Anti-Serbs Exposed
19.04.202512:53
PART 2:
To clarify that only the Ustashas were behind the genocide, The forces of the NDH were few in number and mostly of weak combat value, and the Germans did not have the forces to help them (during 1941, only the 718th garrison division was deployed in the NDH). The strengthening of the uprising put the NDH authorities in a very difficult situation, in which they did not have effective control over most of their territory. For this reason, the NDH authorities were happy to welcome the split in the insurgent forces and accepted a truce with the Chetnik detachments.
What did the fascists say about these heinous crimes that led to the creation of a nationwide Serbian uprising? We have this report:
The force of the uprising forced Pavelić to cede the Bribir-Sidraga parish to the jurisdiction of the General Administrative Commission at the headquarters of the 2nd Italian Army on 21 August, and five days later an agreement was signed in Zagreb on the reoccupation of the "second zone". The zone was declared demilitarized, and the Italian generals and Pavelić agreed that Đujić's forces, called "nationalist rebels" (the term Chetniks was not used because of the Ustashi), could, with mutual, Italian and Ustasha approval, be used against the national liberation insurgents, who were labeled "communist gangs". [2]
This debunks the whole theory that they were behind genocide. Even communists admit that it was like this by twisting words:
@debunkingantiserbs
To clarify that only the Ustashas were behind the genocide, The forces of the NDH were few in number and mostly of weak combat value, and the Germans did not have the forces to help them (during 1941, only the 718th garrison division was deployed in the NDH). The strengthening of the uprising put the NDH authorities in a very difficult situation, in which they did not have effective control over most of their territory. For this reason, the NDH authorities were happy to welcome the split in the insurgent forces and accepted a truce with the Chetnik detachments.
What did the fascists say about these heinous crimes that led to the creation of a nationwide Serbian uprising? We have this report:
The participation of these figures (Chetniks) in cooperation for our goals made it possibleto expand and deepen the already existing intelligence-political organization... it was possible — through them — to establish contacts with General Draža Mihailović, the leader of the remaining Yugoslav forces and the Chetnik-nationalist formations that London intended to push against us by creating a guerrilla, the development of which could have assumed large proportions and forced us to engage significant forces and resources. [1]
The force of the uprising forced Pavelić to cede the Bribir-Sidraga parish to the jurisdiction of the General Administrative Commission at the headquarters of the 2nd Italian Army on 21 August, and five days later an agreement was signed in Zagreb on the reoccupation of the "second zone". The zone was declared demilitarized, and the Italian generals and Pavelić agreed that Đujić's forces, called "nationalist rebels" (the term Chetniks was not used because of the Ustashi), could, with mutual, Italian and Ustasha approval, be used against the national liberation insurgents, who were labeled "communist gangs". [2]
This debunks the whole theory that they were behind genocide. Even communists admit that it was like this by twisting words:
,,thus the Knin phenomenon of World War II was born: the Italian authorities protected, assisted and equally engaged in defending the positions of both the Ustashi and the Chetniks. Anti-communism, or rather the growing threat from the national liberation movement to Italian-Ustasha-Chetnik interests, acted as a cohesive force in the common action of the counter-revolutionary forces". [3]
@debunkingantiserbs
01.04.202515:15
So what is conclusion? Conclusion is that history isnt't true to be checked with one eye, but with full eyes. Croatian lies about Tempo and "partizan-chetnik" collaboration which is cherrypicked had come to dust, so it's easy if you read books about it, you can see it's false. That's it.
@debunkingantiserbs
@debunkingantiserbs
02.03.202513:53
JASENOVAC - BETWEEN LIES AND TRUTH! - Part 1
Let's look at this post about Hitler and Pavelić from Horstenau which they larp but we will debunk it soon. Serbs Exposed post: https://t.me/Serbsexposed/279
SOURCES USED:
1. Marko Hoare, Genocide and Resistance in Hitler's Bosnia: The Partisans and the Chetniks, pp. 23
2- Peter Broucek, Ein General im Zwielicht: die Erinnerungen Edmund Glaises von Horstenau. Band 3
3. Probably Croatian translation of Horstenau memoires (Izmedju Hitlera i Pavelića version)
⚡️- DEBUNK TIME -⚡️
Notes: Opseg is first of all non existent word, German word for book volume is band first sign of their stupidity, post does not refer quotations to source's which is critically problematic they just specified at the end which sources are being used without referencing them in quotations, also the book from Marko Hoare unavailable on the internet which is also problematic.
Sidenote: Co-author of this post is D7[Desničar 07], ex-admin on SŠ a buddy of admin that wrote this. Source he used in co-writing this post [source] a YouTube documentary from which he cherry-picked info that was used in this post.
The only text that we could've find about Marko Hoare is this:
"Calculation may well have played a role also; vicious campaigns against all three groups could channel the Ustasha’s extreme nationalism away from a premature, potentially damaging confrontation with the Ital-ians. More simply, the Ustasha regime was militarily weak, and the Ustasha movement, as a fringe group, enjoyed limited popular support; terror, therefore, was an alternative means of controlling its ethnically disparate population".
Marko Hoare - Genocide and Resistance in Hitler's Bosnia: The Partisans and the Chetniks, pp. 23 (from their source). Note: Try to find full pdf or example whole page it will give more authority, tho this is also good. The only exact reference to a source which SE admin uploaded is "Ein General im Zwielicht: die Erinnerungen Edmund Glaises von Horstenau (pp. 149)" quotation:
"Allerdings ist diese nur theoretisch zu werten. In der rauhen Welt der Tatsachen zieht er aus seinem Österreichertum keine merklichen Schlußfolgerungen. Löhr hatte unmittelbar vor dem Poglavnikbesuch wie schon letzthin mit Hitler über die scheußliche Politik des Ustašaregimes gesprochen und dabei diesmal sogar die Wahrnehmung machen können, daß kein geringerer als Himmler ganz in das Horn Löhrs blies. Aber Hitler winkte ab. Auf die Ustašagreuel verweisend, meinte er, das Pavelićregime in Kroatien sei ihm treu ergeben, und er habe keinen Grund, seinen nicht allzu zahlreichen wirklichen Freunden in die Arme zu fallen. Die guten Kroaten, schloß er, mögen sich "nur austoben" – wommit er die Serbenmorde meinte. In derselben Stunde machte dem Auswärtigen Amt die in Belgrad nicht zuletzt wegen des kroatischen Blutregimes ausgebrochene Nedićkrise schwere Sorgen"
Translation:
,,However, this can only be evaluated theoretically. In the harsh world of facts he draws no noticeable conclusions from his Austrianness. Immediately before the Poglavnik visit, Löhr had spoken to Hitler, as he had recently, about the hideous policies of the Ustaša regime and this time he was even able to make it clear that none other than Himmler was completely following Löhr's horn. But Hitler waved him away. Referring to the Ustašag atrocities, he said that the Pavelić regime in Croatia was loyal to him and that he had no reason to fall into the arms of his few real friends. The good Croats, he concluded, should "just let off steam" - by which he meant the Serb murders. At the same time, the Foreign Office was seriously concerned about the Nedić crisis that had broken out in Belgrade, not least because of the Croatian blood regime.
Let's look at this post about Hitler and Pavelić from Horstenau which they larp but we will debunk it soon. Serbs Exposed post: https://t.me/Serbsexposed/279
SOURCES USED:
1. Marko Hoare, Genocide and Resistance in Hitler's Bosnia: The Partisans and the Chetniks, pp. 23
2- Peter Broucek, Ein General im Zwielicht: die Erinnerungen Edmund Glaises von Horstenau. Band 3
3. Probably Croatian translation of Horstenau memoires (Izmedju Hitlera i Pavelića version)
⚡️- DEBUNK TIME -⚡️
Notes: Opseg is first of all non existent word, German word for book volume is band first sign of their stupidity, post does not refer quotations to source's which is critically problematic they just specified at the end which sources are being used without referencing them in quotations, also the book from Marko Hoare unavailable on the internet which is also problematic.
Sidenote: Co-author of this post is D7[Desničar 07], ex-admin on SŠ a buddy of admin that wrote this. Source he used in co-writing this post [source] a YouTube documentary from which he cherry-picked info that was used in this post.
The only text that we could've find about Marko Hoare is this:
"Calculation may well have played a role also; vicious campaigns against all three groups could channel the Ustasha’s extreme nationalism away from a premature, potentially damaging confrontation with the Ital-ians. More simply, the Ustasha regime was militarily weak, and the Ustasha movement, as a fringe group, enjoyed limited popular support; terror, therefore, was an alternative means of controlling its ethnically disparate population".
Marko Hoare - Genocide and Resistance in Hitler's Bosnia: The Partisans and the Chetniks, pp. 23 (from their source). Note: Try to find full pdf or example whole page it will give more authority, tho this is also good. The only exact reference to a source which SE admin uploaded is "Ein General im Zwielicht: die Erinnerungen Edmund Glaises von Horstenau (pp. 149)" quotation:
"Allerdings ist diese nur theoretisch zu werten. In der rauhen Welt der Tatsachen zieht er aus seinem Österreichertum keine merklichen Schlußfolgerungen. Löhr hatte unmittelbar vor dem Poglavnikbesuch wie schon letzthin mit Hitler über die scheußliche Politik des Ustašaregimes gesprochen und dabei diesmal sogar die Wahrnehmung machen können, daß kein geringerer als Himmler ganz in das Horn Löhrs blies. Aber Hitler winkte ab. Auf die Ustašagreuel verweisend, meinte er, das Pavelićregime in Kroatien sei ihm treu ergeben, und er habe keinen Grund, seinen nicht allzu zahlreichen wirklichen Freunden in die Arme zu fallen. Die guten Kroaten, schloß er, mögen sich "nur austoben" – wommit er die Serbenmorde meinte. In derselben Stunde machte dem Auswärtigen Amt die in Belgrad nicht zuletzt wegen des kroatischen Blutregimes ausgebrochene Nedićkrise schwere Sorgen"
Translation:
,,However, this can only be evaluated theoretically. In the harsh world of facts he draws no noticeable conclusions from his Austrianness. Immediately before the Poglavnik visit, Löhr had spoken to Hitler, as he had recently, about the hideous policies of the Ustaša regime and this time he was even able to make it clear that none other than Himmler was completely following Löhr's horn. But Hitler waved him away. Referring to the Ustašag atrocities, he said that the Pavelić regime in Croatia was loyal to him and that he had no reason to fall into the arms of his few real friends. The good Croats, he concluded, should "just let off steam" - by which he meant the Serb murders. At the same time, the Foreign Office was seriously concerned about the Nedić crisis that had broken out in Belgrade, not least because of the Croatian blood regime.
20.01.202511:31
FAIL:
These anti-Serbs after posting this "document" don't want to show another documents that it didn't happen and that ammandment by Himmler inspired by Meyszner is REVOKED. First we need to analyze this document which ustashe posted it:
By the fall of 1942, the dispute had escalated to such an extent that external mediation was the only option. In fact, the SS Main Personnel Office sent an Obergruppenführer to Serbia to investigate the matter and make suggestions for solutions. By the time his report was available in mid-October, the die had already been cast against Turner; Nevertheless, this source is of interest as an internal SS characterization of Meyszner. In this letter, after the behavior of both group leaders had been described as “shameful” and the impossibility of both men remaining in Serbia had been stated, it was stated that Meyszner, who had recently arrived in Serbia at the beginning of 1942, failed to establish the necessary contact with the senior Turner. The reporter has not known the latter to be tactless for years, but he has bad memories of Meyszner "even from Vienna as being extremely stubborn and opinionated." The HSSPF was able to be sure of this success shortly after he took office, as Himmler had advised him in one of his first reports from Belgrade "never to engage in a conversation with the clever Serbs in the way that, I think, recently happened to our good gymnast In this context it was about Serbian criticism of the Italian allies, who were also acting as occupying powers in the Balkans, but the statement can easily be generalized, because Himmler continued: “Be convinced that the "Serbs will complain against us in the same way at the Italians."
Even before this correspondence, Himmler had unmistakably taken the side of Meyszner and his political concept, if you want to call it that. He urged Turner, following the example of Reinhard Heydrich (1904-1942), to do everything in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia to avoid consolidating and strengthening the government there. Turner, on the other hand, was striving to strengthen the Nedić government. ken, which, however, is completely wrong. A few days later, Himmler followed up with another letter in which he bluntly instructed Turner not to interfere in the interests of the German ethnic group in Banat in the future - the carte blanche for Meyszner could hardly have been more drastic. A few days later, with gritted teeth, Turner had to issue an order to the field commanders on the instructions of the commander, who was thus responding to Meyszner's demands, according to which, from September 15, 1942, the handling of the police department, including the police administrative tasks of substantive law, would be transferred to the HSSPF and its local departments. The long list of matters affected included, in addition to genuine police tasks.
𝕴𝕿 𝕲𝕺𝕰𝕾 𝕽𝕰𝖁𝕺𝕶𝕴𝕹𝕲 𝕿𝕴𝕸𝕰:
A step that was impossible to hide from the public could in no way be in Germany's interest. In order to avert the impending damage, the Belgrade representative of the Foreign Office, Felix Benzler, was summoned to the Führer's headquarters, from where he returned with a mandate stating that no measure could be taken in Serbia without his consent; Benzler should influence Nedić to ensure his stay in office and present this as the express wish of the Reich government, which Benzler DID SUCCESFULLY. [1] In doing so, as Turner's adjutant told Himmler's Adlatus Wolff, Hitler had made, by the way, stuck to this THIS by INVITING NEDIĆ TO VISIT his Wolfsschanze headquarters in September 1943 - a SIGNIFICANT INCREASE in prestige of the SERBIAN HEAD OF GOVERNMENT". [2]
𝔖𝔬 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔦𝔯 𝔞𝔯𝔤𝔲𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱 𝔩𝔦𝔨𝔢 "𝔪𝔲𝔥 𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔟𝔰 𝔴𝔲𝔷 𝔫𝔬𝔱 𝔱𝔯𝔲𝔰𝔱𝔢𝔡 𝔫 𝔰𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔢𝔱" 𝔣𝔞𝔩𝔩 𝔦𝔫𝔱𝔬 𝔭𝔦𝔱𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔞𝔱𝔢𝔯 𝔞𝔣𝔱𝔢𝔯 𝔦𝔱 𝔴𝔞𝔰 𝔯𝔢𝔳𝔬𝔨𝔢𝔡 𝔟𝔶 ℌ𝔦𝔱𝔩𝔢𝔯 𝔥𝔦𝔪𝔰𝔢𝔩𝔣 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔑𝔢𝔡𝔦ć'𝔰 𝔤𝔬𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔫𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱 𝔴𝔞𝔰 𝔰𝔱𝔯𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔢𝔫𝔢𝔡 𝔟𝔶 𝔥𝔦𝔪 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔬𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔯 𝔯𝔢𝔭𝔯𝔢𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔳𝔢𝔰.
(Scholarly work for document's details can be found here)
These anti-Serbs after posting this "document" don't want to show another documents that it didn't happen and that ammandment by Himmler inspired by Meyszner is REVOKED. First we need to analyze this document which ustashe posted it:
By the fall of 1942, the dispute had escalated to such an extent that external mediation was the only option. In fact, the SS Main Personnel Office sent an Obergruppenführer to Serbia to investigate the matter and make suggestions for solutions. By the time his report was available in mid-October, the die had already been cast against Turner; Nevertheless, this source is of interest as an internal SS characterization of Meyszner. In this letter, after the behavior of both group leaders had been described as “shameful” and the impossibility of both men remaining in Serbia had been stated, it was stated that Meyszner, who had recently arrived in Serbia at the beginning of 1942, failed to establish the necessary contact with the senior Turner. The reporter has not known the latter to be tactless for years, but he has bad memories of Meyszner "even from Vienna as being extremely stubborn and opinionated." The HSSPF was able to be sure of this success shortly after he took office, as Himmler had advised him in one of his first reports from Belgrade "never to engage in a conversation with the clever Serbs in the way that, I think, recently happened to our good gymnast In this context it was about Serbian criticism of the Italian allies, who were also acting as occupying powers in the Balkans, but the statement can easily be generalized, because Himmler continued: “Be convinced that the "Serbs will complain against us in the same way at the Italians."
Even before this correspondence, Himmler had unmistakably taken the side of Meyszner and his political concept, if you want to call it that. He urged Turner, following the example of Reinhard Heydrich (1904-1942), to do everything in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia to avoid consolidating and strengthening the government there. Turner, on the other hand, was striving to strengthen the Nedić government. ken, which, however, is completely wrong. A few days later, Himmler followed up with another letter in which he bluntly instructed Turner not to interfere in the interests of the German ethnic group in Banat in the future - the carte blanche for Meyszner could hardly have been more drastic. A few days later, with gritted teeth, Turner had to issue an order to the field commanders on the instructions of the commander, who was thus responding to Meyszner's demands, according to which, from September 15, 1942, the handling of the police department, including the police administrative tasks of substantive law, would be transferred to the HSSPF and its local departments. The long list of matters affected included, in addition to genuine police tasks.
𝕴𝕿 𝕲𝕺𝕰𝕾 𝕽𝕰𝖁𝕺𝕶𝕴𝕹𝕲 𝕿𝕴𝕸𝕰:
A step that was impossible to hide from the public could in no way be in Germany's interest. In order to avert the impending damage, the Belgrade representative of the Foreign Office, Felix Benzler, was summoned to the Führer's headquarters, from where he returned with a mandate stating that no measure could be taken in Serbia without his consent; Benzler should influence Nedić to ensure his stay in office and present this as the express wish of the Reich government, which Benzler DID SUCCESFULLY. [1] In doing so, as Turner's adjutant told Himmler's Adlatus Wolff, Hitler had made, by the way, stuck to this THIS by INVITING NEDIĆ TO VISIT his Wolfsschanze headquarters in September 1943 - a SIGNIFICANT INCREASE in prestige of the SERBIAN HEAD OF GOVERNMENT". [2]
𝔖𝔬 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔦𝔯 𝔞𝔯𝔤𝔲𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱 𝔩𝔦𝔨𝔢 "𝔪𝔲𝔥 𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔟𝔰 𝔴𝔲𝔷 𝔫𝔬𝔱 𝔱𝔯𝔲𝔰𝔱𝔢𝔡 𝔫 𝔰𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔢𝔱" 𝔣𝔞𝔩𝔩 𝔦𝔫𝔱𝔬 𝔭𝔦𝔱𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔞𝔱𝔢𝔯 𝔞𝔣𝔱𝔢𝔯 𝔦𝔱 𝔴𝔞𝔰 𝔯𝔢𝔳𝔬𝔨𝔢𝔡 𝔟𝔶 ℌ𝔦𝔱𝔩𝔢𝔯 𝔥𝔦𝔪𝔰𝔢𝔩𝔣 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔑𝔢𝔡𝔦ć'𝔰 𝔤𝔬𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔫𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱 𝔴𝔞𝔰 𝔰𝔱𝔯𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔢𝔫𝔢𝔡 𝔟𝔶 𝔥𝔦𝔪 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔬𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔯 𝔯𝔢𝔭𝔯𝔢𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔳𝔢𝔰.
(Scholarly work for document's details can be found here)
11.04.202520:45
We're back
Spread the link everywhere https://t.me/+REhArXC6PzE0MDA5
Spread the link everywhere https://t.me/+REhArXC6PzE0MDA5
Reposted from:
Serbs exposed ⚡️⚡️
01.04.202514:37
Svetozar Vukmanović, member of the Partisan General Staff and commander of Partisan units in Bosnia, openly talks about deep Partisan-Chetnik cooperation in Eastern Bosnia, which went as far as establishing a joint staff in those regions, not surprising considering the fact that both groups were overwhelmingly Serbian.
This is one of many instances where it becomes clear that Chetniks thrived on collaborating with anti-axis factions during the war to further their (Serb) goals, the same way as Serbian "National Socialists" lie today to gain sympathy from far-right groups.
@SerbsExposed
This is one of many instances where it becomes clear that Chetniks thrived on collaborating with anti-axis factions during the war to further their (Serb) goals, the same way as Serbian "National Socialists" lie today to gain sympathy from far-right groups.
@SerbsExposed
12.02.202508:55
DEBUNKING THIS UNLITTERACY MADE BY USTASHE:
Their argument: Any connection, even a temporary one, with the anti-communist Chetniks in Croatia is against the order of the Führer
⚡️ - DEBUNK TIME - ⚡️
𝔉𝔦𝔯𝔰𝔱 𝔬𝔣 𝔞𝔩𝔩, 𝔩𝔢𝔱'𝔰 𝔞𝔫𝔞𝔩𝔶𝔷𝔢 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔦𝔯 𝔦𝔩𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔢𝔯𝔞𝔠𝔶:
1. This was at the time of uprising of Serbian people against Ustashe atrocities in Croatia. This document from T311 roll 175 (frame no. 378) is there because Chetniks were involved in uprising against atrocities with partisans until they made compromise with Italians to defend Serbs from Ustashe. [1] In the middle of 1942, the Chetniks took control in the regions of northern Dalmatia, in contrast to Banija, Kordun and Lika, where the partisans prevailed. The Italian current was particularly pronounced in the hinterland of the Dalmatian coast and on the triple border of Dalmatia, Lika and the Bosnian Krajina. [2] So this was the beggining.
𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃 𝐏𝐇𝐀𝐒𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐂𝐇𝐄𝐓𝐍𝐈𝐊𝐒 𝐆𝐎𝐓 𝐑𝐄𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐁𝐋𝐄 𝐋𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐆𝐄𝐑𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐒:
This roll was made because Chetniks took part in uprising until compromise again with Italians. Croatian lies through lies and next documents from NAW can be debunked through these arguments:
1. There is a changing attitude of the German troops towards the Chetniks. In some cases because of uprising, they considered them enemies and had orders to act ruthlessly against them if necessary to carry out operations. However, at the same time, there are instructions to avoid unnecessary conflicts with the Chetniks, and the most important thing is to move quickly towards certain objectives, such as the bauxite area.
2. The relationship between the German forces and the Chetniks is not constant, but changes according to military objectives and strategies at a given moment. German troops were directed to advance quickly towards the bauxite area, which could lead to situations where the Chetniks are as allies in achieving those goals to defeat partisans since they didn't got into war against them.
𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘴:
- German troops have to act recklessly against the Chetniks if it is necessary to carry out operations. On the other hand, one should NOT LOOK FOR UNNECESSARY conflicts with the Chetniks. The most important thing is to move quickly towards the bauxite area. Any offers to negotiate are to be rejected [...]./ (frame no. 435) [3]
- - 7.3.43: /Ammunition for Chetniks. The SSUPREME COMMAND was informed by telegram about the DELIVERY OF 30,000 BULLETS to the CHETNIK units [...]./ (frame no. 448) [4]
- /Despite the combat assistance OF THE BRAVE CHETNIKS, which contributed to the unblocking of the ENCIRCLED PARTS of the 718th Infantry Division, the German troops have the task of quickly breaking through to the bauxite area. They have instructions to consider the Chetniks as enemies. Now it turns out that the situation near Dobro (?), WHOSE CREW CONSISTED of Germans, Italians and Chetniks, IMPROVED THANKS TO THE CHETNIK PENETRATION [...]./ [5]
Their argument: Any connection, even a temporary one, with the anti-communist Chetniks in Croatia is against the order of the Führer
⚡️ - DEBUNK TIME - ⚡️
𝔉𝔦𝔯𝔰𝔱 𝔬𝔣 𝔞𝔩𝔩, 𝔩𝔢𝔱'𝔰 𝔞𝔫𝔞𝔩𝔶𝔷𝔢 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔦𝔯 𝔦𝔩𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔢𝔯𝔞𝔠𝔶:
1. This was at the time of uprising of Serbian people against Ustashe atrocities in Croatia. This document from T311 roll 175 (frame no. 378) is there because Chetniks were involved in uprising against atrocities with partisans until they made compromise with Italians to defend Serbs from Ustashe. [1] In the middle of 1942, the Chetniks took control in the regions of northern Dalmatia, in contrast to Banija, Kordun and Lika, where the partisans prevailed. The Italian current was particularly pronounced in the hinterland of the Dalmatian coast and on the triple border of Dalmatia, Lika and the Bosnian Krajina. [2] So this was the beggining.
𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃 𝐏𝐇𝐀𝐒𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐂𝐇𝐄𝐓𝐍𝐈𝐊𝐒 𝐆𝐎𝐓 𝐑𝐄𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐁𝐋𝐄 𝐋𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐆𝐄𝐑𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐒:
This roll was made because Chetniks took part in uprising until compromise again with Italians. Croatian lies through lies and next documents from NAW can be debunked through these arguments:
1. There is a changing attitude of the German troops towards the Chetniks. In some cases because of uprising, they considered them enemies and had orders to act ruthlessly against them if necessary to carry out operations. However, at the same time, there are instructions to avoid unnecessary conflicts with the Chetniks, and the most important thing is to move quickly towards certain objectives, such as the bauxite area.
2. The relationship between the German forces and the Chetniks is not constant, but changes according to military objectives and strategies at a given moment. German troops were directed to advance quickly towards the bauxite area, which could lead to situations where the Chetniks are as allies in achieving those goals to defeat partisans since they didn't got into war against them.
𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘴:
- German troops have to act recklessly against the Chetniks if it is necessary to carry out operations. On the other hand, one should NOT LOOK FOR UNNECESSARY conflicts with the Chetniks. The most important thing is to move quickly towards the bauxite area. Any offers to negotiate are to be rejected [...]./ (frame no. 435) [3]
- - 7.3.43: /Ammunition for Chetniks. The SSUPREME COMMAND was informed by telegram about the DELIVERY OF 30,000 BULLETS to the CHETNIK units [...]./ (frame no. 448) [4]
- /Despite the combat assistance OF THE BRAVE CHETNIKS, which contributed to the unblocking of the ENCIRCLED PARTS of the 718th Infantry Division, the German troops have the task of quickly breaking through to the bauxite area. They have instructions to consider the Chetniks as enemies. Now it turns out that the situation near Dobro (?), WHOSE CREW CONSISTED of Germans, Italians and Chetniks, IMPROVED THANKS TO THE CHETNIK PENETRATION [...]./ [5]
Could not access
the media content
the media content
31.12.202414:24
As I have entered my prime, I must expose this weak statement as their views are collapsing:
First of all, apart from that "document", there are plenty of documents through which one can see.
1. To prevent at the root all attempts to create military units parallel to the national liberation partisan detachments, because the national liberation partisan detachments are the only force in the national liberation struggle in Montenegro and the bearers of that struggle. To this end, the property of the fifth columnists and spies should be confiscated. [1]
2. In 1941, in Montenegro, the communists captured and shot 70 Serbs. The final number of victims of communism in Montenegro was about 15,000. [2]
We will not let lies to be slided. @debunkingantiserbs
First of all, apart from that "document", there are plenty of documents through which one can see.
1. To prevent at the root all attempts to create military units parallel to the national liberation partisan detachments, because the national liberation partisan detachments are the only force in the national liberation struggle in Montenegro and the bearers of that struggle. To this end, the property of the fifth columnists and spies should be confiscated. [1]
2. In 1941, in Montenegro, the communists captured and shot 70 Serbs. The final number of victims of communism in Montenegro was about 15,000. [2]
We will not let lies to be slided. @debunkingantiserbs
11.04.202519:36
I just wanted to say, thank you for 100 subscribers. We are in prime once again and truth shall be revealed. May God bless this channel and purest National-Socialism.
Reposted from:
Српска Национална Алијанса
19.03.202517:28
Imperial Count Joseph Andreas von Thürheim describes the behavior of Croats in the Habsburg ranks during the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-1748):
"As early as November 2 [1742], Field Marshal Count Traun explained to his monarch the reasons why he could not agree with the majority of the war council to advance across the Panar. On November 9 he reported the desertion of 700 Croats who had abandoned their banners to return home. He gave a reasoned remark that the border peoples (Slavonians and Croats), 5,000 men, constituted almost half of the entire infantry, and now he shows how good it was not to have set out against the Spaniards with such unreliable troops, which, incidentally, would have been of little use in open battle. On November 14 the Field Marshal reported that the Croats who had fled had finally been persuaded to return to the army by the persuasion of the officers sent after them, and that circumstances forced him to let their crime go unpunished."
Source: Joseph Andreas von Thürheim, Feldmarschall Otto Ferdinand Graf von Abensperg und Craun, 1677-1748, Vienna, 1877, 115
"As early as November 2 [1742], Field Marshal Count Traun explained to his monarch the reasons why he could not agree with the majority of the war council to advance across the Panar. On November 9 he reported the desertion of 700 Croats who had abandoned their banners to return home. He gave a reasoned remark that the border peoples (Slavonians and Croats), 5,000 men, constituted almost half of the entire infantry, and now he shows how good it was not to have set out against the Spaniards with such unreliable troops, which, incidentally, would have been of little use in open battle. On November 14 the Field Marshal reported that the Croats who had fled had finally been persuaded to return to the army by the persuasion of the officers sent after them, and that circumstances forced him to let their crime go unpunished."
Source: Joseph Andreas von Thürheim, Feldmarschall Otto Ferdinand Graf von Abensperg und Craun, 1677-1748, Vienna, 1877, 115
12.02.202508:55
01.04.202515:15
FALLACY OF SERBS EXPOSED "DEBUNK" ON FAILED PARTIZAN-CHETNIK COLLABORATION:
Just to be clear, we don't symphatize with Draža, only with Montenegrin chetniks but since Ustashe promote a pseudo-historic illiteracy making Serbs as a non-NS traitors, we need to sanction them with posts. First of all partizan-chetnik collaboration happened in 1941 during mass systematic genocide on Serbs in Croatia, but this stopped during Serbian uprising, but what they forget is that:
- Chetniks made pact with Fascist Italy to form Anti-Communist Militia , stopping a genocide against Serbs due to formation of Chetnik zones, and demarcation line which seperated half of Croatia, there were same zones too.
(For details you can look here in this post)
On systematic genocide it will be soon posts, including Jasenovac. But why do they really attack Tempo? They should claim him. Why am i saying this? It's because... we can look for another reasons:
>The Herzegovinian partisans persistently requested permission to attack Gornji Borac (Donji Borac was liquidated under the command of Major Todorović), but J. B. Tito never gave it. According to Skok, he believed that,
As we can see in these passages, he didnt even hated Ustashe, Tempo is a communist liar who suddently "realised the truth" while making this in WW2 in Balkans. And for now, what did he do to Serbs and how did he mistreat them rather than Croats? We have another sources for this:
>When on August 12, 1941, Svetozar Vukmanović Tempo received a letter from the Đuro Pucara about the massacre of 650 men, women and children in the vicinity of Prijedor, after which it was expected that the Germans would take the Serbs under their protection and abolish the Ustasha government, he replied:
>We have already seen how one of the highest communist officials, Svetozar Vukmanović Tempo, reacted to the news of the massacre of 650 men, women and children in the vicinity of Prijedor. Here is another part of his letter:
Just to be clear, we don't symphatize with Draža, only with Montenegrin chetniks but since Ustashe promote a pseudo-historic illiteracy making Serbs as a non-NS traitors, we need to sanction them with posts. First of all partizan-chetnik collaboration happened in 1941 during mass systematic genocide on Serbs in Croatia, but this stopped during Serbian uprising, but what they forget is that:
- Chetniks made pact with Fascist Italy to form Anti-Communist Militia , stopping a genocide against Serbs due to formation of Chetnik zones, and demarcation line which seperated half of Croatia, there were same zones too.
(For details you can look here in this post)
On systematic genocide it will be soon posts, including Jasenovac. But why do they really attack Tempo? They should claim him. Why am i saying this? It's because... we can look for another reasons:
>We have seen, already known documents say that this cooperation during the fighting in Eastern Bosnia lasted about a month, or as long as was necessary.Also, it was already known that Croatian formations were already supplying the Partisans with ammunition at this time, but the communists hid the Ustashas behind the term "Croatian army". For example, for the period before that written about by Šmider, the delegate of the Supreme Staff for Eastern Bosnia, Svetozar Vukmanović Tempo, reported on March 31, 1942, about the activities they were tasked (the Rogatica Detachment - ed. aut) to connect with some officers of the Croatian army in Podromania, with whom the Glasinac Battalion had already established contact and from whom they received some ammunition. [1]
>The Herzegovinian partisans persistently requested permission to attack Gornji Borac (Donji Borac was liquidated under the command of Major Todorović), but J. B. Tito never gave it. According to Skok, he believed that,
"when it comes to Croats and Muslims, the partisan detachments must show full understanding for their previous avoidance of joining the fight against the occupiers and that, in order to win them over to that fight, attacks on Croatian and Muslim villages should be avoided". According to Svetozar Vukmanović Tempo, the partisans "should not even seek food from those villages", but "the entire burden of the fight should initially fall on the backs of the Serbian people".[2]
As we can see in these passages, he didnt even hated Ustashe, Tempo is a communist liar who suddently "realised the truth" while making this in WW2 in Balkans. And for now, what did he do to Serbs and how did he mistreat them rather than Croats? We have another sources for this:
>When on August 12, 1941, Svetozar Vukmanović Tempo received a letter from the Đuro Pucara about the massacre of 650 men, women and children in the vicinity of Prijedor, after which it was expected that the Germans would take the Serbs under their protection and abolish the Ustasha government, he replied:
"I was much more concerned about the news that the occupiers were going to abolish the Ustasha government in Prijedor and that the regular army of the NDH had taken over all power in the city. If the occupier starts to create a situation in which some more just laws will be applied to the Serbs, this could shake a large part of the peasant masses and jeopardize the development of the armed struggle".[3]
>We have already seen how one of the highest communist officials, Svetozar Vukmanović Tempo, reacted to the news of the massacre of 650 men, women and children in the vicinity of Prijedor. Here is another part of his letter:
"I was much more concerned by the news that the occupiers were going to abolish the Ustasha government in Prijedor and that the regular army of the Independent State of Croatia had taken over all power in the city. If the occupier starts to create a situation in which some more just laws will be applied to the Serbs, this could shake a large part of the peasant masses and threaten the development of the armed struggle".[4]
Reposted from:Српска Национална Алијанса
19.03.202517:28
Царски гроф Јозеф Андреас фон Тирхајм описује понашање Хрвата у хабзбуршким редовима током Рата за аустријско наслеђе (1740-1748):
„Већ 2. новембра [1742], фелдмаршал гроф Траун објаснио је свом монарху разлоге зашто није могао да се сложи са већином ратног савета да напредује преко Панара. 9. новембра пријавио је дезертерство 700 Хрвата који су напустили своје заставе да би се вратили кућама. Дао је мотивисану опаску да су погранични народи (Славонци и Хрвати), 5000 људи, чинили скоро половину целокупне пешадије, а сада показује колико је било добро што није кренуо на Шпанце са тако непоузданим трупама, које би, узгред, биле од мале користи у отвореној борби. 14. новембра фелдмаршал је известио да су Хрвати који су побегли коначно убеђени да се врате у војску наговарањем официра послатих за њима и да су га околности приморале да њихов злочин остане некажњен.“
Извор: Јозеф Андреас фон Тирхајм, Feldmarschall Otto Ferdinand Graf von Abensperg und Craun, 1677-1748, Беч, 1877, 115
„Већ 2. новембра [1742], фелдмаршал гроф Траун објаснио је свом монарху разлоге зашто није могао да се сложи са већином ратног савета да напредује преко Панара. 9. новембра пријавио је дезертерство 700 Хрвата који су напустили своје заставе да би се вратили кућама. Дао је мотивисану опаску да су погранични народи (Славонци и Хрвати), 5000 људи, чинили скоро половину целокупне пешадије, а сада показује колико је било добро што није кренуо на Шпанце са тако непоузданим трупама, које би, узгред, биле од мале користи у отвореној борби. 14. новембра фелдмаршал је известио да су Хрвати који су побегли коначно убеђени да се врате у војску наговарањем официра послатих за њима и да су га околности приморале да њихов злочин остане некажњен.“
Извор: Јозеф Андреас фон Тирхајм, Feldmarschall Otto Ferdinand Graf von Abensperg und Craun, 1677-1748, Беч, 1877, 115
02.02.202510:56
EXPOSING THIS NONSENSE:
The anti-Serbs are again in the act of falsifying history, it is our duty to expose them and show them the light of justice and truth. We see that they misinterpreted the term "Vlach" or that they themselves do not know what it means. Also to mention something for my viewers, these idiots copied all the sources from Wikipedia, so we are going to destroy these claims. Let's get to the discovery:
𝑀𝐼𝒮𝐼𝒩𝒯𝐸𝑅𝒫𝑅𝐸𝒯𝒜𝒯𝐼𝒪𝒩:
Who are the Vlachs first of all? - The term "Vlasi" was known to everyone. As they say, no one denies that the Vlachs existed in the Serbian empire, but they want to hide the history. Vlach was first of all a term whose meaning changed rapidly because the meaning of this definition of the word was used in the Middle Ages for foreigners such as Latins, nomads, etc. So are they called "Vlas" by their definition? [1]
Mostly, Serbs become "Vlachs" only after the dissolution of the Serbian state, because then massive Serbs from the plains move to mountainous areas. And they call themselves Vlachs, which foreigners also accept. [2] Serbs automatically start calling themselves Vlachs after they fled from the plains to the mountains under the Turks. The people of Drobnjak, for example, who were never Vlachs, were called Vlachs after the collapse of the Serbian state because they lived in the hills. The same with Montenegrins. [3]
𝕿𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖗 𝖙𝖗𝖞 𝖙𝖔 𝖋𝖆𝖑𝖘𝖎𝖋𝖞 𝖆 𝕾𝖊𝖗𝖇𝖎𝖆𝖓 𝖙𝖗𝖆𝖈𝖊 𝖙𝖍𝖗𝖔𝖚𝖌𝖍𝖔𝖚𝖙 𝖍𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖔𝖗𝖞 𝖎𝖓 𝕮𝖗𝖔𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖆 𝖆𝖓𝖉 𝕭𝖔𝖘𝖓𝖎𝖆 𝖙𝖍𝖗𝖔𝖚𝖌𝖍 "𝖁𝖑𝖆𝖈𝖍𝖘":
"Vlachs", referring to pastoralists, was a common exonym for Serbs in the Ottoman Empire and later. [4] The term "Vlachs" was also used for Slavs who shared lifestyle (as shepherds) with Romance peoples (Vlachs); it was used for the Serbs who settled the Military Frontier by even Austrian leader, you can look at "Statuta Valachorum" because to debunk all this nonsense, it is an early modern exonym for Serbs. [5] It was used as a derogatory term, and as a common name for Orthodox Serbs in Catholic lands, and lesser in the Ottoman Empire.
𝓔𝓪𝓻𝓵𝔂 𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓼 𝓸𝓯 𝓢𝓮𝓻𝓫𝓼 𝓲𝓷 𝓒𝓻𝓸𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓪 𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓫𝓾𝓷𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝔀𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓷𝓸 𝓢𝓮𝓻𝓫𝓼:
ℭ𝔬𝔯𝔭𝔲𝔰 𝔰𝔠𝔯𝔦𝔭𝔱𝔬𝔯𝔲𝔪 𝔥𝔦𝔰𝔱𝔬𝔯𝔦𝔞𝔢 𝔅𝔶𝔷𝔞𝔫𝔱𝔦𝔫𝔞𝔢 - John Kinnamos, in his work covering 1118–76, wrote: "the Serbs, a Dalmatic (Dalmatian) tribe" (Greek: Σέρβιοι, έθνος Δαλματικόν), thus using "Dalmat(ian)s" or "Dalmatic (Dalmatian) people" in the context of the Serbs, and "Dalmatia" in the context of Serbia. [6]
𝔈𝔦𝔫𝔥𝔞𝔯𝔡'𝔰 𝔟𝔬𝔬𝔨 𝔞𝔟𝔬𝔲𝔱 𝔢𝔱𝔥𝔫𝔦𝔠 𝔰𝔱𝔯𝔲𝔠𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔇𝔞𝔩𝔪𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔞 - Serbs, a people who hold a large land of Dalmatia... [7]
𝕿𝖍𝖎𝖘 𝖆𝖗𝖌𝖚𝖒𝖊𝖓𝖙 𝖔𝖓𝖈𝖊 𝖆𝖌𝖆𝖎𝖓 𝖎𝖘 𝖊𝖑𝖎𝖒𝖎𝖓𝖆𝖙𝖊𝖉 𝖆𝖓𝖉 𝖉𝖊𝖘𝖙𝖗𝖔𝖞𝖊𝖉 𝖇𝖞 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝕾𝖊𝖗𝖇𝖘.
The anti-Serbs are again in the act of falsifying history, it is our duty to expose them and show them the light of justice and truth. We see that they misinterpreted the term "Vlach" or that they themselves do not know what it means. Also to mention something for my viewers, these idiots copied all the sources from Wikipedia, so we are going to destroy these claims. Let's get to the discovery:
𝑀𝐼𝒮𝐼𝒩𝒯𝐸𝑅𝒫𝑅𝐸𝒯𝒜𝒯𝐼𝒪𝒩:
Who are the Vlachs first of all? - The term "Vlasi" was known to everyone. As they say, no one denies that the Vlachs existed in the Serbian empire, but they want to hide the history. Vlach was first of all a term whose meaning changed rapidly because the meaning of this definition of the word was used in the Middle Ages for foreigners such as Latins, nomads, etc. So are they called "Vlas" by their definition? [1]
Mostly, Serbs become "Vlachs" only after the dissolution of the Serbian state, because then massive Serbs from the plains move to mountainous areas. And they call themselves Vlachs, which foreigners also accept. [2] Serbs automatically start calling themselves Vlachs after they fled from the plains to the mountains under the Turks. The people of Drobnjak, for example, who were never Vlachs, were called Vlachs after the collapse of the Serbian state because they lived in the hills. The same with Montenegrins. [3]
𝕿𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖗 𝖙𝖗𝖞 𝖙𝖔 𝖋𝖆𝖑𝖘𝖎𝖋𝖞 𝖆 𝕾𝖊𝖗𝖇𝖎𝖆𝖓 𝖙𝖗𝖆𝖈𝖊 𝖙𝖍𝖗𝖔𝖚𝖌𝖍𝖔𝖚𝖙 𝖍𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖔𝖗𝖞 𝖎𝖓 𝕮𝖗𝖔𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖆 𝖆𝖓𝖉 𝕭𝖔𝖘𝖓𝖎𝖆 𝖙𝖍𝖗𝖔𝖚𝖌𝖍 "𝖁𝖑𝖆𝖈𝖍𝖘":
"Vlachs", referring to pastoralists, was a common exonym for Serbs in the Ottoman Empire and later. [4] The term "Vlachs" was also used for Slavs who shared lifestyle (as shepherds) with Romance peoples (Vlachs); it was used for the Serbs who settled the Military Frontier by even Austrian leader, you can look at "Statuta Valachorum" because to debunk all this nonsense, it is an early modern exonym for Serbs. [5] It was used as a derogatory term, and as a common name for Orthodox Serbs in Catholic lands, and lesser in the Ottoman Empire.
𝓔𝓪𝓻𝓵𝔂 𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓼 𝓸𝓯 𝓢𝓮𝓻𝓫𝓼 𝓲𝓷 𝓒𝓻𝓸𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓪 𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓫𝓾𝓷𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝔀𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓷𝓸 𝓢𝓮𝓻𝓫𝓼:
ℭ𝔬𝔯𝔭𝔲𝔰 𝔰𝔠𝔯𝔦𝔭𝔱𝔬𝔯𝔲𝔪 𝔥𝔦𝔰𝔱𝔬𝔯𝔦𝔞𝔢 𝔅𝔶𝔷𝔞𝔫𝔱𝔦𝔫𝔞𝔢 - John Kinnamos, in his work covering 1118–76, wrote: "the Serbs, a Dalmatic (Dalmatian) tribe" (Greek: Σέρβιοι, έθνος Δαλματικόν), thus using "Dalmat(ian)s" or "Dalmatic (Dalmatian) people" in the context of the Serbs, and "Dalmatia" in the context of Serbia. [6]
𝔈𝔦𝔫𝔥𝔞𝔯𝔡'𝔰 𝔟𝔬𝔬𝔨 𝔞𝔟𝔬𝔲𝔱 𝔢𝔱𝔥𝔫𝔦𝔠 𝔰𝔱𝔯𝔲𝔠𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔇𝔞𝔩𝔪𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔞 - Serbs, a people who hold a large land of Dalmatia... [7]
𝕿𝖍𝖎𝖘 𝖆𝖗𝖌𝖚𝖒𝖊𝖓𝖙 𝖔𝖓𝖈𝖊 𝖆𝖌𝖆𝖎𝖓 𝖎𝖘 𝖊𝖑𝖎𝖒𝖎𝖓𝖆𝖙𝖊𝖉 𝖆𝖓𝖉 𝖉𝖊𝖘𝖙𝖗𝖔𝖞𝖊𝖉 𝖇𝖞 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝕾𝖊𝖗𝖇𝖘.
Shown 1 - 14 of 14
Log in to unlock more functionality.