Friday, November 29, 2013

Operation Anthropoid.

Assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, circa 1942. Artist: Terence Cuneo. Picture: The National Archives
Great painting.
Operation Anthropoid.Operation Anthropoid was the code name for the assassination attempt on SS-Obergruppenführer and General der Polizei Reinhard Heydrich, head of the Reichssicherheitshauptamt (Reich Main Security Office, RSHA), the combined security services of Nazi Germany, and acting Reichsprotektor of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. The operation was carried out in Prague on 27 May 1942 after having been prepared by the British Special Operations Executive with the approval of the Czechoslovak government-in-exile. Although only wounded in the attack, Heydrich died of his injuries on 4 June 1942. His death led to a wave of merciless reprisals by German SS troops, including the destruction of villages and the killing of civilians. Heydrich had been a key player in the rise of Adolf Hitler; as a Nazi potentate, he was given overall charge of the Final Solution and the Holocaust of the Jews in Europe. Despite the risks, the primary purpose of Anthropoid, from the Czech perspective, was to confer legitimacy on Edvard Beneš's government-in-exile in London. -- Wikipedia.


SWIFT said...

A good read on Reinhard Heydrich is his domination of the Wannsee Conference. A totally evil man and a good study of Hoffer's, True Believer. His death, justifiably violent, should be required reading by all political, commie and neo-nazi scum in the U.S.A.

Mt Top Patriot said...

Just saying, what form of reprisal, if so, how swift and what would be the scope, if a similar event where to ever take place on American soil, lets say for the sake of theoretical argument, against a particularly dictatorial chief official of a law enforcement branch of government.

Heavens forbid it could happen to a fine outstanding oath taking unelected individual.

Would it in probability, shake that government to it's very foundations as in all forms of governance as nobody cares for such things as it is a direct impingement on upon the structure and hierarchy of power within government.

As a study of the dynamics of history, be interesting to discover how do events such as these effect the legitimacy, and the perception of legitimacy of various forms of tyrannies?

How critical it is for governments to protect perceptions of legitimacy? After all, it is consent of the governed which is the basis of legitimacy of most forms of representative government.

In America there would of course be no possible reason for a Heydrick event, after all the US .gov is a republic based on the rule of law where our elected and unelected officials swear and honor an oath of office to protect and defend the rule of law and to the people from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. There never could be a state police apparatus or anything like that kind of totalitarianism. (A ludicrous assumption.)

That would be akin to history of an event long ago involving a police state apparatus within a fascist totalitarian regime repeating itself within the structure of a constitutional republic.

Though an impossible and a preposterous idea in America, it could be an interesting exercise into revealing how crisis's of legitimacy develop in republican forms of government.

SWIFT said...

The last three administrations have relegated the Constitution to be nothing more than an archaic piece of parchment. This has been accomplished, seemingly, with the blessing of the DOJ and Supreme Court. In short, the door is wide open and we are incrementally, but progressively, moving toward a police state, like Germany in the 1930's and 40's. The evidence of the truth of this statement, is everywhere. Black clad police with face masks, SWAT raids for unpaid student loans, SWAT raids to kill an allegedly illegally kept fawn, the constant shooting of unarmed people. All, thus far, officially sanctioned. Remember, Germany did all it's atrocities within the "law" also. I'll add in this post, that Rheinhard Heydrich's death, should be required reading for all members of the Praetorian Guard, not just the leadership. While Heydrich's death was planned in London, there are many examples of retaliation by oppressed people. I do not believe this post, or a hundred million just like it, will change the course of events. Sad thing that!

Anonymous said...

In order for such an event to actually shake or even stir a corrupt government to its foundations, the action would have to be more than simply one lone individual, but small teams or individuals targeting more than one dictatorial chief official.

Such incidents would undoubtedly ratchet up the hysterical rhetoric and jack booted tactics on the populace; infringing upon rights with ever increasing totalitarian laws and regulations, violations of free travel and unreasonable searches/seizures....thereby turning more citizens against an abusive, paranoid government.

Meister said...

Politically, the events in Colorado have had the proper motivation effect on other elected officials, as well as the populace. The system in Colorado is set up so that elected officials can be targeted with votes instead of bullets to get them out of office legally. This is the best course of action possible. It keeps the powers that be from being allowed to loose the hounds on the general public for their legal actions. If the same actions were taken illegally, the use of force would dictate a swift response and the heel would be at the necks of everyone who opposed the Regime.

Once the first action is taken outside the rule of law, the game will change, and the spin against patriots will start. Unless a coordinated event was able to really change the landscape of politics, any action taken would be of little consequence due to the fact that it would only further the agenda of the collectivist in charge.

IMO, no matter what reprisals were offered up, they would quickly become a hindrance to the patriotic movements. It's better to act within the system as long as it's an option. With the recent executive orders and domestic spying requirements, there is no doubt that any action taken would have swift consequences. Nor only that, it would allow our dear leader to flex those new muscles he's been given without worry of reprisals from the populace.

We have fully functional army of highly trained and well equipped federal agents answerable only to the executive branch, without any constitutional mandates as to it's behavior. They can do as they please now, giving them a good reason to apply the skills and resources at their disposal would be detrimental to the well being of anyone who opposes the Regime.

At this point, I'm just not sure if it's possible to even begin to ignite the people without severe repercussions to all involved.

Slobyskysa Rotchikokov said...

My thoughts are that no historical tyranny has ever been concerned about 'perception of legitimacy' during its initial stages of purges and massacres of its political enemies. Only much later, after all voices of dissent are silent, do such unelected governments even make a pretense in that area. One of the reasons that many Catholic Bishops and Protestant Ministers were silent during WWII was that on the occasions when they first spoke out against the Reich, hundreds of innocents in their home areas were slaughtered. Rightly or wrongly, most thought that speaking out, was not worth the blood of hundreds or thousands being shed because of their words. Tyrants always choose the innocent and unprotected to use in order to make examples.
This is true all the way back to the times of the Roman Empire. Human shields were often used when entering a hostile area. This mentality has not changed.
However, those who think that they are safe from the talons of justice often overlook the fact that, when the masses feel that there is nothing to lose by rising up, they themselves, and the ones whom they choose to protect them, are often sought out as targets of opportunity. Michael Collins used that tactic well.
There is much more to ponder, but I will cease for now. History is a rich teacher of tactics and principles.

Anonymous said...

The recalls in Colorado perhaps show the way. Simply a list of "Those to be Recalled" and a progrom of Rolling Recall where ever that option is available, throughout each electoral cycle.

Should the 'other' political party retaliate by organising their own recalls that would simply expand and extend opperation to MORE elected officials of both stripes.

Nothing more satisfying than seeing then ripped from the trough screaming!

Fully utilise the ballot box ...


Anonymous said...

Against whom would Leviathan direct its reprisal(s)? Operation Anthropoid was carried out in a foreign nation and the reprisals were against a conquered people.

In the event of the dastardly and utterly terrifying murder of any sacred member of the government - elected or appointed - I am not sure who could be expected to be the recipients of Leviathan's most righteous and proper wrath. Reprisals against the residents of the municipality where the wretched event occurred could hardly be expected to have participated in the act. However, a massive B-52 strike on the municipality where the scrofulous act of the so-called "freedom fighters" was carried out could be used to appeal to the insurgents' consciences. It would, after all, be their fault that the innocent residents had to die to punish the insurgents' evil deeds.

MTP, any right-thinking citizen will tell you that a government's "legitimacy" is not determined either by its actions or the perception of the governed. It is self-evident to any truely law-abiding, right-thinking individual that the mere existence of the government provides it with all the "legitimacy" it requires. So long as a government follows its own procedures, according to that noted scholar and political philosopher, Joshua Horwitz, whatever it does is legitimate and good citizens will obey unquestioningly. Since it is morally wrong for any mere citizen to employ - or even possess the implements to employ - violence, any use of violence by government in the service of peace and order is legitimate and any questioning of that is treason.

Anonymous said...

My opinion on operation:
I remember this episode from reading, and an episode of History channel.. I've always viewed it as a mix bag of success on the results, as the resistance fighters were caught and killed, and Czech resistance was moped up, not counting the scorched earth of thousands of civilians executed and villages razed...


Surveillance offered several different scenarios and offered the best circumstance for ambush. When setting up an ambush, you do it on your terms and your terrain.

Use of a watcher/signaler as support team initially for assault team; support team then provides cover fire for assault force after festivities begin

When submachine gun failed fighter threw briefcase bomb with IED, so backup weaponery for force multiplier.

And in relation to overall strategy assassination was effective exposing Nazis not being invincible and provide psychological warfare incentive to other resistance fighters/supporters in Czechoslovkia and abroad with allied powers.

For a party on offensive or conducting an ambush requires the ballistic superiority of rifles/carbines, not the less effective cartridges of submachine guns or pistols in regards to small arms. Of course, machine guns, rocket launchers, explosives, etc are preferred.

The 2 resistance fighters did not have their operation in a vacuum, but contacted "several families and anti-Nazi organizations" to help them in preparation for their mission, violating the guerrilla fighter policy of leadership resistance and not containing information to be used against them.

Just some thoughts on this episode..not an expert. Seems the Polish resistance Operation Heads was more effective, though somewhat lower targets on the totem pole, they not being all top ruling class or their support staff/ elements:

Anonymous said...

Elitist top-heavy power structures always have one critical flaw - they very much depend on mid-level type "managers" to do there bidding. These in turn direct the army of taxpayer-funded useful idiots that serve as the foot soldiers for the apparatchik.

Since the great majority - if not all - of the low level drones - are without any degree of organizational intelligence, they are utterly dysfunctional and incapacitated if the middle links suddenly disappear from the chain of command.

Since the top level command structure is too well guarded to approach with any confidence of success, then the best opportunity for realizing the desired outcome lies with targeting those in the mid-level positions of the power structure ... Those who have brains enough to run things, but are not sufficiently appreciated by the elite to be afforded more than minimal security - the Benghazi scandal well demonstrates this point.

Thus, mid level operatives are the "soft white underbelly" and the Achilles heal of the regime. A well-planned strike on multiple key components of the bureaucratic management structure would cripple the regime in two ways:

1.) By the immediate loss of semi-competent operators necessary to the regime's continuity, and

2.) By the very large disincentive it would create for any having both the required level of intelligence and a modicum of self-preservation instinct to fill the resultant void.

A widespread campaign, of simultaneous operations directed at multiple targets, would thus affect the greatest possible deterrence to further aggression by the elite.

Anonymous said...

Interesting discussion here... There are several points that need mentioning first.

Officials, elected or appointed are not government. Unlike kings or emperors they have no inherent authority, it is delegated from the people, see Federalist 45 Madison "powers... few and defined".

Next we have six items of important information. 1.) The Debates of the Constitution specifically point out that the Framers intended NOT to erect an aristocracy, by that I take it to mean a privileged class. Thus is the language surrounding the discussion. (A PDF Version of Madison's Notes will allow a word search.) 2.) Federalist Paper 57 tells us that the legislature is to make no law they and their friends are not subject to. 3.) The specific language of the Constitution relating to immunity is from civil service during sessions and things said in debate on the floor. 4.) Article I Section 8 Clause 9 specifically ststed that there will be no titles of nobility. This further demonstrates the Framers disdain and forbidding an excepted class. 5.) This is important, discussing impeachment the Constitution has this to say. It is not an exclusive remedy. In other words the legislature is liable for crimes regardless of impeachment.

.."but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

Article I Section 3 Clause 7, US Constitution


Anonymous said...

So regardless of the impeachment outcome, the party is still liable to the charge he may be found to have committed. I say this because Section 6 of Article I specifically state the parameters and the standard for the legislator's limit to conduct.

Regarding the privilege from arrest, it is conditional. This brings us to point 6.) and it is Article I Section 6, Clause 1 that spells out the limit of their privilege:

Section 6. The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in
going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

I think this long line of reasoning is evidence as to the intent of the Framers. It sweeps aside the notion that election to the legislature affords an "elite" position that grants a privilege from prosecution for breach of the law. It also points out that the privelege against arrest from or to the assembly is subject to crimes, felonies and treason being specifically spelled out.


Anonymous said...

Now I am going to go out on a limb here and make a point regarding felonies. How many legislator have been running around the country side encouraging amnesty for illegal aliens, in public and off the floor of the house or senate???? This act of encouraging such illegal alien to remain in the country illegally is a felony:

Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
8 USC Section 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)
"Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):
A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:
* assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or
* encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
* knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.


Mt Top Patriot said...

There is a regime in a certain republic where various forms of false flag events and crisis as a means, (aka the ends justify the means), in concert with a collaborating media and numerous political party's, to both justify creation of a police state, use fear as a social engineering tool, and conveniently create the narrative where citizens who cling to particular cultural principles and traditions of this aforementioned republic are officially deemed radical and potential domestic terrorists.

For some time, at least over the reign of at least two particular regimes, many efforts have been taken to goad and push those particular "radical domestic terrorists" into reacting with violent redress.

Without exception, the intended recipients of this manipulative political malfeasance have refused to take the bait and become scapegoats.

It is important to reflect on the nature and law abiding traditions of these people. Where the officially, and politically coined term of "bitterly clinging" to arms faith and tradition may just have everything to be said for it in terms of those targeted, whom as a culture possessing great tolerance, of high moral character, and respect for the intent of rule of law and it's importance as the "glue" in the social contract.

A plurality if you will.

This is in itself a very grave danger to the regime.

But it peaks volumes about the good character of those unjustly targeted that those doing the targeting are not swinging from lampposts.

People of such character, once aroused past the point of peaceful redress and restraint, have a tendency to deliver a brutal comeuppance on their tormentors.

Heydrick events may be the least of the regimes worries.

Just saying.