|
|
|
|
THE GERMAN/NORWEGIAN CAPITULATION
AGREEMENT Norwegian WW2 History Dear Friends and Fellow Aryans In this part of the history regarding the capitulation agreement I will tell you about the trial of the Minister of schools and churches in the Quisling Government, Rangar Skancke, and about how the court reacted as ministers in the exile government committed perjury and the defence which has been offered for that perjury. The capitulation agreement has only once been introduced in a court in Norway - and that was in the trial of Rangar Skancke. Before the war Mr Skancke was a professor at the Technical University of Trondheim (NTH). He was among the best professors in his field - electro technics and a pioneer in radar research. Other than Quisling and Hagelin, Skancke was the only member of the wartime government who was sentenced to death. During his second trial before the crown court in Oslo his defence counsel brought forward the agreement of June 10, 1940. The counsellor got hold of a copy of the agreement from the Foreign Office with the signatures of Prime Minister Nygaardsvold, Minister of Foreign Affaires Koht and Defence Minister Ljungberg. All three had seen and read the agreement but in the courtroom they claimed to have forgotten they ever saw it. Nygaardsvold, Koht and Ljungberg were part the exile government of Norway during the war. How can three ministers forget they saw the only capitulation agreement Norway has ever signed? Mr Nygaardsvold had hardly been to a school before he became Prime Minister of Norway in 1935, but he had been a representative in parliament for the Labour Party since 1916. He was an intelligent man - they say. Mr Koht was a professor in History at the University of Oslo. Mr Ljungberg was a brigadier in the military before 1939 when he became Minister of Defence. All three, according to their testimony, had "forgotten" they had ever seen the agreement - and yet they had signed that they had read the agreement. This is one of the greatest lies regarding the agreement that the history of the Norwegian war affords. Nobody ever asked them how they could "forget" the only capitulation agreement Norway has ever signed. And the best part of the story is THEY WERE NOT CHARGED WITH PERJURY FOR LYING TO THE COURT. One of the best legal minds in Norway - professor Johs. Andenes - has given this explanation as to why they forgot: "When you read a lot of documents, you cannot remember all of them!" Well, I can understand that Nygaardsvold forgot, he was a simple man, but I can never understand why both Koht - being a historical professor - and Ljungberg - being a military man - forgot. No, all three were lying and got away with their lies. Never before in the history of Norway have three ministers committed such perjury. What did the court have to say regarding the agreement, you ask? The crown court of Oslo said the Trondheim agreement was the capitulation of the 6th division at Narvik since this fighting group was mentioned in the preamble of the Trondheim agreement. That was the end of all discussion in Norway regarding any
capitulation agreements from the wartime. Nobody wanted to hear about any
Norwegian capitulation to Germany in 1940. After the war the agreement was
only brought forward by former members of Quisling's party, and the
authorities never wanted to discuss it. They pointed to the crown court of
Oslo's decision in the Skancke case. WHY DO THE AUTHORITIES DENY THE CAPITULATION? If they accepted the capitulation - then Norway had no King after 6th December 1940. According to the Norwegian Constitution § 11: "The King shall live within the Country and must not take residence for more than 5 months outside the country without the approval of the Storting. If he does he will forfeit his right to the crown." According to the Constitution the King can only be outside the country for an extended time if the country is at war. (§41) No King - NO Exile Government!!! And consequently all agreements which the Norwegian Exile Government signed during their stay in England are null and void. As you have learned from my newsletters on Norwegian history all agreements were nullities - but those facts are also not accepted by the authorities and their Jewish Controllers.
Anyone who tries to start a discussion regarding the Trondheim Agreement is either rebuffed or is stigmatized as a Nazi. This even as Norwegian historians search for new arguments regarding the agreement. Never in the more than 54 years since the end of the war has a Norwegian historian or jurist discussed both the Narvik and Trondheim Agreements. Nor have they shown any of the other local capitulation agreements from the short war in Norway. This, of course, is because if they do then sooner or later they would end up having to bring forward the Narvik and Trondheim agreements. HOW DID THE WORLD REGARD THE TRONDHEIM AGREEMENT? The Russians said the Norwegian embassy in Moscow had to close since Germany was now handling all Norwegian Foreign Affairs. The British looked upon Norway and her exile government as lackeys and did not inform them that she planned attacks along the Norwegian coastline. The Americans - with their Jewish controlled government - looked at Norway as a willing lackey to Jewish wishes.
We can ask all Norwegian Embassies to explain the two agreements - that of Narvik and of Trondheim. Sooner or later Norway will have to admit that she capitulated to Germany. And when she does - she will have to admit that court actions taken against her own citizens after WWII was illegal. Then we can ask her why she did not admit to this earlier? That is a question she never will answer. NORWAY WILL NEVER ADMIT SHE WAS A JEWISH LACKEY DURING AND AFTER WWII.
ANOTHER LEGAL CASE WHERE THE TRONDHEIM AGREEMENT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED. In the late 50's a book was published in Norway: Ralph Hewins "Quisling - a prophet without honour". Hewins, a Breton historian, exonerates Quisling of all the crimes which he was sentenced for. The Norwegian publisher, Jakobsen, was prosecuted because of this book by a communist - a member of the Storting. In court Jakobsen claimed the Trondheim Agreement was a total capitulation for Norway. He even got a written statement from the German negotiator, Oberst im Generalstabe Buschenhagen, now a General with no command - and just returned from a Russian prison camp. Buschenhagen said the Trondheim Agreement was a total capitulation but the Norwegian court only gave credence to the Norwegian negotiator, Roscher Nielsen, who said the capitulation of Trondheim was only for the troops in Narvik. Unfortunately, Mr Jakobsen did not have a copy of the Narvik Agreement - because the only copy which was in Norway was kept by the Norwegian who signed it : Coronel Wrede Holm. Go back to the first part of this story and find out when he gave "his" copy to the military archive in Norway. As a conclusion to this part of the story of Norway's wartime history I will paraphrase Shakespeare by saying: "There is something rotten in the state of Norway." Dear friends do what you can to help restore Norway's pride and honour by helping her to accept that she capitulated to Germany on June 10, 1940. Stay united and healthy Heil og sael Julius Streiker
|