unit.")http://www.promerit.net/
Apparently Erkki H. has read the book of Erkki K: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... ght=#88131
Uncle Joe wrote:
As for "not taken seriously qualified historians", well, whose soup you eat, his soings you sing. If qualified histoarians mean people like Narikka-Max J-son, they have devoted their life to propagandize on behalf of the winners. Truth means nada to them.
Max Jakobson wrote:
Finland went into the Continuation War on the coat-tails of the strength of Germany. It was believed that Germany would save us from the fate of the Baltic States. The brutality of the Nazi regime, the violations of the rights of small nations - all of these were swept under the carpet.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Throughout the ages this rule has been a guiding light for states and nations in moments of peril.
One typical case was the comment made by Winston Churchill when Germany attacked the Soviet Union "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."
From the Finnish point of view, Hitler had invaded Hell.
emphasis on mine.http://www2.helsinginsanomat.fi/english ... 0031118IE7
A small most probably unintentional mistake:
...kun Mannerheimin aisamiehenä toimineen Vilho Tahvanaisen...
(...Vilho Tahvanainen, Mannerheim's hmmm...
my dictionary doesn't have the correct expression... (asiamies = messenger)
Uncle Joe » 05 Nov 2005, 03:58
Ahh, quoting a review from Helsingin Sanomat, the leading forum of American propaganda in Finland. That review just confirmed how low Narikka-Max has sunk. Much more truthful review on Sana´s Ehrenburgian pamphlet can be found in Sotilasaikauslehti.
Juha Tompuri » 05 Nov 2005, 21:56
Ohto Manninen, Professor in the National Defence College, who also writes at Sotilasaikakauslehti, describes the main source/red line of Erkki Hautamäki, at his book "Stalinin Kiusa, Himmlerin Täi" (Nuisance of Stalin, Louse of Himmler) as:
"Tapaus Tahvanainen" kuuluu kaunokirjallisuuden agenttitarinoiden joukkoon. Siinä joukossa se ei liene huonoimpia, ja sen elinkyky Suomen julkisessa sanassa on kunnioitettava.
In English something like:
"Case Tahvanainen" belongs to the group of secret agent stories of fiction literature. It's not the worst at that group and it's ability to live at the public media of Finland is honoured."
Uncle Joe » 05 Nov 2005, 23:40
Juha, Manninen wrote that piece in 1995 (check the date at the end of the article) and based his comments on what was available to him at that time. Of course, the easiest way to prove/disprove Hautamäki´s thesis would be COMPLETE and UNLIMITED OPENING of ALL Russian, French, American and British archives. And this should be done by surprise without giving time for cleansing the docs by various interest groups. But apparently those who benefit from the status quo won´t allow that to happen for the foreseeable time.
Topspeed, most important contributors to Hesari include people like Tomi Ervamaa, Max J-son and Olli Kivinen who all are fanatic America lovers.
Juha Tompuri » 06 Nov 2005, 00:11
Uncle Joe wrote:
Juha, Manninen wrote that piece in 1995 (check the date at the end of the article) and based his comments on what was available to him at that time.
Yes, for the first time. The book I quoted, as you know, was published three years ago. And after that no evidence of Tahvanainen being an "secret agent man"
have been brought up.
Uncle Joe wrote:
Hautamäki also admits the weaknesses of Tahvanainen as a source.
Even the Colonel Erkki Nordberg who had (been fooled to ?) wrote the preface to the Hautamäki book, didn't believe his theories:
"Mikäli kirjan perusteesi osoittautuu aikanaan oikeaksi..."
"If the basis of your book proves in the future to be correct...http://www.promerit.net/
Juha Tompuri » 07 Nov 2005, 23:08
O. Manninen at his book's preface wrote:...Luvuista suurin osa on ilmestynyt eri ammattilehdissä vuosina 1994 - 2002, osa on ennestään julkaisemattomia. Varhimmin julkaistuja lukuja on kuitenkin nyt täydennetty uusien tutkimusten pohjalta.
"Most of the articles have been published at various professional magazines between years 1994 - 2002 and some of them are unpublished before. The earliest publised articles have however now been updated from the basis of new studies"
Uncle Joe » 10 Nov 2005, 03:53
You have twisted the original meaning in your translation. Manninen preface does not have the the equivalent of "The earliest articles have been..." that suggests all articles have been updated when Manninen´s words have much different meaning. The only correct translation can be "Some earlier articles have been updated...". All other translations are misleading and propagandistic.
Juha Tompuri » 10 Nov 2005, 23:39
Your translation is better than mine.
The only thing I agree with at your post.
Sven-Eric » 26 Nov 2005, 00:41
Hautamäki is said to release a part 2 of his book which will be dealing with the continuation war I think.
Karppinen » 14 Feb 2006, 05:09
The title must be "More conforting fairytales for people who live in a ideological bubble".
Sorry, couldn't resist. I read Hautamäki's book, and it's nothing but fantasy. An interesting theory, nothing more.
Seppo Koivisto » 19 Jul 2013, 14:04
So supposedly, Mannerheim's memoirs which talk of Stalin's backroom deals with the west and backstabbing of Hitler have been edited, but we don't know in what capacity. Well Mannerheim who speaks Finnish probably clarifies but I can not understand Finnish in that youtube video unfortunately. Also, others are not believing in the authenticity of this S.32 file or even the claim of Tahvanainen being some sort of secret agent man who figured all this stuff out about Stain's attempt to betray Finland in order to satisfy Churchill. So there is some debate over small details. But recall that Hautamäki apparently uses more sources than Tahvanainen. As that one Makow article stated, that Finnish report that he saw on the old libertyforum.org in 2005 is nowhere to be found, but this agreement IS REFERENCED clearly in a letter already quoted from the forumbiodiversity topic I quoted.
I would also think that these two articles from justice4germans http://justice4germans.com/2015/01/18/a ... ch-7-1940/http://justice4germans.com/2015/01/13/f ... hill-pact/
have enough evidence in them about Stalin being two faced. In other words, Suvorov, Bunich, Meltyukhov and Solanin and a couple others already mentioned have hit upon something that should be regarded as true in the west but still largely is not.