I'm wondering if this is true or just rubbish. In the book, "The story of Waffen SS General Kurt Meyer", told by himself, I came upon this. ............................................................................ I had already been told at the outset of the invasion that the Allies did not take the Geneva Convention very seriously and the divisions that had already landed had taken few prisoners. On the morning of 9 June I found a group of German soldiers on the railway line south of Rots.They had obviously not been killed in action as they were all laying next to the road and all had been shot through the head. Move ahead. After the German officers had refused to voluntarily act as human shields, the badly injured Oberst Luxemburger was fettered by two British officers,beaten unconscious and, in that blood-covered condition, tied to a British tank as a shield. The tank on which Oberst Luxemburger was tied as a shield was hit by a German anti-tank gun;he died two days later in a military hospital. Move ahead again. On June 7, a notebook was found on a Canadian captain with notes about the orders given before the invasion.There were instructions on how to fight. It read;"No prisoners are to be taken." ................................................................................ There is a litlle bit more but you get the idea. I have to wonder[if true]why the aggression towards the Germans before and right after D-Day. So much is always mentioned during the Battle of the Bulge and the Malmedy massacre.
I doubt that you could find cooberating evidence for any of the above. While Allied units did occasionally shoot prisoners...just as any army of the period did....it was hardly an institutionalized practice or widespread. This sounds more like an attempt by the author to rationalize the behavior of the SS in the West which by all accounts did on more than a few occasions shoot PoW's and do it as an institutionalized practice. One of those "we did it only because the enemy did it first" things.
I can see an occasional shooting, but the "tieing a soldier to a tank as a shield" sounds so.......Eastern Front to me. Interesting read though, so far.
I think that Meyer's writings ( colourful to read though they most certainly are.... ) should be treated with caution. Tried as a war criminal by the Canadians, his book smacks of ex post facto self-justification. For sure, there was no love lost between the Canadians in Normandy and the 12th SS - but there seems little doubt that Canadian prisoners were shot out-of-hand at the Abbaye d'Ardenne near Caen.
Thanks Martin. I'm in the Caen part of his book. I look forward to see if this is mentioned.BTW. He "only" gave Witmann's "famous account" a few sentences.
Ha! This reminds me of a German officers quote ( whos name escapes me ) "War in the West was a sport, in the East it is far from it"... I think thats the quote. If anyone remembers the exact words please let me know.
Maybe there's a clue to Kurt Meyer's mindset in that the scene sounds more like something from the Eastern Front.....
I don't recall ever reading anything such as this and cannot picture any Canadians, British or Americans tying up POWs onto vehicles and use them as shields. Now there have been numerous writings from both sides about the shooting of prisoners between the Canadians and the HJ. Does not matter who started it but both the Canadians and the HJ implemented the "no prisoners taken" rule.
The only order on the Allied side on shooting persons first I found in Williamson´s Aces of the Reich book: After Malmedy Fragmentary Order 27 issued by Headquarters, 328th Infantry on 21 December for the attack scheduled for the following day says: "No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoners but will be shot on sight."
Have you read any of his writings, Martin? You seem to have hit the proverbial nail on the head. I've only got to his capture and return to London, never was there the first mention of any German "wrong doings." Even the part when he's captured seems "fishy". Supposedly partisans were picking out all SS and Fallschirmjager and shooting onsite while the GIs turned their heads.
Yes, I've got the Fedorowicz edition of 'Grenadiers' which is quoted in just about every book about the Normandy campaign. It's a valuable memoir - after all, he was most certainly there and played a very important part in the fighting. But, given his background and views, you certainly can't expect an unbiased account of events.....
The following piece of information was originally on a canadian newspaper site (not anymore): Haven't read the book mentioned so I cannot confim if it's correct... _
I do know this, I read 4 books of my grandfather's journal covering 2 periods during the war. I read about the period covering Apr 1940- Oct 1941 and Apr 43' - Oct 44'. There was an entry where they came across 12 HJ soldiers that were obviously executed lining a road. They were fighting the Canadians and the order went out not to take prisoners for one week and my grandfather ensured that this was carried out. This was the only time I read in his entries that he willfully carried out such an order with no remorse against the West.
The 'human shield' incident is the Inns Of Court Regiment incident from Normandy. There are several versions and the Germans use the 'human shield' description. The Recce Regiment was deep behind German lines when it captured a group of high ranking German Officers. It took some prisoner and placed them on the A/Cars. It is alleged they shot the others and when they came under fire some (or all) the Germans on/in the armoured cars were killed. One only has to realise how valuable such German prisoners were to understand the 'human shield' version is bogus.
