Friday, February 4, 2022

The Great Divide

 


We are repeatedly told that the political divide in the US is as great now as it was in the years leading up to the civil war. A Google search on the topic yields these headlines: Trump leaves America at its most divided since the Civil War, CNN, Jan 19, 2021; Analyst says US is most divided since Civil War, The Hill, Oct 3, 2018; Is the US really heading for a second civil war?, The Guardian, Jan 9, 2022; and Biden says US more divided than at any time since the Civil Was, Fox News, June 24, 2021.

This list goes on and it might be so or maybe not. But, most of the analysis behind these headlines misses the point. The divide, such as it is, is framed in terms of hyper-partisan politics. And clearly the policy differences between the parties now are more than squabbles over taxes, defense spending, social welfare programs and such.

The divide is about the form and shape of the Union going forward. Until now it’s been hidden in fog and shadows. The Covid-19 pandemic has brought it into light and focus.

Our divide is over the ultimate authority federal regulatory agencies and the executive branch can wield over our everyday lives.

Calling to mind President Biden’s hot mic observation on the Affordable Care Act, the vaccine mandate is a big f****** deal. The federal government pushed its authority to act on behalf of a “common good” to an extreme, negating our most fundamental civil rights through coercion.

Through it our individual liberty regarding personal health and wellbeing was suspended in order to serve the collective with compliance is enforced though the denial of a right to earn a living.  

And worse, any objections to this highly questionable public health policy, even by highly qualified critics, were and are censored by corporate communication channels.

The mandate obliterates the civil rights narrative of “life, liberty and pursuit of happiness” outlined in our Declaration, and explicitly violates our right of due process. It arises not from a duly enacted law, but rather it’s an administrative edict resting upon a tortured application of an existing legislative authority.

While the Occupational Health and Safety Administration’s rule has been thrown out by the Supreme Court, it demonstrates the extent to which explicit legislative intent and authority are becoming formalities; a nod to a dated and to what many claim is an irrelevant constitution.

It’s an end point to the Progressive movement where, from Woodrow Wilson onwards, the overriding responsibility of the “modern” state is to unify men into a collective society managed by experts and technocrats for the collective good.

Dwight Eisenhower warned us of the dangers of an industrial/military complex. That sort of unholy union of government and corporations has metastasized into every major segment of the economy.  Depending upon how they are counted, there are between 257 and 430 rule making departments, agencies and sub-agencies (https://cei.org/blog/nobody-knows-how-many-federal-agencies-exist/).

The expansion of regulatory authorities coupled with economic consolidation of major sectors of the economy into mega corporations has led to a symbiotic corporate/government union. This union is responsible for writing the legislation and administrative rules that govern most aspects of our place in the collective.

We have been managed and corralled throughout the pandemic by the union of the corporate health care industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, an army of public health administrators, and propagandizing corporate and social media.

It has been nothing short of a full mobilization of what has been variously called the administrative state, the deep state or the swamp. Its performance in minimizing the mortality rates and economic impacts from the pandemic has been abysmal, while its corporate and government players have been enriched.

Worse, since the outset we’ve been deceived. The denial that the virus was almost certainly a bioengineered product from a Chinese a lab and in part funded by US tax payers is huge. Public funding of viral gain of function research is something few Americans would agree to. That it was hidden through obscure third party research grants is a gross misallocation of government funds, and likely a criminal one.

Similarly, that hospitalizations and mortality rates from the virus were grossly overstated, by obscuring the distinction between “of” and “with,” seemed to be part of a misinformation campaign to justify draconian control measures is huge. So far the pandemic has cost us nearly $5 trillion. The resulting indirect cost from the subsequent social and economic displacement is ongoing. It’s becoming increasingly clear those measures did little to mitigate the spread of the virus or lower its mortality rate. (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jan/31/lockdowns-had-little-or-no-impact-covid-19-deaths-/)

The willful blindness towards and prohibition of therapeutic medications, particularly ivermectin, is huge and is possibly criminal.  Hospitals were paid for treating CV19 patients only if those providers followed CDC protocols and received a bonus payment for those who died. Individual physicians were threatened with losing their hospital admission affiliations and their medical licenses unless they similarly fell in line. The prohibited therapeutic protocols could have cut mortality rates by more than half.  (https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/doctors-organization-has-treated-over-150000-covid-19-patients-9999-percent-survival)

And finally forcing experimental vaccinations through coercion and disinformation is huge. It hasn’t stopped the spread of the virus. At best it’s reduced the severity of the infection. At worse coercing those not at grave health risk become vaccinated may in fact rise to the level of a crime against humanity should we see widespread long term serious adverse effects.

 

The CV19 pandemic demonstrated the degree to which the ruling elite can exert control even over the very mundane aspects of our personal lives if they deem it necessary for the collective.

It’s the imposition of arbitrary and extra legal authority that is the source of the political divide we are seeing now. The measures relating to Covid-19 underscore how far the coercive power of the government/corporate technocracy extend. What is seen as a deep partisan political divide is only partisan in that the Democratic Party has increasingly become the party of the government/corporate technocracy.

It’s natural to assume those governing have the nation’s best interests at heart. Whether we agree or disagree with their policies, we trust they are acting in good faith. Yet when their policies inflict great social and economic harm without benefit, and when objections to those policies are met with censorship and deplatforming, one has to wonder.

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) recently brought defining clarity to our political divide:

“Each of us Americans have to understand and own our responsibility to stand us and protect that freedom in our own way and reject this censorship, and just remind people what this is all about and how – if we allow these threats to continue and this censorship to continue, the power elite to spread their own controlling propaganda, we will lose who we are as a country. We will no longer have this democratic republic. We will have a dictatorship that is controlling what people are allowed to hear, what we’re allowed to see, and what we’re allowed to say, and we will be America no longer.” (https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2022/02/04/gabbard-if-power-elite-continue-censorship-propaganda-we-will-have-a-dictatorship/)

 

 

 

Tuesday, September 14, 2021

The Climate Control Knob

 

United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change most recent assessment report attributes all of the roughly 1.0ᵒC temperature rise since 1850, the end of the Little Ice Age, human generated greenhouse gas emissions. The report was released in August. Here’s what it says:

“The likely range of total human caused global surface temperature increase from1850–1900 to 2010—2019 is 0.8ᵒC to 1.3ᵒC, with a best estimate of 1.07ᵒC. It is likely that well-mixed GHGs (greenhouse gasses) contributed a warming of 1.0ᵒC to 2.0ᵒC, other human drivers (principally aerosols) contributed to a cooling of 0.0ᵒC to 0.8ᵒC, natural drivers changed global surface temperatures by -0.1ᵒC to 0.1ᵒC, and internal variability changed it by -0.2ᵒC to 0.2ᵒC.”

What’s more the UN panel pinned the “best estimate” of equilibrium climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 at 3.0ᵒ C.  

“Based on multiple lines of evidence, the very likely range of equilibrium climate sensitivity is between 2ᵒC (high confidence) and 5ᵒC (medium confidence). The AR6 assessed best estimate is 3ᵒC with a likely range of 2.5ᵒC to 4ᵒC (high confidence), compared to 1.5ᵒC to 4.5ᵒ in AR5.”

Between those two statements the United Nations panel has pressed its imprimatur on the “science” driven measures needed to avert catastrophic climate. But the "science" is not as solid as they would have you believe.

Its determination of 3.0oC as the best estimate for equilibrium climate sensitivity is key. It’s the cornerstone supporting projections of a climate dystopia. It’s also very fragile.

Climate sensitivity to atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations is logarithmic, where doubling the concentration results in a fixed increase in temperature. That is, the temperature increase resulting from increasing CO2 from 285 parts per million to 570 parts per million will be the same as that from increasing it from 570 parts per million to 1140 parts per million.

The logarithmic relationship between greenhouse gas concentrations and global warming is in part driving the urgency to address fossil fuel emissions. The other is the rapidly increasing energy demands of the developing world, particularly in China, India and Africa.

It’s necessary but fragile. A 2.5 or 3.0ᵒ C climate sensitivity is threshold necessary to support claims of an impending climate crisis. And that’s what makes it fragile. If it’s below that point anthropogenic forced global warming might be troublesome, but not catastrophic.

It should also be noted that the equilibrium temperature is not is not fully realized until many centuries after the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. The earth is mostly covered with water and it takes a while for that to heat up.

The more important measure is transient climate sensitivity, the immediate temperature rise from doubling greenhouse gas concentrations. The IPCC analysis sets it at sixty-one percent of the overall equilibrium sensitivity.

If the equilibrium climate sensitivity is 3ᵒC/2xCO2 coupled with future emission projections the temperature increase will likely exceed 2ᵒC before the end of this century. It’s a level beyond what is largely deemed tipping point resulting in widespread serious environmental impacts. If on the other hand, equilibrium climate sensitivity is below 2ᵒC/2xCO2 the temperature increase by the end of this century will likely be relatively benign.  

To make the case for green new deal like regulation, the IPCC has all but declared is greenhouse gases, and primarily CO2, are the global climate “control knob”; and that all of the warming over the past 170 years is due primarily to fossil fuel energy utilization and it zeros out natural cyclical climate variability. Therein lays the problem.

It seems, for entirely political reasons, a chaotic and complex system has been reduced to a grade school “back of the envelope” calculation.

Critics contend: the temperature reconstructions have used “cherry picked” data to overstate the temperature increase since 1850 and have smoothed the Medieval Warming Period into nonexistence; do not account for the urban heat island effect in climate temperature reconstructions; ignore cyclical variations in total solar irradiance; and discount other significant climate factors because they are not well understood. Among the later are: cloud formation; ocean/air boundary thermodynamics; multi-decadal, centennial and even millennial ocean current oscillations; and others.  

In short, they say, IPCC’s climate change analysis is fundamentally flawed because of its overwhelming bias toward anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions to the exclusion of all other natural variable climate in-puts.

Regardless, the IPCC’s AR6 Summary for Policymakers is exactly what it says it is – a political document. Its purpose is to set narrative for policy debate, for environmental journalists and scientific enquiry. To a point that’s to be expected. Yet when other lines of scientific enquiry that contradict the political narrative are shut down it’s something else entirely.

Unfortunately anyone who strays from that narrative is marginalized and branded as a “climate denier”. Still there is a growing body of climate science that indicates that we are not facing an anthropogenic climate crisis. The claim “the science is settled” just isn’t so.

The models run hot. The modeling average used for the AR5 assessment projected a 0.27ᵒC temperature rise per decade over a forty year trend. The actual trend has been 0.14ᵒC according the University of Alabama Huntsville satellite data. The models used for the current assessment run hotter.

The stated policy goal of Zero carbon emissions might not be either the only solution or best solution to greenhouse gas forced climate change. The data indicate the biosphere absorbs CO2 at a rate that follows atmospheric availability. One model, assuming Energy Information Agency projections of emission growth of 0.6% per year until 2050 and constant emissions thereafter shows CO2 would reach an equilibrium of 541 parts per million. Not likely enough to force a climate crisis. http://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/02/will-humanity-ever-reach-2xco2-possibly-not/ 

The efficacy of higher atmospheric concentrations of both CO2 and H2O, the primary greenhouse gases, to significantly raise atmospheric temperatures is questionable. In terms of radiation physics the atmosphere is largely saturated with greenhouse gases. The conclusion is the result of a recent detailed study of the saturation physics of the five most abundant greenhouse gases, by Princeton radiation physicist William Happer and William van Wijngaarden. https://www.cfact.org/2020/09/26/study-suggests-no-more-co2-warming/  Those results have been confirmed by a similar study just published in the International Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences.  

The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is an unavoidably political body. Determining Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions has long been termed the “Holy Grail” of climate science, yet a larger question may be the degree to which climate science has become politically corrupted.

In its 6th report, the IPCC resurrected its discredited hockey-stick temperature graph of the past 2000 year climate history from its 3rd Assessment of 2001. Once again the Medieval Warming Period is gone. The new graph shows current temperatures are 0.05o C warmer than during the Medieval period. The report explains the current warming equals warmest multi-century period “in at least the last 100,000 years, which occurred around 6500 years ago …” The Roman Warming Period is gone too.

Judith Curry, former Chair of the Georgia Institute of Technology’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, told the City Journal she retired from academia and world of government funded research because: “Climatology has become a political party with totalitarian tendencies … climatology is becoming an increasingly dubious science, serving a political project.”       https://www.city-journal.org/global-warming#.XbGKGtFqQQM.email

Meanwhile, no sooner than the ink dried on the latest IPCC’s Summary for Policy Makers, the Los Angelis Times cited the United Nations’ “dire warning” in support for a legislative mandate for carbon neutrality by 2045. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-09-07/california-carbon-neutral-ab-1395 

Friday, July 10, 2020

A War Bride’s Place of Waiting


In January 1942, the situation in California and in Ukraine was similar in that the powers that be were setting the table for what they envisioned to be a long war. Behind the lines, on both sides of the conflict, there was an urgency to mobilize and sustain a war economy.

Hitler had overrun Western Europe, unsuccessfully tried to bomb Britain into submission, was fully engaged against Russia. Germany was short on labor for its factories and fields. The United States, on the other hand, had only just formally entered the war and needed both to build its armies and put its factories into a full war mode. It would be a long war.

Gus and his future bride were in separate but relatively calm eddies of the conflict. As events would playout, they would both wind up in the post war rubble of Germany and in such proximity that a chance meeting of the two would not have been entirely improbable. More to the point, that rubble set the foundation for their eventual marriage. At that time however, their individual prospects were worlds apart. For Gus it was a long uncertain period of waiting to be deployed. Olga on the other hand watched a third wave of Nazi horror roll through Ukraine.

After the Nazis had pushed through Ukraine they quickly advanced to the outskirts of Moscow before stalling. In addition to their early swift and brutal military success they had largely slaughtered the Baltic and Ukrainian Jews. The big job of course remained. It was to crush communist Russia. To do that, they needed to enslave enough labor to man their factories and farms. So, another wave of horror washed over occupied Poland, the Baltic States, and Ukraine – especially Ukraine.

The number of Russian prisoners taken, let alone the casualties of dead and wounded, underscores the scope of the war on the Eastern Front. Those numbers and the scale of the Holocaust overshadow the degree to which the Nazi occupation ripped apart the civil fabric of occupied Eastern Europe. The procurement of slave labor is largely hidden aspect of the war. As with everything Nazi, it was particularly brutal.

Fritz Sauckel was its choreographer.

His career began with the rise of the Nazi party in the early 1920s. In 1927 he rose to the rank of Gauleiter. 

They were the regional commanders in Nazi party’s shadow government, structured around Germany’s roughly 34 electoral districts, or Gaue. At the time, the civilian government was being twisted into political machine affirming Nazi party policies. At the same time it served as the training ground for an infant Nazi bureaucracy.

Sauckel came from this lot of party bosses. His war assignment was recruiting labor from Poland and Ukraine. He reporting directly to Himmler. Like Friedrich Jeckeln, who was in charge of ethnic cleansing, Sauckel took to his job with gusto.

His formal position began in March 1942 with the title of the “Plenipotentiary of Employment.” His job was to “recruit“ civilian workers. As his title implies, he had absolute authority in securing them. His techniques were harsh. So harsh in fact that he eventually was tried at Nuremberg for crimes against humanity. He was one of only twelve Nazi war criminals sentenced to death and hung. (1)

The enslavement began with a soft campaign promising a better life working in Germany. And it met with early success. In January 1942 some 1,500 young volunteers showed up at a recruitment office in Kiev. There was a festive sendoff, complete with a brass band when they departed west by train. Two more trains similarly departed in February. ( 2)

The propaganda quickly wore thin. By midyear the word of working conditions in Germany began reaching home. It got to the point where there were effectively no more volunteers. Under Sauckel, recruitment quickly became a euphemism for forced deportations and enslavement.
Initially, in various districts throughout occupied Ukraine, construction, agricultural and manufacturing ministers would estimate excess labor available and Sauckel’s commissioners.

According to Karl Berkhoff’s account of Nazi rule in Ukraine, Harvest of Despair, village elders were to submit lists of the names those who could be taken to be sent to labor camps in Germany. In the beginning the list of non-volunteers included those who did not live in a village before 1941, mostly former POWs, and those who were particularly disliked by native local authorities and variously included Poles, Communist party members or children of victims of Soviet oppression. The process was expedited with the aid of the police, who took and held hostages until the excess labor could be collected. It was ugly and would quickly become more so. (3)

 As Wendy Lower described it, regional German Commissars established indigenous administrations who provided the Germans with a network of local supervisors and informers; “the weight of Nazi demands fell on their shoulders directly as they were held personally responsible for the population’s fulfillment of German orders in the most remote locations. . .  Anyone who defied or obstructed the implementation of Nazi orders was deemed a saboteur and subject to the death penalty.” (4)

The Nazi strong arm control of the civil administration gave Sauckel the means for wholesale labor “recruitment.”  Berghoff writes:

“His targets in Ukraine were high: 225,000 workers in the last three months of 1942, another 225,000  in the first four months of 1943. Still later, Sauckel demanded that from March 15, 1943, three thousand laborers be apprehended every day, and after a while even six thousand per day… All of the native administrators were threatened with death if they could not supply the assigned total of “recruits.” Sometime in late 1942, the procedure changed and native officials no longer had to supply a certain number of people, but simply all people of a certain age. Hence, in late 1943 everyone born in 1926 and 1927 was supposed to go to the Reich.” (5)

Ultimately, between January 1942 and June 1943 Sauckel enslaved almost 3 million to work in Germany. (6)  For perspective he notes that, in rough numbers, for seventy-eight weeks they were enslaving 34,000 workers each week.

Highlighting the savagely cavalier Nazi attitude toward Ukraine, during trip through there Hitler noticed some of the Ukrainian girls had light hair and “Aryan” features. Must be descendants of the ancient Goths who at one time had settled in the area, he thought. He subsequently ordered that 400,000 girls and young women should be “recruited” to work as maids in German households. Also hoping they might reinvigorate the German gene pool. By early 1944 there were around 100,000 “Eastern” maids working in Germany. ( 7)

It got to the point where “recruitment” amounted to little more than snatching young people off the streets.

According to Lower:

“When Sauckel’s agents or Rosenberg’s commissars received a labor quota, they employed whatever means available to capture and intern the Ukrainians who were then deported to the Reich. Numerous studies have described the sinister methods used by Sauckel’s agents, such as surrounding movie houses and churches and grabbing everyone inside, as well as snatching people on the streets and in market places.” (8)

Ben Shephard, in The Long Road Home, recounts the experiences of some of those caught up in the Nazi labor dragnet.

“I was ploughing the fields, the police appeared and said we were going to be taken to Germany,” Anatolij Ljutikov told an interviewer. He was a seventeen-year-old farm boy who wound up becoming a welder in a German munitions factory.

“A policeman came to tell me I had to be at the collection point the next morning to be taken to Germany...”said Nikolai Sjoma, who was fifteen at the time. “[The policeman] went on to say that if I escaped, they would set my house on fire and hang my mother.
Klavdia Ochkasova was a young girl from a village near Kiev. She recalled: “In the summer of 1942 they chased me to Germany. At the distribution point, they gave us numbers and the masters already waited for their German slaves. They began to choose their free workers – like cattle on the market. I came to a good master. He was an antifascist. He treated me very well and didn’t start anything with the other girls.”

Apparently that wasn’t the norm. She wrote a letter back home warning others not to come to Germany, because they would be humiliated and beaten. The letter was intercepted and she wound up in a concentration camp. ( 9.)   

Meanwhile, the battle on the eastern front in the beginning of 1942 was shaping up to become the deadliest conflict in world history. By early 1943 the Germans were losing 150,000 men a month. The Battle of Stalingrad, waged from late August of 1942 until early February 1943, is widely considered the turning point in the war. It resulted in the surrender of what was left of the German 6th Army. But at the time it meant a redoubling of the Nazi war effort.

Ultimately the Germans suffered the loss of 4,000,000 combatants either killed or missing in action. Another 3,300,000 were taken prisoner by the Russians. This forced the Germans to conscript virtually every man capable of fighting into its armed forces.

By 1944, filling that gap, according to German war records, 7,600,000 non-Germans were toiling away in Germany. (10) Despite its ever increasing reliance on foreign labor, German industrial production continued to grow during 1942 and ‘43 reaching its peak in 1944. The slave labor that fed and armed the Nazi war machine would become the flotsam of its bombed out wreck.

Into that another huge wave of humanity flowed toward Germany. It was massive. As the German army retreated from the advance of the Red army so did some ethnic 3.5 million Germans from eastern European countries and Ukraine, who feared being summarily be branded as Nazi collaborators and subject to Soviet reprisals and persecution. By war’s end these were joined by nearly 3 million who were expelled from Poland and Czechoslovakia. And Besides the ethnic Germans, others fled from the return of Stalinism. According to Shephard, there were another million non-Germans from throughout Eastern Europe who had fled into Germany as the war ended. (11)

In it there was urgency, a sense of flight. This is from the biographical sketch written for Gus’ sister Irene’s funeral.

“Pursued by the Russians, they escaped by oxcart to Czechoslovakia where they stayed for another year and one-half. Again the Russians began closing in on them, and they escaped …”

Gus’ war was different but he wound up in the same neighborhood. While queued for transit to front line and combat in the Ardennes, he was instead pressed into the job of sorting through an unsettled mass of humanity surfacing as the war came to its close.

And it was his luck. He was among the more than 600,000 American soldiers amassed for the Battle of the Bulge, the last major battle of the war, and what turned out to be the largest and most bloody battle fought by the United States, with nearly 90,000 casualties and 19,000 dead.   
For Gus, It was the endpoint of a wartime military career that began in a search light battery in San Diego in February 1942.

At the time United States anticipated a long war but was only beginning to man up to fight it.

When Gus enlisted the term of service was one year. Shortly after the Pearl Harbor attack, on December 19 the term of service was indefinitely extended to the duration of the war plus six months. All men between the age of 18 and 64 were required to register. At the time the U.S. Army wasn’t much. When Germany invaded Poland, the U.S. Army had 170,000 soldiers, and another 200,000 served in the National Guard.

It would take a while before the U.S. could mobilize the sort of armed force necessary to engage in a sustained offensive war. For most enlisted men already in the army, and those being inducted, their immediate prospects were for a long and indefinite period of training and waiting – mostly waiting.
“In the middle of February, [1942], I was sent to San Diego. I was assigned to the coast artillery battery. We were quite fortified there. We had as much as 16 inch guns up there. Point Loma was tunneled. They had the machine gun nests up there and then they had the 16 inch guns on railroad tracks. They could hide them in the tunnels. I worked in the plotting room where they tracked the target . . .” Gus recalled.

Point Loma is a sand stone peninsula on the ocean side of the San Diego Bay. Its cliffs rise more than 400 feet above sea level and offer an unobstructed view along the far southern U.S. coast to Mexico. Fort Rosecrans, on the south side of the peninsula, was a natural home U.S. Army’s Coast Artillery Corps in both World War One and Two.

Gus never said anything about it, but a nearly two year billet there couldn’t have been an altogether bad thing.  It was southern California – a pleasant climate after all. He had friends in relatives in California’s Central Valley. There were not too many targets to track.

In early 1942, it seems military assignments for enlisted men were unavoidably haphazard. Point Loma was one of those places where building a military force from a few hundred thousand into what would number over 12 million began.

“When I got to San Diego, they didn’t need bakers or cooks. So I was assigned to a gun crew. First I was a gun commander on a 10 inch gun. I had a sergeant’s rank.

“I was in “F” battery and we got orders to go to Alaska. Since I had just come back from Alaska I was transferred into ‘K’ battery. When I was transferred to ‘K’ battery, I was moved to the plotting room. I was shipped to Europe in December 1944.”

So Gus’s war was mostly three year wait for deployment into what would be its last big battle. And for most of that time the outlook was pretty grim. 

From December of 1941 through May of 1942, Filipino and U.S. forces were engaged with the Japanese in the Philippines. The engagement concluded with the infamous Bataan Death March.  Of the 150,000 Filipino and American combatants: 25,000 were killed; 21,000 were wounded; and 100,000 were captured.
   
About the only bright spots were: the defeat of the Imperial Japanese Navy, in June, at Midway; and a hard fought victory at Guadalcanal. The Guadalcanal fight raged on from June 1942 until February 1943. The nature of the war became increasingly clear. There were 60,000 U.S. ground forces at Guadalcanal. Overall the battle left 7,100 dead.

The war on the Eastern Front, between the Soviet Red Army and the Nazi Wehrmacht, was more grim. Up to that point in the war, the Soviet dead and missing in action numbered at 8.7million, according to G. I. Krivosheev, in Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses. Of those nearly five million had been taken as prisons of war where over one million died in captivity. The Red Army had been all but crushed in 1941, but held a line and turned the German Army from the outskirts of Moscow in the winter of 1941-42. (12)

On the whole the war wasn’t going well.

When Stalin and Churchill met in mid-August 1942, Stalin understandably wanted an immediate second front in France to relieve the onslaught.  It wasn’t possible. Instead, Churchill’s offensive plan at that time focused on North Africa.

 Churchill recounted the meeting in his history The Second World War, Volume IV:

“I told Stalin … I had good reason against an attack on the French coast in 1942. We had only enough landing-craft for an assault landing on a fortified coast – enough to throw ashore about six divisions and maintain them ...

“Stalin who had begun to look very glum, seemed unconvinced by my argument, and asked if it was impossible to attack any part of the French coast. I showed a map which indicated difficulties of making an air umbrella anywhere except actually across the Straits …

“Stalin, whose glumness had by now much increased, said that, as he understood it, we were unable to create a second front with any large force and unwilling even to land six divisions. I said that this was so …

“Stalin, who had become restless, said that his view about war was different. A man who was not prepared to take risks could not win a war. Why were we so afraid of the Germans? He could not understand. His experience showed that troops must be bloodied in battle. If you did not bloody your troops you had no idea what their value was …” (13)

And Stalin’s view about war was different. A soldier either fought to the last bullet or was a traitor. 
It’s understandable why Stalin was so insistent on an immediate second front in France, but ultimately saw the logic of Churchill’s near term focus on North Africa. Churchill continued later in that passage:

“At this point Stalin seemed suddenly to grasp the strategic advantages of “Torch.” He recounted four main reasons for it: first, it would hit Rommel in the back; second, it would overawe Spain; third, it would produce fighting between Germans and Frenchmen in France; and fourth, it would expose Italy to the whole brunt of the war.”

U.S. ground forces didn’t engage the German land force until the end of 1942 with Operation Torch in North Africa. This was followed by the Invasion of Sicily in July 1943 and Italy with American forces landing on Italian peninsula in September. Rome fell to the Allies in June 1944. Operation Overlord, the invasion of France in Normandy, was launched on June 6, 1944. American forces were fully mobilized.  

So things went. While Gus was stationed in San Diego, waiting, by 1944 the mood of the nation was dark. The foreboding of those serving in the armed forces, and by extension that of their families, loved ones, and friends, was overwhelmingly breathtaking. That is, as in literally breathtaking, as if having had the wind knocked out of you.

The lyrics of Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas expressed the uncertain limbo in which enlistees and civilians alike drifted. It was written by Hugh Martin for Meet Me in Saint Louis, released in November 1944. Here’s what he wrote:

“Have yourself a merry little Christmas
It may be your last
Next year we may all be living in the past
Have yourself a merry little Christmas
Pop that champagne cork
Next year we may all be living in New York
No good times like the olden days
Happy golden days of yore
Faithful friends who were dear to us
Will be near to us no more
But at least we all will be together
If the Lord allows
From now on, we'll have to muddle through somehow
So have yourself a merry little Christmas now

The business of “It may be your last” and “Next year we may all be living in the past” were too dark for Judy Garland, who had those lines rewritten to “Let your heart be light” and “Next year all our troubles well be out of sight.” A recording of the song, released at the same time as the movie, became hugely popular with U.S. troops.

Gus shipped to Europe in December 1944, at the age of thirty-five, as a sergeant and presumably an infantryman. He arrived in Glasgow Scotland and from there to London. There was a five day layover in London prior to shipping to Le Havre, France. They camped out in a London park because the transport ships at harbor were subject to submarine attacks
.
In those five days “they had torpedoed two boats,” he said.

Le Havre was devastated during the Battle of Normandy following D-Day. Nevertheless, it was one of the largest “Replacement Depots” through which thousands of combat troops poured before moving into combat and the transition was almost immediate.

“The Battle of the Bulge was just going on there,” Gus said. “We got there at night. We got up the next morning, had our breakfast, received our day rations, got our cigarettes and all that. The trucks were there and we were just lining up [to be transported to the front].”

“I didn’t give any thoughts about fighting Germans. No one asked me and I didn’t think about it.
“See, my records showed I was born in Russia. It never said anything about my being German. In fact, they wouldn’t have sent me to the front had they known I was German or if I claimed I was German. I had a good friend who went over but went into the medics because he was German. They could use you for non-combat jobs.”

The ambiguity of being Russian or German worked out well when he emigrated from Canada to the U.S. It play out well again as Gus queued for transport to the battle front.

“I was always lucky. I never thought about it. I just went in and always got some better job, even in the army. That’s just the way it turned out.”

Just as he was lined up to be transported, an officer came around asking if anyone in the group could speak German. Gus said yes.

“What had really happened, a couple of G.I.s had raped a girl. She came and complained but there was no one in the group that knew what she was complaining about. So they asked if anyone could understand German. I went over there, got the story and relayed just what happened. After that, I was a translator.”

He told them, “I speak German, Russian, Ukrainian and I understand Polish but don’t speak it too well.”

So there was Gus’ luck. Rather than combat, he was detailed to another side of the war – bringing order from chaos. The scope of that side of war was becoming increasingly clear as the Allied forces advanced toward Germany. It was huge.

From the outset, shortly after D-day the Allied forces confronted the weird reality that many German combatants were actually Russians.  Then as they advanced into Germany they found the people manning its factories and farms weren’t German either, but a hodgepodge Eastern Europeans.  Gus was pressed into sorting through that mess. It unfolded almost with the same lightning speed as his transfer from the US to the front line in Europe.

In the days and weeks following D-Day, the Allies often found they were fighting a peculiar enemy. They were taking German prisoners who oddly did not speak a word of German. They were Russians. By June 14, barely a week after the first Allied soldiers set foot to the Normandy beaches, 1,600 of them had been taken, and army intelligence obviously wanted to know what was going on. (15)

At that time nearly 900,000 former Soviet soldiers were serving in the German army, 115,000 were positioned in Normandy by D-Day. Another 2 million Soviet POW forced laborers were within Germany, according to Mark Elliott in Ukraine During World War II.  And the POWs made up only one-third of the Russians in German forced labor camps. Remember, Ukrainians were considered “Russian.”(16)

Shephard gives this description from the eyes of Allied journalists embedded with the troops. “They began to see Germany for themselves, they noticed first the prosperity of the countryside. . . .However, as they ventured deeper into Germany, other impressions followed: the total devastation of many of the cities, the air of defeat – and then the slave laborers.”

An American intelligence officer, Alan Moorehead, described the scene as the Allied advanced into Germany.

“Thousands,” he wrote, “tens of thousands, finally millions of slaves were coming out of the farms and the factories and the mines and pouring on to the highways.” He saw:

“… little groups of Frenchmen, then Dutch, then Belgians and Czechs and Poles and Italians, and finally in overwhelming majority, the Russians in their bright green uniforms with “SU” – Soviet Union – painted in white on their backs. Half the nationalities of Europe were on the march, all moving blindly westward along the roads, feeling their way by some common instinct towards the British and American lines in hope of finding food and shelter and transportation there.” (17) 

The number of people stranded in Germany was astonishing, but more astonishing was how many did not want to return to their homes. That too was something that began to be evident with the Russians captured among the German Army ranks.

Shepard reported, “One soldier reminded the interrogator of the fate of the 32,000 Russian prisoners of war exchanged against the Finns after the 1939 Finnish campaign: they were shot by a machine-gun company which in turn was liquidated by the NKVD, the Soviet secret police.” (18)

The fear of Stalin, of persecution and reprisals wasn’t limited to Russian POWs but was a fear that shared by many of those stranded in Germany and by all who fled there.

Here was the battle front into which Gus was dispatched.  Unknown to him, that sea of humanity would profoundly shape his future, but at the time it was just another contingency of war. 
The need to deal with uprooted people was anticipated following the lessons from World War I. Planners anticipated a-half-million or so displaced persons in the immediate aftermath of the war. The scope of what was unfolding was by orders of magnitude greater than anything imagined. Allied commanders found that in addition to defeating an enemy, they had to avert an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. It was something couldn’t be placed on hold until the end of the war. Its urgency explained Gus’ on-the-spot transfer from combat into a built on-the-fly, makeshift occupation force.
Already in early 1943, the Allied countries began planning for processing the people left stranded in the wake of the war. The efforts resulted in the formation of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA).  It should be noted that “united nations” at the time simply referred the Allied Nations, not to the formal international body formed in 1945.

The task of creating the agency fell to an up and coming diplomat, U.S. deputy secretary of state Dean Acheson and the ambassadors to the U.S.: from Britain, Lord Halifax; from Russian, Maxim Litvinov, an old Bolshevik who in fact roomed with Stalin while attending the 5th Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party in London in 1907, and; from China, Wei Tao-ming a senor diplomat who ultimately wound up as foreign minister of the Republic of China (Taiwan).
    
It took them until June, 1943, to draft an agreement. Said Acheson of the deliberations, “our group was a congenial one, often escaping from the confines of an uninspiring agenda to speculate about the world which was to be.”

It took Roosevelt and Acheson nearly another five months to get Congress on board with it.
UNRRA was an international civilian authority funded with a $2 billion budget, with more than half coming from the U.S. and the balance from the United Kingdom, Canada and Latin America.
It was no small thing. That $2 billion is the equivalent of about $28 billion in 2020 dollars. Upon signing the agreement, in November 1943, President Roosevelt announced:

“In UNRRA we have devised a mechanism, based on the process of true democracy, which can go far toward accomplishment of such an objective in the days and months of desperate emergency which will follow the overthrow of the Axis.” (19)

Anticipating a problem is one thing, which clearly the UNRRA was set up to do. But in establishing UNRRA, neither the immediate scope, nor the internal and international politics of that “desperate emergency” were fully anticipated.

At the outset of 1945 the infant international bureaucracy was simply overwhelmed by mess it had been charged to address. Instead, a here and now problem that unfolded as the Allied armies advanced, and dealing with defaulted to the “feet on the ground,” to the military.

From Shephard’s account, this is how the situation unfolded:

“The plan was that the DPs would be rounded up by the military and transported to assembly centers or camps, where they would be fed, fumigated and kept in order by special UNRRA teams. In December 1944 – after, it will be recalled, “vexatious delays” caused by the High Command’s reluctance with the new international organization – SHAEF [Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force] had asked UNRRA to provide 200 such teams and then, on February 1, 1945, requested a further 250. This was almost certainly an impossible task. At all events, thanks to further delays caused by the German offensive in the Ardennes, UNRRA’s recruiting problems, and difficulty with transport and supply, only fifteen “spearhead” UNRRA teams (consisting of seven people each instead of the intended thirteen) were in the field by the end of the war … The military would have to man the assembly centers itself, with some help from the voluntary agencies. And so 20,000 solders – the equivalent of an entire division – had to be withdrawn from combat units and assigned to the task.” (20)

Instead of the Battle of the Bulge, Gus marched into this other theater of war. But not directly, he was assigned to become a translator for anticipated war crime tribunals and sent off to training for it.
 “At first we weren’t doing anything. We had a school, maybe an hour or so a day. They were trying to teach us what the laws were before Hitler’s time and during Hitler’s time. I was supposed to be an interpreter in court. I wasn’t good enough for that. They were looking for interpreters to handle war crimes.”

This wasn’t surprising given Gus’s formal education was limited to four or possibly five years and pretty much ended in the turmoil following World War One and Russian Revolution.

He was subsequently assigned to the occupation forces until the end of the war and his discharge.

“We went through concentration [labor] camps right when we got into Germany. We interviewed a lot of those people. There were a lot of them [forced laborers] in Germany. The used the people to work in factories. We found some people – they were nothing but skin and bones. They fed them so little, you know. . .

“The German men were all in the army and forced labor ran the factories. There were a lot of Russians and a lot Poles working there. Prisoners of war didn’t work in the factories. They had a lot of laborers they brought in from Russia. Some of Olga’s cousins volunteered. And they took a lot of them – whether they wanted to go or not.”

His job mostly involved in restoring some semblance of civilian order.

“When we took a town we got some old German who lived there and made him the Burgermeister – the mayor – and then left an attachment of American soldiers there.”

After that he was assigned to an occupation detail in charge of maintaining order in a town, and after that an entire county or more precisely a German Gaue.

It wasn’t easy.

Gus said, in general the liberated Displaced Persons were somewhat unruly. While the DPs were placed in “refugee” camps they were not confined to them and could pretty much come and go as they pleased. They became particularly adept in navigating the black market that whole of the post war German economy had sunk into.

Gus continued.

“We were involved with the refugees. We had a lot of trouble with the Poles. They had regular [DP] camps. They used to go out.”

“They would rob. They would break into German houses. One time, we were just travelling and a girl came running down. She had a flock of sheep that she was watching. The Poles came and got into the sheep. They were butchering her sheep, one after the other.

“One time, this was later on when we were in Bavaria, the Poles used to go into a farm and clean it out. If there were and pigs or other livestock, they would take and butcher it. And they killed one guy. We were the authority. We had to get rid of them. So our commander said, this is enough, well send them back to Poland. They didn’t want to go.”

Among all the nationalities comprising the cohort of Displaced Persons, Gus was not alone in observing the Poles were particularly lawless and unruly. The Brits found them troublesome too.

This is from Shephard’s history: 

“In August 1945, the British military government warned that a growing problem of law and order among Polish DPs was bringing British rule into disrepute ... Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery proposed shooting on sight to stop “looting, rape and murder by DPs, and warned that the German police might be rearmed ... When fourty-eight Poles were put on trial for acts of violence against Germans four were sentenced to death in August 1945.” (21)

It should be noted that given what can only be called the German rape of Poland, it’s understandable that the Poles would seek a measure payback and even more so in that many of those stranded in Germany at the end of the war were subject to the abuse as forced laborers and POWs. A similar rage was expressed during the expulsion of ethnic Germans from Poland and Czechoslovakia after the war while sovereign order was being restored.
    
At the end of the war forced repatriation was both a matter of official policy, and an expedient means to restoring order. It was a two way street.

In the summer of 1944 the U.S. War Cabinet agreed that Russians POWs would be returned to the Soviet Union. This was in light of the Soviet policy regarding soldiers who surrendered that had been displayed by the treatment of 32,000 soldiers who were captured during Russia’s ill-fated invasion of Finland.

Yet with that in mind, based on humanitarian considerations, the War Cabinet was somewhat reluctant to adopt the policy of forced reparations. The decisive factor, according to Shephard, was the need to insure the Russians would return the 50,000 U.S. and British prisoners who had been liberated by the Red Army from German POW camps. “In September they gave into the Russian request that all Soviet citizens be returned. At the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, a verbal agreement further stipulated Soviet citizens should be repatriated “whether they were willing or not.”
Nevertheless, the policies didn’t match the realities on the ground. Forced repatriations were a nasty business, both for those being repatriated and those doing it. Between the black and white of high command orders there was every shade of grey. If you were a grunt or a junior officer in the army, being part of a forced repatriation detail was the last job you wanted.  It got to the point where the officers in charge, held off releasing assignment lists until the last moment and equipped repatriation details with guidelines on how to prevent suicides.
                                    
Shepard offers this account by Olexa Woropay from her book, Road to the West: Diary of a Ukrainian Refugee.

This incident happened at the Kempten DP camp in Bavaria in the summer of 1945. At the time in the American troops were forcibly transferring Ukrainians for the American DP camps to Russian ones, and ultimately to repatriation. When the soldiers were sent to Kempten, the refugees sought refuge in a church.

 “[The soldiers] began to drag people out forcibly. They dragged the women by their hair and twisted the men’s arms up their backs, beating them with the butts of their rifles. One soldier took the cross from the priest and hit him with the butt of his rifle. Pandemonium broke loose. The people in a panic threw themselves from the second floor, for the church was in the second floor of the building, and they fell to their death or were crippled for life. In the church there were suicide attempts.”

Elsewhere Shephard writes, “The Americans found it not only shocking but incomprehensible when Soviet refugees targeted for extradition bit each other’s jugular veins rather than submit to repatriation.” (23,)

Needless to say, the American command on the ground conveniently used extremely narrow criteria in determining just who exactly was Russian. For example, White Russians and Cossacks from Czechoslovakia who fled Russia in the 1920’s were not Soviet Russian Citizens. Western Ukrainians who were Polish citizens prior to 1939 were not Russian.  And why, the ethnic Germans who fled Ukraine and Russia in advance of the Red Army were not Russian citizens. They were German refugees and so it went.

In addition, to avoid repatriation the Ukrainians variously avoided the DP camps or, forged or falsified identity documents claiming they were from Western Ukraine which was part Poland prior to 1939.


Still the whole business of forced repatriations was ugly. General Eisenhower banned forced DP transfers on September 4, until Washington reconsidered the policy. Yet the situation remained unsettled and turbulent.

Gus recalled: “I came, one time, to a [train] station and there was a family of Germans there from Romania. They had them all rounded up and were waiting for the train to come. They were crying. So, I asked them what the trouble was. Well they were being sent back and they didn’t want to go back. I said you don’t have to go back if you don’t want to go back. Come on. They can’t force you back.”

But there was a caveat. It was huge.
   
 “I had to find them a place to live, which was kind of hard there. They stayed on. But a lot of people didn’t know any different and they sent them all back.”

The problems posed by displaced persons were amplified by the ethnic German refugees who fled from the advancing Red Army. Following the conclusion of the war their numbers would swell as the Eastern European nations expelled more than 10 million of them.

That too was the result of an agreement reached Yalta between Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt. The Germans being deported were from Eastern European settlements, the ethnic roots of which had been established for generations. With regard to expulsion of these people from their homes, Churchill cavalierly commented to Stalin they would make up for Germany’s nearly six or eight million war dead.

They were discussing post was political boundaries of in the course of which, according Churchill’s history The Second World War, Volume VI, Roosevelt observed:

“Poland has been a source of trouble for over five hundred years.”

 Churchill replied, “All the more, must we do what we can to put an end to these troubles.” 
In his account, Churchill acknowledged the moral question of forcibly relocating six or eight million ethnic Germans was something “I would have to settle with my own people.” (23)

In addressing the House of Commons, December 15, 1944, he explained: “Expulsion is the method which, so far as we have been able to see will be the most satisfactory and lasting.” And he went on: “A clean sweep will be made. I am not alarmed at the prospect of the disentanglement of the population, nor am I alarmed by these large transfers, which are more possible now than they were before through modern conditions.” (24)

This soft ethnic cleansing it seems was widely viewed necessary to create a politically stable post-war Eastern Europe. Ironically that political stability was cemented by Stalin’s iron curtain.

And in any case the “clean sweep” wasn’t so clean with as many as 2.5 million dying in route. No one knows. Regardless of the precise numbers, the continuing prospect of a humanitarian remained unabated. By late summer and autumn in 1945, according to Shephard, more than 2 million displaced persons remained in displaced persons camps in the country, and 13 million homeless were wandering about the county, most were expelled from the Sudetenland, the new Polish territory and Czechoslovakia. 

“There was a danger of serious rioting in the winter, and administrators on the spot believed that some 5 million to 10 million Germans would die.” (25)

That assessment was illustrated by the scenes unfolding in Germany and Austria. Two British journalists went to meet a train transporting uprooted German refugees from Poland and arriving in Berlin in August, 1945. The refugees endured a seven day train trip in cattle car accommodations. As Shephard tells it, in one car they were greeted with the sight of four dead women on stretchers one side of the car and four dying women on the other. Throughout the station people were dying. They described one woman, “emaciated, with dark rings under her eyes and sores breaking out all over her face, could only mutter self-condemnation because she was unable to feed her two whimpering babies . . . [she was] desperately trying to force milk from her breasts – a pitiful effort that only left her crying in failure.”  (26)

In December repatriation for most Displaced Persons officially became voluntary. Ultimately, about one million people refused to be repatriated. This group included approximately fifty-two nationalities, and were scattered among 920 camps in Germany, Austria and Italy. In the US Zone of occupied Germany they were polled over why they refused to return to their homes. Eighty-two percent said they refused to live behind Stalin’s Iron Curtain.  Said one Estonian, “my country has ceased to exist.” (27) 

This is the scene of Gus’ departure from Germany. He was discharged from the army in December of that year, 1945. It seems he took this part of the war home with him. Once settled in civilian life he increasingly found himself sponsoring the entry of immigrants from the rubble of post war Germany into the U.S. It began with blood relatives and mushroomed from there.

Decades later, when the extended family of aunts and uncles, of cousins and grandchildren gathered for various social events at Gus’ suburban home, two entirely separate gatherings took place: the young were drawn together as extended siblings in the blood ties of cousins; their parents and grandparents were the “old timers,” bound in a brotherhood of time and place, of Germany 1945 and various roads that led there.

Sunday, April 30, 2017

Double Chocolate Cherry Cookies and a Journey into Cookies Bitchdom


Who knew? It seems I’ve become a little cookie bitch – complete with a cute frilly apron and a wooden spoon.

It all started innocently enough with a simple batch of chocolate chip cookies, from the recipe on the back of bag Nestle chips. But one batch leads to another. What followed in no particular order were: my Aunt Betty’s famous oatmeal cookies; beautiful lemon cookies with a coarse Turbinado sugar finish; chewy molasses cookies, coconut macaroons; and others.

All innocent enough by themselves, but it’s where these things inevitably lead – and who knew. I think my journey into cookie bitchdom reached the point of no return when I entered the local baking paraphernalia shop, (and who would have thought such stores existed,) and bought a miniature cookie scoop. And these come in several different sizes. Again who would have thought?

In time it got to point where commercial store bought cookies wouldn’t do and worse I began thinking maybe the standard cookie recipes could be improved upon, and maybe for example, malted milk powder might be a fine addition to Toll House chocolate chip recipe. (It is.)

Now often, late at night for hours on end, I’m obsessively glued to my computer searching cookie recipes – both for varieties I’ve never made and comparing various recipes in a quiet quest for perfection.

It’s gotten to the point where in social settings no longer capable of engaging in pleasant manly conversation. While the other guys are happily talking about the NFL draft or the NBA playoffs, I’m apt to spout off at great length about the magnificent recipe for double chocolate, cherry cookies I created.

This isn’t jest. Here’s the recipe and it turned out better than even in my dreams. It’s an adaptation of a Martha Steward recipe.

2 Cups all-purpose flour

½ Cup unsweetened cocoa powder

1/8 Cup zested bakers chocolate

¼ Cup malted milk powder

1 teaspoon baking soda

½ teaspoon salt

1 cup, (two sticks), unsalted butter at room temperature

1 ¼ cups of granulated sugar

½ cup brown sugar

1 egg

2 table spoons of heavy cream

2 teaspoon vanilla extract

2 5 oz. Bags of sweetened dried tart cherries

Preheat the oven to 350 degrees.

Put on frilly apron.

In a mixer whip the butter then add the sugars, add the malt, chocolate zest and cocoa powder. Beat in the egg, vanilla extract and cream. Sift together the flour, salt and baking soda and gradually add it to the mix.

Add the cherries when the dough is thoroughly mixed. This will require some hand mixing with a wooden spoon so that the cherries are evenly distributed in the dough.

Line cookie sheets with parchment paper. Scoop rounded table spoon size portions to the sheet pan spaced about three inches apart. (A cookie scoop works well for this if you have one.)

Bake 12 to 15 minutes until the tops begin to crack and transfer to wax paper or parchment paper to cool.

Monday, August 1, 2016

The Good Fortune of Fishing with Father Frank


I went fishing with my brothers. The trip was the sort of which most fishermen only dream, via float plane to far north Canadian lakes. While Father Frank has been long dead, he nevertheless joined us on this trip.

To understand how this worked out, you must first know something of the man.

The Rev. Father Frank Paulus was my father’s brother, my uncle. His presence occupies my memories, from my earliest childhood and into my adulthood. And they are good memories. Father Frank was a good man.

In fact my earliest memory is with him. I was just a toddler. I was being carried by him in a hospital at night and after visiting hours. He was taking me to see my mother who was very ill. Even at that early age I was worried that because of the late hour we would be turned away. And as I recall I even pretended that I was ill and that this priest was whisking me to some sort of urgent procedure. In any case, I don’t think my little ruse was necessary. At the time, a priest hurriedly carrying a small child in a hospital was simply not someone to be questioned – a simple fact that impressed me greatly.
Never Mess with a Priest in a Hurry

At that time, it seems, priests in a hurry were not messed with, but given a free pass. It was an unwritten rule Father Frank believed always applicable when he drove and he always drove large, powerful black cars.

As for his mild disregard of speed limits, he explained it this way. Part of his job was to minister to and comfort the dying and more importantly to send them on their way in a state of grace. It was important. Even the most wretched scoundrel could receive a free pass to heaven if in his last dying breath a priest might hear his act of contrition.

In this regard he was always on call. So if stopped for speeding, he would simply say, “I must tend to the dying.” And it was always true, whether a dying soul was his immediate destination or not. Though occasionally, such a traffic stop would lead to a police escort to the nearest hospital.

A priest’s life is somewhat lonely. The company of associates in a rectory is not the same as family. He would regularly show up at our house, sometimes for dinner but more often just to spend awhile with my father and mother. Sometime the visit would be for conversation but often he would come and simply spend the time in the comfort of home, sitting quietly with his breviary and smoking his pipe.

When I was young, sometimes I would wake in the morning and aroma of his pipe from the night before would linger and greet me. It was a mild and comforting scent. Father Frank was a marvelous story teller. On those occasions I would feel cheated and complain ‘why had no one woken me to visit with him too.’

Many years later, and I still have the photograph, it’s of him smoking his pipe while happily riding on the back of my motorcycle. His pipe, like his roman collar and the black Fedora hat with a two inch snap brim were part of his persona.

After he died I somehow wound up with his bible. It must have sat in my bookcase for more than a year before I opened it. When I did, that same comforting scent from my childhood, that of his pipe faintly enveloped the room and with it I was filled not just with memories but with the joy the man had so often brought into my life.
Sometimes It's Best to Keep Quiet

Father Frank was a kind and generous man, but he was not a man without a temper. On the few occasions he showed it, he spoke almost snarling with clenched teeth like some men will just prior to throwing a punch. Once in turmoil of the late 1960s and I was at that stage of life where I no longer an adolescent but yet not a man, the conversation between him, my father and myself grew somewhat animated, then heated.

It grew heated to the point where he stood up and snarled at me with the full force of his anger. At that moment my father forcefully said: “You are a guest in my house and no one speaks to my son that way in my house. Get out of here.”

As he left I felt badly. It hurt my father to kick his brother out of our house and I was ashamed to have so upset my uncle. More than bad, I felt small. The incident was one we would laugh about later, yet in it I learned a number of lessons. Not the least of which, more often it’s just better to be quiet and listen.

My dad’s passion outside of work was fishing. He was a musky fisherman. Our family vacations were to northern Wisconsin where he would rent a cabin at Rudy’s Rest Haven on the Manitowish Waters Chain of Lakes. We would fish for Walleye and Muskies.

Later in the fall he would take a long weekend to go fishing again. Often he would go with Father Frank. I don’t know if Father Frank was as avid of a fisherman as my dad. But they both enjoyed time away from their work and everyday life, and enjoyed it together.

Sometime in the 1950s they returned from one of those trips with identical new fishing rods. They had stopped at the St. Croix Company, and bought them there. The rods must have been top-of-the-line. My dad kept his wrapped in a muslin bag with individual compartments for each of the two sections. As a child this fishing rod was like one of the crown jewels, something I could look at but wasn’t allowed to touch.

My oldest brother, David, took dad’s rod with him on one of his earliest fishing trips to Canada. He took the trip with a few of his college friends, one of whom was new to fishing. The prize rod somehow wound up in the novice’s hands. It didn’t go well. He managed to impale the back of his neck with the treble hook attached to large spoon he was trying throw.

The hook was deeply imbedded in the fleshy part of his neck just below the back of his skull. He collapsed in agony, snapping the rod in two as he landed on it.

When Dave returned home, he needed some time and courage to bring up subject of the broken fishing rod. Dad wasn’t pleased. He tried to make most of it by mending with fiberglass cloth and resin. While the mend held the two pieces together, it was ugly and only underlined the fact the rod was ruined. Nevertheless, he took the mended rod with him on his annual fall trip. Upon returning, among the things he unloaded from his car was Father Frank’s identical fishing rod.

He said, “Opps, Father Frank must have forgotten to take this with him.”

The rod was in a tubular aluminum rod case. Dad immediately stuck a piece of masking tape to the case and marked it boldly “Father Frank.”  And he could not have more forcefully said to all of us “don’t touch.”
In truth, I’m sure Father Frank, knowing how badly dad felt about the fate of his prize St. Croix rod, told him, here Larry take mine. It’s just how Father Frank was.

It wasn’t for another four or five years until dad thought I was old enough for serious fishing, to go with him on his fall fishing trips, usually in late October or early November. We went to large undeveloped Chippewa or Flambeau to fish hard for Muskies and Walleye and with a guide.

On those trips when we fished for Walleye, I found myself fishing with Father Frank’s rod. It was still the best spinning rod my dad had and he wanted me to fish with it. It’s a particularly good rod for Walleye fishing in Wisconsin’s northern lakes. My dad was mostly interested in my success.
"Genuine Double Power"

Its label reads “Genuine Double Power.” The claim seems to be more than just a branding slogan. There is some truth to it. The rod’s action is light enough to detect and distinguish a light hitting Walleye from rocks and bottom rubble while retrieving a baited jig. The lower half of the rod has the stiffness and power needed to set the hook on a large Northern Pike or Musky, that were encountered occasionally while Walleye fishing.

I don’t remember if I took sole possession of the rod when I was married or after my father died. However, I did take it along on our honeymoon to the Boundary Waters canoeing with my wife. We were sent off in marriage with a sort of genuine-double-power blessing. It was officiated by my somewhat pre-Vatican II, orthodox, Catholic Uncle, Father Frank and her somewhat Calvinist, evangelical North American Baptist Minister. The two elderly ministers hit it off well and put together a wedding ceremony that was so seamless as to make one believe the Protestant Revolution was long forgotten.

 It seems Father Frank’s blessing didn’t just extend to our marriage in general, but through his fishing rod to our honeymoon in particular. I had turned the rod over to my wife who hadn’t done much fishing before that. While fishing, she kept getting hung up on rocks and waterlogged drift wood. So I put a surface bass lure on her line. We were not fishing bass water at the time, but I thought the bait would let me fish uninterrupted.

It didn’t work out that way. In a short while she said, “I’m hooked on the bottom again.”

I told her to give the rod a good jerk to see if she could free the snag. I then followed the “snag” around the bay in which we were fishing for ten or fifteen-minutes. She caught a Northern, larger than any I had ever caught and larger than I had seen. I told her to release it. It was too large to eat and we had no way to keep it, but she was having none of it.

“It’s got teeth,” she screamed, “you, release it.”

In the following years my attention turned to pan fishing with my children with ultra-light spinning gear, and then to fly fishing with a childhood friend who was a fly fisherman and was looking for a fishing partner. I drifted away from lake fishing for Walleye and Musky to stream fishing for trout and bass. During that time, if I fished with my father or brothers it was mostly motor trolling on Lake Michigan for salmon.

After my dad died I wound up with his fishing tackle. Over the years, on the occasions when my brothers and I could find an opportunity to go fishing together, I fished with my dad’s bait casting musky rod and with Father Frank’s spinning rod.

So it was when my brother Greg called and said you’re going fishing. He and my brother David had been taking a fly-in trip together every year for a number of years. Greg had booked the latest trip so that his two son-in-laws could join them. To my good fortune, as the trip approached it turned out one of them couldn’t make the trip – mostly because of a pregnant wife with a conflicting due date.
The Buggy Whip

A few weeks later, while talking to David, he said I’d have to come over.

“I want to look through your tackle box and put new line on your reel,” he told me.

Dave has been an avid fisherman since before the trip he took with his college friends and broke my dad’s fishing rod. With the exception of fly fishing, he has fishing gear for every occasion times three. After putting new line one of my somewhat dated Mitchell 300 reels, he said I needn’t worry about having the right rod for big pike. I could use one of his. He also noted that while my old reel appeared to be mechanically sound, I might prefer fishing with one of his newer ones.  

Still, I brought Father Frank’s fishing rod with me. It’s always been kind of the benchmark by which I’ve judged other new rods. The ones that have measured up to it have always been prohibitively costly. Though when we boarded the floatplane to lakes we would fish for large pike and lake trout, my confidence in Father Frank’s rod considerably diminished.
The first day out fishing, I took it and one of Dave’s newer rods. I told him I wanted to catch some nice fish with Frank’s rod and take some pictures. I wanted to print those pictures for the background of shadow box frame to which I would retire the rod and hang it on a wall in my fishing cabin.

And I caught some big lake trout and pike with it. I switched over to the rod Dave had wanted me to use. I found I liked the old rod better. The next day I put a more modern reel on it and fished with it exclusively. Our guides took to derisively referring to the sixty-year-old rod as a buggy whip, obviously unimpressed by its “Genuine Double Power” design.

But there is more to it. My brothers both recognized it as Father Frank’s rod and referred to it as such. On this trip it took on many of the same qualities that Father Frank’s bible had on me when I first opened it. While it didn’t have the pleasant aroma of his pipe tobacco, from time to time our conversation would turn to individual memories of the good times we had with him and with my father.

During the trip we rotated fishing partners. The first day I fished with my brother Greg’s son-in-law. We had a good day fishing, and except for fifteen or twenty minutes I needed to lay out and relieve my back, the young man who is the same age as my own children made me feel twenty years younger.

The second day, I fished with Dave. He’d had a lousy night with an irregular heartbeat. It hadn’t improved by morning and he was short of breath. It’s been troublesome for a number of years. He has had some surgery with stents and the like for it. He took a nitroglycerin tablet that night to settle it down, but without avail. Than morning, on the line between annoying and alarming, things were tilting to the alarming side. He didn’t know if he should go out fishing or not, and wasn’t in good spirits.

When we met at the dock he commented, “oh, you’ve brought Father Frank’s rod,” somewhat disapprovingly.

When we got on the water he hooked into a nice pike. The shot of adrenaline that hits when hooking a big fish restored his heart to its normal rhythm. That day we caught a lot fish. More than ten of them exceed forty inches. I caught one just shy of 48 inches and he got one that might have been a bit longer, but not quite as large around the girth.

At the end of the day he said, “I think that’s best day fishing I’ve ever had.” And then as we were unloading our gear from the boat, he said sternly, “John, you are not going to retire that rod.”

I fished with Dave again on the last day of our trip. When we met at the dock he smiled and asked, “Did you bring Father Frank?”

Yes, I nodded firmly, smiled and said, “I have.”