Did Martin Bormann survive the war?

[Kilroywashere]

Sid,

Well, as I did not post this article to state a fact that Bormann survived after WWII, I’ll let those who read this make up their own minds either way.

This is another great site with information pertaining to this subject which I had found to be interesting:

https://goldeneyepublishingltd.wordpres ... -evidence/

You are highly mistaken about the “bank note” from the Deutsche Bank of Buenos Aires, and it is within the files of Central de Inteligencia of the Argentina secret police of the Ministerio del Interior. All you need do is actually get there or request a copy and see it for yourself.

The clay is seriously proof positive that the skeleton was planted there (no red clay in surrounding area at all), and it was ohhhh so funny how they just happened to know EXACTLY where to find the bodies in 1972….that is with all the news cameras there for emphasis. Funny though, when the actual teeth of Martin Bormann’s were shown to have a procedure in the jawline which post dates 1945 and even up to the 50’s, it’s poo pooed away and not discussed….

But how about this simple fact…What about the KGB report that the Russian’s supposedly dug up Bormann’s and Doctor Ludwig Stumpfegger's bodies and had moved them for further analysis…..What do you want us to believe, that they re-buried the bodies back there when they were finished just so the media and the German government could find them in 1972?

That’s about as silly as your red terracotta flower pot joke.

RE: Watch video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP0snh_zNiU
5:00 into the video….

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Kilroy,

You write, "I’ll let those who read this make up their own minds either way". I did read this. I have made up my own mind. I was not impressed. Nor will anyone interested in traceable evidence be!

You say with absolute certainty and without qualification that the "bank note" is within the files of "Central de Inteligencia of the Argentina secret police of the Ministerio del Interior." I take it from this that you have personally seen it. Can we please have a file or accession number so that we can "request a copy", as you suggest?

Your new link is simply a rehash of the old one and with the same untraceable evidential limitations.

Did they really know EXACTLY where the bodies were? And if they did, why is that so strange given that there were surviving members of the escaping party able to give evidence as to route and where Bormann was last seen?

I am still sticking to the slain-by-falling-red-terracotta-flower-pot-on-the-head-theory, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary!

Can you tell us more about the rank of "Vice Fuhrer"? When was Bormann appointed to this rank and by whom? It can't be the same post as "Deputy Führer", because Hitler abolished it on 12 May 1941, following the flight of the only previous holder, Rudolf Hess.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Kilroywashere]

KGB report, body not even there in the first place (they took out two bodies years before), but somehow they knew where it was because certain people want us to believe that in 1972 the powers that be in Germany knew exactly where to exhume both bodies just in time for the press release. But here's the kicker folks, they had no idea where it was in the first place, hadn't found them, and then almost to the day Paul Manning's book comes out, a construction company just happens to come upon two bodies where they begin work...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP0snh_zNiU
4:10on

The skeletal remains are said to have a DNA match but know one has ever seen the report???? Gee Sid, why aren't we looking for that report in order to verify your claims of his dying in 1945? Please show me that report so I can state for the record it's in fact Bormann's body and not a "flowery" substitute....

But....

Then there's the dental report which for some reason cannot be found, why might you ask...because they didn't get what they wanted this time. It seems that the dentistry work completed on this convenient jaw line in question couldn't have been done in the 40's, but instead in the 50's and later....

Vice Fuhrer? Huh? Where did I state this at? Please elaborate. Martin Bormann, the Brown Eminence, was Hitler's eyes, ears and mouth. He usurped power away from Himmler, Goering, or anyone who attempted to get to Hitler's ear without his acceptance or gain.

You want to verify the Bank note, here's the website address you can request it at:

https://www.mininterior.gov.ar/inicio/index.php

Paul Manning was the first author I know of that disclosed this information and his references were in the book. Buy a copy and perhaps it will help.

Lastly, I'm glad you are staying with your "Flowery" conclusion and please don't take this personally but I have the funniest suspicion that no matter what anyone presents here, you would continue to nay say anyway. There are eyewitness accounts from reliable people that have seen him and have been interviewed, there is a direct connection with the Peron administration verified by Peron's own ADC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQgmw7KfUgo

And on and on....Whatever you believe, the truth is that there is a lot of information out there that shows he survived WWII and died in South America.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi kwh,

You ask, "Gee Sid, why aren't we looking for that report in order to verify your claims of his dying in 1945?"

Firstly, please do not invent my position. I made no claims of Bormann "dying in 1945", so I don't have to verify them. My point was that if Bormann didn't die in 1945, he might as well have, as he hasn't resurfaced since. The onus is on those proposing Bormann survived after 1945 to prove their point with verifiable evidence. They haven't done so.

Secondly, "Gee", why would we? There are no credible reports of Bormann resurfacing after his disappearance, he has not resurfaced and would be dead now even if he had survived anyway. He was never a major player when alive, and has been even less so since his disappearance, most likely due to his death in 1945.

So why, apart from the occasional journalist making money out of rehashing the story, and those with high credulousness and low standards of evidence, would anyone feel impelled to follow this story up? It just doesn't matter much. It is a very minor footnote of history.

The onus is entirely on those supporting the proposition that Bormann survived to bring forward some substantive evidence. Secondary journalistic articles without traceable sources and implausible joint bank accounts with no traceable source do not amount to this.

I will believe anything, provided it is supported by credible evidence. The Bormann survival story entirely lacks this.

The only thing we seem to know is that DNA seems to indicate that his body was found pretty much where eye witness reports indicate that it should have been given where he was last definitely seen.

So where is the mystery?

Cheers,

Sid.

[Kilroywashere]

Sid,

Neither of us know for sure what happened to Martin Bormann after 1945.

So that you know, the supposed "DNA" evidence, tested when the practice was barely out of its infancy stage, is not the end all or as much of an exacting science as people wish it to be. In the case of Bormann, I do believe that it was his skeletal remains, and that the DNA was correct...That is, after it was dug up in a grave in Paraguay and replanted in the exact area everyone who stated he was last seen there said it was...actually nearby and not exactly all of them because it really depends on which stories from the bunker eyewitnesses you believe.

But even if there are those out there who believe that the DNA evidence is controversial, and not an exacting science, which should be taken as 100 percent proof, this article comes to mind:

DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show
From: NYTimes.com

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories...

Whichever way you slice it, the end result is this story and it's many facets, makes for a lot better consideration than Hitler escaping the bunker or Lizard men controlling us from their subterranean headquarters. To many people had witnessed him....his stepdaughter in Argentina must be a liar, Peron's ADC must be lying, the CIA eyewitnesses in Argentina must be lying, the financial records must be fake, the Nuremberg abstentia conviction must have been for fun, the managers and the assistant front desk employees at the la plaza in 62' must have been imagining it, Reinhard Gehlen must have been fibbing when he was questioned, and on and on.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi kwh,

Certainly, "Neither of us know for sure what happened to Martin Bormann after 1945." However, that doesn't put us on an equal footing.

One of us apparently favours a simple explanation that conforms with the few known hard facts, while the other of us favours an incredibly complex and convoluted explanation based on the flimsiest of dubious evidence.

If, as you say, DNA samples can be faked, then it is unlikely to apply in this case, which was, as you say, early in the history of DNA analysis - 1998. It is unlikely that a means of fabricating DNA samples was developed so early and evidence for this is entirely lacking. Indeed, your first reference to such a technique is from 2009. What is more, all Google references go back to one article, based on the research by someone with a financial stake in its marketing. Furthermore, there seems to be no development in the story since. So I think we can discount faking of the DNA sample in 1998 unless something more substantive comes up.

No, the story is in exactly the same category as "Hitler escaping the bunker", though admittedly a little short of "Lizard men controlling us from their subterranean headquarters".

No, it is not necessary for anyone to be lying, though any or all of them certainly could be for a variety of motives. They could also be plain wrong. Their memory may be at fault. They may be mad. They may just want to please. They may enjoy the attention. They may have been subjected to leading questioning,, etc., etc., etc.

Furthermore, the third parties interviewing them and making money and careers out of articles and books could be selective, or downright dishonest, or accept low standards of evidence or, be deficient in analytical skills, or suffer from confirmation bias, etc., etc., etc.

CIA witnesses in Argentina must certainly be suspect, as the CIA and its immediate predecessor ran one of their earliest destabilization and misinformation campaigns against Peron in the late 1940s and early 1950s because he would not conform with their foreign policy goals in Latin America.

As for the financial records, I would ask again, "Can you tell us more about the rank of "Vice Fuhrer"? When was Bormann appointed to this rank and by whom? It can't be the same post as "Deputy Führer", because Hitler abolished it on 12 May 1941, following the flight of the only previous holder, Rudolf Hess."

Cheers,

Sid.

[Kilroywashere]

Sid wrote: One of us apparently favours a simple explanation that conforms with the few known hard facts, while the other of us favours an incredibly complex and convoluted explanation based on the flimsiest of dubious evidence.

The few known hard facts? And they are? I asked you to properly place them in a response and show me the evidence of these “few” facts, and yet I see none of them here. On the other hand, you have been continuously overzealous about stating how my “convoluted” facts are “based on the flimsiest of dubious evidence”, yet I am the only one actually showing facts as they are presented. This does not mean that you believe them or not, but considering your lack of probable eyewitnesses to the contrary, contradictions about Bormann’s escape from the known bunker escapees have been dubious to say the least.

1. They had everything to gain by supporting the “he’s dead” theory, as if they didn’t, it could be quite possible they wouldn’t be around for very much longer, due to perhaps Die Spinner or the Auslander’s group, or Odessa, or whatever you wish to call those who supported the Rat Lines. Some stories had Bormann leading a tank attack, others had him running away with another person other than the doctor, and others had him in another area of Berlin. Years later they even changed their minds….so much for those “few facts”.
2. It’s assumed by Bormann’s known prowess that his influences, if he did survive the war, would have been easily maintained and utilized to control factors within a continuation of said party, and arguing that he couldn’t have had anyone he deemed a threat to his maintaining control killed, would be ignorant.
3. Dental work done after 1945 would have made him survive and there is no explanation for this fact found on his jaw line.
4. Red Clay Red Clay Red Clay Sid, sorry…no real explanation. This was found on the skeleton and NO WHERE AROUND the dig site or even further down in the ground when they decided to dig. There are pictures of this and they clearly show the difference no matter how many vines of wine you wish were grown there.

Sid Wrote: If, as you say, DNA samples can be faked, then it is unlikely to apply in this case, which was, as you say, early in the history of DNA analysis - 1998. It is unlikely that a means of fabricating DNA samples was developed so early and evidence for this is entirely lacking. Indeed, your first reference to such a technique is from 2009. What is more, all Google references go back to one article, based on the research by someone with a financial stake in its marketing. Furthermore, there seems to be no development in the story since. So I think we can discount faking of the DNA sample in 1998 unless something more substantive comes up.

Sid, since you persist in this one:

From: https://redice.tv/news/mystery-still-su ... utys-death
"The comparison of the sequence of HV1 and HV2 from the skeletal remains and a living maternal relative of Martin Bormann revealed no differences and this sequence was not found in 1500 Caucasoid reference sequences.
Based on this investigation, we support the hypothesis that the skeletal remains are those of Martin Bormann."

And Yet….

http://sciencenordic.com/dna-evidence-n ... -foolproof

And my point was that since you only have some “few” facts as you state, alone this bodes badly for your case to hold up in any court worth its water.

Sid Wrote: No, the story is in exactly the same category as "Hitler escaping the bunker", though admittedly a little short of "Lizard men controlling us from their subterranean headquarters".

No, it is not necessary for anyone to be lying, though any or all of them certainly could be for a variety of motives. They could also be plain wrong. Their memory may be at fault. They may be mad. They may just want to please. They may enjoy the attention. They may have been subjected to leading questioning,, etc., etc., etc.

Yes, and this can be utilized in the opposite agenda driven directive as well…They could be lying for reasons of their own security, and this seemed more plausible at the time, due to the constant redaction's and differences heard in the interviews. One could be left as happenstance, and one seems overtly obvious.

Sid Wrote: CIA witnesses in Argentina must certainly be suspect, as the CIA and its immediate predecessor ran one of their earliest destabilization and misinformation campaigns against Peron in the late 1940s and early 1950s because he would not conform with their foreign policy goals in Latin America.

And where are the papers which show this Sid? That the CIA and its immediate predecessor ran this destabilization and misinformation campaign against Peron? I’d like to read the memo’s which outline how they targeted Peron for this reason by creating or making aware of eyewitnesses to Martin Bormann’s "fake" presence in Argentina, and did this out of the country in Paraguay, Brazil and oh yes, Chile as well. I’d like to be privy to the entire campaign and the genius who would use an objective so far out there as you like to explain it, in regards to directly lowing the PR of President Peron…..Because otherwise, wouldn’t there have been a much better way of approaching the same outcome….say for instance,
telling the truth with facts about Peron’s real Nazi connections instead? Why make something up when you can pick so many who they knew were there and working with the administration at the time instead?

No Sid, I am sorry, your "few facts" really seem lacking in that they are for the most part, few, and now shown could have been unreliable. Remember, I said I thought The DNA evidence was real, just probably planted there many years later. The witnesses who said they saw Bormann killed, or had to be killed, changed their minds and went back to their original testimonies, time and time again. The one place they found the bodies didn't even match some of those witnesses who stated he was not even in that area when the explosion when off...and on and on.

[Blackadder2000]

I honestly don't believe that Bormann died in 1945.

From wikipedia:

Discovery of remains
Over the coming years, several organisations, including the CIA and the West German Government, attempted to locate Bormann without success.[103] The West German government in 1964 offered a reward of 100,000 Deutsche Marks for information leading to Bormann's capture.[104] Sightings were reported at points all over the world, including Australia, Denmark, Italy, and South America.[53][105] In his autobiography, Nazi intelligence officer Reinhard Gehlen claimed that Bormann had been a Soviet spy, and that he had escaped to Moscow.[106] Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal believed that Bormann was living in South America.[107] The West German government declared that its hunt for Bormann was over in 1971.[108]

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi kwh,

We know where and when Bormann was last definitely seen by acquaintances and fellow escapers from Berlin in 1945 and we know where his DNA-tested remains were found. They are in virtually the same place in 1998. These are the few hard facts available. They are also ones that you have, in the past, agreed upon.

All the convoluted stories that come between these two dates purporting to show Bormann lived on appear to be speculative and/or lack verifiable sources. (In which connection, do you have file number for the bank details or any explanation as to why Bormann is described as Vice Fuhrer in it? I have asked several times now.)

Your link to sciencenordic says absolutely nothing about (1) Bormann, (2) faking DNA, or (3) Frumkin. Why did you put it up?

You write, "Yes, and this can be utilized in the opposite agenda driven directive as well…They could be lying for reasons of their own security, and this seemed more plausible at the time, due to the constant redaction's and differences heard in the interviews. One could be left as happenstance, and one seems overtly obvious." Exactly! All the stuff between 1945 and 1998 is unreliable. The only theory that needs verifiable confirmatory information from this era is the one that contends he lived on after 1945.

As a rule of thumb, the simpler a theory, the more plausible it is likely to be, because the number of variables is much reduced. Bormann being killed escaping from Berlin conforms with the few known hard facts from 1945 and 1998.

Cheers,

Sid.

P.S. If you want to follow up US/CIA interference in Peron's Argentina in the 1940s and early 1950s, look out the activities of Ambassador Sprouille Braden and Silvano Santander.

[Kilroywashere]

Sid Writes: We know where and when Bormann was last definitely seen by acquaintances and fellow escapers from Berlin in 1945 and we know where his DNA-tested remains were found. They are in virtually the same place in 1998. These are the few hard facts available. They are also ones that you have, in the past, agreed upon.

Wrong on this one Sid. We have no clue whatsoever which “eyewitness” account to believe, as many of the very same differ in the areas and the approximate places where the supposed bodies “might” have been found. Some of them state that Bormann and a totally different man other than the good Doctor were put up in an apartment until weeks after the battle of Berlin. Others state that Bormann didn’t die near the Lehrter Station, but during the tank attack near the Weidendammer Brücke.

Did you know that as early as 1965 authorities were looking for both Bormann and Stumpfegger near to thee former grounds of the Universem Ausstellungspart?

And I will tell you why…The “eyewitness” account supposedly goes that the Russians found both the bodies there and a Russian soldier who was interviewed years later by the name of Krunmov stated that he and some others buried them at Ausstellungspart….

But please don’t take their words for it Sid…Here’s some others you point to for your "Simple facts" which must prove Bormann died escaping and was buried there:

“According to "eyewitness" Erich Kempka, Hitler's chauffer and a member of the Fuehrer Bunker escape party, Bormann tried to cross the bridge under cover of a German tank navigating the narrow span. The tank was shelled by a bazooka and exploded in a violent burst of flame, killing Bormann.”

Yet here’s the kicker…. “At least four others of Hitler's trusted insiders reported seeing virtually the same event, but again, none had inspected the body or could declare with certainty it was dead, though all were convinced of it.”

And then there’s: “Except this witness, the Spaniard Juan Roca-Pinar, who, as an avowed Nazi was fighting near the bridge as part of a small SS unit, later reported that Bormann was not at the side of the tank but riding inside the tank when it was hit by the bazooka shell.”

But yet…..

“Roca-Pinar reported that he was ordered to board the tank and save Bormann, but when he opened the hatch to rescue survivors, he found Bormann dead from the blast. He nonetheless pulled Bormann's corpse from the tank before being forced to abandon it in the street under pressure of enemy fire.”

Where was the body buried Sid? Was the Good Doctor also in the tank and sharing a ride? Why did the others leave out that important point about "inside" versus outside? And guess what...the Tank was no where near where the bodies were found in 1972, and if you believe that the Russians later buried them, then it was even father away. No, the real convolution lies in the supposed facts he died in 1945.

So once again, where is your proof or what you like to call, “simple facts” that Bormann was definitely buried right where they actually found them in 1972? How many conflicts would you like to see before you realize that even the "Bormann died escaping" fact as you like to call it, makes no sense when listening to the very people who were there, and even the Russians who supposedly buried them not even near where they were found in 1972?

Even Stalin believed Bormann escaped.


Sid Writes: All the convoluted stories that come between these two dates purporting to show Bormann lived on appear to be speculative and/or lack verifiable sources. (In which connection, do you have file number for the bank details or any explanation as to why Bormann is described as Vice Fuhrer in it? I have asked several times now.)

Funny…when it’s shown to you how convoluted the so called “simple facts” of Bormann’s supposed death is in 1945, you insist they are obviously correct, but when presented with so many specifics, such as eyewitness accounts after 45’, including evidence which places the skeleton beyond the reach of originally buried "there?" in 45’, including the contradicting testimony of the bunker escapee’s (you are limited to have to use to prove your case); the acknowledgement fails to at least show how it’s not so drawn out and final as you’d like it to be.

Sid Writes: As a rule of thumb, the simpler a theory, the more plausible it is likely to be, because the number of variables is much reduced. Bormann being killed escaping from Berlin conforms with the few known hard facts from 1945 and 1998.

Unfortunately your “Few hard facts” are no where to be found, and the only one you can point to, is a DNA match taken from a swab of a Bormann relative who shows a match. And once again for those of you who are bored enough to read this thread, a match which is meaningless…one I have already agreed is real and authentic and would be an acknowledged bit of evidence if it wasn’t for the fact that the skeletal remains were planted there years later after Bormann’s death in Paraguay.

If not, explain the postmortem dentistry…explain the red clay…explain the contradicting eyewitness accounts from the bunker escapees, explain the financial trail with President Juan Peron, explain on….

As a rule, real evidence and not placed evidence wins out the day once again.

[Kilroywashere]

I honestly don't believe that Bormann died in 1945.

From wikipedia:

Discovery of remains
Over the coming years, several organisations, including the CIA and the West German Government, attempted to locate Bormann without success.[103] The West German government in 1964 offered a reward of 100,000 Deutsche Marks for information leading to Bormann's capture.[104] Sightings were reported at points all over the world, including Australia, Denmark, Italy, and South America.[53][105] In his autobiography, Nazi intelligence officer Reinhard Gehlen claimed that Bormann had been a Soviet spy, and that he had escaped to Moscow.[106] Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal believed that Bormann was living in South America.[107] The West German government declared that its hunt for Bormann was over in 1971.[108]

You are not alone in your opinion on this, and isn't it interesting that the one country which ended it's "hunt for Bormann" was the West German govt in 1971. What they didn't tell most everyone, was that the Mossad had found close to 7 graves purportedly to have been Bormann's ever since they took an interest in thus. Why would there be 7 graves told to them throughout the world, of a Man who really hadn't the acclaim and fancy of someone like a Himmler or a Hitler for? Could it be that there were certain people who were attempting to put the trail to rest? And for what reason? These were the questions that made me inquisitive all those years ago. I wanted to find out just why Bormann was so interesting to so many who felt he never died. Unfortunately, you have many out there buying up the "obvious" instead of looking through the glass at what's really on the other side.

Lastly, track the financial position of West Germany after 1945 and what happened with all the major West German Companies, namely their expansion and how it came about. A very interesting subject.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi kwh,

If we didn't know which eye witness accounts were most plausible before Bormann's remains were found, we did afterwards. Some (you list five) last saw him near where the remains were found. They are therefore most likely to be the most accurate.

All other versions require special pleading and convoluted, complex strings of events over decades and half the globe if they are to be believed. It requires a particular conspiratorial inclination to credit them over the more straightforward explanation - Bormann's body was found pretty much where he fell in Berlin in 1945. It is difficult to tell exactly because the relevant maps on the internet have no scale, but there seem to be perhaps 200m between where Axmann says he found Bormann's corpse in 1945 and where it was dug up decades later.

You seem under the impression that there is something suspicious or unusual about numerous contradictory versions of the same event in the heat of battle. It is perfectly normal for men under stress and with multiple preoccupations regarding their own personal safety, to have differing versions. It would be more suspicious if they all had identical stories, giving the trying circumstances.

So what if "Even Stalin believed Bormann escaped" (original source please?). He didn't have an identified body or DNA evidence. Nor was he unacquainted with paranoia and fear of conspiracy.

Please do not invent what I post. I did not write that Bormann's remains were found in "exactly" or "right where" he was last seen. You have added the words "exactly" and "right where". I did not use them. Bormann's remains were found on the route he and the other eyewitnesses were attempting to use to make their escape from Berlin in virtually the same place.

You seem under the misapprehension that those who think it most likely Bormann was killed pretty much where his body was found have to explain away a load of alternative explanations. They do not. They have a number of circumstantial eyewitness accounts about the place and date of his death and a body found in virtually the same place that has been DNA tested. Their case is made.

The onus is entirely on the purveyors of the various, convoluted alternative explanations to produce evidence as compelling. This they are not, apparently, capable of doing.

I have asked you a number of direct questions in posts above, some of them several times, and you have failed to address even one of them. If you don't know the answers, just say so, and we can move on.

So far, you have only brought up tertiary journalistic links on the interweb. You never offer a primary source. What is the hardest source you have before you? Does it have no footnotes, bibliography, etc.? So far you are presenting us with unsourced chinese whispers. Please give us some meat.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Kilroywashere]

Sid: If we didn't know which eye witness accounts were most plausible before Bormann's remains were found, we did afterwards. Some (you list five) last saw him near where the remains were found. They are therefore most likely to be the most accurate.

LOL! That’s like saying we need to pass the heathcare bill before we know what’s in it! The entire mess of the so called witnesses had much more to lose and plenty more to gain by throwing off the trail of Martin Bormann’s escape, than they did presenting the truth. The entire mangled mess of contradictions wouldn’t stand up in any court, no less the kangaroo court which seems to be the prototype of those who’d rather place everything in a nice little box with a tie, instead of understanding the complexities of a man such as Bormann.

Sid: Bormann's body was found pretty much where he fell in Berlin in 1945. It is difficult to tell exactly because the relevant maps on the internet have no scale, but there seem to be perhaps 200m between where Axmann says he found Bormann's corpse in 1945 and where it was dug up decades later.

“Pretty much where he fell”….Where, while he was in the tank, out of the tank, taken out of the tank, or ran there himself? Or was it after he left the apartment a week later after the ceasefire? Or was it when the Spaniard placed him yards away from where he was found in 1972? Come on, you need to do a little better then this Sid. “Pretty much” isn’t making it.

Sid: You seem under the impression that there is something suspicious or unusual about numerous contradictory versions of the same event in the heat of battle. It is perfectly normal for men under stress and with multiple preoccupations regarding their own personal safety, to have differing versions. It would be more suspicious if they all had identical stories, giving the trying circumstances.

No one argues this point. There are always “slight” variances when telling the stories when under stress…but they are differences in aspects of the color of one’s shirt, or the amount of time….not whether the man was in or out of a tank Sid. Not when one witness points to him across the town, and another not even there. Or many who state that they last saw him but never checked to see if he died. In the case of “the heat of battle”, many differences can be shown about the same situation….but these are obvious variances and not at all similar in any respect.

Sid: So what if "Even Stalin believed Bormann escaped" (original source please?). He didn't have an identified body or DNA evidence. Nor was he unacquainted with paranoia and fear of conspiracy.

"Stalin told Harry Hopkins in Moscow that he believed Bormann escaped. Now he went further and said it was Bormann who got away in the fleeing U-boat. More than that Stalin refused to disclose."
William Stevenson author
The Bormann Brotherhood

I pray you meant this sarcastically: Sid: Nor was he (Stalin) unacquainted with paranoia and fear of conspiracy.

Sid: Please do not invent what I post. I did not write that Bormann's remains were found in "exactly" or "right where" he was last seen. You have added the words "exactly" and "right where". I did not use them. Bormann's remains were found on the route he and the other eyewitnesses were attempting to use to make their escape from Berlin in virtually the same place.


Sorry to infringe on your theory Sid. Exactly, ummmm…. Close to……well, perhaps 200 yards away, across town, whatever…bottom line is, the route could be whatever and whoever you choose would fit your example. The point is and was, Martin Bormann has been found dead in Paraguay, Munich, and 5 other known locations throughout the years to the Mossad. What’s the difference which one you pick, they all are wrong, that is, unless you pick a little marked grave in Paraguay….which by the way, has the very same “RED CLAY” in it that was found on the skeletal remains of The Brown Eminence.

Sid: You seem under the misapprehension that those who think it most likely Bormann was killed pretty much where his body was found have to explain away a load of alternative explanations. They do not. They have a number of circumstantial eyewitness accounts about the place and date of his death and a body found in virtually the same place that has been DNA tested. Their case is made.

Wrong Sid. There case is so far fetched and so convoluted it stinks. They have Nazi escapees as witnesses telling of where the man died, all of which were what I believe to have been purposely contradictory. The body was found at a distance from all of them, with a clay which cannot be found anywhere around, and with a jaw line which has within it dentistry done after the 50’s. Where is this case made?

They have DNA evidence and this is something I have not questioned, even though many have, because this form of evidence in the hands of humans is highly volatile, and many times corrupted. I believe those skeletal remains were Bormann’s…..I believe he was buried there…..Just long after 1945 and only after he lived a nice long life in South America, heading up one of the largest financial circles ever to see the light of day leave Germany.

If you or anyone wants further information on this financial train he masterminded, please consider buying the book, Hitler in Exile, by Paul Manning. This was the man’s entire life’s quest after his stint as a correspondent in WWII.

He lost a son because he knew so much Sid (after being threatened not to publish some of the information which is there, and no Sid, this was not some cheap angle to get more books sold. We didn’t know about this until well after he died from his other son), and whether you believe this or not, it pains that family to this day to realize it.

Matter of fact, if I am not mistaken, I think I can find an audio interview with his son who discusses what happened if you want to hear it.

[Michael Kenny]

I love reading crazy theories. Am I correct in seeing (the claim) Bormann was living in South America under his own name and had a bank account where he was paid by Peron?

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Michael,

By Peron using his own name as well and after Bormann was mysteriously promoted to Vice Fuhrer by hand unknown!

However, I have a theory that explains the supposed anomaly about red clay being found on Bormann's skull and ties up a number of loose ends. My theory is that he was actually killed by a falling red terracotta flower pot or roof tile hitting him on the head during his escape. Either plummeting from as low as a second floor window ledge could prove fatal. Nobody has offered any evidence to the contrary, so it is presumably as viable an explanation as any other and should therefore be taken equally seriously.

Cheers,

Sid.