Was Wittman personally responsible for the 6,000,000 or something? Far as I'm aware that was upper leadership?
She's got a whole section on her masturbatory profile page about "false equivalence arguments" where she proudly shows herself removing or rewording mentions of Allied war crimes because it's "Wehrmacht propaganda." I'm glad we have an obsessive-compulsive Stalinist hag who larps as a sekrit agent Nazi hunter to remind us that no German women ever got raped, no Poles were ever killed by the Red Army, no planned starvation ever happened in Eastern Europe or Allied POW camps, and no bombs were ever dropped on Tokyo's suburbs. It's just neutral, unbiased, PRAVDA-approved fact!
So they took Zaloga's probably exaggerated idea of how competently an American force would've handled it and turned it into "Wittman bad nazi evil bad man dummy bad stupid doodoohead?"When fucking up Michael Wittman's page, they reference Steve Zaloga who is a good military historian, and they misrepresent his views about the Battle of Villers Bocage in particular.
Essentially Wittman blames the British at Villers Bocage for essentially driving into the middle of the town, parking up and just creating a cluster fuck. Most of the soldiers didn't even realise that they were actually on the front line and there were no friendly forces screening them. For example there was an Anti Tank company stuck in the town with their guns limbered up for towing instead of being deployed like they shoudl have been.
Wittman Charged into the town, and essentially wrecked a British Armoured Brigade. Not only this but he stopped the British advance in it's tracks becaue the British Commanders overstated the enemy forces that had attacked them.
Zaloga's argument is that if Wittman had tried that against the US Army he'd have been spotted miles away and stopped before he even got to the town, and the US army wouldn't have allowed the town to become a disorganised mess of vehicles.
THe battle has its own entry on Wikipedia, and is still a good article. What's intersting is someone has edited the the introduction and conclusion to state that Wittman's role was exagerated. Yet they've obviously just done a word search for his name, because in the body of the Article it's very clear, that it was Wittman's attack that was crucial. However because they don't use his name it's not picked up on.
Battle of Villers-Bocage - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The article goes out of it's way to point out that Wittman wasn't really important to the battle, that his achievements were overexaggerated as part of SS propaganda and neo-Nazis, and that he ACKSHUALLY could've done way better if he followed proper protocol with his unit and nearly got himself killed for no gain. The citations look cherry picked and likely m taken out of context to diminish the accomplishment.
It's fucking lunacy this bitch is heralded as a hero for debunking Wehraboo/neonazi narratives on X german soldier while she rewwrites allied warcrimes as if they were never as bad as investigations found. I guess firebominbg Japanese cities and causing untold death and destruction on cities made mostly of wood and other flammable materials isn't that problematic after all. But hey, you have people who suck the cock of Bomer Harris despite him being the British equivalent of the German bombing thesis so it's fine I guess. Just ignore he was involved in dropping chemical weapons on Iraqi rebels in the 1920s.
They really fucking hate this guy for no reason, don't they?
Imagine my surprise when I see this kike bitching about inclusion of a Polish organisation on list of "Holocaust related organisations". Hey goy, don't you know this is Jewish turf? The pathological hatred kikes feel for Poles is truly bizarre, I bet the Poles are glad they went out of their way to save the Jews. Kikes love stabbing their benefactors in the back.
Don't you know? Israel was demanding gibs a few years back because the Polish government, per Polish law at the time, took control of all Jewish property when Jews died and had no living heirs. Somehow this is anti-Semitic and makes them as bad as Nazis. They also flipped out when Poland made the term Polish Death Camps illegal.
Also after the war the government had a nationalization program, which was also antisemitic. "Polish communist government nationalizes property: Jews most affected"
So you're telling me it's an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory to suggest Jews are overwhelmingly a landholding class with industry and business yet Jews were most effected by land appropriation?
You will see woketards literally just outright lie about what sources said, whether because they are actually too dumb to understand what the sources actually said, whether they look at everything through the lens of their retardation, or just deliberately lying.
You know how you avoid that? You have a will.
The U.S.
Unless this rule was solely applied to Jews, it is more or less the same rule applied in common law countries such as the U.S. and the UK.
Double standards are the bread and butter of the far left, always have been.
Uh oh, someone's had a little too much to think!
It's interesting that Jewish historians will emphasise the Holocaust in Poland and what happened between 1939 and 1944, but rarely want to discuss the Jewish influence on what happened before and after.
It's not like this was normal law inheritance law, it was a proclamation by Soviet Poland after the war and didn't require the Jews to actually be dead. The government immediately nationalized all property confiscated by the Nazis, which was pretty much all Jewish property and relatively little Gentile property, whether or not the survivors were alive. They also nationalized all property "abandoned" by their owners at the end of the war, and of course very few Jews were in active possession of their property at that point. I don't think either of these laws allowed for heirs. It probably didn't matter much in the end because very few Jews wanted to go back to an increasingly bad Poland anyway, but the fact that the Nazis and then the Communists took confiscated most of their property while they were in limbo didn't help.
And yet again, who is defending her? One of the most contemptible neocons, Anne Applebaum, who supposedly hates totalitarianism, except when it's Jews doing it (Trotskyism > Neoconservatism, yet again). Applebaum is used as as source in the article and depicts her in a sympathetic light:
