Mission Report From A Short-Term Mission On The Labour: Fill & Download for Free

Churchill visited Athens as soon as he could after the British occupation in 1944. Like Byron before him, Churchill saw Greece as the cradle of Western civilisation, of which, he believed, Britain and the United States were the post-war standard bearers.Good question. Churchill was famously full of crazy ideas, of which his staff, especially his CIGS Allan Brooke, were deft at forestalling. I don’t know which one resulted in his worst decision, but I do know he had to juggle competing military, political and humanitarian priorities of staggering proportions. Thus I could have equally well written about his role in the 1943 Bengal Famine, his response to intelligence on the Holocaust, or his decisions leading to the disastrous Norway campaign of 1940. But I’m going to have to pick one and it’s his obsession with Greece.The Balkans certainly led to a few Churchillian corkers: although it’s important to understand the context, and that the man was paradoxically a hopeless romantic, a fervent British patriot and a far-seeing and ruthless politician. He was concerned about long-term political as well as short-term military outcomes - both for Britain and what he saw as the free world.The small and poorly equipped Greek army successfully held up the Italians in 1940, and Churchill rushed to their aid.During the First World War Serbia had successfully blunted the Austro-Hungarian armies in the Balkans, and the Danube became a significant defence line for the Anglo-French, Italian and Russian alliance. Britain had gained important interests and mandated territories in the Eastern Mediterranean after the construction of the Suez Canal, and again after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, and British troops had been sent to Greece in 1916. During 1915 Churchill had been personally involved in Mediterranean strategy, especially the well conceived but disastrously executed Dardanelles campaign, and felt he was an expert on the region.After the initial Italian attack on Greece from Albania in 1940, the Greeks seemed to be carrying on the tradition, by successfully holding up Mussolini’s armies in the mountains. Given the recent and quite unexpected success of Wavell and O’Connor’s tiny Western Desert Force in routing the massed armies of the Italians in Egypt and Libya, Churchill could be forgiven for believing that a Balkans front against Mussolini could be constructed on Great War lines again. He had not, of course, bargained for a German blitzkrieg in either North Africa or Greece and Yugoslavia, nor that the panzer divisions would strike from Bulgaria, outflanking the Greek front line.Churchill’s first Greek intervention ended in defeat at the Battle of Crete in 1941, which fell to German paratroopers despite an epic defence by the New Zealand-led garrison.Churchill was also determined to keep Turkey out of the Axis camp, and support for Greece would keep the Germans out of the Middle East.More romantically, Churchill believed in the ‘right to rule’ of his class and the lessons of his classical education. For him the European aristocracy were the time honoured bulwark against Bolshevik and Fascist totalitarian populism, and Greece the cradle of the Western civilisation they had built. He championed the European constitutional monarchies, of which he believed the British were the natural leaders, wherever they supported the Allies. In the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway and Denmark, the monarchies had been supported by Britain to establish government’s in exile, and he wished to do the same for their counterparts in Greece and Yugoslavia.Of course the scratch British, Australian and New Zealand force he hastily sent from Egypt to Greece in early 1941 was destroyed by Hitler’s decision to delay his invasion of the USSR and sent his panzer spearheads and airborne forces into the Balkans (and detach the Afrika Korps to assist the Italians in Libya). The outcome was to give Rommel an opportunity to drive the British back in North Africa, which he grabbed with both hands. How much Hitler’s delay in Operation Barbarossa contributed to his failure to capture Moscow or Leningrad that year, or Rommel’s intervention in Libya extended the war in the West is moot. They both probably cancel each other out.335 and 336 Squadrons Royal Hellenic Air Force (RHAF) flew missions in support of partizans from Italy in 1943-4. Although the pilots and ground crews were Greek, the wartime RHAF was Churchill’s creation, and reported to the monarchist Greek government in exile in London.Yet Churchill had not given up on Greece. As the war progressed, Churchill became increasingly concerned that Stalin would end up dominating Greece and Yugoslavia, giving him access to the Mediterranean in the post-war world. He was determined to keep Greece in the Western Camp. He extracted a promise from Stalin to keep out during the unseemly horse-trading at the Forth Moscow Conference in 1944 (the famous percentages agreement that Churchill recorded on his napkin). From 1941–44 he kept up the pressure on his commanders to maintain support to Greek and Yugoslav partizans, to carry out commando raids in the Greek Islands and bombing missions against German facilities in the Balkans. And as with other occupied nations, Greek and Yugoslav units were formed in the British armed forces.Churchill’s napkin - keeping Greece in the Western camp.In September 1943 he foolishly pushed forward an ill-conceived attempt to capture the Dodecanese Islands in the Aegean (bordering Greece and Turkey) from the surrendering Italians by occupying the islands with a motley bunch of half-starved garrison troops from Malta and Egypt-based special forces (LRDG and SBS). The operation went ahead in the teeth of opposition from Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Brooke and Alexander who wanted to focus on Italy and steer clear of the Balkans. As a result the US refused to provide P-38 long range fighters, which were needed to provide air cover, or release any of the Anglo-American forces earmarked for the invasion of Italy. After initial success the scant British occupation force was driven out by two divisions of German paratroopers and Brandenburger special forces based in Greece. Despite putting up stiff resistance there was little they could do to stop them.Churchill’s second Greek adventure also came to a sticky end. British POWs march into captivity on the Island of Leros after the disastrous Dodecanese Campaign in 1943.During the 1944 Italian campaign he maintained his conviction that Greece and Yugoslavia must remain in the British camp, creating an Italy-based ‘Balkan Air Force’ to support partizans in both countries, and deploying large numbers of SOE and MI6 agents (although British clandestine policy in the Balkans was influenced by Kim Philby and other Comintern spies to provide most support to the communists!). After the Germans left Greece to avoid being cut off by Soviet Forces entering Yugoslavia (who were invited in by Tito), Churchill quickly sent British divisions to Athens in order to prevent the Soviets moving further south, and to ensure that the monarchist government-in-exile was restored to power and elections held. They soon became involved in crushing the leftist partizans with dubious human rights outcomes.British SOE support for the Greek resistance was more successful, although Churchill’s long-term political objective of minimising post war Soviet influence in the region was undermined by Soviet agents in MI6 who made a case for sending most support to pro-communist groups.He was much maligned by military leaders, politicians and public opinion in Britain and the United States at the time for his “Imperial’ approach in the Balkans, and the incoming Labour government in 1945 quickly extricated Britain from Greece. However, despite their vocal disapproval of his interest in the country during the war years, the United States stayed on in Greece post-war, propping up various military regimes until democracy took hold again and Greece entered NATO and the European Community. They did so because Churchill’s wartime fears about Soviet intentions in the region were quickly realised.Thus in the short term, Churchill’s calculations about support for Greece and Yugoslavia were militarily disastrous, but in the long-term his concern to sustain Western influence in the Eastern Mediterranean was borne out. It could be said that Churchill was often correct in the long-view about which strategic objectives should be sought by the Allies, but equally often way off the mark about how those could be achieved militarily. He was a much better political strategist than a military strategist after all.Churchill sent the British Army into Greece in 1944 to ensure Stalin kept his word and stayed out. In order to put the monarchist Greek government in exile back into power, they quickly became embroiled in a war against the very leftist partizans MI6 and SOE had previously supported. The move was deeply unpopular in Britain and contributed to Churchill’s 1945 election defeat. However distasteful in the short-term, the intervention probably kept Greece in the NATO camp. The US recognised this and the CIA picked up the baton after the British withdrew.

Demonetisation is not a new concept in India. It has been done in the past but not in such a large scale. For example, the 10,000 rupee note was demonetised in 1978. However, only the very rich had these notes and the general population of the country remained unaffected by this move.An absence of other steps to curb black money would make demonetisation a pointless exercise just like the 1978 attempt.On July 12, 2017, almost 8 months after the announcement of demonetisation, RBI Governor Urjit Patel told a Parliamentary Standing Committee that the RBI was still counting the money that had been received by the banking system, and hence he could not state how much money had actually come in.This was doubtless an extraordinary admission. It speaks pretty poorly of India's banking system that there cannot even be a rough estimation of this amount, since all exchanges were stopped on December 30, 2016.I'm going to make a bold guess here and say that the RBI Governor is lying. Yes, you read that right. The RBI Governor is lying. He knows exactly how much money has come back into the system, but is unable to reveal it. Why?At the time of the demonetisation announcement last year, the amount of money in circulation in 500 and 1000 rupee notes was estimated to be 15.5 lakh crores. There was talk that the government was expecting about 13 lakh crores to come back into the banks as a result of the forced exchange, and that the remaining 2.5 lakh crores was "black" and could not be returned in the full glare of publicity. It was thought that black money holders would throw these worthless notes into the river (some of that did happen). This was how black money was going to be "hit".Further, since 2.5 lakhs crores of (in essence) promissory notes ("I promise to pay the bearer") were never going to be presented, it meant that the RBI would be absolved of 2.5 lakhs crores worth of debt to the general public! This extinguished debt was going to be a one-time windfall that the RBI could transfer to the government as a huge budget surplus that could then be used to fund so many initiatives.Farmers, fishermen, vegetable sellers, small shopkeepers without card readers or Paytm, taxi drivers, truckers, etc., have all been affected with loss of livelihood which may be irretrievable in some cases, for example, loss of daily wages for casual labour, or lower sales for vegetable vendors.Now here's my theory.I believe that the expected shortfall in currency returns did not materialise. On the contrary, I believe more money than the expected 15.5 lakh crores has come back into the system. It implies that far from demonetisation having struck a blow against black money holders and counterfeiters, the system has been cheated, and it has been cheated in more than one way.Everyday the banking system comes with modification of the rules, the conditions under which the people can withdraw money. That reflects very poorly on the Prime Minister’s office, on the Finance Minister’s office and on the Reserve Bank of India. I am very sorry that the Reserve Bank of India has been exposed to this sort of criticism which I think is fully justified.1. Black money has been effectively turned white using demonetisation, since virtually all the deposits made have been under the no-questions-asked limit of 2.5 lakhs per bank account. A lot of private deals between black money holders and ordinary account holders must have been struck to enable this laundering, and the government is none the wiser. Minus a commission to the account holders, the original owners will eventually get back all their money. The whitewashed money will therefore largely return to the black economy, and the taxman will remain empty-handed.2. Counterfeit currency in 500 and 1000 rupee denominations has been successfully exchanged for genuine currency in smaller denominations. Think about it. If the money that returned is more than what the RBI had put into circulation, it only means a large number of counterfeit notes have also been submitted and exchanged for genuine notes in smaller denominations. Demonetisation has unwittingly devalued the currency. By how much is anyone's guess. The RBI surely knows but is not telling.3. It means poor people have suffered for nothing. It was remarked during the months of November and December 2016 that the Indian people were demonstrating exemplary patience. Poor and lower middle class people underwent great hardship during these months, standing for hours in bank and ATM queues, and managing their lives with a chronic shortage of cash. Yet the thought that it was all in a good cause, and that holders of black money were suffering even more, kept them in relative good humour. But now, if it turns out that black money holders have managed to have the last laugh, and that common people have suffered for nothing, won't the voting public be outraged?4. Paradoxically for a move that caused such widespread suffering, demonetisation boosted Modi's personal popularity. He was seen to have struck a blow for the common man against corruption, and the people were willing to suffer to see his efforts successful. The word "masterstroke" was often used, along with the phrase "He has delivered!" Modi seemed like a clever and decisive leader who had outwitted the enemies of the country and placed India on a path to growth and prosperity. Now everything has been turned upside-down. Modi no longer looks clever. The crooks have taken him for a ride.5. RBI halves dividend paid to govt to Rs 30,659 crore in 2016-17 as compared to last year Rs 65,876.6. Most consumers and households in India prefer transacting in cash for purchase of durables as well as essentials. Most Indians also prefer to save cash at home. Also, over fifty percent of the populous does not know how to transact in card or other forms of digital payments.The banking infrastructure in India is way behind other emerging markets. Access to ATMs and point-of-sale terminals is limited and typically available mostly in towns and cities and in organized sector. Rural India has limited access to even banks.Access to internet, especially broadband connection, is limited to urban areas. Also, even if internet connections are available, it is not very reliable.Nearly 80 percent of Indians have mobile phones. However, nearly 65 percent of such mobile phone users do not access the internet from their phones. Also, most of those who do use internet on their smartphones often use it to access WhatsApp, Facebook, etc., and not for shopping or banking.For the first time in India's history, RBI has skipped releasing the balance sheet for the week of June 30th.This is the day when central bank officially closes its accounting year. They did it to hide the effects of demonetization from people.I won't be surprised if 100% or even more than 100% of demonetized currency has come back. And they're probably still wondering how they can fake this data to make DeMo look nice.Government effectively switched to cashless economy but on 8 Nov demonetisation was done to fight against black money, counterfeit currency, corruption.I am also amazed at the silence of opposition which is just not raising the issue at any forum. They should actually be going all guns blazing in Parliament and other forums asking the govt to explain the outcome. But they chose to be silent.....it's a scary silence which indicates that either they too are in connivance or under some threat !Corruption is legalized in India after 22nd March 2017, hardly any mainstream media channel cover this, they also fudged GDP figures, watch these videos-Finally I would like to end this with Dr. Manmohan Singh words- In the process of demonetisation monumental mismanagement has been undertaken about which today there is no two opinions in the country as a whole. Even those who say that this measure will do harm or cause distress in the short term but be in the interests of the country in the long run should be reminded of what John Keynes said once,” In the long run all of us are dead.”Narendra Modi oratory skills are very good but he sounds not good in implementing what he said, see this-Old name- New name1. Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account - Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana.2. National Girl Child Day Program- Beti bachao, Beti padhao Yojana.3. Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan- Swach Bharat Abhiyan.4. Indira Awaas Yojana- Pradhan Mantri Gramin Awaas Yojana-.5. Rajiv Awaas Yojana- Sardar Patel National Urban Housing Mission.6. Rajiv Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana-Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gram Jyoti Yojana.7. Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme-Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana.8. Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission-Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation.9. Comprehensive Crop Insurance Scheme-Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana .10. National Skill Development Programme-Skill India.11. National Manufacturing Policy- Make In India.12. National e -Governance Plan- Digital India.13. Planning Commission of India- NITI AyogHe is just changing names of Congress schemes.Narendra Modi on 15th August 2017 said that Demonetisation revealed Rs 3 lakh crore black money. How he came with this figures because RBI has not given any figures till 15th August, Is he running the RBI?? Something very fishy is going on.Demonetisation revealed Rs 3 lakh crore black money, says PM Narendra Modi - Times of India.While RBI reports shows that 99% of demonetised currency returned to banks, so if i combine what Modi said on 15th August and what RBI figures revealed, black money returns to bank.99% of demonetised notes returned, says RBI report.GDP also decline by 2% in last quarter , Dr. Manmohan Singh predicted the same after demonetisation.GDP can decline by 2 percentage points, says Manmohan Singh.But Narendra Modi make fun of him saying that Manmohan Singh baths in Bathroom with raincoat because Congress was involved in so many corruption charges but there is no spot on Dr. Singh.“According to me, instead of looking into Dr. Singh’s bathroom, if Modi looks into his library, Indian economy will be in good condition today.”What RBI said today i.e on 4 September, 2017 clearly indicates that Demonetisation was a failure.Either govt is lying or RBI. Both these statements can’t be true at the same time.Demonetisation was a political stunt to win elections in March which they won.Dr. Manmohan Singh brings Raghuram Rajan( one eyed king in the land of blind) from US to India and Narendra Modi deports him back to US.Do banks take our money without counting?? If no, then why RBI count the notes manually.Modi government rename the scheme National e-governance plan to “Digital India” and RBI counting notes without machines. “ Biggest Irony it was..”Now, two Veteran leaders of BJP Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha questioned the motive behind demonetisation. Arun Shourie said that demonetisation was largest ever money laundering scheme. Arun Jaitley remark on Yashwant Sinha that he is looking for a job at the age of 80 shows his mental condition.In a recent RTI reply, RBI said that they have no information how much black money and counterfeit currency recovered post demonetisation.RBI is behaving like a MBI( Modi Bank of India).The black money which is earlier in the house or somewhere else is now in Banks and people earning interests on the amount.Congress did corruption for 60 years according to Narendra Modi but he is not able to arrest any corrupt in 3.5 years, this shows that he is hand in glove with them.Nov 8, 2017 celebrated as Anti-black money day by incumbent government. 150 people died, 15 million people lose their jobs, GDP goes down by 2%, Industrial output goes down from 7% to 1.7% but the government not ready to reckon that Demonetisation was a wrong move.This year's Nobel Economics prize winner Richard Thaler thinks that the concept of demonetisation is good but the Narendra Modi government’s rollout of the note ban was “deeply flawed”.If demonetisation one aim was to stop terror funding, then who is responsible for Attack on Pilgrims during Amarnath Yatra in the month of July 2017, whos is responsible for Pulwama??? Ask this question to yourself.“A Spectre is haunting India”.

What if Hitler had at his disposal weapons capable to change the outcome of the war and never used them?The classical answer is that Hitler was traumatised by his own experience with gas during WWI, a conflict during which he was gassed and spent months in recovery, to the point that he ever refused to use them.This explanation may be trueand for sure Hitler was not an enthusiast of chemical warfare, yet:a) Hitler was not someone famous for moral scruplesb) Hitler had experience with vescicant and blistering gas such as phosgene, chlorine and mustard gas but not with nerve gasc) Germans used occasionally gas during the war on the Eastern front and they massively used it during the HolocaustSo something sounds strange, right?This man is Otto Ambros, an high ranking manager of IG Farben (in 1930’s the largest industrial conglomerate in the whole Europe and one of the leading enterprises in the research and production of chemical components) who was condemned for using gas on inmates to 8 years in prison and in 1952 he became a key consultant with Dow Chemicals in the US.Ambros was a key figure in the research and production of nerve agents, namely sarin and tabun.These two nerve agents were completely different weapons from what we (and most people during WW2) imagine: they don’t kill by blistering like mustard gas or phosgene but they are either inhaled (much more effective) or absorbed by skin contact (slower) and suffocate the victims who lose the control of their respiratory muscles.As a consequence, one to be protected when such gases are deployed needs to be fully covered: now imagine the difficulty of designing such an integral protective clothing in a short term and of mass-producing it and deploying it on the field.Add to this the fact that, to give you an example, 500 kg of Tabun released by V2 on London would cause more deaths than Hiroshima.These two nerve agents (together with their more powerful “brothers” soman and cyclosarin) were discovered by a German team of scientists in 1936 by accident and patented in 1937: their discovery was soon protected as it had a military value and soon the production began in 1939 in DyhernfurthAs for December 1944 Germany had at its disposal an arsenal of 12,000 tons of Sarin and Tabun, thus having an absolute supremacy in this field (since Allies never even suspected the existence of such weapon).Now, did you know that Patton III Army was diverted, in April 1945, on Thuringia against all other proposed options?Why?Let’s see what Patton said in an interview at Life Magazine on 27 August 1945:“Several times during the European phase of this war, victory was almost within Germany’s grasp… Especially in the last months of the war , our margin of safety was slimmer than most of us suspected. [The situation] is known best to certain American military experts who have since inspected some of Germany’s underground research laboratories and war plants. Here they saw secret weapons … Weapons which might conceivably have turned the trick for the Nazis if they could have used them boldly in a last desperate gamble. Some of these things can be revealed. Others cannot – Yet.”In Thuringia Germans were experimenting “secret weapons” in the famous triangle Ohrdruf-Arnstadt-Wechmar, among which many rumours state that the III Reich tested a miniaturised atomic bomb and the debate is still open, yet:a) All documents have been classified for 100 years until 2045 (not even ULTRA or MAGIC were given such protection).Everything Patton found in Thuringia, all documents about the IG Farben’s implants of Buna. Hamburg, Bremen and so forth and all the ALSOS (the US mission to investigate the state of German nuclear and biological weapon program): all classified. Why?At Nuremberg Trials, 21 June 1945 (IMT Blue series, Vol. XVI, pg. 526–527), the famous judge Mr. Jackson (the same who famously sanctioned the “six millions” number, so definitely not a Nazi supporter):MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: [Turning to the defendant.] Leaving the question of your personal participation in these matters and coming to the questions dealt with in the second part of your exami- nation, I want to ask you about your testimony concerning the pro- posal to denounce the Geneva Convention. You testified yesterday that it was proposed to withdraw from the Geneva Convention. Will you tell us who made those proposals?SPEER: This proposal, as I already testified yesterday, came from Dr. Goebbels. It was, made after the air attack on Dresden, but before this, from the autumn of 1944 on, Goebbels and Ley had often talked about intensifying the war effort in every possible way, so that I had the impression that Goebbels was using the attack on Dresden and the excitement it created merely as an excuse to renounce the Geneva Convention.MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, was the proposal made at that time to resort to poison gas warfare?SPEER: I was not able to make out from my own direct observations whether gas warfare was to be started, but I knew from various associates of Ley's and Goebbels' that they were discussing the question of using our two new combat gases, Tabun and Sarin. They believed that these gases would be of particular efficacy, and they did in fact produce the most frightful results. We made these observations as early as the autumn of 1944, when the situation had become critical and many people were seriously worried about it.MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, will you tell us about these two gases and about their production and their effects, their qualities, and the preparations that were made for gas warfare?SPEER: I cannot tell you that in detail. I am not enough of an expert. All I know is that these two gases both had a quite extraordinary effect, and that there was no respirator, and no protection against them that we knew of. So the soldiers would have been unable to protect themselves against this gas in any way. For the manufacture of this gas we had about three factories, all of which were undamaged and which until November 1944 were working at full speed. When rumors reached us that gas might be used, I stopped its production in November 1944. I stopped it by the following means. I blocked the so-called preliminary production, that is, the chemical supplies for the making of gas, so that the gas-production, as the Allied authorities themselves ascertained, after the end of December or the beginning of January, actually slowed down and finally came to a standstill. Beginning with a letter which is still in existence and which I wrote to Hitler in October 1944, I tried through legal methods to obtain his permission to have these gas factories stop their production. The reason I gave him was that on account of air raids the preliminary products, primarily cyanide, were needed urgently for other purposes. Hitler informed me that the gas production would have to continue whatever happened, but I gave instructions for the preliminary products not to be supplied any more.MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Can you identify others of the group that were advocating gas warfare?SPEER: In military circles there was certainly no one in favor of gas warfare. All sensible Army people turned gas warfare down as being utterly insane since, in view of your superiority in the air, it would not be long before it would bring the most terrible catastrophe upon German cities, which were completely unprotected.The entire, supposed, blame is placed on Göbbels (who was dead and so could not made any affidavit) and on Robert Ley (who had killed himself 8 months earlier) and then, for the entire process, such marvellous weapons the world had never seen are mentioned…zero times.Now, this is the interrogation of Ambros in December 1947 (Trials on War Criminals before the NMT - Vol.VII - The IG Farben case 1946–49):Q. Now you were also on the Special Committee "C." This was only formed in 1943, and if the development of chemical warfare agents was concluded in 1943, then I would like to know why this Special Committee HC" was founded in 1943, and what was its mission?A. In 1943, the organization of the representatives of industrial economy was set up, and in this organization there was a Central Committee for Powder and Explosives.Q. Mr. Ambros, I would like to interrupt you briefly, and I would like to introduce Ambros Document 5, Ambros Defense Exhibit 5.* On the basis of this sketch, which is on page 37 of the English document book, please explain the position of the Special Committee "C." Do you have this?A. Yes....A. On 15 May 1943, as the last conference, there was a discussion with Hitler and this concerned the"treatment of the chemical warfare agents.Q. Were you alone?A. Shortly before this date I was notified by telegram by the Armament Ministry, and I was told to come to Berlin, and I was taken to the supreme headquarters in East Prussia by airplane. There were representatives of the General Staff, Speer, Schieber, and various directors of central committees from the armament industry.Q. And what did Hitler want from you?A. As the last point on the agenda of this conference there was a one-hour conference about the situation in the poison gas field. Mr. Speer and Mr. Schieber reported, first of all, about the military aspect, about the general situation, and then I was given the floor; and I showed, on the basis of a table: (a.) the requirements of poison gases by the General Staff, (b) the actual production, (c) the stocks. Thus, I discussed objectively all types and described the situation as it was.Q. Did Herr Hitler ask you-one could practically gather thiswhether one could use poison gases, or what was the situation?A. The first reaction was a disappointment, since, in most types, not even half of the requirements of the General Staff had been met. There followed a discussion about the reasons for this, and he asked the question: "What is the other side doing?"Q. Before that, I would like to ask you a question. Did you have the impression as if Hitler wanted to use the poison gases?A. No, Hitler himself did not, but around him there were people who did.Q. Well, go ahead, please; describe to us what happened at this conference.A. He discussed the main types, always with a point of view of "How does it look on the other side?" and I reported objectively that, for example, in the Lost [mustard gas] field, countries which have a lot of ethylene would perhaps have the possibility to produce larger quantities of these substances than we could. Thereupon he [Hitler - ndr] said: "I understand that the countries with petroleum are in a position to make more, but Germany has a special gas, Tabun. In this we have a monopoly in Germany." At that moment I said: "I have justified reasons to assume that Tabun, too, is known abroad. I know that Tabun had been publicised as early as 1902 , that Sarin was patented, and that these substances appeared in patents," and I said, "I am convinced that other countries, in case the German side might use these gases, would very shortly not only be able to imitate these special gases, but even produce them in much larger quantities."Q. Mr. Ambros, before the recess we were talking about this conference with Hitler in May 1943. Is there anything important to say about this conference other than what we have already said?A. During this conference an expansion was also discussed which the ORH had suggested for Tabun. This plan was to be put into execution, but a few months later it was withdrawn.Q. Mr. Ambros, we can draw our own conclusions about your attitude at this meeting. I do not want to go into that much further. I have another question in this connection. You said that certain circles, or certain people in Hitler's "entourage, would have been glad to use poison gas. Do you have any indications that after you took an objective point of view at that time you were not doing these people a favor and that later attempts were made to gain your assistance?A. In August 1944, I was called to Mr. Speer, and again there was a suggestion from the people who wanted gas warfare, but the situation was exactly the same, and my attitude was exactly the same again about the objective of a technical expert. Speer had the same attitude, and so it was again possible to prevent the use of this terrible weapon.Q. Mr. Ambros, for absolute clarity on this point: your point of view was objective?A. Yes.Q. In addition to that, did you tell the people who were in favor of gas warfare that you were against it, Dr was that not possible, or did you think it advisable not to do so in your own interests?A. Those who were in favor of it were Ley, Goebbels, and Bormann. I did not know any of these men. I did not speak to any of them, and I never spoke to Hitler again.The italic part is a lie: the “1902 publicised elements” are just precursor chemical elements and both gases had been strictly kept secret since their discovery in 1937 and Ambros knew that rather well and so should his interrogators since the war had ended over two years earlier and the German inventory had been examined thoroughly.Hence it would appear that Hitler knew about the German monopoly over the production of Sarin and Tabun and he was persuaded that such a monopoly was actually just temporary when in reality no other nations was studying the subject nor had any clue about the existence of such gases, for the American program led to the discovery of DDT, not of sarin and tabun.It also ought to be considered that Ambros and Hitler had had several meetings from 1938 onward considering that IG Farben was charged with producing Sarin and Tabun in 1939.It’s also suspicious how lenient the judges were at Nuremberg: Speer uttered these words during the above-quoted interrogation:MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And certain experiments were also conducted and certain researches conducted in atomic energy, were they not?SPEER: We had not got as far as that, unfortunately, because the finest experts we had in atomic research had emigrated to America, and this had thrown us back a great deal in our research, so that we still needed another year or two in order to achieve any results in the splitting of the atom.This is the first lie because Germany had at its disposal excellent scientists, on par with those the Allies recruited, namely Manfred von Ardenne, Werner Heisenberg, Otto Hahn, Kurt Diebner, Hans Geiger, Erich Bagge, Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker and so forth.But then the judge, Robert H. Jackson, continues:MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I have certain information, which was placed in my hands, of an experiment which was carried out near Auschwitz and I would like to ask you if you heard about it or knew about it. The purpose of the experiment was to find a quick and complete way of destroying people without the delay and trouble of shooting and gassing and burning, as it had been carried out, and this is the experiment, as I am advised. A village, a small village was provisionally erected, with temporary structures, and in it approximately 20,000 Jews were put. By means of this newly invented weapon of destruction, these 20,000 people were eradicated almost instantaneously, and in such a way that there was no trace left of them; that it developed, the explosive developed, temperatures of from 400° to 500° centigrade and destroyed them without leaving any trace at all. Do you know about that experiment?The judge is wrong about the temperatures and the location (it was not Auschwitz but Monowitz probably), nonetheless it would be a big story, wouldn’t it?20,000 people killed instantly and all of it mentioned during the first process for crimes against humanity would make foresee a clear investigation, right?Nope, the story was never mentioned again.Walther Gerlach, commander of the Reichsforschungsrat (the German research council, thus responsible for the entire German nuclear program), was not even call to testify.Hans Kammler, responsible for the construction of Auschwitz, of the V2 implants where thousands of slave labourers died and of all German “Wunderwaffen” programs, disappeared after the Battle of Berlin and was simply declared dead and not even put under investigation.The same applied to Heinrich Müller, a chief responsible of the Holocaust (and thus well aware of what may have happened during that “experiment”, disappeared as well and was never put under investigation.Why? Because, similarly for Otto Ambros and for the whole nerve agents case, agreements had been made and the Allies were already occupied with the impending Cold War.Furthermore, Dr. Schrader, the leading scientist of the team that discovered Tabun and Sarin, testified about the production of both nerve agents suggesting to Major Tilley, the US investigator, to ask to Georg von Schnitzler who was, together with Ambros one of the leading managers of IG Farben, who in turn named Dr. Karl Krauch, whom Tilley also interrogated and from whom he learnt about Sarin (the name comes from the letters of Schrader, Ambros and two other officers Rüdiger and Linde who were all members of the discovering team).Krauch also told a surprising tale: while in hospital he had been approached by Lt. Col. Tarr, member of the US Chemical Warfare committee, who asked for details of fabrication and Krauch told them to talk with Ambros.Curiously, no one told to the interrogators of the III Army (that of Patton, the same army that was inexplicably re-directed toward Thuringia and that, curiously, captured Ambros) that Ambros was wanted for war crimes nor that he was a key member of German chemical weapons program and Tilley had not been informed by Tarr about anything, hence Tilley concluded that Tarr was, in fact, conducting a separate investigation from the Nuremberg Trials on behalf of the US.Tilley then notified his superiors about Ambros and orders were given to arrest him at his house in Gerndorf but Ambros was gone, headed for the US Army Intelligence interrogation center where the Chemical Warfare had its headquarters.Be also aware that von Schnitzler admitted to Tilley that it was known in the IG Farben board that gas were used to kill people (he is referring to Zyklon B), so the Lt. Col. Tarr was protecting someone who knowingly provided gas to murder people.It does not end here though: Ambros and a colleague of his, named “Stumpfi” (his real name has never been ascertained) were trusted with retrieving the drawings of the equipment needed to manufacture the nerve agents on a large scale and the blueprints.After some troubles, including Lt. Col. Tarr falsifying a telegram of the British ministry of Supply, a double escape of Ambros and Tarr evading requests to comply with the commission charged with interrogatories, Ambros ended up collaborating with the US biological warfare program.Consider that they were a game changer: Sarin and Tabun could have been loaded onto a V2 or just into artillery shell (15 cm Nebelwerfer) and tossed on the Normandy beaches or Bagration fronts (I’m naming the two major Allied operations in 1944 that highlighted how desperate the war situation was for Germans), thus halting them and giving the Reich months to research other “miraculous weapons” and/or increase their production.A V2 loaded with Tabun could have caused countless deaths in London: why did not Hitler ever threaten such use? Why did not he use it as a threat of retaliation (considering that V2 were called “Vergeltungswaffen”, “weapons of retaliation”…)in order to stop the Allied bombing?Do you think I am making such thoughts up?This is an excerpt from Omar Bradley’s memoirs:"When D-Day finally ended without a whiff of gas, I was vastly relieved. For even a light sprinkling of a persistent gas could have forced a decision in one of history’s climactic battles."From the US Army volume about the Normandy campaign:"Concerned that Hitler would respond to the invasion with extreme violence and might even resort to poison gas, Eisenhower's chief surgeon, Maj. Gen. Albert W. Kenner, and the Chief Surgeon of the U.S. Army's European Theater of Operations, Maj. Gen. Paul R. Hawley, had prepared their staffs to process at least 12,000 killed and wounded in the First U.S. Army alone"Consider another thing: they are talking about mustard gas whose deadly concentration in the open is 10,000 mg/m^3 for masked soldiers and 2,000 for unprotected people and it has to be inhaled.Tabun’s lethal dose is 400 mg and 150 are enough to permanently maim someone (in a terrible way), Sarin’s one is 100 mg and Soman is 50.Nerve agents can be inhaled or absorbed by skin and they are much deadlier than previous gases.Nerve agents are not persistent, therefore they are a tactical weapon which is very effective against concentration of troops: exactly like in Normandy.In conclusion, Hitler in my opinion did not use nerve agents (which could have changed the outcome the war) because :he was deceived by his own men who were fearful of the post-war conditions (not certainly out of morality given the disgusting acts they committed during wartime) and was led to believe Allies had retaliatory weapons, which actually they did not have (my first reason)Or alternatively:Hitler, even though was aware of the potential devastation, refused to use such weapons fearing the reprisalHitler was not, in spite of what may be though, an omniscient and almighty ruler and those charged with conducting the German weapon of mass destruction program decided that it was not worth to use such weaponsSources:A. Jacobsen, Operation PaperclipNuremberg trials actsGermany and the Second World War, volumes IV-V-IXR. Karlsch, Hitler’s Bomb