by Professor Revilo P. Oliver
I mean that today, as I write these lines. By the time they are printed in "Liberty Bell," it may already be too late. I hope not, and that is why I am inserting now this concise statement of the problem, separating it from a fairly long discussion of the operations of secret services and intelligence agencies in the modern world, of which I intended it to be a part.
We have all heard of Rudolf Hess, the famous victim of the noted ferocity of Americans and British when they have been made rabid by their Jewish masters and exceed in savagery the Apaches and Balubas to whom they once thought themselves superior. There have been several attempts to procure the release of the old man who has been so viciously kept in solitary confinement for thirty-eight years and in prison for forty-four. He has been the subject of a half a dozen books, notably "Prisoner of Peace," by Frau Ilse Hess, with extracts from the prisoner's censored letters (London, Britons, 1954), and "Prisoner No.7, Rudolf Hess," by Lieutenant Colonel Eugene K. Bird, who was for many years the American commandant at Spandau (New York, Viking, 1974).
The torture of the prisoner by keeping him in solitary confinement is a mystery in itself. Why was he not murdered at Nuremberg? It would, of course, be simply silly to suppose that there had been any sense of justice or compassion in the murderers who served the Jews in the obscene and disgusting farce that was called a "trial." The only reasonable explanation is that Hess was not murdered and has been kept alive in prison as a pawn in a blackmail game between the Anglo-American savages and the Soviet savages, and it is likely that the latter are levying the blackmail, i.e., so long as the prisoner lives, he could, if released, disclose something that even forty years later could embarrass the unspeakable creatures who did not blush for such things as the incineration of the men, women, and children of Dresden to please their loathsome parasites.
The mystery begins much earlier, in 1941. The generally accepted story that Hess flew to Britain on his own initiative in the hope of arranging a negotiated peace is, of course, unbelievable, since there is no evidence that he became insane in the weeks preceding his departure from Augsburg in a borrowed Messerschmitt 110 on 10 May 1941. That story, however, is taken for granted in the two books I have cited above and in virtually all efforts to procure a modicum of mercy for the prisoner. It is, however, untenable and must be, to SOME extent, a "cover story."
The mystery began in 1941. In all intelligence services, despite all efforts to compartmentalize them, there is a certain circulation of information between members of those services who regard one another as trustworthy, except in certain extremely crucial matters, in which, in the current parlance, "the lid is on tight." The secret of Hess's flight to England was almost as well kept as, for example, the identity of the person who delivered one of Germany's latest "Enigma" cipher machines to the British before 1939, or the circumstances of the death of Franklin Roosevelt. Members of M.I.6 who knew the secret would say only that it was an "utterly foul business" and "unbelievably dirty" – and those epithets are eloquent indeed when they come from hardened members of intelligence services, who must operate on the principle that "all is fair in war" and in many of the intervals between wars that are called peace.
There is one reasonable explanation of what happened, one which I have accepted for almost forty years and do not intend categorically to reject now. I do not know whether the explanation was 'leaked' by someone who knew the closely guarded secret or was an inference logically drawn from knowledge of the precautions taken to preserve it. According to this explanation, Hess was lured to England by official proposals for secret negotiations for an armistice or peace between Germany and the Britain that was then still Great. The intent was, I need not say, to weaken Germany by luring into captivity one of Hitler's most trusted associates and, indeed, the deputy whom Hitler had named as his successor. That was certainly "an utterly foul business," an act of the blackest treachery, of which Englishmen would have been incapable before Aryan morality was superseded by Jewish commands, and also an act of sheer folly. Even men who have no honor do not fire on a flag of truce, for example, because they know that they may sometime have to send envoys under such a flag, but, as was shown by the murders at Nuremberg, even the prudence of self-preservation is lost by persons whom their Jewish trainers have made inhuman and crazed.
There has always been one serious objection to that explanation. It is inconceivable that Hess would have undertaken such negotiations without the knowledge of Hitler, although doubtless with a proviso that Hitler could disavow Hess, if the negotiations proved fruitless and the secret errand became known and embarrassing. But if Hess had been lured to England by such treachery, why did not Hitler denounce British perfidy, which would have been shocking in 1941, and why did he choose to accept the British story (put out to explain why persons who knew Hess personally were not permitted to see him) that Hess had become insane? Hitler, furthermore, seems to have accepted the letter, purportedly from Hess, that was delivered to him after Hess had departed, although, had he known of Hess's mission he would have known that the letter must be a forgery. It can be argued, of course, that the letter was provided so that Hitler could disavow Hess, should that become expedient, and that Hitler decided that an admission that Hess had flown to England with his permission would be interpreted as an admission of German weakness on the eve of war with the Soviets.
There is a further puzzle in the explanation above. If what was to be concealed was only British perfidy, the obviously sure method of preserving the secret (assuming that there was still something of which a British government COULD be ashamed) would have been to murder Hess at the time of the obscene murders at Nuremberg. Certainly nothing was to be gained by keeping Hess alive to call attention, decade after decade, to what was being concealed.
There is an alternative explanation and one which does cover all the known facts: the prisoner in Spandau is not Rudolf Hess.
I do not know whether this explanation is the correct one. What I do know is that it can be conclusively confirmed or disproved TODAY. Tomorrow may be too late.
In 1979, more than five years ago, there was published in England and the United States a book by a British physician, Dr. W. Hugh Thomas, "The Murder of Rudolf Hess." There is no possible room for quibbling: either this book states the crucial truth behind the long imprisonment of the man in Spandau or it is a hoax. If it is the latter, it could be conclusively exposed in a day with the consent of either the British or the American governments. So far as I know, no slightest effort has been made to determine the truth or falsity of the facts reported by Dr. Thomas. Instead, every precaution is being taken to prevent such testing of his report, obviously with the intent of preserving SOME secret forever.(1) That is foolish, because if Dr. Thomas's charges are ignored in an attempt to preserve the mystery, his explanation is the one that will be accepted by the historians of the future – assuming, of course, that our race survives and has not become so weak-minded as to lose its racial interest in historical truth as distinct from pleasing Jews by believing even such blatant lies as their famous Holohoax.
Dr. Thomas' who was an expert consultant of the Royal Army Medical Corps and attached to the British Military Hospital in Berlin, was summoned to attend Prisoner No.7 in Spandau, and he naturally made a thorough examination of his patient. Puzzled by what he failed to find in that examination, he consulted the records of the German Army. Rudolf Hess served in the German Army during the First World War and was wounded three times. He was wounded at least twice in such a way that his body must have shown the scars of those wounds, and his wife certifies that she saw those scars on his body. One of his wounds was made by a bullet that passed through his lungs and would necessarily have left internal scars that X-ray pictures could not fail to show. The prisoner whom Dr. Thomas examined had no scars on his body and X-rays showed that his lungs had not been injured.
There is no escape from the irrefragable conclusion: either Dr. Thomas is a brazen liar or the prisoner in Spandau is not Rudolf Hess.
Which of these alternatives is the truth could be quickly determined by having the prisoner examined by reputable physicians. So far as I have been able to learn, this has not been done in the five years since Dr. Thomas's book, with a foreword by Rebecca West, was published in England and in this country by Harper & Row, and attracted very considerable attention, having been noticed by even the Establishment's periodicals. This means that the criminals who now govern Britain and the United States dare not have such an examination made, for it cannot be to their best interest to have Dr. Thomas's explanation accepted, as it otherwise will be. The prisoner is an old man, and in the course of nature he cannot live much longer. Preparations have been made to have his corpse cremated the moment he dies and even before his family is notified of his death. That preparation, which is a matter of public record and admitted by all concerned, can have no purpose other than to conceal something that an examination of the corpse might disclose. If the prisoner dies and his corpse is destroyed as planned, that will be tantamount to tacit confirmation of Dr. Thomas's report.
The truth could be conclusively ascertained today. As I have said, tomorrow may be too late.
Dr. Thomas has assembled a great deal of data to corroborate his explanation that Rudolf Hess never flew to Britain and never intended to do so. Let me summarize his reconstruction of what really happened.
1. Rudolf Hess, although interested in negotiating a peace with England before the German invasion of Russia and willing to meet a suitable British envoy in some neutral nation, never entertained a notion so absurd as flying to England.
2. An experienced aviator, Hess often enjoyed flying solo in a late (but not the latest) model of the Messerschmitt 110, lent him by the factory.
3. He took off on one such flight on 10 May 1941, intending to return, since his plane did not carry sufficient fuel for a flight to the place in Scotland at which he is said to have landed.
4. On this flight, he was shot down, probably over the North Sea, by a German fighter plane, whereupon the man now a prisoner in Spandau, who had been selected for his resemblance to Hess and may be the man who had served as Hess's 'double,' took off from some northern German base, perhaps Aalborg, and flew to Scotland, which was within the range of a Messerschmitt 110 from that base.
5. A forged letter, purporting to be from Hess, was delivered to Hitler, whose amazement and anger at being told that Hess had been so mad as to fly to England was therefore genuine, not simulated.
British Intelligence, if it did not know of the plot in advance, must have known of the substitution almost immediately after the impersonator landed in Scotland. This explains the otherwise scatter-brained treatment of the prisoner, e.g., the precautions taken to prevent persons who knew Hess personally from talking with the prisoner, and many other odd circumstances, including the sudden cancellation of the plan to exhibit the airplane in which the prisoner arrived (someone might have noticed that it could not have carried enough fuel for a flight from Augsburg in southern Germany to Kilmarnock in western Scotland). And there was a great deal of what Rebecca West accurately describes as "foolish scurrying to and fro and brainless impromptu chases," which would have been simply idiotic, if the man who landed near Kilmarnock had been Hess, but would be entirely explicable, if he were an impersonator, but many British officials, who could not be let into the secret, thought that he was Hess and acted accordingly until overruled.
7. If the prisoner is an impersonator, this would account for many inconsistencies in his conduct and especially for his categorical refusal to see Hess's wife, Hess's son, or any other relative until 1969, twenty-eight years after his supposed departure from Germany and a space of time long enough to make imprecise even the memory of those who loved Hess and were naturally prepared to find a man much changed by his suffering.
8. Dr. Thomas conjectures that the murder of Hess was contrived by Heinrich Himmler, who, on that assumption, would have been a vile traitor. Thomas does not consider the more probable theory that the murder of Hess may have been arranged by the infamous Admiral Canaris, the Jews' masterly double-agent, probably a Jew himself, who was the head of German Military Intelligence and one of the most trusted of Hitler's closest friends and advisers (since he had cunningly attached himself to Hitler and secretly supported him when Hitler was at the very beginning of his political career and had only a tiny following – gratitude is one of the Aryan characteristics for which Jews have special contempt). Canaris made arrangements to betray Germany with British Intelligence at the very beginning of the war and possibly before, although he never supplied the British with quite as much information about German operations and plans as he supplied to the Soviets. The murder of Hess and sending of an impersonator would have been easier for Canaris, who had his own stable of German traitors at his disposal, than for Himmler, who is not known to have been a traitor at all.
The average reader is apt to doubt that an impersonator could deceive a man's wife, even if she had not seen him for twenty-eight years, or a man's son, although the latter was only a boy of four when he last saw his father. Our unwillingness to believe in such impersonation is largely sentimental, based on some wish that there were a natural or spiritual sympathy between persons so closely related, which would be an inerrant "voice of the blood." That is to ignore the remarkable successes of many impersonators, not only quite a few of the persons who claimed to be Louis XVII of France, who could have informed themselves thoroughly from historical sources, but of impersonators who had little but their own audacity and some physical similarity to aid them.
Roger Tichborne, a scion of an old but not especially distinguished Hampshire family, was lost at sea in 1854. Arthur Orton a butcher's ne'er-do-well son in Australia, who had never seen Roger Tichborne and had only such information about him as he obtained from Tichborne's nigger servant, impersonated the dead man in 1865, convinced Tichborne's mother that he was indeed her son, convinced the family's solicitor, and was eventually able to produce more than a hundred persons who swore they recognized him as Tichborne. It required a trial that lasted over one hundred days to unmask the impostor.
One could multiply examples. In 1548 a young French peasant named Martin Guerre, eager for adventure, went off to join the Spanish army, leaving behind his twenty-year-old wife, a son, and his patrimony. (Yes, French peasants had property of considerable value, despite what you were told in school.) Eight years later, a young man, Arnaud du Tilh, thought it would be fun to impersonate Martin Guerre, to whom he had some resemblance. He deceived Guerre's wife and all of Guerre's numerous relatives and might never have been exposed, had he not been greedy and tried to claim property that belonged to Guerre's uncle in addition to what Guerre had inherited from his father. The case was carried to the Parlement (Court of Appeals) at Toulouse, where the impostor was finally identified and executed.
Orton and Arnaud could rely only on some physical resemblance and their wits. An impersonator coached by Canaris or a traitor who had been trained to serve as Hess's 'double' by Hess himself could very easily have carried out the deception postulated by Dr. Thomas.
The editor of a "right-wing" periodical in a letter to me asks "what on earth could motivate a man to spend 40+ years of his life in jail under atrocious conditions?. . . There is no convincing answer.(*) Well, for one thing the prisoner DID deny he was Hess when he was imprisoned in Germany before the murders by the "tribunal" at Nuremberg, and one can readily imagine how he was dissuaded from persisting in that denial. And for another, a man held in solitary confinement and guarded at a cost of $300 a minute (paid chiefly by the tax-paying serfs in the United States), does not have much choice in the matter. He is never permitted to talk to any possibly honest person alone, and has no means of knowing it, if he should see someone whom he could trust. (* The editor very properly dismissed as absurd the explanation that Dr. Thomas offers, that the prisoner is afraid of being killed by wicked "Neo-Nazis" if he were released. Dr. Thomas evidently believes some of the swill that the Jewish press dishes out for credulous Aryans. That does not affect his competence as a physician and one who is particularly known as an expert on gunshot wounds.)
I repeat, I do not know whether or not Dr. Thomas is telling the truth. If he is, only one conclusion is possible, but unless his testimony is verified, some doubt will remain. I happen to have retained the Aryan belief that historical truth does matter. That is why I insist that it is still possible today to establish that truth beyond cavil. Tomorrow may too late_too late forever.
(1) The prisoner's body is to be cremated as soon as he dies. At this late date it is most unlikely that the purpose of the cremation is the same as in 1946, when the British and the Americans, repudiating all the traditions of Western civilization and even elemental human decency as understood by our race, equated themselves with the vilest savages and murdered the German generals; the bodies were cremated and the ashes given to the Jews, so that they could pour them into latrines and defecate on all that was left of the brave and heroic men who had dared to stand in the way of their surreptitious conquest of the world old Yahweh gave them.