|
|
|
|
THE NORWEGIAN/GERMAN CAPITULATION AND
NORWAY'S DENIAL OF SUCH AN AGREEMENT NORWEGIAN WW2 HISTORY Volume 2 Dear Friends and fellow Aryans. I have finished the story of the above capitulation agreement. I have made my statement: NORWAY DID CAPITULATE TO GERMANY - AND SHE CAPITULATED TOTALLY. In this letter I will tell you more about the persons who acted on behalf of Norway in this charade, Wrede Holm and Roscher Nielsen. But I will also tell you what the leading Norwegian historian says regarding the agreement from Trondheim. Let us start with Wrede Holm. As you learned in part 1 of the story he was a member of the Norwegian General Staff but had to step down to become an acting colonel in May 1940. Always, as long as he lived, Wrede Holm, claimed he told the Germans at Spionskop (outside Narvik) that he could not capitulate on behalf of the troops who left the country with the King or on behalf of the King himself. This was because the King wanted to continue the war against Germany. Let us believe Wrede Holm's statement. What does it matter. He was the negotiator in a local capitulation and questions like this do not belong in such a discussion. If Wrede Holm had been at his wits he would have known that. But he was angry he was not allowed to go to England and live with his mates and the government. As he read the proposal for the agreement which the Germans gave him he could either accept them or reject them. Had he rejected the treaty between the two belligerent parties, the war between the Norwegian 6th Division and the German North Army would have continued until the Germans were defeated - which would have happened before they could get help from the south. Then the Norwegian 6th division would have been the first troops to defeat Germany in WWII. When he signed he was happy with the terms and the conditions under which his troops had to lay down their arms. To claim anything else at a later stage is cowardly and idiotic. Let us now return to the negotiation in Trondheim between Roscher Nielsen for Norway and Burschenhagen for Germany. Before we go into what happened I will tell you something Roscher Nielsen told Norwegians in a radio speech after the war. He said the Germans asked him if he wanted to do anything or contact anyone before the negotiations started. Roscher Nielsen said he wanted to telephone his wife. The German officer told a German soldier to call Mrs Roscher Nielsen at their apartment in Oslo. He called, but when he started to speak the telephone was laid down on the hook. The German soldier, tried several times - always with the same result. Then Roscher Nielsen was allowed to try. He got hold of his wife and spoke to her. His wife hated the Germans so much that she refused to speak to any of them. (Remember this was in June 1940.) After 1945 the main thing in Norway was to show how nationalistic you were during the war. You had to show you were anti-German. By telling the Norwegian audience how his wife reacted when she got a telephone call from a German, Roscher Nielsen showed what a patriot his wife was. Back to the negotiations in Trondheim on June 10, 1940. As you have learned, Roscher Nielsen claimed he told the Germans that he had no credentials before the negotiations started. In the above mentioned radio speech he elaborated on this - to show Norwegians how stupid the Germans were. My comment on this is: If he had no credentials the Germans would have sent him back to gen. Ruge's camp in Tromsų. Since the negotiation continued Roscher Nielsen had all the credentials and papers he needed to negotiate the capitulation which gen. Ruge had telegraphed the legation in Stockholm and told them what he wanted and what the King had agreed to do: Capitulate for Germany. In his letters to the Norwegian court (see part 3) Burschenhagen said the Germans knew the King and Government had left the country. The Germans expected Roscher Nielsen would make exception for the troops which had left with the King. This was not done, since they are not mentioned in the agreement. Such an exception was known to the Germans. They wrote it into the capitulation which Holland signed on May 15, 1940. In this agreement the troops fighting in Zeeland would sign their agreement at a later stage - but still Holland did capitulate totally to Germany. Such a paragraph could also have been written for Norway had Roscher Nielsen insisted on it or had he been told to make such exceptions. Since he did not, he and gen. Ruge were in agreement that Norway would make no exceptions in the capitulation agreements. As the Government did not bring Roscher Nielsen and gen. Ruge to trial after WWII they must have agreed to the total capitulation. The government/King could and would bring a negotiator to trial if he did not demand such exceptions as agreed before he went into negotiations. This is even taken into account in the Norwegian Military Laws. Neither England, France nor the USA looked upon Norway as a part of the allied armies who fought against Germany after June 10, 1940. Had they done this Norway would have been able to claim all weapons left by the Germans after May 8, 1945. Norway did not get any of the weapons - or rather only some rifles and the guns which were in the forts. Norwegian troops did participate, but only as volunteers in the British army. This fact were kept a secret from Norwegians until 1995. Only then did the newspapers tell us that Norwegians fought as volunteers during D-day and not as Norwegian troops in a Norwegian army.
The leading Norwegian historian, professor Skodvin, has always claimed that the Trondheim agreement was a local capitulation. He has done so because the thesis for his doctorate was paid for by the Norwegian resistance after WWII. In his long thesis he shows why this must be so. He claims that the first paragraph should read "in the air, at sea and on land" instead of "each and all" Norwegian troops must lay down their weapons. Since there were no copies of either the German or the Norwegian text with signatures available he has also discussed this. The only copies which were available were copies of telegrams with the text. Up until 1990 one assumed that all signed German texts had been lost when the German War Department in Berlin was bombed. In 1990 one of the five German copies was found and published. In his thesis claiming the text should read: "in the air, at sea and on land Norwegian troops will lay down their weapons" he discusses the German-French agreement and the agreement the USA and England demanded Germany should sign after WWII. The fraudulent historian forgot to tell Norwegians that the German-Dutch and the German-Belgian agreements both used the same wording as the Norwegian-German agreement: "gesamte" or "each and all". And these countries admit that they capitulated totally to Germany. It is true, in a draft of the Trondheim agreement the wording "in the air, at sea and on land" is used, but the wording was changed by General Falkenhorst's legal assistant.
Why was the wording changed? Norwegian historians and the capitulation
WHAT WILL THE FUTURE BE? I really hope - for the sake of Norway - that
one day in the near future we will be able to admit that we did capitulate to
Germany on June 10, 1940. Please write a letter to the nearest Norwegian Embassy. Give them the preambles of both agreements, Narvik and Trondheim - and ask if they can explain to you what the two agreements mean. You could even write to: Utenriksdepartementet (Foreign Office) 7 Juni plassen N-0251 OSLO, Norway If you write you should include both preambles - that of Narvik and of Trondheim. Then the Foreign Office would have to tell you what those two agreements mean. Stay united and healthy Heil og sael
|