Winston Churchill and the death of Prince George, Duke of Kent

[Len Colby]

John,

Back when you believed that the man held in Spandau wasn’t the real Hess you pushed the theory that he was the “extra” person aboard the Sunderland and that it was off course because it was flying back from having secretly picked him up at a Scottish loch. Now that you agree that Hess didn’t die in the crash why do you think the plane was off course and who do you think the “extra” person was? Do you think its possible that finding scattered body parts a miscount could have been made?

Len

.....nonsequetous

Nice word.

I'm glad you liked it.

[John Simkin]

I am sorry that I have not been able to post any new material on this subject over the last few months. However, today I was interviewed by Ivan Howlett of the BBC who is working on a documentary on one of the figures involved in this case. It has forced me to re-read this thread and will encourage me to publish the rest of my research into the case.

[Len Colby]

John,

Congratulations! Was it for a TV documentary? Can you tell us who it is about? How did the interview go? Is there anyway for us to see or hear it?

I was hoping when you find the time you would answer the questions I asked you in my previous post.

Len

[John Simkin]

John,

Congratulations! Was it for a TV documentary? Can you tell us who it is about? How did the interview go? Is there anyway for us to see or hear it?

It will be on BBC Radio 4 in September. I am afraid he did not seem very interested in my theories about Winston Churchill, Maxwell Knight and the Second World War. He had his own agenda that did not involve the role MI5/MI6 played in peace negotiations with Germany in 1939-41.

[Len Colby]

The main problem for Churchill and his co-conspirators was Rudolf Hess. He was the one German involved in these negotiations who was still alive after the war. According to Dr Hugh Thomas, who physically examined the man claiming to be Hess in Berlin in 1973, the prisoner was an imposter (Prisoner Number 7). Thomas argues his case in two books, The Murder of Rudolf Hess (1979) and Rudolf Hess: A Tale of Two Murders (1988). The most convincing aspect of his argument is that the prisoner he examined did not bear the scars from the First World War.

In June 1916 Hess suffered gunshot wounds to his body, left hand and arm. As doctors will tell you, scars might fade with time, but they never disappear. Yet a total of 58 doctors examined Hess after 1941 and not one mentioned these scars. The most detailed medical examination of Hess was carried out by Dr. Ben Hurewitz in Nuremberg in 1945. Even though Hurewitz listed every wart and blemish on the prisoner’s body, including a quarter-inch wart on his chest and a very faint half-inch-long scar on one of his fingers, there is no mention of the war wounds he received in 1916. (J. R. Rees, The Case of Rudolf Hess, 1947, page 136)

One of my students is a prominent dermatologist/dermatological surgeon. Besides having earned her MD at the local medical school where she taught dermatology for 25 years she holds a PhD in dermatology from the Universidade de Sao Paulo considered to be the best medical school in Brazil.

The subject of scar reduction came up yesterday and I thought of Hess. Without going into details I told her that a surgeon concluded that one of his patients was not who he purported to be because he could not locate the scar from a 50 - 60 year-old bullet wound. She laughed and said the doctor must be “crazy” because it not uncommon for scars to disappear or virtually disappear after much shorter periods of time. Apparently this is an individual characteristic some peoples’ scars disappear quickly others peoples’ don’t. She said the doctor obviously was not a dermatologist.

John - I’m still curious as to your current take on the crash and who the "extra" body belonged to.

Can we hear the audio of the interview or read a transcript anywhere?

Len

[John Simkin]

John - I’m still curious as to your current take on the crash and who the "extra" body belonged to.

I have no idea if Hess was the "extra" body. The evidence available is inconclusive.

[Len Colby]

John - I’m still curious as to your current take on the crash and who the "extra" body belonged to.

I have no idea if Hess was the "extra" body. The evidence available is inconclusive.

I thought you'd concluded that Hess died in Spandau in the 80's 'as advertised'.

Is it posible to hear your interview anywhere

[Len Colby]

Sikorski still had one card still to play. He also knew about the 1940-41 peace negotiations between Hitler and Churchill. Could he blackmail Churchill into resisting the demands of Stalin after the war?

On 4th July, 1943, General Sikorski was on a Liberator that refuelled in Gibraltar. Within minutes of taking off the plane crashed into the sea. There was only one survivor, the pilot, Flight Lieutenant Edward Prchal. He survived because he was wearing a life-jacket that he had put on before the aircraft had taken off. According to the official inquiry the elevator controls had jammed. Summer Welles, the US Under-Secretary of State, went on record as saying he believed Sikorski had been assassinated. Sikorski’s widow claimed that her husband had been assassinated on the orders of Winston Churchill. (David Irving, Accident, 1967, page 168)

I stumbled upon this while looking for something else:

It is well known that some years ago Mr. Irving convinced himself that General Sikorski, who died in an air crash at Gibraltar, was “assassinated” by Winston Churchill, to whom in fact his death was a political calamity. Not a shred of evidence or probability has ever been produced in support of this theory and when it was tested in the courts, Mr. Irving’s only “evidence” was shown to be a clumsy misreading of a manuscript diary (I have myself seen the diary and feel justified in using the work “clumsy”).

Hugh Trevor-Roper (Aclaimed British historian, cited several times by John) - London Sunday Times Weekly Review, June 12, 1977

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/irving.asp...amp;item=Irving

[John Simkin]

Sikorski still had one card still to play. He also knew about the 1940-41 peace negotiations between Hitler and Churchill. Could he blackmail Churchill into resisting the demands of Stalin after the war?

On 4th July, 1943, General Sikorski was on a Liberator that refuelled in Gibraltar. Within minutes of taking off the plane crashed into the sea. There was only one survivor, the pilot, Flight Lieutenant Edward Prchal. He survived because he was wearing a life-jacket that he had put on before the aircraft had taken off. According to the official inquiry the elevator controls had jammed. Summer Welles, the US Under-Secretary of State, went on record as saying he believed Sikorski had been assassinated. Sikorski’s widow claimed that her husband had been assassinated on the orders of Winston Churchill. (David Irving, Accident, 1967, page 168)

I stumbled upon this while looking for something else:

It is well known that some years ago Mr. Irving convinced himself that General Sikorski, who died in an air crash at Gibraltar, was “assassinated” by Winston Churchill, to whom in fact his death was a political calamity. Not a shred of evidence or probability has ever been produced in support of this theory and when it was tested in the courts, Mr. Irving’s only “evidence” was shown to be a clumsy misreading of a manuscript diary (I have myself seen the diary and feel justified in using the work “clumsy”).

Hugh Trevor-Roper (Aclaimed British historian, cited several times by John) - London Sunday Times Weekly Review, June 12, 1977

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/irving.asp...amp;item=Irving

I am afraid that Hugh Trevor-Roper is no longer an "acclaimed British historian":

In April 1983, the German news magazine Stern published extracts from what purported to be the diaries of Adolf Hitler, known as the Hitler Diaries (German: Hitler-Tagebücher), which were subsequently revealed to be forgeries. The magazine had paid 10 million German marks for the sixty small books as well as two "special issues" about Rudolf Hess's flight to the United Kingdom, covering the period from 1932 to 1945.

Journalist Gerd Heidemann claimed to have discovered them, and submitted them to be reviewed by a number of experts in World War II history, notably the historians Hugh Trevor-Roper, Eberhard Jäckel and Gerhard Weinberg. At a press conference on April 25, 1983, the diaries were declared by these experts to be authentic. Even though they had not yet been properly examined by scientists, Trevor-Roper endorsed the diaries thus:

"I am now satisfied that the documents are authentic; that the history of their wanderings since 1945 is true; and that the standard accounts of Hitler's writing habits, of his personality and, even, perhaps, of some public events, may in consequence have to be revised."

Trevor-Roper was a then-director of Times Newspapers, and although he denied acting dishonestly, there was a clear conflict of interests, because The Sunday Times had already paid a substantial sum for the rights to serialise the diaries in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Diaries

[Len Colby]

Sikorski still had one card still to play. He also knew about the 1940-41 peace negotiations between Hitler and Churchill. Could he blackmail Churchill into resisting the demands of Stalin after the war?

On 4th July, 1943, General Sikorski was on a Liberator that refuelled in Gibraltar. Within minutes of taking off the plane crashed into the sea. There was only one survivor, the pilot, Flight Lieutenant Edward Prchal. He survived because he was wearing a life-jacket that he had put on before the aircraft had taken off. According to the official inquiry the elevator controls had jammed. Summer Welles, the US Under-Secretary of State, went on record as saying he believed Sikorski had been assassinated. Sikorski’s widow claimed that her husband had been assassinated on the orders of Winston Churchill. (David Irving, Accident, 1967, page 168)

I stumbled upon this while looking for something else:

It is well known that some years ago Mr. Irving convinced himself that General Sikorski, who died in an air crash at Gibraltar, was “assassinated” by Winston Churchill, to whom in fact his death was a political calamity. Not a shred of evidence or probability has ever been produced in support of this theory and when it was tested in the courts, Mr. Irving’s only “evidence” was shown to be a clumsy misreading of a manuscript diary (I have myself seen the diary and feel justified in using the work “clumsy”).

Hugh Trevor-Roper (Aclaimed British historian, cited several times by John) - London Sunday Times Weekly Review, June 12, 1977

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/irving.asp...amp;item=Irving

I am afraid that Hugh Trevor-Roper is no longer an "acclaimed British historian":

In April 1983, the German news magazine Stern published extracts from what purported to be the diaries of Adolf Hitler, known as the Hitler Diaries (German: Hitler-Tagebücher), which were subsequently revealed to be forgeries. The magazine had paid 10 million German marks for the sixty small books as well as two "special issues" about Rudolf Hess's flight to the United Kingdom, covering the period from 1932 to 1945.

Journalist Gerd Heidemann claimed to have discovered them, and submitted them to be reviewed by a number of experts in World War II history, notably the historians Hugh Trevor-Roper, Eberhard Jäckel and Gerhard Weinberg. At a press conference on April 25, 1983, the diaries were declared by these experts to be authentic. Even though they had not yet been properly examined by scientists, Trevor-Roper endorsed the diaries thus:

"I am now satisfied that the documents are authentic; that the history of their wanderings since 1945 is true; and that the standard accounts of Hitler's writing habits, of his personality and, even, perhaps, of some public events, may in consequence have to be revised."

Trevor-Roper was a then-director of Times Newspapers, and although he denied acting dishonestly, there was a clear conflict of interests, because The Sunday Times had already paid a substantial sum for the rights to serialise the diaries in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Diaries

This doesn’t seem to have stopped you and others on this forum and elsewhere from citing him as a reputable source. I don’t think one such error is enough to taint an otherwise distinguished career. His professional opinion is yet another bit of evidence against an already weak theory.

[John Wilson]

Someone I debated with on another forum once wrote;-

"Mountbatten... was a promiscuous bisexual and it was rumoured that he had an affair with Edward VIII (who was Prince of Wales at the time) when he accompanied him on his Empire tours. Another 'close friend' was an Irish student whom he met at Cambridge James Jeremiah Victor Fitzwilliam Murphy - who was known by the name of Peter. Peter was a leading Cambridge homosexual and very left wing.

Murphy became Mountbatten's close constant companion till his death in 1966. his wife Edwina of course was to have a torrid affair whilst in India with Pandit Nehru.

I suppose Mountbatten pales into comparision at the side of his elder brother George who inherited the title Marquis of Milford Haven on the death of their father. George was a promiscious bisexual who was married to another promiscious bisexual Nadeja, Countess of Torby, who was a niece of Czar Nicholas II. (remember I mentioned earlier that Mountbatten's aunt was the Czarina of Nicholas II so inter marrying of cousins was still prevalent in royal and semi circles)

George Mountbatten's claim to fame was his vast collection of pornography which he lavished money on, lovingly binding it into volumes emblazoned with the family crest! Some of the pornography consisted of aristocrats having intercourse with their servants, but far more disturbing were the pictures of family orgies in which children were involved in active sexual participation and bestiality. On George's death the collection was inherited by his son, so is it still in the hands of the Mountbatten descendents? Well part of it may very well be, but the bulk of it was donated to the British Museum!

I wonder if a member of the public made a request to the British Museum to view the donated collection of pictures from David Mountbatten, nephew to Mountbatten of Burma would their request be granted?"

And;-

"...first port of call would have to be the British Museum to see if the collection was available for public viewing. The family orgies and bestiality was noted and documented in the collection put together by George Mountbatten, so I surmise we would have to accept what he stated in his collection, although it shouldn't be too difficult to cross reference (if one had access) with other photos of family members with the ones in the collection to substantiate and support the claim.

The infamous pornographic collection had notoriety throughout London, so it must have been made available to view by others to achieve such notoriety, and not just kept within the confines of the Mountbatten family circle."

Almost too incredible to be true?

[Len Colby]

I don't suppose any evidence for the above was offered? It is hard to imagine that if such photos existed and were known to people willing to talk about it that no one would have been able to make a few copies and release them. And if the claimant had not seen them how could he (or she) be sure they existed?

How reliable is the person making these claims?

[John Wilson]

I don't suppose any evidence for the above was offered? It is hard to imagine that if such photos existed and were known to people willing to talk about it that no one would have been able to make a few copies and release them. And if the claimant had not seen them how could he (or she) be sure they existed?

How reliable is the person making these claims?

No, I never did verify the sources or the person (she) behind the posts -on a forum I used to administrate- and I'm always careful not to believe just any conspiracist material, no matter how fascinating or 'believable', without having a reasonable source confirmed.

I posted this out of interest to see if anyone here could either support or trash the claims made? 'She' was an interesting member who posted infrequently but disappeared without posting again.

[Terry Mauro]

I don't suppose any evidence for the above was offered? It is hard to imagine that if such photos existed and were known to people willing to talk about it that no one would have been able to make a few copies and release them. And if the claimant had not seen them how could he (or she) be sure they existed?

How reliable is the person making these claims?

No, I never did verify the sources or the person (she) behind the posts -on a forum I used to administrate- and I'm always careful not to believe just any conspiracist material, no matter how fascinating or 'believable', without having a reasonable source confirmed.

I posted this out of interest to see if anyone here could either support or trash the claims made? 'She' was an interesting member who posted infrequently but disappeared without posting again.

This article may shed some light on the matter. By Scott Thompson, 1997.

http://american_almanac.tripod.com/naziroot.htm

[John Wilson]

This article may shed some light on the matter. By Scott Thompson, 1997.

http://american_almanac.tripod.com/naziroot.htm

I don't know Scott Thompson's credentials, but his article sounds just as fanciful, despite what we know of the Royals and the nazis?