Some of my regular readers might remember that I once posted an interesting photo series of Stephanie Seymour and one of her sons at a beach. Recently, she posed in lingerie (along with two of her sons) for a photoshoot in HarpersBazaar. Many people, both online and offline, thought that those photos and the implied relationship with her two supposedly gay sons was “icky” and “unnatural”. While the first type of objection (ickyness) is subjective, the second type (un-naturalness) implies objective evaluation. But, is casual incest among humans really that “un-natural” ?
But before we do that, let us get back to this particular case and be honest about the facts. Firstly, the mother of those teenage boys is a pretty well-preserved ex-supermodel. Secondly, her on-and-off-and-on again husband (and their father) is an rich white guy two decades older than her. Based on her dating history before marrying him (lots of rockstars), it is quite clear that she settled for him because he was filthy rich. It is also clear that she craves attention- perhaps much more so because she used to be a supermodel. It is therefore plausible that the relationship with her two teenage sons has a significant sexual component, despite their public statements to the contrary.
And this brings us back to the uncomfortable question: Could casual incest have been more common, even normal, in previous eras – especially during human prehistory?
The belief that incest was, and always has been, a fringe phenomena are based on a set of circular sophistic assumptions that have little basis in reality. And just to be clear, I am not trying to suggest that incest was ever the major sexual outlet for humans. Yet there is reason to believe that it was far more common than we want to or, perhaps more importantly, would like to believe.
The main scholastic argument against incest is based on the premise that it is dysgenic and that humans have a “natural” aversion to such encounters. But is that assumption supported by facts? Let us go after the dysgenic angle first. How many people obsessively filter the people they want to have sex, and perhaps children, with based on the “dysgenic-ness” of the outcome. While I am sure that aspy retards, such as those who frequent HBD sites, might care about dysgenics- people who are actually having sex are more concerned with factors such as the ease of getting laid, attractiveness, status and sometimes money.
Low barriers for partner selectivity are especially prevalent in casual sexual relationships, as opposed to those that are have socio-legal approval. Furthermore there is a large body of evidence which suggests that, historically, bestiality was not uncommon among those who worked around farm animals. To put it another way, people will have sex with far uglier and weirder people (and animals) than they will ever willingly admit.
But what about the supposed “natural” human aversion to incest? Aren’t we supposed to have some sort of deterministic aversion towards having sex with people we are closely related to? Well.. the real-life definitions of definition of “close” are rather vague and culturally determined. Consider the case of cousin marriages, which still account for around 10% of all marriages in the world yet are illegal in some parts of the USA.
For most of time anatomically modern humans have existed as a species, we have lived in tightly knit groups containing anywhere between 100 and 1000 individuals. Human groups are also quite distinct from those of most other mammalian groups in that are multi-generational and fairly gender balanced (at least over the medium term). Then there are logistical issues related to finding sexual partners outside your group. While most people born in the last few decades cannot imagine a would where people don’t live and find sexual partners in large and cosmopolitan cities, that was not always the case. Throughout human pre-history and history, most people never went further than 50 km from their birthplace. Given those conditions it is quite possible that people were more inbred than we would want to believe.
But there is more..
Over many years of searching through online porn (text, art, photos, videos) I came to an interesting realization. Certain sexual preferences and practices are far more popular than one could otherwise assume from looking at “popular” culture. For example- sexualized spanking and mild-to-moderate BDSM are far more popular than most people realize. Similarly other supposedly fringe practices like annalingus and female-to-male strapon sex are far more common in online porn than you would expect from immersing yourself in “popular” culture. So what is happening? Is depiction of these preferences and practices just another way to sell more porn? Or are they reflections of what people really want? In my opinion, it is mostly the later since it is really hard to keep on pumping out material without regard to audience engagement.
And this brings me to another observation about online porn. Incest themed online porn is just too widespread to cater to a small fringe audience. This is especially obvious in the era of online streaming porn, where incest-themed video clips keep popping up far more frequently than expected. Some of you might say that incest-themed porn is just a new way to push MILF or old-young porn. Well.. perhaps, but why push something in a way that makes it less valuable to a more conventional audience? Here is an analogous example- Would you repackage an expensive cut of meat as a supposedly less desirable cut unless there was a market for it.
What do you think? Comments?
Mulling over GamerGate and its coverage by media for the last few days has provided me some interesting insights into the issue and how things might look in the near future (weeks to months). Some of my insights came from a dispassionate look at the responses of most “main-stream” journalists to GamerGate. A few came from studying changes in the tone of their articles and stated goals over time. Others came from my insights on the dynamics of this confrontation.
The short version of my conclusions is as follows: GamerGaters are prevailing over SJWs, feminists and journalists- and will continue to do so in the near future (weeks to months). I also believe that this trend will probably continue in the medium term (few years). FYI- I do not make predictions about events more than ten years in the future.
Here is the longer version of my insights.
1. The tone of “mainstream” journalists has shifted over the previous 2-3 weeks.
Their almost unanimous belief in an inevitable, decisive and spectacular triumph over the crushed ego of GamerGaters has increasingly been replaced by articles like this: Nobody Wins the GamerGate Civil War, Why can’t both sides bury hatchet over ethics in video games row?, Video game industry calls for an end to polarising ‘Gamergate’ controversy and The Disheartening GamerGate Campaign. It seems that some of those who wrote articles predicting the death and growing irrelevance of “gamers”, “nerds” and “neckbeards” are changing their tone. But why? Well.. a few were probably never enthusiastic about the whole thing in the first place. Some have been demoralized by the lack of an early decisive victory and are now re-evaluating their previous positions. Others are trying to buy time to regroup for a counter-offensive. Then there are those who can now see that this is turning into an insurgency.
2. GamerGate now displays all the main characteristics of an insurgency.
The last decade has seen the USA lose two wars in the middle-east. While some of you might not consider the outcome of military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan to be defeats or failures for the USA, the facts say otherwise. Simply put, the USA has failed to de-Talibanize Afghanistan after a decade of military presence in that country. They have also not been able to suppress Sunni Arab militarism in Iraq after almost a decade of being in that country. Why did they fail? Did they not spend enough money, buy enough fancy weapons or put enough boots on the ground? In my opinion, it comes down to a simple fact about warfare in the post-industrial era.
Conventional centralized armies cannot defeat determined insurgencies, especially if the later lacks a centralized command and control structure.
Let us compare the outcomes of WW2 with the decade-long dabbling in the middle-east. Ever wonder why the occupation of Germany and Japan after their defeat in WW2 was so orderly? Well.. it comes down to the fact that both nations had highly centralized command and control structures based on a national identity. People kept on fighting only as long as that structure did not surrender. Once that occurred, the occupiers faced no real resistance from the population. In contrast to that, both Iraq and Afghanistan are agglomerations of clans and tribes that form temporary alliances to fight external aggressors. In such situations, there is no central authority and command structure to declare defeat or victory.Furthermore, there is no hard and fast difference between allies and enemies in such societies.
The GamerGate crowd is similar to these insurgents in that there have no centralized command and control setup. Alliances between various groups in the coalition are temporary and ever-changing. Consequently the SJW-Feminist-Journalist crowd will never be able to rest in peace even if they declare victory. Even worse, such declarations will invite more attacks, sabotage and trolling. The SJW-Feminist-Journalist crowd in contrast are part of a fairly centralized hierarchical setup with only a few important power centers.
3. The GamerGaters have far less to lose than their adversaries.
The SJW-Feminist-Journalist crowd delights in portraying the GamerGate crowd as basement-dwelling neckbeards without well-paying careers. While that is an exaggeration, it does contain a core of truth. A lot of GamerGaters are intelligent but somewhat socially awkward and lonely guys in jobs that don’t pay well. In contrast to that, their equivalents from a previous era had far better economic and sexual opportunities. While this inter-generational change in fortunes might not seem like a big deal, it does actually has a major influence on the nature and longevity of GamerGate.
Consequently, the men participating in GamerGate today don’t have much to lose. Compare this to their equivalents from previous eras who often went along with social “consensus” because they had stable and well-paying jobs, wives, children and mortgages. People who believe they have something worthwhile to lose act far more conservatively than those who know that they don’t have much to begin with. Computer games are far more important to guys with poorly paid and unstable jobs than people who fancy themselves as petite bourgeoisie. The SJW-Feminist-Journalist crowd, on the other hand, are full of aspirational and actual petite bourgeoisie. They simply cannot afford to take the same risks as GamerGaters.
It also does not help that the SJW-Feminist-Journalist crowd are not especially conversant with the technology and other factors/issues underlying computer gaming. As many of you might have noticed by now, they cover their rudimentary understanding of technology with buzzwords and appeals to their “authority” or gender.
What do you think? Comments?
These links are NSFW.
Amateur Belfies: Oct 26, 2014 – Cuties taking selfies of their nekkid behinds.
More Amateur Belfies: Oct 26, 2014 – More cuties taking selfies of their nekkid behinds.
A few days ago, I considered writing two posts on the ongoing GamerGate controversy- or should we say manufactured controversy. Just so that you know, this post contains a lot of stuff that will upset established or wannabe SJWs.
It all started about two months ago (Aug 2014) as the fallout of some infidelity-related relationship drama between a manipulative fat white “woman” and her rather unremarkable boyfriend. While this dramatic bullshit might have remained localized in a previous less-connected age, the widespread availability and use of the web (especially social media) resulted in that toxic spat spilling over into, and contaminating, the rest of the world. FYI, I have no real interest in exploring the ethical issues stemming from the trade of sexual favors for favorable media exposure. As I like to say- to each their own.
This post is about why computer gaming has suddenly became so culturally relevant.
As you will see, this new-found cultural relevance of computer gaming is almost exclusively about corporations trying to sell people more crap. But why is this happening now? Why was computer gaming not a big cultural issue twenty or even ten years ago? What has changed? And why?
Well.. there are many reasons.
Advances in hardware design was the first necessary, but not sufficient, condition that made all this bullshit possible. Prior to the era of Microsoft Xbox-360s, Sony PS3s, Ninentdo Wiis, smartphones and tablets- most dedicated computer gaming occurred on Desktop PCs and high-end Laptops. To put it another way, the core customer base of computer games was fairly dedicated and almost exclusively male. Sure.. there were gaming consoles like N64s, Dreamcasts, PS1s, PS2s and Xboxs- but they too were mostly a male domain. Furthermore, computer gaming was largely (and perhaps rightly) seen as the natural habitat of socially-awkward and often poor males without female company. Companies that produced computer games in those days were often small or medium-sized and produced whatever appealed to their core audience.
This started changing in the mid-2000s, but especially after the introduction of reasonably good gaming consoles that could produce pretty pictures and more life-like scenery. The introduction of these consoles also came at a time when easy online gaming became feasible. Consequently, it began to attract people who would have otherwise not started playing them. Smartphones and tablets accelerated this trend further so that everybody and their grandparents started playing Angry Birds, Farmville and CandyCrush. Corporations saw this as an opportunity to sell more crap and changed their business model accordingly. The stagnation of growth in more established form of entertainment such as network TV, movies and sporting events also made corporations see gaming as the new frontier for growth.
To summarize my first point, computer gaming became more important because of stagnation and decline in profit from other forms of entertainment. It is therefore no surprise that events such as Comic Con now receive so much corporate backing and positive advertising. This corporate interest in profit-making is also behind an explosive increase in the number of “gaming-related” journalists or as I like to call them – paid shills.
While the previous three paragraphs explain the technological (and capitalism-linked) reasons behind gaming becoming “culturally” relevant, it is not capable of explaining how a toxic spat between a manipulative fat white woman and her unremarkable boyfriend has morphed into a another “culture” war.
To understand what drives the invective of SJWs and their supposedly “liberal” journalistic allies, you have to look at cultural factors- especially what they intend to gain. So what do they intend to gain anyway? What can they possibly gain from antagonizing hardcore gamers- who are almost exclusively male? Don’t they understand, or care, about the long-term effects of antagonizing the most important and reliable customer base for that industry.
The short answer is- they don’t care about the effects of their actions on the computer gaming industry because they are not really part of that industry. The somewhat longer answer does something like this.. All those SJWs and their journalistic “friends” writing ever more toxic rants about the core audience of computer gaming are in it for themselves. It is about attempts to gain power by screwing over other people under the pretense of helping “society”.
Let us first focus on what is driving the journalists, who are perhaps the less repulsive of the two groups- if not by much. Have you ever wondered what all these people would have been doing in the pre-internet age? The simple answer is that they would have been trying to advance their careers by shilling and writing hit-pieces for print media. Journalists, with a few exceptions, have always been paid sophists, shills and character-assassination specialists for their rich masters. Think of them as whores, though that comparison is kinda demeaning to real whores. My point is that most journalists, but especially those who are trying to climb up, will shill and whore for anything that has a chance of improving their career prospects.
But why are they focusing so much on GamerGate? Why are they not paying a similar level of attention to far bigger issues like systemic racism in the american judicial system, narco-wars in Mexico or the endemic corruption and patient abuse in the american health system?
Apologists might say that some journalists do cover those issues- and that is true. But media coverage and critique of those problems bears no proportion to their impact on people. Moreover, journalists who cover the big and difficult issues have always been in the minority. But why is that so? Why do most people who pretend that their profession is devoted to speaking truth to power shy away from it whenever they have an opportunity to do so? Well.. it comes down to money and the fear of reprisals.
Systemic racism against non-whites in the USA is, and has always been, state policy. Critiquing that beyond a certain extent is not good for your journalistic career. Nor is it unique to that issues as most journalists were willing shills for the case to invade Iraq under false pretenses in 2003. Similarly most american journalists have been extremely unsupportive of people like Edward Snowden or Julian Assange, inspite of the importance of their revelations. Similarly people who do actual field-based reporting on the government-abetted narco war in Mexico run the risk of losing their heads- literally. Therefore the vast majority of journalist will never focus on the truly important issues of that era.
So how do these shills maintain their public credibility- or whatever is left of it?
While the general credibility of journalists has been on a downward slope for many decades, they still attempt to make occasional attempts to maintain their credibility. But as we talked about just now, they cannot do so by antagonizing people who pay them or are likely to kill them. Most investigative journalism is therefore about issues, groups or people they can antagonize without fear of reprisal. That is why journalist spend so much time on subjects that can let them demonize or at least look down upon people. These include single mothers, drug addicts, black men, small time con artists and medium-sized scams.
Journalist who write about games are no different. They, and their colleagues at “social-issue” driven publications, have no real expertise or empathy for the subjects and issues they write about. I could have compared them to pimps, but that would be insulting to pimps. In a way, they are part of a trend sweeping american society in which the best pretenders (such as CEOs) make the most money and get the most power. The massive user response to recent and continuing biased journalism in computer gaming therefore represents an affront to their self-perceived power and importance. In a way, the response of journalists to GamerGate is not unlike the response of parasite to the host immune system.
However parasites, unlike journalists, never believe that the host exists because of them.
I will talk about my views on SJWs and their real “motivations” in an upcoming post.
What do you think? Comments?
These links are NSFW.
Pantyless Cuties: Oct 21, 2014 – Cuties without panties.
More Pantyless Cuties: Oct 21, 2014 – More cuties without panties.
The character of Ernst Stavro Blofeld, as presented by Donald Pleasence in the movie ‘You Only Live Twice‘, has gone on to become one of the most iconic cinematic super-villains of the half century. Some may recognize him as the character who was parodied in the Austin Powers trilogy as Dr. Evil.
But have you ever wondered if the original Blofeld character was based on a real person?
Well.. as I found out over the years, he is- but not in the way you think. Moreover, the life-story of the guy that character was based on is even more interesting than the literary super-villain. However, I also realized something else.. The author of the James Bond series, Ian Fleming, took great care to obscure and hide the connection between his literary super-villain character and the guy he was almost certainly based on. As readers will see, Fleming had a very good reason to hide the true identity of the guy who served as the inspiration for one of his most iconic literary characters.
In the previous paragraph, I mentioned that it took me some time to figure out the identity of the person who inspired the Blofeld character. Here is why.. My first exposure to this character came from watching James Bond movies, especially as played by Donald Pleasence. To put it another way, I (like most of you) saw his character on screen before reading about it in a book. The best clues to to true identity of Blofeld are found in some of the first James Bond novels. Having said that, his first cinematic representation of Blofeld (and Dr. Evil) holds one important clue to his true identity.
Notice something common to both Ernst Blofeld and Dr. Evil?
Apart from the fact that both Blofeld and Dr. Evil are bald, they both have a peculiar scar on their face. But what would cause such a scar? Well, it turns out that such scars are the result of an old Germanic academic tradition known as Academic fencing. While researching a bit more about academic fencing, I came across a picture of Otto Skorzeny who apparently had one of the larger and more photogarphed version of such a scar. Some of you might wonder, as I did, if depicting the super-villain character with such a scar was simply a cinematic device. Well.. that is certainly a possibility. But why chose such an obscure, if dramatic looking, scar that had no role in his path to super-villainy? Here is my theory- The producers of ‘You Only Live Twice’ tried to further obscure an already obscured literary character because the real-life inspiration for him was still alive when that movie was produced and released.
So why do I believe that the literary character of Ernst Stavro Blofeld was principally inspired by the career and exploits of Otto Skorzeny? Let me start with the original physical description of Ernst Blofeld in Ian Fleming’s older novels as summarized on Wikipedia.
Blofeld is described physically as a massive man, weighing roughly 20 stone (280 lb; 130 kg), has black crew-cut hair, black eyes (similar to those of Benito Mussolini), heavy eyelashes, a thin mouth and long pointed hands and feet. He has violet-scented breath from chewing flavoured cachous (breath mints). A meticulous planner of formidable intellect, he seems to be without conscience but not necessarily insane, and is motivated solely by financial gain.
Readers will immediately notice that this physical description is nothing like the one depicted in any James Bond movie. This is our first clue that the character of Blofeld was originally based on someone who looked very different from his cinematic version. Another set of clues are found in biographical facts about the literary version of this character.
According to the novel, Blofeld was born on 28 May 1908 (which is also Fleming’s birthday) in the city of Gdingen, then part of Imperial Germany (now part of Poland and known under the name Gdynia); his father was Polish and his mother was Greek, hence the well-known Greek name Stavro. As a young man, Blofeld was well-versed in the social science disciplines, but also in the natural science and technology disciplines. He first graduated from the University of Warsaw with a degree in Political History and Economics, and then from the Warsaw University of Technology with a degree in Engineering and “Radionics”.
Correctly foreseeing the coming of World War II, Blofeld made copies of top-secret wires and sold them for cash to Nazi Germany. Before the German invasion of Poland in 1939, he destroyed all records of his existence then moved first to Sweden, then to Turkey, where he worked for Turkish Radio and began to set up his own private intelligence organisation. During the war, he sold information to both sides. After the defeat of Erwin Rommel, he decided to back the Allied war effort, and was awarded numerous medals by the Allied powers after the war’s end. Blofeld then temporarily moved to South America before founding SPECTRE.
Taken as a whole, these autobiographical facts about Blofeld are not particularly helpful in uncovering the identity of his real-life inspiration. They do, however, contain three important clues. Firstly, he was born in 1908 in a city that is now in Poland. Secondly, he was an engineer by training. Thirdly, he was a very pragmatic person who switched loyalties as needed. Lastly, he moved to South America after WW2 to found SPECTRE.
So, the real-life inspiration for Blofeld was a dark-haired, tall and muscular culturally Germanic guy. He was born in 1908- either in Poland or his family had Polish roots. He then went on to study engineering and worked for the Nazis during WW2. After the war, he disavowed his previous loyalties and went into the international private “security” business as the head of a private organisation initially based in South America.
Now have a look at this guy..
Otto Skorzeny was born June 12, 1908, in Vienna, Austria into a middle class Austrian family with Polish roots. Skorzeny spoke fluent German and French and was educated locally before attending university. While there, he developed skills in fencing. Taking part in numerous bouts, he received a long scar on the left side of his face. This along with his height (6’4″), was one of Skorzeny’s distinguishing features.In 1931 Skorzeny joined the Austrian Nazi Party and soon became a member of the Nazi SA. A charismatic figure, Skorzeny played a minor role in the Anschluss on 12 March 1938, when he saved the Austrian President Wilhelm Miklas from being shot by Austrian Nazis. A civil engineer by trade, Skorzeny came to minor prominence when he saved Austrian President Wilhelm Miklas from being shot during the Anschluss in 1938. This action caught the eye of Austrian SS chief Ernst Kaltenbrunner. With the beginning of World War II in September 1939, Skorzeny attempted to join the Luftwaffe but instead was assigned as an officer-cadet in the Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler (Hitler’s bodyguard regiment). Serving as a technical officer with the rank of second lieutenant, Skorzeny put his engineering training to use.
In 1940, as an SS Untersturmführer (second lieutenant), he impressed his superiors by designing ramps to load tanks on ships. He then fought in the Netherlands, France and the Balkans, where he achieved distinction by forcing a large Yugoslav force to surrender, following which he was promoted to Obersturmführer (first lieutenant) in the Waffen-SS. Skorzeny went to war in the USSR with the 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich and subsequently fought in several battles on the Eastern Front. In October 1941, he was in charge of a “technical section” of the German forces during the Battle of Moscow. Skorzeny was wounded by shrapnel from Katyusha rockets in December 1942. Though injured, he refused treatment and continued fighting until the effects of his wounds forced his evacuation. Taken to Vienna to recover, he received the Iron Cross.
Given a staff role with the Waffen-SS in Berlin, Skorzeny began extensive reading and research into commando tactics and warfare. Enthusiastic about this alternative approach to warfare he began advocating it within the SS. Based on his work, Skorzeny believed that new, unconventional units should be formed to conduct attacks deep behind enemy lines. In April 1943, his work bore fruit as he was selected by Kaltenbrunner, now the head of the RSHA (SS-Reichssicherheitshauptamt – Reich Main Security Office) to develop a training course for operatives that included paramilitary tactics, sabotage, and spying. Promoted to captain, Skorzeny quickly received command of Sonderverband z.b.V. Friedenthal. A special operations unit, it was redesignated 502nd SS Jäger Battalion Mitte that June. Relentlessly training his men, Skorzeny’s unit conducted their first mission, Operation Francois, that summer. Dropping into Iran, a group from the 502nd was tasked with contacting dissident tribes in the region and encouraging them to attack Allied supply lines. A list of the other pre-1946 operations he was involved in can be found in this link. FYI- His leadership of the successful commando raid that freed Mussolini in 1944 is widely seen as the moment when he first attracted significant international attention.
But it was his post-WW2 exploits that made him a legend.
After Germany surrendered in 1945, he like many other high-ranking German Army officials was imprisoned and tried at Dachau for war crimes. However a combination of circumstances and the reticence of many potential allied witnesses to testify for fear of divulging their own war crimes resulted in his acquittal for those charges in 1947. Skorzeny was then detained in an internment camp at Darmstadt awaiting the decision of a denazification court.On 27 July 1948 he escaped from the camp with the help of three former SS officers dressed in US Military Police uniforms who entered the camp and claimed that they had been ordered to take Skorzeny to Nuremberg for a legal hearing. Skorzeny afterwards maintained that the US authorities had aided his escape, and had supplied the uniforms. Skorzeny hid out at a farm in Bavaria which had been rented by Countess Ilse Lüthje, the niece of Hjalmar Schacht (Hitler’s former finance minister), for around 18 months, during which time he was in contact with Reinhard Gehlen, and together with Hartmann Lauterbacher (former deputy head of the Hitler Youth) recruited for the Gehlen Organization.
Skorzeny was photographed at a café on the Champs Elysées in Paris on 13 February 1950. The photo appeared in the French press the next day, causing him to retreat to Salzburg, where he met up with German veterans and also filed for divorce so that he could marry Ilse Lüthje. Shortly afterwards, with the help of a Nansen passport issued by the Spanish government, he moved to Madrid, where he set up a small engineering business which helped serve as a front for his operations with the ODESSA network as he had become the Spanish coordinator. On April 1950 the publication of Skorzeny’s memoirs by the French newspaper Le Figaro caused 1500 communists to riot outside the journal’s headquarters. There is a strong possibility that he also worked for as a high-ranking security “adviser” for Juan Peron in the early 1950s, and is rumored to have had an affair with Evita Peron- yes, that Evita!
And it gets even better..
In 1952, when the country had been taken over by General Mohammed Naguib, Skorzeny was sent to Egypt the following year by former General Reinhard Gehlen (who was now working for the CIA) to act as Naguib’s military advisor. Skorzeny recruited a staff made up of former SS officers to train the Egyptian army. Among these officers were SS General Wilhelm Farmbacher, Panzer General Oskar Munzel, Leopold Gleim, head of the Gestapo Department for Jewish Affairs in Poland, and Joachim Daemling, former chief of the Gestapo in Düsseldorf. In addition to training the army, Skorzeny also trained Arab volunteers in commando tactics for possible use against British troops stationed in the Suez Canal zone. Several Palestinian refugees also received commando training, and Skorzeny planned their raids into Israel via the Gaza Strip in 1953-1954. One of these Palestinians was Yasser Arafat. He would eventually serve as an adviser to Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser.
But wait, there is more..
Skorzeny later provided intelligence to Mossad on ex-Nazi scientists working for the Egyptian government. Skorzeny agreed to cooperate with Israel on condition that Simon Wiesenthal erase his name from the list of wanted Nazi war criminals and act to have an arrest warrant against him cancelled. Though Wiesenthal rejected this request, Skorzeny decided in the end to cooperate with Mossad anyway. Yes.. you read that right- he even worked for Mossad. Take a second to reflect on the irony of a guy who was in the inner circle of the Third Reich working for Mossad.
And then there is his central role in the formation of the Paladin Group which was pretty much a real life-version of the fictional SPECTRE.
The Paladin Group was created in 1970 in the Albufereta neighborhood of Alicante, Spain, by former SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny and former US Colonel James Sanders. A former special operations officer, Skorzeny had become a member of the ODESSA network after the war, helping to smuggle Nazi war criminals out of Allied Europe to Spain, South America and other friendly destinations to avoid prosecution for war crimes. Skorzeny himself resided after the war in Spain, protected by Franco. Skorzeny envisioned the Paladin Group as “an international directorship of strategic assault personnel [that would] straddle the watershed between paramilitary operations carried out by troops in uniforms and the political warfare which is conducted by civilian agents”. In addition to recruiting many former SS members, the Group also recruited from the ranks of various right-wing and nationalist organizations, including the French Nationalist OAS, the SAC, and the ‘Légion étrangère’. The hands-on manager of the Group was Dr. Gerhard Hartmut von Schubert, formerly of Joseph Goebbels’ Propaganda Ministry, who had trained security personnel in Argentina and Egypt after the war. Under his guidance, Paladin provided support to the PFLP – EO led by Wadie Haddad.
The Group’s other clients included the South African Bureau of State Security and Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi. They also worked for the Greek military junta of 1967–1974 and the Spanish Dirección General de Seguridad, who recruited some Paladin operatives to wage clandestine war against Basque separatists. The Group is also reputed to have provided personnel for José López Rega’s notorious Argentine Anti-Communist Alliance death squad. The Paladin Group was also allegedly allied with a number of other right-wing governments, including Salazar’s Portugal, and some of the Italian neo-fascists involved in the strategy of tension attacks of the 1970s and 80s. The Paladin Group also held offices in Zurich, Switzerland. The Soviet news agency TASS alleged that Paladin was involved in training US Green Berets for Vietnam missions during the 1960s, but this is considered unlikely, since Skorzeny’s methods were considered somewhat antiquated, and he resented the USA for its role in destroying Nazi Germany.
This is why I believe that the literary character of Ernst Blofeld was based on Otto Skorzeny.
So why did Ian Fleming and the producers of the James Bond movie franchise took pains to obscure the true inspiration for that character? Well.. consider the timeline. Skorzeny died in 1975 and many of the most memorable James Bond movies came out in the 1960s. Would you really want to get on the bad side of a guy like Skorzeny?
What do you think? Comments?