Another interesting story about the world of cloak and dagger:


https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol13no3/html/v13i3a05p_0001.htm


Dirk

Dirk,

I have started to read. It is nearly a book. I met some names that I recognized as Hans Oster, whom we recently discussed overhere as his meeting with the Dutch Major Sas.

There are several conspiricy theories about negociations in the dark, as the intention of Hitler to get a deal with Britain. Europe for Germany and the rest for Britain. 
I contributed to them on French fora as 
https://www.39-45.org/index.php
http://www.delpla.org/forum/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Delpla

I prefer to discuss with François, now already more than a year ago, via le Forum 39-45 while he has many times some authoritarian approach, reluctant to other opinions. But nevertheless I have esteem for him as he seeks the questions out to the core, even with nearly a book of all his arguments.
As for instance the Hitler Haltbefehl before Dunkirk. I think there are more than thousand pages about the question on the several fora. 
I remember, that it was already common thinking in a book from a Flemish journalist who was there, that the "haltbefehl" was issued because to give the negociations with Britain and Halifax a last chance (if I remember it well you said the same to me some years ago?).

And perhaps these theories aren't that stupid, as one read for instance this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birger_Dahlerus
and this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_cabinet_crisis,_May_1940

The Germans were at that stage, I think, quite well informed about the dificulties in the Cabinet, especially the previous events that happened?
If it wasn't of Churchill and later the backing of Chamberlain...?
Indeed the Brits owe a lot to Churchill in these crucial hours.
No, not in France, where a Paul Reynaud was so stupid to invite Pétain from Spain. And then Paul Baudouin asked the question if it wouldn't be reasonable to ask the Germans for the conditons to start negociations about an armistice...of course all directed from the background by Pétain...

Nothing to do Dirk with your subject here on the "unexplained events". But perhaps indeed it is still not fully explained and I would better to start it overhere.

Paul.

Dirk,

while reading your CIA report I came on Alexander Rado...
I see now (and it is an aside, you know me) that Alexander in Hungarian is "Sándor". It reminds me that we in Dutch also say "Sander"...

I had never before believed that I would read a CIA report and be carried away as if I was reading a novel

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol12i3/html/v12i3a05p_0001.htm

And for what it is worth: the wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Rad%C3%B3


Paul.

Dirk,

I have now read the whole stuff. Interesting and a clear indication of all those matters that we don't know about secret intelligence during WWII of course, while it was secret and only emerge when official data come free. And even then, when it didn't disappear. One asks then if it didn't disappear conveniently, as I think to remember from the role of Prince Bernhard in the Arnhem landing, that we discussed in the time together.

As for instance also the warning of the German spion (working for money) to the French counter-espionage about the push through the Ardennes, what ended to be true. And the Deuxième Bureau gave it to General Gamelin, who had still plenty of time to act, before the start of the German invasion of 10 May 1940.
Abelard and I discussed it here in detail on this forum 

In the CIA document is one figure important for me and although I knew already that much about him, I learned still some additional information.
Hans Oster (and he seems to have had a son Joachim Oster, who played a role after WWII)
https://www.dhm.de/lemo/biografie/hans-oster

I read for the first time about Hans Oster in the book of Heinz Höhne "Canaris"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_H%C3%B6hne
https://www.amazon.com/Canaris-Hitlers-Master-Heinz-Hohne/dp/0815410077

I had in the time of the BBC a discussion with the German contributor "Thomas" about Canaris and I mentioned then Hans Oster.

My opinion was that Canaris was till the end not so much a "weerstander" (resistant?) for the cause of avoiding the war, but more for savegarding the beloved German Nation, while Oster was really seeking for avoiding war as a principle and for the good of humanity.

But when I said that I preferred the rather unknown Hans Oster (Thomas didn't know him until I mentioned him) above Canaris, shown in some history books a the great resistant, I am not sure that Thomas has ever understood me.

Paul.