35 3 mins 15 yrs

Hitler1.jpgYes, of course we all remember that Irish President Eamon De Valera signed a book of condolences at the sad news of the death of Herr Hitler, back in 1945.

Now comes the news that his sympathy towards Nazis did not end with Hitler’s suicide, as it is revealed that a Nazi war criminal was given asylum in Ireland after the second world war and lived under an assumed name approved by Eamon de Valera’s government, according to devalera.jpgnew research. The Nazi collaborator was advised by de Valera to continue using an alias so that if the French government asked if he was in Ireland, the taoiseach could truthfully answer no. Jesuitical duplicity?

Célestin Lainé was leader of the Bezen Perrot, a Waffen SS unit, and responsible for the torture and murder of civilians in occupied Brittany. He joined the SS when the Germans recruited local help and took command of the region, ordering the torture and execution of resistance fighters who had once lived alongside him.

 

In 1944, as the allies liberated Brittany, many Nazi collaborators fled France. Some of those captured were found in possession of letters of recommendation written in English and addressed to the Irish consulate in Paris.

 

In 1947 word reached Lainé that the Irish government was prepared to grant him asylum. In an interview with RTE to be broadcast this week, Dan Leach of the University of Melbourne reveals that the former head of the Breton Nationalist Party met de Valera to discuss Lainé. “De Valera advised him (that Lainé should) continue using his alias so that if the French asked him if Lainé was in the country he could truthfully answer ‘no’,” Leach said. Lainé kept a low profile in Ireland until his death in 1983.

 

Another Nazi to take advantage of the soft approach of the Irish government was Andrija Artukovic, who was responsible for the death of 1m people in Croatia. Cathal O’Shannon, who has researched Ireland’s treatment of the Nazis after 1945, has discovered that there is a file on Artukovic in the Department of Foreign Affairs but the government has refused to release

 

I wonder was it raw hatred of Britain that led to such obnoxious decisions being made by De Valera? Since many Irish people courageously fought AGAINST the Nazis, and made the ultimate sacrifice in defence of liberty and freedom, it must be so annoying for their relatives to read of this State sanctioned collaboration with the vermin of the 3rd Reich.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

35 thoughts on “DE VALERA AND THE NAZIS….

  1. David – I suspect that a lot of this was linked to the Vatican which was involved, as with the fugitives from Rwanda, in organising the escape from justice of many of these people. Stepinac is a good example. An appalling man, sentenced to prison for terrible war crimes – the papal response ? To promote him to Cardinal and Prayers were said for him in Ireland on a regular basis.

    The Hubert Butler affair is worth remembering.

    And of course Dublin itself has been rather ambiguous on Irish Nazi sympathisers – it will be interesting if Dublin Council will permit the NGA to erect another memorial to the terrorist and collaborator Sean Russell.

  2. Dev was a muppet. And was at the time surrounded by people whos hatred of all things British clouded their judgement. The overhang of the turmoil of the 20’s reached well into the 60s/70s of Irish political history

  3. I duno Mad, Ive never liked the man. Ive read a lot about Irish history and his involvement in it and i just find him duplicit. His reaction to the treaty annoys me, not because of the fact that he objected to it, that was his choice, my disgust comes from the fact that he knew exactly what would unfold from the negotiations and despite repeated calls for him to join the negotiating team, he declined. I think he did this to save his own neck. And then to come out so strongly against the treaty and effectively encourage the civil war annoys me.

    He was in effect a mini dictator, at least in the way he was a control freak. He had his hand in every dept. He wanted to keep the republic in some sort of time bubble, socially at least, the economic failure followed as a result.

    The close association he kept between the state and the church kept us socially backward for generations.

  4. >>I suspect that a lot of this was linked to the Vatican which was involved, as with the fugitives from Rwanda, in organising the escape from justice of many of these people.<<

    I duno if you caught the documentary on the Discovery channel recently about the SS. It was a re run im sure, but it was excellent all the same. At the end they covered the means by which many SS escaped and it does seem like the vatican was up to its neck in it. It would have been exposed except for th fact that the americans started using the channel as a means of getting their spies in and out and therefore didnt want to endanger that

  5. >>I wonder was it raw hatred of Britain that led to such obnoxious decisions being made by De Valera? <<

    We have to differentiate hatred of the British government from hatred of the British people. I dont believe that dev bore a hatred of the British people. He may not have brought Ireland into the war for various reasons, but he did stretch neutrality to it limits in his attempts to aid the British with food supplies and labour sources.

  6. Step forward the real Vatican and the real Stepinac. The history of Croatia during WW2 is one of the Vatican setting up an ideal Catholic state. Have they now stopped. I don’t think so. Below is comment from Prof Noble which sums up the Vatican attitude.

    Pope beatifies a Mass Murderer – after canonising another

    ——————————————————————————–
    Stepinac, Archbishop of Zagreb during World War II, was the very opposite of a saint: he approved, directed and perpetrated mass murder in the name and employ of the Vatican.

    Professor Arthur Noble

    In October, 1998, Pope John Paul II paid a visit to Croatia to beatify Cardinal Alojsije Stepinac. Beatification in the Church of Rome is only one step away from nomination to sainthood. Writers such as Avro Manhattan (Catholic Terror Today) and Edmond Paris (The Vatican against Europe) have recounted in horrific detail how Stepinac, Archbishop of Zagreb during World War II, was the very opposite of a saint: he approved, directed and perpetrated mass murder in the name and employ of the Vatican.

    The English Churchman recently carried the following comment:

    The real activities of Stepinac during World War II are graphically documented in the chapter entitled "Monsignor Stepinac’s Croatia" in Edmund Paris’ book The Vatican against Europe. Having "welcomed the creation of the Nazi puppet Croat state", Stepinac sat in the Ustashi Parliament which approved the policy of extermination of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Jews, Gypsies and communists. Stepinac wrote in the Croatian Sentinel on 1st January, 1942: "Hitler is an envoy of God."

    It is not possible to repeat here all the horrors of the forced conversions, the slow tortures and the ugly deaths of the resisting Serbs. Throughout 1942 Stepinac wore Ustashi decorations, attended all their important official meetings and made speeches.

    What is more, it comes as no real surprise when the Catholic Times of 11th October this year [1998] reports Stepinac’s beatification under the headline "A surprise endorsement".

    The paper proceeds to describe the gratitude of the head of the Croatian Jewish community for Stepinac’s intervention later in the war. This is in keeping with Edmund Paris’ account. He says: "It is true that at the end of 1943, when everyone saw that the Nazis and Fascists were losing, Monsignor Stepinac took certain steps to provide for the future."

    However, at his trial for war crimes in the Autumn of 1946 the evidence of his not only having consented to but also having "organised" Ustashi units and "crusaders" for the purpose of forcing Serbs to convert to Rome was overwhelming, and he was sentenced to 16 years’ hard labour."

    Stepinac a saint? It is with typical brazen effrontery that Rome projects this notorious satanic monster as a candidate for sainthood.

  7. Kloot,

    I agree it is often wrong to conflate the people of a country with its Government at any given time. My target in this post was Dev and those who supported the Nazi sympathetic view. That’s all – I do NOT want to be seen as attacking all Irish people, many of who, profoundly disagreed with Dev.

  8. No Worries David, I understood that from your post. Dev did divide and continues to divide public opinion in the republic.

  9. David,
    what do you make of the Chief Rabbi in Ireland hiding Dev from the British during the Irish War of Independence?

    What do you make of him being honoured in Israeal by a forest in Galilee being named in his honour in the 1960s?

    Why do you think the Irish Jewish community and the state of Israel thought of him as a friend?

  10. I’m no fan of the Long Fellow. And with no little effort it could be argued his foisting on the Irish people was due to no small part by the British. It’s highly unlikely that Dev would have become leader if the leaders of 1916 had been executed. So, thanks a lot. In fact, it could be argued that Ireland would still be part of the UK if it didn’t make martyrs out of the once very unpopular 1916 leaders.

    But, back to endorsement of dodgy leaders. Does anybody think the recent remarks by Thatcher regarding Pinochet would be hurtful to the people of Chile, when she commiserated with the loss of the brutal South American dictator.

    So, will the BBC follow RTE’s lead and do an expose of British leaders cosying up and supporting the likes of Saddam. For many years the darling of the West. Of course it might be more difficult now that the man in question is conveniently not around to spill the beans.

    Re Dev – A saying about glasshouses comes to mind.

  11. Let’s not forget that De Valera caused the Irish civil war to start in 1921:

    1. Sent Collins to London to negotiate the treaty with Britain.
    2. Disowned the treaty over the oath to the king.
    3. Lost the vote on the treaty in Dail Eireann .
    4. Lost the subsequent general election in which the treaty was endorsed by the electorate.
    5. Started the civil war, leading to hundreds of deaths and decades of bitterness.
    6. Lost the civil war and boycotted Dail Eireann.
    7. Later took their seats in Dail Eireann, taking the oath to the king "with mental reservations".

    What a guy!

  12. ‘In relation to Dev it’s a pity the Brits didn’t shoot him in 1916.’

    Or shot none of them. The effect would have been the same for Dev’s political career.

  13. Garfield – you already yapped that elsewhere and were dealt with.

    p.s. this would be the same Jewish state that honoured the villain Robert Maxwell ?

    Chris – sour grapes because deV took a hard line with dissidents ? And Adams and McGuinness have gone FAR further than de Valera did in recognising partition – after all de Valera was elected several times to seats in the North and took an abstentionist line 😉

  14. "In relation to Dev it’s a pity the Brits didn’t shoot him in 1916" – Chris

    Silly and predictable comment Chris. Every Shinner I know says exactly the same thing about Dev and it’s a fairly unthinking position to take. While I’m not his biggest fan I can acknowledge his self-sacrifice and achievements. Also, MR is right, Adams et al have gone much further than Dev in recognising and legitimising partition.

  15. JG

    This man was responsible for stirring the waters that led to Civil War and for what "External association"?

    He didn’t have the balls to lead the delegation so he sent Collins, a decent bloke, to bring back the bad news.

    He allowed the Catholic church to gain a position within Bunreacht Na hÉireann that they never should have got, FFS he wrote the damn thing with a Catholic Bishop beside him!

    His policies turned the place into an economic ruin where the main export was the Nations sons and daughters.

    In relation to your comment about about legitimising Partition, NONSENSE!

    Sinn Féin is a 32 county Socialist Republican party and unlike Dev’s Fianna Fail our Republicanism doesn’t stop at the Armagh Louth border!

  16. <Q>In relation to your comment about about legitimising Partition, NONSENSE!</Q>

    LOL – taking seats in partitionist assemblies and the Dail, recognising the partitionist Gardai and soon the PSNI ….

  17. Happy New Year Gang:
    I think Dev committed a few technical errors in his neutrality during The Emergency (World War Two to us over here). I know he drove Churchill and FDR crazy. The call on the German consulate after Hitler’s death, in his mind the diplomatic thing to do, probably stings the most. However, Ireland’s neutrality was necessary (it had no air defense and was in as great a danger of being invaded by GB as it was by Germany). I think most historians would agree that it was a neutrality that leaned greatly toward the allied cause. In addition, despite lingering resentment from its own struggle with GB, I beleive there were a significantt number of Irishmen who fought with the British forces, and a good number earned the Victoria Cross.

  18. "4. Lost the subsequent general election in which the treaty was endorsed by the electorate.
    5. Started the civil war, leading to hundreds of deaths and decades of bitterness."

    Controversial statements there Peter!

  19. Peter,

    I said "controversial" rather than "inaccurate"!

    Firstly, from what I remember of A-level history, SF fought the 1922 general election on a joint republican ticket under the Collins-de Valera Pact (the numbers were split between pro and anti Treaty, I think, based on the Dail vote on same). Also, the Pro-Treaty side’s separate manifesto was only published the day before the election thus creating confusion.

    Therefore, whether the public would have endorsed the Treaty (and they probably would have) was never known.

    Secondly, I wouldn’t say that de Valera started the civil war. It wasn’t started by politicians but by the irreconcilible divide between the rival factions in the republican army.

  20. Reg
    Point taken about the general election.

    As to the civil war, the anti-treaty side occupied the Four Courts and the first shots were fired to dislodge them. They then deliberately burnt a large part of the public records, destroying a priceless historical record.

  21. "As to the civil war, the anti-treaty side occupied the Four Courts and the first shots were fired to dislodge them. They then deliberately burnt a large part of the public records, destroying a priceless historical record."

    Agreed. Although I was never sure how much of the damage was due to arson v the Free State attack.

    Being a northerner, I tend to take Frank Aiken’s (original) view of the civil war – leant towards the republican side but think both sides are to blame for the dreadful waste of life/missed opportunity.

    It didn’t even address the most unpleasant part of the Treaty (the acceptance of partition).

  22. In articles entitled "De Valera helped Nazi war criminal" in The Sunday Times Ireland edition, and "How Dev’s Ireland became safe haven for fugitive Nazis" in the Sunday Independent (Ireland), I am quoted regarding Irish postwar asylum cases. Both articles are by Nicola Tallant and appear in the January 7th editions, using the forthcoming documentary series Ireland’s Nazis. Both articles are also, unfortunately, wrong and misrepresentative in several important areas.

    This is my actual quote from the script of Ireland’s Nazis (Programme One), courtesy Tile Films:

    "The former head of the Breton nationalist party Raymond Delaporte reportedly had an interview with De Valera in which De Valera advised him to continue using the aliases with which he’d entered Ireland so that then if the French asked De Valera is this man in the country De Valera could truthfully answer “NO”."

    That became this in The Sunday Times article:

    "Dan Leach of the University of Melbourne reveals that the former head of the Breton Nationalist Party met de Valera to discuss Lainé. ‘De Valera advised him (that Lainé should) continue using his alias so that if the French asked him if Lainé was in the country he could truthfully answer ‘no’,’ Leach said."

    Two different people; two different subjects of discussion. There is no evidence De Valera ever met Bezen Perrot leader and militant Breton collaborator Célestin Lainé (aka Neven Henaff). The discussion was between De Valera and Raymond Delaporte, and ‘Dev’s advice was for Delaporte alone. I certainly did not mention Lainé in this context, as can be plainly observed.

    Delaporte was a moderate nationalist, so obviously his meeting with De Valera lacks the kind of sensationalist verve Tallant requires to beat up her story.

    In addition, Tallant calls all this "new research". Wrong. As I said in my interview, the account of Delaporte’s meeting with the Taoiseach appears in Yann Fouéré’s memoirs La Maison du Connemara, published some 12 years ago.

    In her Sunday Independent piece, Tallant makes further errors, including referring to me as "Professor" Dan Leach. This will be interesting news to my department, as a simple Google search would have revealed that I am a PhD candidate.

    She goes on to describe Lainé as a "French extremist". He was a Breton nationalist.

    She also avers that during the war he would "take young men and women into the forests at night to torture and then execute them". This is untrue. Lainé was the political leader and driving force behind the Bezen Perrot, but he was not its field commander and never personally tortured nor executed anyone. It is true that the unit itself is alleged to have executed and tortured Resistance fighters, but no-one has ever found any evidence that Lainé himself was involved in this behaviour.

    The Sunday Times article can be accessed here:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-2534680,00.html

    The Sunday Independent piece may require registration with Unison.ie, but can be found here:
    http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=36&si=1750505&issue_id=15078&eid=265882

    — Daniel Leach
    PhD Candidate & Gerry Higgins Scholar
    Dept. of History, University of Melbourne d.leach@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au

  23. Dan,

    Many thanks for your clarification, much appreciated! As ever, the MSM cannot be trusted.

  24. Great stuff from Dan. Makes me wonder if I should trust what I read in the Sunday Independent about Albert Folens. Anyway …

    David,

    The Folens publishing company is one of if not THE biggest educational publisher in this state. And, according to the Sunday Independent, Folens was a member of the Gestapo before he set up his publishing company here.

    To my mind this is a far bigger scandal than anything De Valera might or might not have done with regards to Breton nationalists in the 1940s.

  25. I note furthermore that Tallant claims in the Sunday Independent piece that Artukovic entered Ireland under the pseudonym ‘Alois Annick’. Wrong again. As Hubert Butler noted many years ago, it was ‘Alois Anitch’ ("The Artukovitch File").

    I would make this final point: Artukovic was arrested in Austria by British military authorities, who then — despite his known activities and history — let him go. He spent a year in Ireland, certainly… but then spent over 40 years in the USA. The Yugoslavs tried for years to have him returned, and it was, I believe, the longest extradition battle in history that eventually culminated in him returning to face justice in 1988. I recommend the excellent website ‘The Pavelic Papers’ for more detail on Allied complicity in the escape and sanctuary granted to this and other ‘proven anti-Communist assets’ from Eastern Europe (not sure if it’s still online at http://www.pavelicpapers.com, but I can dig up copies of relevant sections if anyone wants). Ireland was not alone in this regard, by any means.

    Otto Skorzeny, Hitler’s swashbuckling commando, likewise alleged the Americans staged his "escape" from US custody; that it was a pre-arranged stunt to fool the Soviets and enable his anti-Communist expertise to be utilised. He claims he was smuggled back to Germany in 1950 to hire as many former SS men for the US as possible. These claims all appear in Glenn B. Infield’s ‘Skorzeny: Hitler’s Commando’ (NY: 1981).

    I would like to comment further, but am very busy cleaning up the mess this Irish ‘journalist’ has created.

    Cheers,

    DL

  26. Dan,

    Sloppy misrepresenting journalism is indeed a scandal and I am glad you have put these facts straight.

  27. Wasn’t Ms Tallant formerly employed by the Sunday Life?

    That might explain her 2nd-rate sensationalist journalism.

  28. I saw some of this documentary last night and it was pretty interesting, as is all of the programs that Cathal O’Shannon has been involved with. Cathal O’Shannon is right to be annoyed about his treatment on returning from the war and to question why former Nazi members got better treatment then he did

    Its good to see programs like this addressing the issues of the past.

Comments are closed.