A Norman Civilian's Experience with Overlord

Another Canadian, gonna grab a bag of popcorn and enjoy this

So far, we have learned..

1. Not all German soldiers were slavering war criminals.

2. It was possible for Canadian soldiers to get extremely pissed off...
like we needed to be told !!


btw, both my parents were liberated in Holland, and they both never talked much about it.

 

Another Canadian, gonna grab a bag of popcorn and enjoy this

So far, we have learned..

1. Not all German soldiers were slavering war criminals.

2. It was possible for Canadian soldiers to get extremely pissed off...
like we needed to be told !!


btw, both my parents were liberated in Holland, and they both never talked much about it.

Martin....I am in total agreement....but then you probably guessed on that one...eh?

 

While Meyer claimed it, the best fit to the date and location he described was D Coy of the Regina Rifles. To refute him, the prosecution had Maj HS Roberts on hand at the trial, as well as the affidavits of two other ORs from the Reginas. The court ultimately ruled that their evidence was unecessary, as retaliation was not a valid defense.

Affidavits of all three RRRs here:

Kurt Meyer accusations against Canadians (was North Nova Scotia Highlanders History) - MLU FORUM

Kevin

Thanks for adding the facts to this thread.

 

I don’t think that I can remember what happened to me at three or four years old. I lived in India where my father was with the Bombay Sappers & Miners. I have vague memories of those times, but I’m sure they were only things that my parents told me. Would be interested to know what people here at this forum can confidently recall from such an early age?

 

After the battle, some Canadian troops billeted at our farm. They captured a group of Waffen SS troops. One big Canadian took me on his shoulders and carried me to where the Germans were lined up. He told me to count to three and I did. On three, the Canadians fired several tommy gun bursts into the Germans, killing them. I remember several of the Germans were boys.

That Canadian soldiers, at that stage of the battle of Normandy, would deliberately murder Waffen SS prisoners, should really come as no surprise to anyone. Very little documentation exists of those incidents but much anecdotal evidence from vets that it did occur often. I am not upset by that. I think the SS set the rules early on in the campaign and from that point on the SS and Canadian units fought according to their own unique code.
What is very surprising about this account is that they would intentionally do that in the presence of a child. That just doesn't pass the reasonability test.

 

Japanese battlefield atrocities were openly reciprocated by Australians in New Guinea after evidence of POW's being bayoneted and shot as well as those surrendering using it as a ruse to inflict further deaths when they were being searched or medically treated.

The Japanese for their own part did not wish to be taken prisoner and in many cases they were obliged.

 

Martin....I am in total agreement....but then you probably guessed on that one...eh?




So, did we scare off Kevin yet ?

 

I'm still here. Do you have anything substantial to contribute?

 

I'm going to repeat. The original post was a "oral history." Most are flawed. She was, as I acknowledged, quite young to remember such detail. Any historian who creates history by doing oral interviews must remember the changes that time and space make on memory.

It could be that these stores were related to her more than they were actual memory. For example, her family was present when the Waffen SS officer put her on his knee. It could well be that her "memory" of the event is that of her family.

It is an interesting account of the event from a civilian's perspective. If I used it in a book, it would recieve a heavy footnote with discussion of the interview and my fear that at four years of age, she wouldn't normally have such detailed memories. But then again, being a human shield on the Corridor of Death might do that to someone.

And why isn't it reasonable that men hardened to war would do something like this in the presence of a child? A new book has demonstrated that there were nearly 20,000 rapes perpetrated by American GIs in Britain, France, and Germany. Does that strain credulity?

I did have the same thought when she related the story of the shootings. Why would a soldier do that? I don't have any idea, but one thing reading much history has taught me is that humans are capable of doing anything.

I at no time held this account up as fact. I never argued that she was certainly telling the truth. It is funny what a cord it has struck in some of you.

 

That Canadian soldiers, at that stage of the battle of Normandy, would deliberately murder Waffen SS prisoners, should really come as no surprise to anyone. Very little documentation exists of those incidents but much anecdotal evidence from vets that it did occur often. I am not upset by that. I think the SS set the rules early on in the campaign and from that point on the SS and Canadian units fought according to their own unique code.
What is very surprising about this account is that they would intentionally do that in the presence of a child. That just doesn't pass the reasonability test.


Why doesn't it pass the reasonability test? One of your making? History is full of examples of people not acting according to "reason."

 

Another example I can think of is the autobiography of Siegfried Knapp, "Soldat." It strains my concept of the credible for him to go to such lengths to suggest his friendships with the French and a pre-war close friendship with a Jewish high school mate. Why bother to put that in, except to artificially distance himself from the Germany of World War Two?

But should I then throw out his entire account of what it FELT like to be a German soldier? That is what oral history really comes down to, someone's feelings and personal memories of what they saw. If those of us participating in this thread saw a murder, ten minutes later, we would all remember it in different ways. We would even have trouble deciding on the culprit's shirt color, or size.

So, nearly seven decades later, her memory is undoubtably flawed and varnished by time and experience. Yet if you drop your own blinders, such as being insulted about the murders she says she saw, you can certainly feel the pain and sorrow of that horrible time in her story. She was probably really a human shield, even if she doesn't remember it exactly as it happened.

She may have even lied about seeing the murders to make a better story. I know her son, who runs the Montormel Bunker Memorial, quite well, but his mother I've met just the once. I don't have any way of verifying the veracity of what she said. But even if she didn't see the murder, she had influences that led her to remember it so, or to base a lie upon. Which would lead me to suggest, and only suggest, that a cultural remembrance of such murders exists among the Norman populace that she grewup among.

Moreover, my own uncle, a man I know to be a good and honest man, participated in such a killing. He was in the military police in occupied Germany. A former SS member shot one of his friends on the street as my uncle and several buddies ate at a sidewalk cafe in Germany after the war ended. They took the SS man out in the woods and tied him naked to a tree where nobody would ever find. him. That I know happened as I doubt my uncle had any reason to lie. It was the only story about killing someon during the war that he was ever willing to tell me.

 

Why doesn't it pass the reasonability test? One of your making? History is full of examples of people not acting according to "reason."

I don't disagree with your statement that people often act without reason, particularly in wartime. In fact, the story may be true. But, while Canadians killing SS troops is an entirely plausible scenario, having a 4-5 year old child do the 'countdown' just doesn't ring true to me.
It is a matter of opinion so while you may choose to accept the story verbatim, I reserve the right to be sceptical. The obvious animosity between the SS and Canadians was a warrior code and I suspect would not extend to brutalizing a child. I wouldn't even accuse her of lying but children who are barely capable of remembering events at that age can and do take on the memory of the adults who undoubtedly spoke often of those difficult times.
We may have to agree to disagree since it is highly unlikely that her story can ever be corroborated.

 

I think we agree more closely than you think. I suspect you are correct that her memories reflect much more what others told her than what she actually saw. More of a community memory than anything else. And I was taken aback by the image of a soldier doing that even during the interview. Seems a bit dramatic.

 

Having seen a great deal of action ..Some of the most violent ever. I have to say this I never witnessed at any time atrocities by British troops...None. Indeed when I captured an enemy, I often found him to be a young lad like myself.

That did not stop me from loathing all that they stood for. But I never ill treated anyone, Had I done so I would have had to answer to my officers.#

Meanwhile the SS had captured and murdered both British and Canadian troops in cold blood. That there may have been a reluctance to take prisoners afterwards? that may well be in the heat of battle. But I repeat, it is not the usual practice for British troops to commit atrocities,,, In battle it is different..... There are also times when the loss of a friend can make anyone turn and vent violence on-the enemy.
But at no time did I witness anything but proper treatment.... Some may find it surprising to learn that German prisoners would help out with the wounded, so that a stretcher would have a German on one end and a Brit on the other.

But I still loath them for what they did .
Sapper

 

It would be worth a visit to the Mairie where this lady lived .
Most villages have written documentation of events that took place during WW2.
In the village where I live a book written by local inhabitants detailing life from 1939 - 1945 can be bought in the Mairie.
This might help to verify her testimony.
Gill

 

Piaf -
Since you appear to be closet to the scene of this massacre - perhaps you can visit the area and check if there is a written account of the event - if so then it will perhaps establish the facts once and for all.....
Cheers

 

Certainly Tom,
do we know where this lady was living?
Regards Gill

 

Piaff - I don't but I should think that Casey Cobb would know all that since he originated the thread - would be of great interest though - I don't know one end of France from the other merely passed through Boulogne-Paris - Dijon to and from Switzerland-Italy-Austria etc
Cheers

 

Casey, Do you know where this Lady lived please?
Regards Gill

 

I'm going to repeat. The original post was a "oral history." Most are flawed. She was, as I acknowledged, quite young to remember such detail. Any historian who creates history by doing oral interviews must remember the changes that time and space make on memory.

It could be that these stores were related to her more than they were actual memory. For example, her family was present when the Waffen SS officer put her on his knee. It could well be that her "memory" of the event is that of her family.

It is an interesting account of the event from a civilian's perspective. If I used it in a book, it would recieve a heavy footnote with discussion of the interview and my fear that at four years of age, she wouldn't normally have such detailed memories. But then again, being a human shield on the Corridor of Death might do that to someone.

And why isn't it reasonable that men hardened to war would do something like this in the presence of a child? A new book has demonstrated that there were nearly 20,000 rapes perpetrated by American GIs in Britain, France, and Germany. Does that strain credulity?

I did have the same thought when she related the story of the shootings. Why would a soldier do that? I don't have any idea, but one thing reading much history has taught me is that humans are capable of doing anything.

I at no time held this account up as fact. I never argued that she was certainly telling the truth. It is funny what a cord it has struck in some of you.

20,000 rapes by Americans? What is the name of the book?