July 8, 1944

WASHINGTON DC (Routers)

Several relatives of those lost in the tragic attack on Pearl Harbor, two and a half years ago, have expressed shock and outrage over use of attack footage in a presidential campaign newsreel.

Just released to movie theatres in the wake of the recent nomination of New York Governor Thomas Dewey to run against President Roosevelt this fall, the ads were clearly intended to have a “morning in America” theme, playing up the Roosevelt administration’s accomplishments. These include ongoing success in the “war on Nazi terror” and against Shinto extremism.

The newsreels seemed designed to capitalize on the recent Normandy invasion, which has provided an allied foothold in France, and in the recent air/naval victory in the Phillippine Sea, which allowed the US to break the Japanese inner defenses with the capture of the Marianas. The administration believes that these events, along with the news that the Japanese are starting to retreat from Burma, provide an opportunity to frame a positive message before the Dewey campaign has time to define itself.

But not all view the newsreels positively.

“I lost a son on the Arizona,” said Lucille Whinehardt, in town from Sioux Falls to protest. “I was sitting in the theatre, waiting to see ‘The Song of Bernadette,’ when the campaign reel came on, and I had to relive his loss.”

“I go to the movies to escape, not to watch his ship sinking and burning over and over again.”

“It’s absolutely inappropriate,” said Marian Davis, who lost her brother, Ned Flewelling, and leads Never Again, a group for victims’ families. “There are certain memories and certain images that I consider sacred.”

Doris Kelly, of Bakersfield, CA, whose husband, John, died in the attack, said Roosevelt should not use the tragedy as “political propaganda.”

“Hundreds of innocent soldiers were murdered on President Roosevelt’s watch,” she said.

Media critics agree that the newsreel campaign is very insensitive to the feelings of the victims. In addition, the US Chamber of Commerce, which has endorsed Mr. Dewey, has passed a resolution demanding that the Roosevelt administration pull the newsreels immediately.

The Roosevelt campaign is defending the ads, however.

“December 7th changed the equation in our public policy. It forever changed the world,” said the White House press secretary. “The president’s steady leadership is vital to how we wage war on Japan and Germany.”

Some of the victims’ families agree.

“These images honor those whose lives were lost,” said Mildred Farnsworth, whose brother, James, died on the battleship Oklahoma. Proudly wearing her “Remember Pearl Harbor” button, she continued, “I guess some people just don’t want to be reminded that we are at war.”

Copyright 2004 by Rand Simberg

July 8, 1944

WASHINGTON DC (Routers)

Several relatives of those lost in the tragic attack on Pearl Harbor, two and a half years ago, have expressed shock and outrage over use of attack footage in a presidential campaign newsreel.

Just released to movie theatres in the wake of the recent nomination of New York Governor Thomas Dewey to run against President Roosevelt this fall, the ads were clearly intended to have a “morning in America” theme, playing up the Roosevelt administration’s accomplishments. These include ongoing success in the “war on Nazi terror” and against Shinto extremism.

The newsreels seemed designed to capitalize on the recent Normandy invasion, which has provided an allied foothold in France, and in the recent air/naval victory in the Phillippine Sea, which allowed the US to break the Japanese inner defenses with the capture of the Marianas. The administration believes that these events, along with the news that the Japanese are starting to retreat from Burma, provide an opportunity to frame a positive message before the Dewey campaign has time to define itself.

But not all view the newsreels positively.

“I lost a son on the Arizona,” said Lucille Whinehardt, in town from Sioux Falls to protest. “I was sitting in the theatre, waiting to see ‘The Song of Bernadette,’ when the campaign reel came on, and I had to relive his loss.”

“I go to the movies to escape, not to watch his ship sinking and burning over and over again.”

“It’s absolutely inappropriate,” said Marian Davis, who lost her brother, Ned Flewelling, and leads Never Again, a group for victims’ families. “There are certain memories and certain images that I consider sacred.”

Doris Kelly, of Bakersfield, CA, whose husband, John, died in the attack, said Roosevelt should not use the tragedy as “political propaganda.”

“Hundreds of innocent soldiers were murdered on President Roosevelt’s watch,” she said.

Media critics agree that the newsreel campaign is very insensitive to the feelings of the victims. In addition, the US Chamber of Commerce, which has endorsed Mr. Dewey, has passed a resolution demanding that the Roosevelt administration pull the newsreels immediately.

The Roosevelt campaign is defending the ads, however.

“December 7th changed the equation in our public policy. It forever changed the world,” said the White House press secretary. “The president’s steady leadership is vital to how we wage war on Japan and Germany.”

Some of the victims’ families agree.

“These images honor those whose lives were lost,” said Mildred Farnsworth, whose brother, James, died on the battleship Oklahoma. Proudly wearing her “Remember Pearl Harbor” button, she continued, “I guess some people just don’t want to be reminded that we are at war.”

Copyright 2004 by Rand Simberg

July 8, 1944

WASHINGTON DC (Routers)

Several relatives of those lost in the tragic attack on Pearl Harbor, two and a half years ago, have expressed shock and outrage over use of attack footage in a presidential campaign newsreel.

Just released to movie theatres in the wake of the recent nomination of New York Governor Thomas Dewey to run against President Roosevelt this fall, the ads were clearly intended to have a “morning in America” theme, playing up the Roosevelt administration’s accomplishments. These include ongoing success in the “war on Nazi terror” and against Shinto extremism.

The newsreels seemed designed to capitalize on the recent Normandy invasion, which has provided an allied foothold in France, and in the recent air/naval victory in the Phillippine Sea, which allowed the US to break the Japanese inner defenses with the capture of the Marianas. The administration believes that these events, along with the news that the Japanese are starting to retreat from Burma, provide an opportunity to frame a positive message before the Dewey campaign has time to define itself.

But not all view the newsreels positively.

“I lost a son on the Arizona,” said Lucille Whinehardt, in town from Sioux Falls to protest. “I was sitting in the theatre, waiting to see ‘The Song of Bernadette,’ when the campaign reel came on, and I had to relive his loss.”

“I go to the movies to escape, not to watch his ship sinking and burning over and over again.”

“It’s absolutely inappropriate,” said Marian Davis, who lost her brother, Ned Flewelling, and leads Never Again, a group for victims’ families. “There are certain memories and certain images that I consider sacred.”

Doris Kelly, of Bakersfield, CA, whose husband, John, died in the attack, said Roosevelt should not use the tragedy as “political propaganda.”

“Hundreds of innocent soldiers were murdered on President Roosevelt’s watch,” she said.

Media critics agree that the newsreel campaign is very insensitive to the feelings of the victims. In addition, the US Chamber of Commerce, which has endorsed Mr. Dewey, has passed a resolution demanding that the Roosevelt administration pull the newsreels immediately.

The Roosevelt campaign is defending the ads, however.

“December 7th changed the equation in our public policy. It forever changed the world,” said the White House press secretary. “The president’s steady leadership is vital to how we wage war on Japan and Germany.”

Some of the victims’ families agree.

“These images honor those whose lives were lost,” said Mildred Farnsworth, whose brother, James, died on the battleship Oklahoma. Proudly wearing her “Remember Pearl Harbor” button, she continued, “I guess some people just don’t want to be reminded that we are at war.”

Copyright 2004 by Rand Simberg

August 12, 1945

WASHINGTON DC (Routers) President Truman, just a few months into his young presidency, is coming under increasing fire from some Congressional Republicans for what appears to be a deteriorating security situation in occupied Germany, with some calling for his removal from office.

Over three months after a formal declaration of an end to hostilities, the occupation is bogged down. Fanatical elements of the former Nazi regime who, in their zeal to liberate their nation from the foreign occupiers, call themselves members of the Werwolf (werewolves) continue to commit almost-daily acts of sabotage against Germany’s already-ravaged infrastructure, and attack American troops. They have been laying road mines, poisoning food and water supplies, and setting various traps, often lethal, for the occupying forces.

It’s not difficult to find antagonism and anti-Americanism among the population–many complain of the deprivation and lack of security. There are thousands of homeless refugees, and humanitarian efforts seem confused and inadequate.

In the wake of the budding disaster, some have called for more international participation in peacekeeping.

A Red Cross official said that, “…the German people will be more comfortable if their conquerors weren’t now their overlords. It makes it difficult to argue that this wasn’t an imperialistic war when the occupying troops in the western sector are exclusively American, British and French.”

The administration, of course, claims that, given the chaos of the recent war, such a situation is to be expected, and that things will improve with time. As to the suggestion to internationalize the occupying forces, the administration had no official comment, but an unofficial one was a repetition of the quote from General McAuliffe, when asked to surrender in last winter’s Battle of the Bulge–“Nuts.”

In an attempt to minimize the situation, a White House spokesman pointed out that the casualties were extremely light, and militarily inconsequential, particularly when compared to the loss rates prior to VE Day. Also, the attacks seem to be dying down with each passing month. But this statement was leaped upon by some as heartless, trivializing the deaths and injuries of young American men.

Many critics back in Washington seem now to be prescient, with their previous warnings of just such an outcome a little over a year ago.

One congressman said that “…it’s time to ask whether the German people are better off now than they were a few months ago. Yes, a brutal dictator has been deposed, but at least the electricity and water supply were mostly working, and the trains running on time. After years of killing them and destroying their infrastructure with American bombs, it seems to me that the German people have suffered enough without the chaos that our occupation, with its inadequate policing, is bringing.”

It’s not clear how much support the Werwolf has among the populace, who may be afraid to speak their true minds, given the fearfully overwhelming “Allied” presence in the country. But it is possible that, like the guerilla forces themselves, the people have been inspired by Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels’ pre-victory broadcasts, and those of Radio Werwolf.

“God has given up the protection of the people . . . Satan has taken command.” Goebbels broadcast last spring. “We Werewolves consider it our supreme duty to kill, to kill and to kill, employing every cunning and wile in the darkness of the night, crawling, groping through towns and villages, like wolves, noiselessly, mysteriously.”

While no new broadcasts of Goebbels’ voice have been heard since early May, no one can be certain as to whether he is alive or dead, and continuing to help orchestrate the attacks and boost morale among the forces for German liberation. As long as his fate, and more importantly, that of the former leader Adolf Hitler himself, remains unresolved, the prospects for pacifying the brutally conquered country may be dim.

Although Grand-Admiral Donitz made a radio announcement of Hitler’s brave death in battle to the beleaguered German people on the evening of May 1, some doubt the veracity of that statement, and there has been no evidence to support it, or any body identified as the former Fuehrer’s. Rumors of his whereabouts continue to abound, including reported sightings as far away as South America. Many still believe that he is hiding with the “Edelweiss” organization, with thousands of Wehrmacht troops, in a mountain stronghold near the Swiss border.

Many have criticized flawed intelligence for our failure to find him, causing some, in the runup to next year’s congressional elections, to call for an investigation.

A staffer of one prominent Senator said, “For months, starting last fall, we were told by this administration that Hitler would make a last stand in a ‘National Redoubt’ in Bavaria. General Bradley diverted troops to the south and let the Russians take Berlin on the basis of this knowledge. But now we find out that there was no such place, and that Hitler was in Berlin all along. And now we’re told that we can’t even be sure of where he is, or whether he’s alive or dead.”

For many, marching in the streets with signs of “No Blood For Soviet Socialism,” and “It’s All About The Coal,” this merely confirmed that the administration had other agendas than its stated one, and that the war was unjustified and unjustifiable.

General Bradley’s staff has protested that this is an unfair criticism–that the strategic decision made by General Eisenhower was driven by many factors, of which Hitler’s whereabouts was a minor one, but this hasn’t silenced the critics, some of whom have bravely called for President Truman’s impeachment, despite the fact that most of these decisions were made even before he became president in April.

But some have taken the criticism further, and say that failure to get Hitler means a failed war itself.

“Sure, it’s nice to have released all those people from the concentration camps, but we were told we were going to war against Hitler, even though he’d done nothing to us,” argued one concerned anti-war Senator. “Now they say that we have ‘Victory in Europe,’ but it seems to me that if they can’t produce the man we supposedly went to war against, it’s a pretty hollow victory. Without this man that they told us was such a great threat to America, how can even they claim that this war was justified?”

(Copyright 2003 by Rand Simberg)

The renowned satirist, Iowahawk (aka David Burge) emails:

To honor Earth Day and Al Gore’s latest enviro-gibberish, I dusted off this moldy oldie for you…

Gore Attacked By Angry Muscle Cars

And he further threatens:

BTW, I’m gonna do the blog thing soon; more of an archive of old stuff like this. I’ll let you know when it’s up.

You don’t scare us, Burge.

You will be assimilated. We told you that resistance was futile.

(PONN—Pessimistic Objective News Network) August 26, 1944

Risking civic anarchy and destruction of the ancient fabled and beautiful city by Hitler’s rockets of vengeance, “Allied” forces recklessly entered Paris yesterday, while ravishing French women by the thousands, and slaughtering helpless Germans, often allowing the Parisians to hang or shoot them, without even the semblance of a fair trial.

Led by the Second Armored Division of the “French Army,” commanded by “Major General” Lecleric, the troops marched up the Champs Elysee, reportedly to at least scattered cheers and throwing of flowers. Of course, the Paris natives have had a rough few years, and almost anyone, even the “Allies,” might at first seem preferable to the Germans, against whom there are serious but unsubstantiated allegations of human rights abuses, including “genocide.”

Editor’s note: can we come up with a less judgmental word? One man’s genocide is another’s freedom fighting.

Though General Eisenhower’s spokesmen would never confirm it, there had been much concern over the past few weeks that the “Allied” forces might be bogged down in a northern French quagmire, as the Germans seemed well dug in, and were bringing up reinforcements from their eastern front against the brave and stalwart Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the main US ally. Thus, even if Paris cannot be ultimately held, its seizure represents at least a temporary appearance of an “Allied” “victory.”

Over the past few weeks, as they marched through the French countryside from Normandy, often accompanied by great destruction and civilian casualties, “Allied” troops, particularly Americans, have been engaging in dangerous propaganda tactics. They have been distributing pamphlets urging the helpless French people to rise up against the much better-armed Germans. Also, in an attempt to show that this war is not against the people of Vichy France, they have been handing out chocolate to children, and nylon st0ckings to the women, though they lack enough to feed or clothe the entire French populace.

The “Allies” and the US had been warned that Mr. Hitler would not allow Paris to be taken, and that he would destroy it before he let it happen. However, at the urging of “General” de Gaulle, they decided to go for the quick propaganda victory, instead of waiting for a more orderly French government to form.

Official US government organs put out stories of a people happy to be liberated.

Pvt. Howard Katzander, a correspondent for Yank, the Army’s weekly magazine, reported on the “hundreds of thousands of men, women and children who cheered them on their way.”

“There was one GI on a truck who kept pointing toward Germany, and then lifting a finger and slashing his throat,” Katzander wrote. “The crowd loved him.”

Such stories, if true, indicate that the American soldiers were allowed to inflame the passions of the Parisian populace, which no doubt led to many of the atrocities and murders against the unarmed German officials, and also against French who had collaborated with them. Many Vichy French officials were summarily hung or shot with their German counterparts, and the heads of many of the poor French women who had slept with the “enemy” were shaved.

Also, it was reported that many German troops were unfairly shot and strafed by aircraft and French resistance fighters as they escaped the city, even though they were in full retreat, and not firing back.

When American and British troops entered the city today, there was reportedly a great deal of wild and uninhibited sex between them and the French women. It was not clear whether any of it was consensual, as these are a people who have been subjugated by armed troops for years, and may have simply resignedly accepted more rape by the troops as an inevitable part of this long and needless war, to which no end is in sight.

(PONN—Pessimistic Objective News Network) August 26, 1944

Risking civic anarchy and destruction of the ancient fabled and beautiful city by Hitler’s rockets of vengeance, “Allied” forces recklessly entered Paris yesterday, while ravishing French women by the thousands, and slaughtering helpless Germans, often allowing the Parisians to hang or shoot them, without even the semblance of a fair trial.

Led by the Second Armored Division of the “French Army,” commanded by “Major General” Lecleric, the troops marched up the Champs Elysee, reportedly to at least scattered cheers and throwing of flowers. Of course, the Paris natives have had a rough few years, and almost anyone, even the “Allies,” might at first seem preferable to the Germans, against whom there are serious but unsubstantiated allegations of human rights abuses, including “genocide.”

Editor’s note: can we come up with a less judgmental word? One man’s genocide is another’s freedom fighting.

Though General Eisenhower’s spokesmen would never confirm it, there had been much concern over the past few weeks that the “Allied” forces might be bogged down in a northern French quagmire, as the Germans seemed well dug in, and were bringing up reinforcements from their eastern front against the brave and stalwart Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the main US ally. Thus, even if Paris cannot be ultimately held, its seizure represents at least a temporary appearance of an “Allied” “victory.”

Over the past few weeks, as they marched through the French countryside from Normandy, often accompanied by great destruction and civilian casualties, “Allied” troops, particularly Americans, have been engaging in dangerous propaganda tactics. They have been distributing pamphlets urging the helpless French people to rise up against the much better-armed Germans. Also, in an attempt to show that this war is not against the people of Vichy France, they have been handing out chocolate to children, and nylon st0ckings to the women, though they lack enough to feed or clothe the entire French populace.

The “Allies” and the US had been warned that Mr. Hitler would not allow Paris to be taken, and that he would destroy it before he let it happen. However, at the urging of “General” de Gaulle, they decided to go for the quick propaganda victory, instead of waiting for a more orderly French government to form.

Official US government organs put out stories of a people happy to be liberated.

Pvt. Howard Katzander, a correspondent for Yank, the Army’s weekly magazine, reported on the “hundreds of thousands of men, women and children who cheered them on their way.”

“There was one GI on a truck who kept pointing toward Germany, and then lifting a finger and slashing his throat,” Katzander wrote. “The crowd loved him.”

Such stories, if true, indicate that the American soldiers were allowed to inflame the passions of the Parisian populace, which no doubt led to many of the atrocities and murders against the unarmed German officials, and also against French who had collaborated with them. Many Vichy French officials were summarily hung or shot with their German counterparts, and the heads of many of the poor French women who had slept with the “enemy” were shaved.

Also, it was reported that many German troops were unfairly shot and strafed by aircraft and French resistance fighters as they escaped the city, even though they were in full retreat, and not firing back.

When American and British troops entered the city today, there was reportedly a great deal of wild and uninhibited sex between them and the French women. It was not clear whether any of it was consensual, as these are a people who have been subjugated by armed troops for years, and may have simply resignedly accepted more rape by the troops as an inevitable part of this long and needless war, to which no end is in sight.

(PONN—Pessimistic Objective News Network) August 26, 1944

Risking civic anarchy and destruction of the ancient fabled and beautiful city by Hitler’s rockets of vengeance, “Allied” forces recklessly entered Paris yesterday, while ravishing French women by the thousands, and slaughtering helpless Germans, often allowing the Parisians to hang or shoot them, without even the semblance of a fair trial.

Led by the Second Armored Division of the “French Army,” commanded by “Major General” Lecleric, the troops marched up the Champs Elysee, reportedly to at least scattered cheers and throwing of flowers. Of course, the Paris natives have had a rough few years, and almost anyone, even the “Allies,” might at first seem preferable to the Germans, against whom there are serious but unsubstantiated allegations of human rights abuses, including “genocide.”

Editor’s note: can we come up with a less judgmental word? One man’s genocide is another’s freedom fighting.

Though General Eisenhower’s spokesmen would never confirm it, there had been much concern over the past few weeks that the “Allied” forces might be bogged down in a northern French quagmire, as the Germans seemed well dug in, and were bringing up reinforcements from their eastern front against the brave and stalwart Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the main US ally. Thus, even if Paris cannot be ultimately held, its seizure represents at least a temporary appearance of an “Allied” “victory.”

Over the past few weeks, as they marched through the French countryside from Normandy, often accompanied by great destruction and civilian casualties, “Allied” troops, particularly Americans, have been engaging in dangerous propaganda tactics. They have been distributing pamphlets urging the helpless French people to rise up against the much better-armed Germans. Also, in an attempt to show that this war is not against the people of Vichy France, they have been handing out chocolate to children, and nylon st0ckings to the women, though they lack enough to feed or clothe the entire French populace.

The “Allies” and the US had been warned that Mr. Hitler would not allow Paris to be taken, and that he would destroy it before he let it happen. However, at the urging of “General” de Gaulle, they decided to go for the quick propaganda victory, instead of waiting for a more orderly French government to form.

Official US government organs put out stories of a people happy to be liberated.

Pvt. Howard Katzander, a correspondent for Yank, the Army’s weekly magazine, reported on the “hundreds of thousands of men, women and children who cheered them on their way.”

“There was one GI on a truck who kept pointing toward Germany, and then lifting a finger and slashing his throat,” Katzander wrote. “The crowd loved him.”

Such stories, if true, indicate that the American soldiers were allowed to inflame the passions of the Parisian populace, which no doubt led to many of the atrocities and murders against the unarmed German officials, and also against French who had collaborated with them. Many Vichy French officials were summarily hung or shot with their German counterparts, and the heads of many of the poor French women who had slept with the “enemy” were shaved.

Also, it was reported that many German troops were unfairly shot and strafed by aircraft and French resistance fighters as they escaped the city, even though they were in full retreat, and not firing back.

When American and British troops entered the city today, there was reportedly a great deal of wild and uninhibited sex between them and the French women. It was not clear whether any of it was consensual, as these are a people who have been subjugated by armed troops for years, and may have simply resignedly accepted more rape by the troops as an inevitable part of this long and needless war, to which no end is in sight.