Vezeryubung vs. Wilfred

70
9 April 1940 German assault units landed in Norway. Within a day of 63, the small German army fully occupied this country. This is usually not surprising: well, did Hitler seize another European country, what else would one expect from a demon-possessed Fuhrer? He just had something to win, and that is not important. However, Norway in the eyes of Hitler has never been an enemy of Germany. Moreover, in his opinion, it was a unique and one-of-a-kind country with such a “pure” racially population, that “crossing” with the Norwegians could improve the “breed of Germans”. And it was far from easy for Hitler to kill such valuable and useful people during the "fratricidal" war with them.

There were other considerations. Hitler still considered the warriors to have significantly changed from the time of the Viking era, as Hitler he considered potential great warriors and was afraid of big losses in battles with local berserkers (which he still found, but in 1941 in another country). In addition, the terrain in Norway was extremely convenient for defense. Therefore, Hitler was afraid to meet serious resistance and “get bogged down”, which in the conditions of a “strange” but still war with Great Britain and France was completely inappropriate. However, there was one factor that caused serious concern both in the General Staff and in the German Ministry of Economy. This factor is a constant fear of losing supplies of high-quality iron ore from Swedish mines in Gallivar (Ellewar). The Swedes on trade with Germany earned very well in the First and Second World Wars. Moreover, they sold the Reich not only iron ore (to which 1939 million tons were supplied in 1945-58), but also cellulose, wood, bearings, machine tools and even anti-aircraft guns from Switzerland and chocolate. So on their part there was no threat of termination of supplies. But there was a danger of seizing these mines strategically important for Germany by the countries of the warring bloc. To do this, it was necessary to violate the sovereignty of neutral Sweden, but, as we will soon see, neither Britain nor France was in any way embarrassed. One could go the other way, making Swedish supplies impossible: to seize Narvik, violating the sovereignty of neutral Norway. Given the UK’s powerful fleetThe second way seemed simpler and preferable.




Narvik, modern photo


The fears of the German industrialists and generals were by no means groundless. Such plans in the UK really developed - since the times of World War I. In 1918, they were not implemented only because they were opposed by the commander-in-chief of the navy, Lord Beatty, who said:
"For officers and sailors of the Great Fleet, it would be morally unacceptable to try to subdue small but strong-willed people by force. If the Norwegians resisted, and they could have done so, it would have been shed blood. It would be one of the same serious crimes that the Germans commit. "


Vezeryubung vs. Wilfred

Admiral David Beatty


Not surprisingly, in the 1939 year, the French and the British immediately remembered the "Achilles heel" of the German military industry, and returned to the discussion of the possibility of occupying part of Norwegian territory. Only the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spoke against it. Stung Churchill recalled:
"The arguments of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were weighty, and I could not prove my case. I continued to defend my point of view by all means and in any case."



W. Churchill. October 1 1939 of the year


However, the British government did everything to discredit the Norwegian neutrality in the eyes of Germany. So, 5 September 1939 was published an extensive list of goods that are now qualified as military smuggling. British warships received the right to inspect the merchant ships of other countries. If Norway agreed to recognize these demands, it would lose some of its sovereignty, it would be possible to forget about neutral status, and foreign trade would actually be lost. Therefore, the government refused to comply with the pressure from this side, but was forced to agree with Britain chartering most of its merchant fleet - the British could now use Norwegian vessels with a total gross tonnage 2 450 000 (of which 1 650 000 was for tankers). Germany, of course, did not like it very much.

The beginning of military preparations


19 September 1939 of the year W. Churchill insisted on taking a decision on the development of a minefield project in the Norwegian territorial waters and "blocking the transport of Swedish iron ore from Narvik". This time even the foreign minister, Lord Halifax, voted in favor.

In Germany, according to the captured documents, the first mention of Norway dates back to the beginning of October 1939. Naval Commander-in-Chief Admiral Erich Raeder tells Hitler about his fears that the Norwegians might open their ports to the British. He also notes that for the actions of German submarines it would be advantageous to get bases on the coast of Norway, for example in Trondheim. Hitler rejects this proposal.


Oskar Graf. Erich Raeder, portrait


Immediately I draw attention: the matter is not in the peace-loving or the sentimentality of Hitler - he is still realistically assessing the state of affairs, and restraining the “appetites” of his military and industrialists. It is in this direction that he does not need war now. He would have agreed with Great Britain (which he always speaks of with respect, and even with admiration) - not as a junior partner, but as equals. However, the trouble is, do not take it seriously yet proud British, do not consider it as an equal. And the French still do not understand, and are trying to be arrogant. But the British and French have not yet refused to use Germany and Hitler for their own purposes, so they do not want to fight in the main theater of hostilities: building plans to seize strategically important mines, they hope to make Hitler more compliant by directing his aggression in the right direction. Then the ore can be allowed to Sweden to sell it - in controlled amounts, keeping Germany on a short leash.

In the meantime, the Soviet-Finnish war began, which in Great Britain decided to use as a reason "legally" (under the guise of sending expeditionary forces to Finland) to take control of the strategically important part of the territory of Norway. In a note from 16 in December, Churchill frankly admitted that this could push Hitler to occupy all of Scandinavia - because "if you shoot at the enemy, he will fire back."

In Norway, many were not thrilled with such prospects, including Vidkun Quisling, the former Minister of Defense of this country, and now the leader of the National Unity party.


Vidkun Quisling


It is curious that, despite his nationalist convictions, Quisling had close ties with Russia: he was the Norwegian military attache in Soviet Petrograd, collaborated with the Nansen committee in assisting the starving, and participated in the League of Nations humanitarian mission in Kharkov in 1921. And even twice married Russian women.

During a meeting in Berlin with Admiral E. Raeder, Quisling tried to convince him that in the near future Britain would occupy his country. Therefore, he proposed to Germany to hurry, considering the German occupation as a lesser evil. These arguments and the general situation seemed so serious to Raeder that he arranged for Quisling two meetings with Hitler (16 and 18 took place in November). In conversations with the Führer, Quisling, who had supporters in the military leadership of Norway, asked for help in the implementation of the coup d'état, promising to give Narvik to Germany in exchange. He failed to convince Hitler, the Fuhrer declared that he "does not want to expand the theater of military operations", and therefore "would prefer to see Norway (like other Scandinavian countries) neutral."

This position of Hitler remained unchanged for quite some time. More 13 January 1940 was recorded in the combat log of the headquarters of the German Navy that "the most favorable solution would be to preserve the neutrality of Norway." At the same time, it is noted with alarm that "England intends to occupy Norway with the tacit consent of the Norwegian government."

And in Britain, Churchill, really, as they say, went right through. In Oslo, the phrase he said during one of the receptions caused a lot of concern:
"Sometimes it is possible to wish that the northern countries were on the opposite side, and then it was possible to capture the necessary strategic points."


Ordinary British imperial cynicism, which Churchill himself did not hide in his memoirs and which he never hesitated.

Not too far behind the French allies of the British. For example, the commander-in-chief of the French army, General Gamelin 15, on January 1940 sent to Prime Minister Daladier a plan to open the front in Scandinavia, which included landing in Petsamo (northern Finland), “seizing ports and airfields on the west coast of Norway”, the occupation of the mines in Gallivare. " Actually, in France, they stubbornly did not want to fight in France, but, as we see, they very much wanted to make war with the neutral Scandinavian countries. Moreover, 19 in January 1940, Daladier ordered General Gamelin and Admiral Darlan to prepare a plan of attack on the Baku oil fields - well, the French really wanted to make war with anyone other than Germany. The British thought more widely: March 8 1940 prepared a report according to which, besides Baku, Batumi, Tuapse, Grozny, Arkhangelsk and Murmansk were considered as promising targets for a possible attack against the USSR.


N. Chamberlain, E. Daladier, A. Hitler and B. Mussolini in Munich


But back in Germany, the British and French agents who did not receive any money, and in the General Staff were not fools. The Anglo-French plans for Norway could not be kept secret, and 27 in January 1940. Hitler ordered the development of a plan of military operations in Norway in the event of its occupation by Great Britain and France. And in Paris on the same day, the Allies (Great Britain was represented by Chamberlain and Churchill) agreed to send British and French "volunteers" in the 3-4 division to Finland. But then the allies disagreed on the point of landing of these troops. Daladier insisted on Petsamo, while Chamberlain suggested not to take the small things and immediately seize Narvik, as well as "to gain control over the iron ore deposits in Gällivare" - so that 2 would not go.

Fatal Incident with Altmark Transport Ship


14 February 1940 an event occurred that served as a catalyst for further military preparations on both sides. The German transport ship "Altmark", on which the Englishman's 292 was stationed from British ships, sunk by the Admiral Spee's pocket battleship, called at the Norwegian port of Trondheim, intending to continue to follow the skerry fairway to Germany. February 17 British squadron (the cruiser "Arethusa" and five destroyers) discovered the "Altmark" in the Norwegian territorial waters and tried to take the ship to board the ship. The captain of the German ship ordered to send it to the rocks, the crew - to land on the shore. Pursued by the Altmark, the British destroyer Kossak opened fire, which killed 4 and injured 5 of German sailors. The captains of the two Norwegian gunboats, who were nearby, did not like the British arbitrariness. The Norwegians did not enter the battle, but at their request the English destroyer was forced to withdraw. The Norwegian government sent Britain a formal protest against the actions of its warships, which was arrogantly rejected by London. From these events, Hitler concluded that Britain does not take seriously the neutral status of Norway, and Norway in the case of the landing of the British will not defend their sovereignty. On February 20, he instructed General von Falkenhorst to begin forming an army for possible actions in Norway, telling him:
“I was informed of the British’s intention to land in the area, and I want to be there before them. The occupation of Norway by the British would be a strategic success, as a result of which the British would have access to the Baltic, where we have neither troops nor coastal fortifications. move to Berlin and inflict a decisive defeat on us. "



Army commander "Norway" Nikolaus Falkenhorst


The plan of military operations in Norway was called "Vezeryubung" - "Teaching on the Weser".

The French, too, were eager to fight. February 21 President Daladier suggested using the Altmark incident as a pretext for the "immediate capture" of the Norwegian ports by an "unexpected hit."

Now Norway was actually doomed, and only a miracle could save it from invasion. The question was only about which of the opposing sides would have time to complete the preparations for the occupation of the first.

Preparing for the invasion: who is first?


4 March 1940. Hitler issues a directive on the completion of preparations for the invasion.

8 March of the same year, Churchill at a meeting of the military cabinet of Great Britain presents a plan for the immediate landing of Narvik’s British airborne forces with a view to “show strength in order to avoid the need for its use” (a remarkable formulation, isn't it?).

12 March The British government decides "to return to the landing plans in Trondheim, Stavanger, Bergen, and also in Narvik." Four squadrons of British cruisers, four fleets of destroyer squadrons, the number of expeditionary corps reached 14 thousand people were to go on a military campaign. Moreover, the detachment landed in Narvik, was to immediately move to the iron ore deposits in Gallivare. The date of commencement of this operation was scheduled for March 20. All these aggressive actions against Norway and Sweden were justified by the help of those who were defeated in the war with the USSR Finland. March 13 English submarines advanced to the south coast of Norway. And on the same day Finland capitulated! The “most beautiful” reason for the Anglo-French occupation of Scandinavia was lost, and it must be assumed that the British and French general headquarters expressed that day exclusively with foul language. Churchill, to calm his nerves, probably had to drink a double portion of brandy. In France, the Daladier government was forced to resign. The new head of this country, Jean-Paul Raynaud, was determined to bring the matter to the end and still occupy Norway. William Churchill became his ally in the implementation of these plans. 28 March The 1940 meeting in London hosted a meeting of the Allied Supreme Military Council, at which Chamberlain agreed with the requirements of Raynaud and Churchill, and from himself suggested mining the Rhine and other German rivers from the air. Here, Raynaud and his military advisers somewhat strained: it’s one thing to fight in distant and neutral Norway, and another to get an answer from the pissed “Teutons” on their front, where the military of both sides congratulated each other on religious holidays and played football in the neutral zone. Therefore, it was decided not to touch the German rivers. The invasion plan for Norway, codenamed Wilfred, proposed to mine Norwegian territorial waters (April 5) and landings to Narvik, Trondheim, Bergen and Stavanger (April 8).

“Since our mining of Norwegian waters could have caused Germany’s response, it was also decided that an English brigade and French troops should be sent to Narvik to clear the port and advance to the Swedish border. Troops also had to be sent to Stavanger,”
- Churchill writes in his memoirs with his usual sweet cynicism.

War in norway


31 March 1940 The British cruiser Birmingham, the destroyers Firless and Hostail set sail for the Norwegian shores in order to intercept all German ships (even fishing trawlers) and to cover the British ships setting mines. But those came only April 8. While waiting for them, the British seized three German trawlers.

At this time, the Wilfred plan was somewhat corrected and divided into two: R-4 — Narvik’s seizure was set for April 10, and Stretford — the seizure of Stavanger, Bergen and Trondheim 6 – 9 April.

1 April, Hitler was informed that the Norwegian anti-aircraft and coastal batteries were given permission to open fire without waiting for an order from the high command. This order was directed against Britain and France, but Hitler, fearing to lose the element of surprise, makes the final decision, setting the invasion of Norway and Denmark on April 5. However, as is usually the case, it was not possible to prepare for the deadline.

On April 5, 1940, England and France handed over notes to Norway and Sweden stating that the Soviet Union was planning to attack Finland again and create bases on its Norwegian coast for its navy. Also, "on a blue eye" was reported on the planned actions of the Allies in Norwegian territorial waters with the aim of "protecting Scandinavian freedom and democracy from the threat from Germany." It should be said right away that they did not know anything about Hitler’s plans, and they did not even consider the possibility of real German aggression against Norway. As a result, the military clash with Germany came as a big surprise to them. Even detection aviation the German fleet, moving towards Norway (April 7, 13) was disregarded. Churchill will write in his memoirs:
"It was difficult for us to believe that these forces were heading to Narvik, despite the message from Copenhagen about Hitler’s intention to seize this port."


But let's not get ahead.

6 on April 1940 in London approved directives to the command of the expedition teams in Norway and Northern Sweden.

Meanwhile, even the Swedes suffering from the hardest Russophobia began to realize that the Western World of "freedom and democracy" is much more dangerous for their country than the "totalitarian" USSR. On April 7, the official Stockholm rejected the Anglo-French demarche, saying that Sweden would resist violation of its neutrality. But in London and Paris, the opinion of the Swedish government no longer interested anyone.

7 – 8 April, the British fleet begins to advance to the shores of Norway.
On April 8, twelve British destroyers under the cover of the cruiser Rigown begin mining the territorial waters of Norway from Narvik. The Norwegian government protests, but does not dare to order its fleet to resist these illegal actions.

On the night of April 9, a mobilization order was issued in Norway - this country is going to fight with Britain and France.

April 9 reports appear in British newspapers that on the eve of the ships of the naval forces of England and France entered the Norwegian waters and set up minefields there, "to block the way to these waters to the ships of the countries trading with Germany." Ordinary Englishmen are delighted and fully support the actions of their government.

Meanwhile, in Germany, the implementation of the Weserubing plan has begun. 9 April 1940 The first German assault troops seize the main ports in Norway, including Oslo and Narvik. German commanders declare to local authorities that Germany is taking Norway under protection from the invasion of the French and British - which, in general, was completely true. A member of the military office, Lord Hankey, admitted later:
"From the very beginning of planning and up to the German invasion, England and Germany kept more or less at the same level in their plans and preparations. In fact, England began planning a little earlier ... and both sides implemented their plans almost simultaneously, and in the so-called an act of aggression, if the term is really applicable to both parties, England is ahead of Germany by 24 hours. "


Another thing is that Norway did not appeal to Germany for protection.

The German invasion forces were significantly smaller than the Anglo-French: 2 battleships, pocket battleship, 7 cruisers, 14 destroyers, 28 submarines, auxiliary vessels, infantry formations of about 10 thousands of people. And this is the whole coast of Norway! As a result, the maximum number of paratroopers attacking in one direction was no more than 2 thousand people.

The Norwegian campaign of the German army is interesting because during it, for the first time in the world, parachute units were used that captured the airfields in Oslo and Stavanger. The landing of the parachute assault in Oslo was an improvisation, since the main forces of the invasion were delayed due to the torpedo strike from Fort Oskarborg on the Blucher cruiser (which eventually sank).


Oscarborg fortress, top view



Oscarborg Fortress


It was necessary to spend some time on airstrikes on Oskarborg (after which the fortress capitulated), and to send skydivers to Oslo. Five companies of German paratroopers landed on the airfield, got into the confiscated buses and trucks, and calmly, like tourists, rode onto them to seize the capital, which they surrendered to them - without a fight. But the parachutists decided to do everything “beautifully” - to walk along the streets of the city with a parade. If it were not for this German love for parades, they could have arrested the king, the government and the country's top military leaders, who miraculously managed to escape.

The cities of Bergen, Stavanger, Trondheim, Egersund, Arendal, Kristiansand surrendered without resistance. On the approaches to Narvik, two ships of the Norwegian coastal defense tried to engage the German destroyers, and were sunk. Narvik himself surrendered without resistance.

9 April 1940. Quisling delivered a radio address announcing the creation of a new government, demanding the immediate cessation of mobilization and peace with Germany.

The news of the German invasion of Norway plunged the British military command into a state of shock. All further actions of the British - it is in its pure form a hysterical fit of a child who rolls on the floor in protest against the actions of his mother, who did not give him the shown candy. The cruisers of Narvik hastily landed four amphibious battalions, forgetting to unload the weapons attached to them, and went into the sea (weapon these parts were delivered only 5 days). Escort ships that were supposed to lead ships with troops to Trondheim were recalled to Scapa Flow - precious time is running out, the Germans take up positions and organize defense. The British, instead of opposing the German invasion forces on land, are trying to defeat Germany at sea. Already after the landing of the German landing force, the British destroyers attacked the Germans at Narvik, but did not succeed. Only 13 of April, after the arrival of the new squad led by the battleship Worspite, the German ships were able to sink - as a result, the crews of these ships joined the German ground forces, significantly strengthening them.

The weakest positions of the Germans were in central Norway. The only German units in Trondheim were few, the English fleet blocked the bay, two narrow passages in the mountains separated this part of the country from Oslo, where help could come from. The British landed landings north and south of Trondheim, but the extremely effective and practically unpunished actions of German aviation demoralized the British. British paratroopers first went on the defensive, and then were evacuated - 1 and 2 in May 1940.

For the strategically important port of Narvik, the British decided to fight. By 14, the number of their troops near this city reached 20 000 people. They were opposed by the 2 000 of the Austrian Alpine Riflemen and about the same number of sailors from the drowned German destroyers. Against the overwhelming forces of the British, Austrian soldiers fought like lions, and in this connection I recall the anecdote popular in post-war Germany - two great achievements of the Austrians who managed to convince the whole world that Mozart was Austrian, and Hitler was German. The battles of Narvik went to 27 in May of 1940, when the new British Prime Minister William Churchill decided to evacuate these units, which are now necessary for the defense of the coast of England itself. 7 June, the last British soldiers left Norway. If it were not for Quisling, who created his own government, King of Norway Hakon VII might have agreed to an agreement with the Germans, like his Danish "colleague" - Christian X. Now, being deprived of power and opportunity, he has to offer at least something to Hitler was humbly going to bow to London.


King of Norway Hakon VII


The remnants of the Norwegian army capitulated on June 12.

Danish Blitzkrieg


With the seizure of Denmark, Germany had no problems. An hour after the start of the war, the king of Denmark and the government of the country informed Hitler about the surrender, the rigsdag approved this decision the same day. On April 12, the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Denmark, on the radio, thanked his subordinates - "for inaction on the German troops entering the country"! A Danish king Christian X congratulated the commander of the German army with "brilliantly done work." The Germans did not deprive him of the throne. During the war, this pitiful king regularly supervised the country's enterprises in the task of supplying Germany with food and industrial goods.


King Christian X on a daily horse ride in Copenhagen, 1942 year


Nazi "Source of life" in Norway and the USSR


Let us return to Norway captured by Germany. This country did not suffer any special "horrors of occupation". But the very notorious program "Lebensbern" ("Source of Life") began to act on the "production of racially full-fledged children", which it was supposed to be transferred to German families for upbringing. In Norway, 10 points of this “Aryan factory” were opened (in which “racially valuable” unmarried women could give birth and leave a child), while in another Scandinavian country - Denmark, only 2, in France and the Netherlands - one by one. In a speech from 4 in October 1943, Mr. Himmler stated:
"All that other nations will be able to offer us as pure blood will be accepted. If necessary, we will do this by abducting their children and raising them in our midst."


And this was probably the main crime of the Nazi regime in Germany, because it was not industrial goods, not food and art that were stolen from the conquered peoples, but the future. Moreover, it was the Nazis who had to kidnap children, mainly in Eastern and Southern Europe. According to the testimony of the head of Lebensborn - Standarfenführer M. Zollman, given by him at the Nuremberg Tribunal, many children suitable for the program were found in the occupied regions of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Of course, there were no open Lebensborn points on the temporarily seized territory of the USSR - blond and blue-eyed children aged from several months to three years were simply taken from their parents and sent to Germany. After four months of treatment in special boarding schools, those who did not remember (or forgotten) who they were, the children ended up in German families, in which they believed that they were raising German orphans. 28 April 1945, the archives of Lebensborn were burned, so the exact number of Soviet children abducted by the Nazis is unknown. Given that 1944 children from the Vitebsk region were taken out only in April 2500 in Germany, their total number can be about 50 000 people. In Norway, everything was different, the program was supervised by Heinrich Himmler, relations between German men and Norwegian women were encouraged, and no violence was applied to them. The current Norwegians can tell as much as they like how desperately they “resisted” the German occupation, bravely attaching the notorious clips to the lapels of their jackets. This does not negate the fact that even at the end of the war, in the 1945 year, every seventh marriage in Norway was registered between Norwegian and German. But the marriages of Norwegians with Germans are only 22 registered - because in the German army there were a lot of men and few women. It ended very sad.

Norway after the war: shameful revenge on women and children


Immediately after the end of World War II, the “stern Norwegian men,” who, under the Germans, were polite and obedient share-boys, decided to recoup women and children. The Provisional Government suddenly recalled Norway’s “humiliation” and adopted an amendment, according to which marriage with the Germans was declared a “highly unworthy act”, meaning “breaking civil ties with Norway”. Parliament approved the amendment. As a result, 14 thousands of women who had children from German soldiers and officers were arrested (they were officially called "tyskertøs" - German girls), many of them were deported to Germany, 5 thousands were sent to specially created filtration camps for a year and a half. All "tyskertøs" were deprived of Norwegian citizenship (only some of them were returned to 1950).

"Society resorts to such measures in order to preserve the purity of the race",

- the Norwegian newspapers quietly wrote about this, calling at the same time to inform the “neighbors” in order to wash away the “racial shame” from the nation. With children from the Germans, who were called "tyskerunge" or "German bastards" (not yet born - "Nazi caviar"), also did not stand on ceremony. These children were officially declared "persons of limited ability and asocial psychopaths".

Eugenic laws are now remembered only when speaking of Nazi Germany. Meanwhile, in Norway, the same were taken in 1934 - simultaneously with the same Germany and Sweden. Of course, later than in the US (1895 - Connecticut, 1917 - already 20 states), in Switzerland (1928) or in Denmark (1929). But earlier than in Finland and Danzig (1935), and in Estonia (1936). So talk of the danger of the "Nazi genes" of the children of German soldiers and the threat that these children bear to the sovereign Norwegian democracy did not arouse anyone’s surprise. Around 12, thousands of “German bastards” taken from their mothers were sent to shelters for the mentally retarded or to psychiatric hospitals.

Preserved memories of some of them. So, for example, Paul Hansen said: "I told them: I am not crazy, let me out of here. But no one listened to me."

From the mental hospital, he was discharged only in 22 year.

Harriet von Nickel recalled:
“We were treated like the dregs of society. When I was small, one drunken fisherman grabbed me and scribbled a swastika on my forehead, while the other Norwegians watched.”


There are numerous reports of extremely abusive treatment of these children in "medical facilities". Beatings were common, but rape was also practiced, not only for girls, but also for boys. Thor Branaher, another victim of the Norwegian “democracy,” reports:
"Many of us were abused. People got in line to rape 5-year-olds. Therefore, it’s not even compensation from the Norwegian government that is important to us, but public disclosure of what was happening."


Norwegian lawyer Randy Spidewold, who later represented these children in court, argued that some of them were tested for drugs and chemicals, in particular, LSD and Meskalin. These "studies" were attended by Norwegian military doctors, representatives of the CIA, and even doctors of the University of Oslo.

One of the "tyskerunge" was Anni-Fried, born 15 in November 1945, at the age of eighteen, Sunni Lyngstad from the German soldier Alfred Haase. The girl was lucky: rescuing her daughter from the distraught post-war Norwegian democracy, Sunni managed to send her and her mother to the Swedish city of Torschell. At present, Anni-Fried Lyngstad is known to the world as the “dark ABBA group.” In 1977, Bravo magazine didn’t know why it made her happy by finding her father — in fact, an absolutely alien person — the forced communication was painful for both of them ( which, in general, was to be expected).


Anni-Frid Lingstad, soloist of the group "ABBA" - "tyskerunge", who managed to avoid the vengeance of sovereign Norwegian democracy


"Tyskerunge", remaining in a free and democratic Norway, could only dream of Anni-Frid’s fate. They were able to get out of mental hospitals and boarding schools only in the 60 of the twentieth century, while remaining virtually all despised outcasts. Until the middle of 1980. The problem of "German children" was a topic in Norway that was not open to discussion. Liberalization of Norwegian society was leaps and bounds, "success" was evident, but they concerned anyone, but not children from Norwegian marriages and Germans. In 1993, the Islamic Council was created in the country, the purpose of which was "activities aimed at allowing Muslims to live in Norwegian society in accordance with Islamic teachings." In 1994, the first mosque was opened. But even in 1998, the Norwegian parliament refused to create a special commission to study the issue of discrimination "tyskerunge". Only in 2000, the Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg decided to apologize for the “excesses” of the past years. This was done, as it were, by the way, during the traditional New Year's address to the citizens of the country.


Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg, who found the strength to apologize to "tyskerunge"


It was only in 2005 that the surviving victims of these repressions managed to get the Ministry of Justice to pay 200 thousands of crowns (about 23,6 thousands of euros) compensation - but only to those who can provide documents "about particularly serious harassment."

159 of the former "tyskerunge" considered this amount insufficient and appealed to the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights, which in 2007 decided to refuse to consider their cases, arguing this decision by the expiration of the statute of limitations.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

70 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    10 May 2019 08: 35
    And the Germans feared for good reason.
    The Norwegian operation became one of the most difficult for the Germans in 1939-40. And the losses were very serious - including at sea (losses in destroyers, for example, were off scale). The course and outcome of an operation unfavorable to the Allies was greatly influenced by the unfavorable course of the French campaign, and the evacuation began.
  2. -7
    10 May 2019 08: 48
    It fell to the Norwegians to break the nuclear program of Germany, Norway was the only place in Europe where heavy water was produced for German experimental nuclear reactors.
    "Never before in history has so much depended on so few."
    1. +11
      10 May 2019 09: 12
      Come on! Against the background of the Norwegian resistance, the French "resistance" is seen as simply a "bloody guerrilla"
    2. +3
      10 May 2019 09: 51
      Do not believe the scriptures on * Norwegian resistance *. Deuterium was simply stolen. In Norway, even today, organized crime, in close contact not only with its government but also with imported * mafias *, most often from Tsereu, carries out many * delicate * missions. Because many criminal cases are kept secret, including robbery and murder.
      By the way, in ALL countries, criminals carry out such * instructions * of their own government and see this as their patriotic duty. But in RUSSIA, criminals are entirely dissidents, with very few exceptions. Even during the GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR it was so.
      1. +1
        10 May 2019 10: 50
        To understand why this happened, you need to turn to the domestic history of the criminal world, which, incidentally, is quite closely connected with the history of the political, at least in the early twentieth century.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. -1
        11 May 2019 11: 59
        Is it called stolen? https://www.ok.ru/video/574739122845
        1. +2
          11 May 2019 13: 02
          Quote: Nikolay Chudov
          https://www.ok.ru/video/574739122845

          On request https://www.ok.ru/video/574739122845 nothing was found. and that’s all you can say about this epic event
          1. -2
            11 May 2019 13: 17
            Do not play the fool. The link must be copied to paste into the browser search. And then you cannot distinguish deuterium from heavy water.
            1. +1
              11 May 2019 19: 49
              Quote: Nikolay Chudov
              And then you cannot distinguish deuterium from heavy water

              I can easily show you where to put in, and how the deuterium differs from heavy water, I know that I don’t see only the feat of Norwegian resistance and the meaning of undermining the plant. like the Americans and ours, too, managed without heavy water when they did the bomb, I don’t know directly
              1. 0
                17 May 2019 18: 42
                A little-known fact is the case when Bothe conducted an experiment to identify the properties of graphite responsible for neutron moderation. By that time, it was known that neutron moderation was necessary to initiate a chain reaction in the 235U uranium isotope and the Germans were looking for material suitable for this. As options, cheap graphite and extremely expensive deuterium oxide (heavy water) for production were considered. Bothe made a mistake in the experiment, which entailed enormous consequences for the German nuclear weapons development program. In particular, Bothe recognized graphite as unsuitable material for organizing the process of neutron moderation. This by then had already been refuted by the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi, working on nuclear weapons in the United States. Bothe did not know anything about Fermi's studies, since they were classified. There is speculation that Bothe specifically conducted an unsuccessful experiment to lead the German atomic program in the wrong direction [5]. In any case, the Germans had no choice but to use heavy water, the only plant in the world for the production of which in Norway has been attacked by the United States and Britain since 1942.

                http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Боте,_Вальтер
                https://www.ok.ru/video/574739122845
    3. +2
      11 May 2019 04: 11
      Stop lying, Aloizych’s nuclear program, even when fully implemented, didn’t even make it possible to get an experimental nuclear explosive device by 1947, which the Nazis saw as an exploding nuclear reactor, and not as a nuclear bomb.
      1. -1
        11 May 2019 11: 54
        These are your visions. No one knew how far the German physicists had come. Then they worked in the USA and in the USSR.
        1. +5
          11 May 2019 12: 27
          Quote: Nikolay Chudov
          These are your visions. No one knew how far the German physicists had come. Then they worked in the USA and in the USSR.

          These are facts, no matter how painful you are for the Norwegian collaborators.
          They did not make any contribution to the disruption of Hitler’s nuclear program, which it was not necessary to disrupt.
          From the word voosche.
          1. -3
            11 May 2019 12: 54
            Do not lie. https://www.ok.ru/video/1006809846174
            1. +3
              11 May 2019 14: 47
              Not ham, a link to a propaganda clip of unknown origin about allegedly heroic brazen agents in Norway proves nothing.
              More thoroughly necessary, more careful ...)))
              1. -3
                11 May 2019 15: 16
                You are not worth your lies.
                1. +2
                  11 May 2019 15: 23
                  In short, you merged! laughing
                  Drain counted! good
  3. +6
    10 May 2019 08: 49
    Bravo, Valery!
    It remains to add that the Norwegians (and so few) paid for their eugenic policy with the deepest "demographic pit" of the 80-90s.
    1. 0
      26 June 2021 00: 54
      Better about the Russian demographic pits lamented
  4. VLR
    +12
    10 May 2019 08: 56
    By the way, it was precisely because of the eugenic laws of the United States and Europe that the USSR treated genetics with such a prejudice, calling it "the corrupt girl of imperialism." You see, everything in the world has an explanation.
    1. +4
      10 May 2019 10: 12
      Interesting version. But I do not think it is comprehensive.
    2. 0
      26 June 2021 00: 54
      How about an explanation about the second corrupt girl - cybernetics?
  5. +7
    10 May 2019 09: 14
    Thanks to the author for not being afraid * of the democratic public * and daring to write about Norway and the Norwegians.
    By the way, laws aimed at the cultivation of * mother-in-law * in the Scandinavian countries are still valid.
    About how the Germans were accepted in these countries and then these same Germans were persecuted, when it became * possible * even to read awkwardly. But in * the countries there * they are quite officially proud of this. This is the question of * European values ​​* and mentality. It is somewhat reminiscent of Ponyakovsky, who shouted in his hearts: "Ponyakovsky will sell you all, then he will buy and sell again, but at a much higher price." No?
    1. +6
      10 May 2019 09: 55
      By the way, laws aimed at the cultivation of * mother-in-law * in the Scandinavian countries are still valid.
      No not like this. At the turn of the 80-90s. Norway realized that it was simply dying out (native Norwegians did not want or could not give birth). Laws were passed to simplify immigration policies and improve social guarantees of motherhood. However, this led to the partial Islamization of the country, as indicated by the author. Norway was the first in Europe to step on this rake. The first one received an asymmetrical response from the indigenous population, in the form of a "Breivik attack"
      1. +2
        10 May 2019 10: 15
        In Sweden, a similar picture. "And emigrants take their children to this museum." You can't think of it like that yourself.
      2. +3
        10 May 2019 22: 43
        No not like this. At the turn of the 80-90 years. Norway realized that it was simply dying out (the native Norwegians did not want or could not give birth).

        Russia is the last hope of the Swedish couple: “We tried everything” (Svenska Dagbladet, Sweden)
        In Sweden, approximately 15% of all couples who are trying to conceive a child are not able to get pregnant. Things are no better in other countries. Doctors often drag on treatment, and then retreat from patients because of their age. But not in Russia: future parents from all over Europe come to the clinic in St. Petersburg. The author talks about the problem using the example of a Swedish couple.

        inosmi.ru
        Perhaps it was all so conceived!
        As well as the Argentinean President Fujimori’s program to reduce the number of poor, through forced sterilization (under the guise of medical examinations) of women from the poor !!!
        1. +2
          10 May 2019 22: 53
          Alexei, I don’t have statistics at hand, but I assure you: everything is not rosy at our place either.
          1. +2
            10 May 2019 23: 34
            In this matter, I do not need statistics ... Living examples before my eyes ...
            1. 0
              10 May 2019 23: 50
              I suppose that in Lipetsk this problem is somewhat more acute than the average for Russia.
    2. 0
      26 June 2021 01: 00
      In the fabulous country of the Russian Federation, the world's most liberal abortion laws are still in effect.
  6. 0
    10 May 2019 10: 48
    Judging by the author's latest articles, he resolved the dilemma of who to be - a historian or a propagandist, in favor of a propagandist, telling the story in the "spirit of the times" and not bothering with the reliability of the presentation.
    The same episode with "Altmark" is distorted by three quarters.
    The captain of the German ship ordered to send him to the rocks, the crew - to disembark. The British destroyer Kossak, pursuing the Altmark, opened fire, which killed 4 and wounded 5 German sailors. The captains of the two Norwegian gunboats in the vicinity did not like this arbitrariness of the British. The Norwegians did not enter the battle, but at their request the British destroyer was forced to withdraw. The Norwegian government sent a formal protest to the UK against the actions of its warships, which was arrogantly rejected by London.
    The captain of "Altmark" did not give the order to direct the ship to the rock - they ran aground due to a navigational error. The British did not shoot at the Altmark. Taking advantage of the fact that he ran aground, they landed a boarding party. The German crew entered the battle, as a result of which seven were killed and eleven were wounded. All 299 British prisoners were released.
    From the Norwegians there were two torpedo boats that did not intervene in the events. Norwegians have explained this. that a neutral country is not obliged to resist superior forces.
    UK admitted neutrality violation.
    1. +5
      10 May 2019 11: 11
      With deep respect for both of you, I want to note that harsh judgments do not contribute to the constructiveness of the dialogue.
    2. 0
      10 May 2019 11: 38
      A strange announcement from the article: "Germany conquered Norway" - like the latter resisted this.

      By the way, did you not transport British prisoners of war from the German side through the territorial waters of Norway without violating the neutrality of Norway? And what did the Norwegian torpedo boats do in the vicinity of the German prison ship — oppose the release of British prisoners of war? And what did the Norwegians do with the German sailors-jailers after their disembarkation - were they interned?

      And why did Norway get bored and didn’t want to spit on its neutral status - was preparing to join the German Reich with its king when Hitler would say it was time (after the end of the military campaign against France)?

      Norway, like other European countries (with the exception of Britain, Ireland, Yugoslavia and Greece) in WWII fought on the side of the German Reich. Therefore, the author’s pathos about the alleged inadmissibility of the British occupation of the pro-Nazi Norwegian state is not clear. Another thing is that in Britain this did not happen because of the military catastrophe in France because of the desire of the majority of the French to go under the Germans (and not because of the 100% of the heroism of the Austrian mountain shooters in some outlandated Norway).
    3. +4
      11 May 2019 04: 27
      The commentators' arrogance to the brazen people is striking - instead of assessing the flagrant violation of international law by the British who characterize the Anglo-Saxons as barbarians who have no place in United Europe and in the civilized world, as the author of the article did, the commentator cites a version of the crime of lemongrasses, set out by lime criminals as truth.
      1. -2
        11 May 2019 13: 56
        Quote: snerg7520
        The commentators' arrogance towards the brazen people is striking - instead of assessing the flagrant violation of international law by the British,

        The occupation of neutrals by the Axis countries has always caused repression against the local population. If the British could capture and hold Narvik, World War 2 ended much earlier, the number of victims in Norway would be less. In general, the Anglo-Saxle occupation of Iceland, part of Portugal, the French colonies allowed the local population to avoid becoming acquainted with the horrors of the Japanese and German occupation.
  7. +9
    10 May 2019 11: 15
    Hmmm ... And what was it like in France, when the French, during the occupation, reptiles before the Germans, after the latter were expelled, suddenly "inflamed with" hatred "without borders", both to the Germans and to the "sold-out Germans" ...!? And the story with 2 English islands off the coast of France, captured by the Germans? Many "law-abiding" British subjects reported to the occupation administration, both about the escaped Soviet prisoners of war, and about their neighbors who dared to help the prisoners in one way or another. By the way, no one was subsequently punished! So, I suppose, the "English patriots" died by age, without any remorse! Well, what about !? First of all, order!
    1. 0
      26 June 2021 01: 06
      Many "law-abiding" Soviet subjects reported to the occupation administration both about Soviet soldiers leaving the encirclement (General Vlasov) and about their neighbors who dared to help the encirclements and partisans in one way or another.
      1. 0
        26 June 2021 02: 15
        And yet, you are confusing a "fork with a bottle", comparing the "heterogeneous" Russia "of that time" with the "homogeneous" European countries! European countries are countries with "homogeneous" societies ... civil wars in the distant past ... Homogeneous and ethnic composition! The populations of these countries had no reason to regard the existing governments as hostile to themselves; and myself "captured", "defeated" by a hostile force, and there was no reason to "take revenge"! Russia in the 30s and early 40s still well remembered the civil war of the "whites" and "reds" ... the participants in this war were alive and not of advanced age ... their relatives, family members ... The "burp" of that war had not yet passed and there was a policy of "fighting the internal enemy" ... there were convicts, dissatisfied ... In addition, the multinationality of the state! And again, in the past, wars for "independence" (the period of the civil war ...) Hence the presence of active nationalists, their relatives and family members! So ... don't turn off your smart phone!
        1. 0
          26 June 2021 08: 47
          There was no civil war somewhere, but somewhere there was, like in Finland. By 1941, the ultra-right party IKL and the pro-Soviet fifth column represented by the Society for Peace and Friendship with the USSR, which had about 40 thousand members (and this was after the Winter War!), Operated in this country. Societies were heterogeneous everywhere.
  8. +4
    10 May 2019 11: 26
    Thank you very much very good article
  9. +1
    10 May 2019 13: 38
    Useful article.
  10. +1
    10 May 2019 15: 56
    But there was a danger of seizing these mines strategically important for Germany by the countries of the warring bloc. For this it was necessary to violate the sovereignty of neutral Sweden, but, as we will soon see, neither Britain nor France was in any way embarrassed.


    A part of the iron ore from Sweden was delivered to Germany via the Norwegian port of Narvik. Ore was delivered to Narvik from Sweden by rail with a length of approximately 120 km. In this case, the Germans were able to use large ships with large draft to transport ore; in the Baltic, these ships could not use the ships because of the shallow depths. Even if the British could just block Narvik with their fleet, then in this case Germany could not immediately receive part of the iron ore from Sweden and this would not be just a heavy blow for Germany.
    1. +1
      11 May 2019 04: 40
      If it’s not a secret, what part of the iron ore consumed by the Third Reich was all of Sweden’s iron ore, by the way, whose export by Sweden was practically shared between England and Germany?
      3%? 2%? 1%?
      1. VLR
        +2
        11 May 2019 06: 33
        58 million tons of ore with an iron content of 60% (at an average rate - 30), delivered to Germany - is it a lot or a little? Incidentally, this is 90% of all ore produced in those years in Sweden.
        1. +2
          11 May 2019 06: 52
          So 58 million tons of ore with an iron content of 60% (with an average rate of 30) supplied to Germany - what is the percentage of iron ore consumed by Germany over the years? 3%? 2%? 1%?
          And the fact that after the occupation of Norway 90% of the Swedish railway. Germany received ores with the previously observed equality of exports to Germany and England, it is natural - export to England became physically impossible.
          1. VLR
            +2
            11 May 2019 07: 02
            Here, I found: in 1942, 21 million tons of steel were melted in Germany. Sweden supplied 18 million tons of ore with an iron content of 60%. Consequently, 10,8 million tons of steel are "Swedish". This is over 50%.
            1. +3
              11 May 2019 09: 44
              Googled - yes, from 35% to 60% (according to various sources) of steel of the III Reich was smelted from Swedish ore.
              Strange, I read a book or a large article on the occupation of Norway on the Internet a few years ago (I couldn’t find it now), and I clearly remember that it was reasonably justified relying on German sources that the loss of the amount of ore that was imported in winter through the ports of Norway for Germany It was uncritical and was easily replaced by supplies from other sources, which was one of the reasons why Hitler considered the occupation of Norway to be unprofitable.
      2. +2
        12 May 2019 15: 40
        Quote: snerg7520
        If it’s not a secret, what part of the iron ore consumed by the Third Reich was all of Sweden’s iron ore, by the way, whose export by Sweden was practically shared between England and Germany?
        3%? 2%? 1%?


        As for the whole iron ore delivered to Germany from Sweden during WWII, the data did not come across to me. But as for the 1943 of the year- in this book-

        Guntram Schulze-Wegener "Die deutsche Kriegsmarine Rüstung 1942-1945" (Armament of the German Navy in the 1942-1945's)

        / At the bottom of the article

        http://alternathistory.com/voprosy-kasayushhiesya-linejnyh-korablej-kriegsmarine/

        there are 2 tables showing the number of materials allocated for the German Navy, Air Force and Wehrmacht's ground forces for the 1 quarter of the 1942 year and for the German Navy for the 1 quarter of the 1943 year.

        it is indicated that in Germany, from ore supplied to Germany from other countries, 54% of all steel was smelted-43% of these 54% accounted for supplies from Sweden. The Germans received the highest quality steel just from Swedish ore.
      3. 0
        26 June 2021 01: 08
        Soviet ore supplies would make up for the loss of Swedish supplies.
  11. VLR
    +2
    10 May 2019 21: 01
    By the way, I just read it, maybe someone will be interested: "The new Minister of Health of Norway, Sylvie Listhoug, said that people should be allowed to smoke and drink alcohol." How did she forget about drugs?
    1. +3
      10 May 2019 22: 35
      Valery, are you sure she said just that?
      1. VLR
        +1
        10 May 2019 22: 55
        On May 8, RIA-Novosti reported this with a reference to the Norwegian radio NRK: "She noted that she did not want to be a spiritual mentor and tell people how they should live."
        At the same time, it is reported that "Listhoog is one of the most popular politicians in Norway."
        1. +2
          10 May 2019 23: 08
          I assumed something similar, which is why I asked the question. A phrase taken out of context can be interpreted exactly the opposite.
          1. +1
            10 May 2019 23: 37
            A phrase taken out of context can be interpreted exactly the opposite.
            This was successfully accomplished by the respected author with the help of RIA-Novosti and "disseminated further."
            If you watch the entire interview, then Listhaug says the following.
            “I do not plan to be a morality police and I will not tell people how to live their life, but I do intend to help people receive information that serves as a basis for choice.
            The only thing we governments have to do is provide information so that people can make informed choices. That is why we must, among other things, now develop a tobacco control strategy that will help prevent young people from starting to smoke and make adults quit smoking. "
            Well, what's wrong?
            1. +3
              10 May 2019 23: 44
              That is, the person openly said: "I am not Mother Teresa, and I will not drag anyone by the ears to heaven." In my opinion, this is more honest than the systematic destruction of medicine with a triumphant sound of fanfare.
              1. 0
                10 May 2019 23: 48
                A person is going to move from useless moralizing to concrete actions, as I understand it.
                1. +1
                  11 May 2019 00: 03
                  And further. For not being able to create a national idea capable of consolidating society, the government of the Russian Federation decided to exploit the "image of the enemy" as old as the world. This is the collapsar path.
  12. +2
    10 May 2019 22: 16
    Then they frightened the Swedes and the Norgs that "evil Stalin" was dreaming and planning to capture them. Now "evil ..." who? That's right - "Putin" dreams of capturing the Balts, Poles, again Swedes ...
    And after all - they believe!
    1. 0
      26 June 2021 01: 12
      "Eh, twenty years later, after a good war, go out and take a look at the Soviet Union of 30-40 republics. The devil knows how good it is!" Film "Great Citizen". 1937 g.
      [media = https: //vk.com/video? z = video-102162718_456244335]
  13. +1
    11 May 2019 00: 18
    even anti-aircraft guns from Switzerland
    Author, how did Switzerland appear here? The Swiss company "Oerlikon" is not the same thing as the Swedish company "Bofors", although they are united by one or both firms that produced anti-aircraft guns. By the way, on the basis of "Bofors" were produced the most widespread in the Soviet Army 37mm 61-K assault rifles and less common 25mm 72-K assault rifles.
  14. +4
    11 May 2019 04: 55
    The author of this excellent article did not mention yet another reason for Hitler’s reluctance to occupy Norway - in the event of occupation, the entire supply of Norway, whose imports were ten times higher than exports, fell on Germany’s shoulders, as it turned out in reality.
    Those who wish can just google.
  15. VLR
    +2
    11 May 2019 06: 42
    Quote: Operator
    A strange announcement from the article: "Germany conquered Norway" - like the latter resisted this.

    In Britain, this did not happen because of the military catastrophe in France because of the desire of the majority of the French to go under the Germans (and not because of the 100% heroism of the Austrian mountain shooters in some kind of out-of-place Norway).

    1. Well, why did Norway not resist at all? Here, the cruiser at Oskarborg, for example, was sunk. And in the direction of the Germans, they did some shooting before June 12 - albeit it was vyalenko, without much enthusiasm.
    2. Before 27 in May, the 2000 of the Austrian Alpine Riflemen, supported by the sailors of the drowned destroyers, fought against the 20-thousandth British Expeditionary Force - and did not allow them to capture Narvik - what is it if not heroism? Here we must say that the Germans did not suit the English at Narvik mini Dunkirk just because they were preparing a real Dunkirk for them in France.
  16. +1
    12 May 2019 03: 30
    -Yes ...- vicissitudes of fate ...
    - Once Norgia was a "sample of the purity of the Aryan race" ...
    -And today in Norgia there are so many blacks, Arabs, Turks, Indians, Pakistanis, Asians ... that in 20 years a "real Norwegian" can only be seen in old photos ... -Hahah ...
    -But then ... in Russia ...- the same thing ... -Hahah ...
  17. +1
    15 May 2019 00: 47
    not enough mention of the film about these events, the film is called
    George from the dinka of jazz is mentioned in the film. Only old people go to battle.
  18. 0
    25 June 2021 23: 46
    "Then it will be possible to allow Sweden to sell it in controlled quantities, keeping Germany on a short leash ..." - Germany received ore, ferrous and non-ferrous metals, as well as grain, timber, oil and oil products from the USSR. There is no doubt that in the event of a loss of supplies from Sweden, a mustachioed Moscow friend would make every effort to meet Germany's needs for iron ore.
  19. 0
    26 June 2021 00: 01
    "Moreover, on January 19, 1940, Daladier instructed General Gamelin and Admiral Darlan to prepare a plan for an attack on the Baku oil fields - well, the French really wanted to fight at least someone other than Germany." - Germany experienced a shortage of oil, she received it from two fields Ploiesti (Romania) and Baku (USSR). So the French did not want to fight, but to deprive the enemy of strategic raw materials.
  20. 0
    26 June 2021 00: 31
    If not for this German love for parades, the king, the government and the country's top military leaders, who miraculously managed to escape, could have been arrested.
    - "a skirmish between German and Norwegian forces near Midtskogen, when the Norwegians successfully defended their king from capture" (Wikipedia).
  21. 0
    26 June 2021 00: 44
    Today's Norwegians can tell as much as they want how desperately they "resisted" the German occupation, bravely attaching the notorious paper clips to the lapels of their jackets.

    In February 1943, in Vemork, a group of Norwegians trained by British special services blew up a heavy water workshop at Norsk Hydro.
    In April 1943, Norwegian underground workers blew up a German ship.
    On March 15, 1945, one of the largest actions of the Norwegian Resistance movement took place - the only railway connecting southern Norway with the northern part of the country was blown up in more than 1000 places.
  22. 0
    26 June 2021 01: 30
    fair-haired and blue-eyed children from several months to three years old were simply taken away from their parents

    Don't lie. "The Nazis took the kids from the Soviet orphanages, and sometimes even tricked them away from their relatives. The children of the dead partisans and the orphaned children of the German colonists also got into the program.

    Source: What happened to Soviet children who were taken to Nazi Germany
    © Russian Seven russian7.ru "
  23. 0
    26 June 2021 08: 40
    Only in 2000, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg decided to apologize for the "excesses" of the past years.

    In 2021, half of this country jokes merrily after hearing the words "Holodomor" and "repression"

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"