@Gary Higgins *The intractable pain from my R-foot is driving me to the point of suicide* *I can barely function after 5-months of constant pain from my foot which NEVER ceases, despite the intervention of blood-clot removals and the placements of 'stents'...I will be 69 in April and I doubt I will last that long* _____________ *Glad to hear you have overcome your disability...and i will overcome mine by my own hand* *I have no intention of being a 'Cripple' on a permanent basis for myself*

Gary hope you are doing well mate. Great story, I just had spinal surgery here in Australia. Men like these are literally the stuff of legends, makes anyone gain strength.

Adolf not Adolph

Real professional.

Perfectly correct analysis but the cause he fought for was rotten .

@@davidrussell8689Not to mention that he began his "career" as a ground attack pilot during the Spanish Civil War. Only God knows in how many criminal attacks against the civilian population he participated, in a war as atrocious as that one, where cruelties such as carpet bombing of villages were tried for the first time, or where machine-gunning from the air civilians who were fleeing in terror from the bombing was common practice. I really question his status as "knight of the air". A murderer is simply a murderer, even if he wears a fancy uniform, a chest full of medals, or has impeccable ways of conducting himself in public.

@@franciscojaviernarbaiza9517 the condor legion was responsible for various war crimes ( attacks on unarmed civilians ) The systematic strafing of civilians as they escaped from Guernica is but one example of the Germanic cruelty during the Spanish Civil War . I’m not sure that Galland participated in this action in particular but it gives you an idea of the disregard for human life when the country below is not your own .

@@davidrussell8689 Werner Molders did participate in the bombing of Guernica, flying a Bf-109 that gave escort to the bombers. I'm not sure about Galland's participation in that specific bombing, but anyway there were multiple "Guernicas" that did not receive as much international media attention, and on which a wall of silence imposed by the dictatorship fell after the war. But not only the infamous Condor Legion dedicated itself with impunity to bombing the civilian population. My own hometown, Durango, suffered several bombardments by Italian fascist aircraft in March and April 1937, the deadliest of all being March 31. A sister of my grandmother lost both legs, when a fascist plane dedicated itself to machine-gunning a group of women who were washing clothes in the river, what kind of murderer does that, attacking defenseless civilians with impunity?.

Lfmao what a comment…… just boys being boys

You are a lucky man Mike! I am extremely envious, but very happy for you. Cheers.

Oh how wonderful. Great day you had. Envy of everyone

Story for the Ages mate. Awesome

100% agree

YES…Galland led his men according to honorable “laws” of warfare. If you are interested in reading about this man, there’s a book (sorry, I don’t remember the name!!); but,it’s a non-fiction book dealing with the story of the Luftwaffe…. 👍🏼👣👠

@@alvashoemaker8536 Its called the first and the last i have a hardback copy up loft

I want to read his most recent book “My Log Book” or “My Flight Log” just released prior to his death

@oceanhome2010 While I was watching episode 1 & 2 I was expecting Adolf Galland would have a story to tell about Hans Ulrich Rudel, unfortunately not a single word. Pretty strange.

@@christophemacker5338 Would it be strange if the interviewer didn't have those questions to give to him because the show was about his own history? Perhaps, since this was the same production team and extremely likely this video was recorded at the same time, these are those questions. The magic of television!

I am uncertain why "the media" (as people that have problems with mostly accurate and sometimes sensationalised information say) chose to highlight that person's decisions but I doubt it was only for what you describe. For one the procedure you describe did not take place as, from what I understand, (I only know the information I am giving) she has kept her penis but most importantly her testicles. In case you don't know, testicles, you may utilise slang terminology instead but they are the glands that produce not only the reproductive cells but also the chemical testosterone. Testosterone is required to have masculine attributes. Females also produce this hormone but in not as great a quantity. Males also produce a female hormone estrogen, again but not in the quantities required to have more feminine attributes but with the addition by prescription and removal of the testicles a more complete alteration can be achieved. She may have altered her appearance to be that more feminine outwardly with cosmetic surgery alteration but an actual or best transformation into the other sex is an inaccurate description. They probably highlighted this person's alteration because decades prior to their alteration they were a prominent sports figure, an Olympic athlete representing our country and a participant is televised sporting shows that had admitted to long struggles with the attempt at understanding and expressing themselves since these things were at odds with what was displayed in their physical form. I know some biology but know nothing of the person you described at least not well enough to know their new name and I surely don't know as much as you do since you seem to have such a strong opinion about them. I only know they kept their male genitalia, which in just knowing that, I know your statement was made in ignorance about science. I hope you know more about how your body works but you and Jenner are going to have to work out your differences you have together. I do hope it improves.

@@minirock000 Read your statement again, then give your head a wobble. You and people like you are the problem. If you can't understand the utter, cretinous, moronic stupidity of the phrase "Her penis" then you are as mentally ill as Bruce Jenner. The statement was about two men who conducted themselves with bravery, courage, chivalry and honour, and all you can do is harp on about a mentally confused man who dresses as a woman. You really do need to take you head for a 5h1t...

@@somebloke13 Hey johnny webb, how many accounts do you have? So what you are saying is that people that can, by no action, accept what others want to think of themselves as are the demise of civilisation. On the other hand, people that are willing to take action, by legislation and violence, to repress free thought are the saviours of said civilisation. Seems one of us is on the side of freedom and the other is on the side of repression. I am sure that is an opaque belief system you have since you won't see it that way. In America, not sure where you are from, we have an unwritten motto that as long as people are not hurting anyone else and are obeying the laws to let them live as they wish. Perhaps your country could do the same so we could all get along better.

En effet les guerres lavées et les génocides, Yougoslavie, Vietnam et bien d autres horreurs.

Mr. van Bemmel, Fair and square, your post.

My country fell victim to the soviet influence in the east,and let me tell you,it was no joke. My country's direct victims after the war were in the hundreds of thousands,in Rusia for example,it was millions. Yeah,that's right. Tens of millions of our own citizens perished,during time of peace,in soviet states. Want to talk about totalitarian,talk about communism. No religion,no culture but one of being a proletariat,and only that,your country's history being denigrated and ridiculed,and the list goes on. On the less severe side,if you can call it that,they would take entire villages and move them to other areas,sometimes even to far away countries. Knew a girl from Kazakhstan,whose grandmother was forcibly taken from Moldova,and moved to Kazakhstan. Why,do you ask? Simple,to sever the peoples ties to their own land,and nation-to be more easily controlled. So yeah,i think in particular,spanish people were lucky not to have communism instilled in them,and their societies. When i was in Spain,i was astounded at the beauty of its buildings. Spent only one day in Barcelona,but my good,what a beautiful city. Every inch has to be pure art,every corner,every street lamp. You know what we got in the East? Ugly,sterile concrete blocks,hunger,terror of being truthful,ban of religion, corruption(if we are all equal,then a drunkard has thesame value as an educated man,no?),stifling of most developments. You sir,i'm afraid, talk from an incomplete point of view. You only saw,or heard what the Fascists did(from communist sympathizers),yet not one peep about what the Communist did. I know you heart may be in the right place,and you mean good-but to take a decision,you have to put into balance both sides. We only heard the side of the communists,and allied victors-about the others there is a strict censorship. Gee,i wonder why this information was muted,and by who? The sole purpose of communism was to destabilize countries to take them over,like they did in Russia,like they tried in germany in 1919,and the rest of Europe. That's why you had uprising of nationalist movements everywhere.Simple as that.

@@alakhazom I don't know how to answer this other than: 1. I'm not surprised 2. At the time, the Allies saw the Nazis and Japanese in a worse light than the USSR. I believe at least in general the West had heard of Stalin's purges, but and this is no excuse, my guess is that his crimes were internal, whereas the Axis was aggressively invading countries to extend their own empires. This is of course no solace to you your countrymen who suffered so much at the hands of the USSR and by extension even today. All of you deserve much better. If one considers Churchill who had said plenty at the expense of the USSR had then to work with them due to the threat perceived by the Nazis. I expect it was a very hard pill to swallow.

@@henrivanbemmel What other countries did "Axis"(Germany,i assume) invade it's allies? Was Spain invaded? Or Portugal? Oooh,but you will claim Poland. Agreed. How many of you know that Germany was trying to recuperate her territories from the Poles? How many of us know how the germans were treated after Ww1 in new polish territories? I repeat myself,the soviets from Moscow were trying to create a russian revolution in all of Europe. Drenched in blood,with all the intelligent strata of society purged. Then tell me how in what world,what universe is going against that called starting a war. Germany,and Hungary 1919 attempt to overthrow the governments,and subjugate the people. Have you heard of the Katyn massacre? 28000 polish officers were executed by the russians. Churchill always mentioned that he wished war with Germany,especially. His creditors demanded it. He dragged them in a disastrous war,while the germans detested that idea. "The moustache man" always said that he viewed them as brothers,and that they took the european culture to all the world. Even wondered why they let 300.000 soldiers at Dunkirk go? It was his own will,he demanded it-against his generals advisal . One of his mistakes,in my opinion. I could go on,but you have to understand a thingh. Very few people in the East hate the germans from ww2,and view them as extremely honest. When germans passed by,they brought all sorts of goodies with them,even bought animals from peasants. When the russians came,they came raping,stealing everything,and executing nilly willy. My great grandfather hid from them cause he had a tractor. You see,private property for them was tantamount to being a huge capitalist,so there was reason for for strife,with that. You in the west know only half the story,and so,a form of communism knocks on your door. If you are lucky,you will fight against it. If we are all lucky,to be honest. No more brother wars,especially for a bloated globalist monstrosity,which created suffering al over the globe. We need each other.

​@@alakhazom could it be the case that Hitler Stalin , Churchill, Roosevelt, musoleni were all puppets of higher forces like the Jesuits or other powers no one is ever going to know about? And once again the true losers were the public brainwashed and indoctrinated on all sides? War has always been profitable!! I'm certain that forces who are hidden always start to brainwash the vast majority of people in the world to start conflict, it will never stop happening

I'm a private pilot but don't fly gliders, only Cessnas. As a pilot, every time I take off I'm constantly scanning the land around and even behind me to look for a flat place to do a forced landing. All pilots flying small planes are like that, AFAIK. It's ingrained into my mind since my early days as a student pilot. If I forget to scan the land around me every 2 minutes or so, my flight instructor would look me sternly in the eye and ask if I forgot something?. LOL!

Those are questions typically not asked because rarely they would have wanted to talk about those things. I think, for most pilots , they are not into "politics", they are in love with flying and its just unfortunate that to fly they had to fight, and for some it was for the wrong kind of governement Read up on any Vietnam Era US Pilot, and if he fought over Vietnam because he believed in the war... or just fought for his buddies in the air and on the ground.

Bader's boss was Leigh-Mallory who lost the main show to Park. It was really odious of Churchill to give in to their pressure in being so ungrateful to Park and Dowding. Bader's ego was so overbloated that he destroyed most of the sympathy the public had for him. Bader's showiness over France in 1942 cost his freedom for 3 long years. Perhaps that was a good thing for the RAF.

@@Charlesputnam-bn9zy odious is a good word for it. Although 11 Groups loss (& subsequent inept use in fighter sweeps over France) was Malta's & 8th Armies gain when Park was posted there. Malta's plight directly influenced/reflected the 8th Armies plight in North Africa.

@@prof_kaos9341 Air Marshal Keith Park TWICE saved The Empire. But perhaps his Neo-Zealander origin was what the aristocratick Leigh-Mallory resented. Unfortunately, Bader was also furious that his boss was commanding the Force in the North that had at best a supporting role instead of the limelight of glory in the South. That was not the only infamous Churchillian act in his treatment of British heroes : _ General Auchinleck was the real savior of Suez by his incredible strategic decisions in the face of impending defeat, despite his burdening responsibilities East of Suez too. Yet because Churchill needed a victory before the coming of the Americans, he urged Auchinleck into attacking Rommel immediately. Sir Claude Auchinleck seeing the need for reorganizing the Eighth Army refused. So Churchill callously replaced him with Monty. The latter was far from a bad commander & was one of the best Allied generals. But the odds nevertheless took him 10 nights to achieve the Alamein victory. (Corelli Barnett's "The Desert Generals") _ 1st Lord Of The Sea Dudley Pound was the one to whom Churchill owed his return as Minister Of The Navy in 1940 before becoming PM. & his decision to disperse the PQ-17 for 19 out of 31 freighters & their crew to perish in the Arctic was never officially acknowledged because Churchill owed him too much. Pound apparently was scared stiff of the avowedly Anglophobe King, who had his own fair share of British & American merchant sailors slaughtered by his early utter incompetence. But in the PQ-17 episode he was loyal to his allies, providing all the help possible, heavy carrier USS Wasp & battleship USS Washington included. But Pound, fearing American losses political implications preferred to retire the escort, making once more British & American merchant sailors pay with their lives. The only thing he contributed, apart from helping Hitler, was to provide the dubious ally Stalin with another occasion to obscenely insult the sacrifices made by the West ; & to help the boasting of a dubious her0 of the s0viet union of having torpedoed the Tirpitz. The guy had the good sense to not survive his victims by more than 18 months.

@@Charlesputnam-bn9zy Kia Ora, i am currently sweating in a Kiwi summer. You raise valid points, i find it most ironic that it was Churchill's plan to invade Norway, changing to support Norway when the Nazis got there 1st, that caused Chamberlain's resignation & Churchill's promotion to PM, tho' appeasement had failed. [Churchill the brains behind the failed invasions of Gallipoli, Norway (mentioned) and later Greece]. I am not a fan of Auchinleck, his strategic command was good but tactically the Army failed to fight together as one team, persisting with the 18th/19th Century tactics of uncoordinated disparate groups. Pre radio tactics. The change of mind-set to combined arms had to be implemented from the top down, the armour needed to be told to work with the infantry & vice versa. I think it a crime that a far smaller, poorly supplied force ran rings around 8th Army for 2yrs. Time after time Rommel gave them a bloody lessons in the new combined arms tactics but nobody of significant rank took notice. Changing this mindset can only be done from the top & was not. Op Crusader(Nov 1941), was a plan to let the armour charge off alone, but it led to 8th Army lossing 75% of it's armour at Sidi Rezegh (charging AT guns, a job for infantry). The next stage of Crusader was the infantry getting mauled for lack of tank support. Sadly this was not a unique outcome. IMO only Auchinleck was in a position to change this. During Alamein Montgomery threatened to remove his armoured Divisional and Brigade commanders replacing them with those who would follow his orders. A desperate act in the middle of a battle.

@@prof_kaos9341 Entirely with you sir, on General Auchinleck's woes in the tactical field : viz the cascade of replaced British 8th Army commanders from Cunningham to Ritchie, after whom Auchinleck had to take direct command. The British Army glued-to-tradition led to some absurd results like the absolute refusal to use the excellent 94mm AA gun as antitank, although it's better than the German 88. Re. Corelli Barnett's "The Desert Generals" I cannot recommend this book too much for its accuracy & humour. By the way, Medinine 1943 was the British 8th Army's revenge for Sidi Rezegh 1941. Yet the bizarre thing is precisely that were General O'Connor be allowed to take Tripoli in early 41, the British would've been entirely victorious in North Africa. & there would be no Rommel to bask in vainglory (NO port of Tripoli oblige) & who would be sent to Russia to try his so-called "War without Hate"(puke!). Obersturmbannfuehrer Paul Carell shamelessly stated that the Afrika Korps was representative of the "Good Germany with no gestapo, no ss, no concentration camp."(Re. his ''The Desert Foxes'') Yet in the 1971 novel "Rommel's Gold" by Maggie Davis, there's mention of an ss officer in Rommel's staff. Which turned out to be true - so much for saint-Erwin, who early in the war wasn't loath to rub shoulders with the likes of Himmler. (& that's also the only thing of value worth mentioning in this book more concerned with bedding than fighting) In one of the chilling what-ifs of WW2, were Churchill NOT to take on-the-verge-of-total-victory-general O'Connor's 2 best motorized units & send them to Greece to be destroyed there, Hitler, free of the need to save his pal Benito's colony, would have to reconsider his planned invasion of Russia & adopt the strike from the South that would at least have secured him the Iraqi & Iranian oil for his war machine. Mr. Prof_Kaos, my post is a little too long as it is. Allow me to just temporarily close it with this most interesting quotation from Historian Alan Clark's masterful 1965 "Barbarossa" : `` The Devil's hand had protected Hitler. `` To persons not of the Roman Catholic faith, ``especially to those such as scientists, ``technicians (and even military historians), ``who are concerned with fact and reality, ``the purported existence of cosmic forces ``can seem an irritating abstraction. ``Yet there are occasions when the ``eternal struggle between good and evil ``seems more than a convenient adjunct ``to a code of behaviour evolved by ``the priesthood for disciplining the ``lower classes and assumes ``a disquieting magnitude, ``which towers over the puny `` "self-determination" of mortal man.``

With the title being "Luftwaffe General: Adolf Galland Documentary part 3" it will be about a General in the German military, the department that operates aircraft, Adolf Galland and it is a factually based film part number three. If you are having problems understanding why so much time was spent on Badar that was information provided for the people ignorant of who the man was. It wouldn't make any sense just to say he treated this one prisoner nicely, good-bye, so in order to add to the story information was provided about the other subject. The other subject is admittedly very complex and has a story worth telling of his own but a summary placed here adds to the story of the original subject. In this instance it adds complexity of personality to the subject.

It's a common name. Probably born to an Englishwoman and an Indian father.

Read Leonard Mosley's 1968 "Battle Of Britain - The Making of A Film" for a look inside Galland's mentality.

Yeah, every nazi raised one arm pre-1945 shouting "Heil Hitler !" and two arms post-May 1945 whimpering "Kamerad !"

Sometimes you just have to close your eyes John.

@@davewilson9772 I guess so.

I was about to make the same observation. Greetings from Amsterdam.

In 1996 I think. The year he passed away

Yes, strange eh? 😂

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

Not really.

@@DannyBoy777777 Yes. A good idea that didn't work. They took too long to form up as a group owing to the disparity in speed between Hurricanes and Spitfires. Big Wings did not work and were quietly abandoned some time later. It proved to be like herding cats.

@@johnvaleanbaily246 Incorrect. Big Wings were used throughout the war; it was the bedrock of the Cicus offensives.

Especially the Canadian POWs slaughtered by the SS in Normandy.

don't matter because he couldn't do anything about it, he was just being used as a tool

Galland undoubtedly knew of the open air American POW camps along the Rhine after the War that killed 1.5 million Germans who had surrendered, mostly 17-19 year olds

As a matter of fact, in the Battle of Britain, Fighter Command instructed their pilots NOT to shoot at German pilots who bailed out over Britain and were parachuting down, as they would land in Britain and so should be treated as prisoners of war. However, RAF pilots who bailed out over Britain could expect to be shot by the German pilots at as they would be viewed as combatants.

@@kawarthaohio5507 cos they needed intel. Later, when terror bombing started over Europe and US Air Force wanted air superiority they briefed their pilots to kill the axis fighter pilots on parachutes cos they could get another bf109 for the next sortie right away. The allied airmen losses were high until the end of war (2 sorties / fighter pilot and he was over) You can check this out, there is a docu here about a thunderbolt wing and their last 2 months of ww2. Göring tried convincing Garland to shoot bailed out pilots but Galland refused and Göring did not bring up it again.

@@hakapeszimaki8369 "coz they needed intel" - I don't think this was the primary reason in the Battle of Britain (when a nuanced legal point was still considered important) - unless you can provide a credible source for your assertion. Later in the war, yes, when most concepts of "fair play and chivalry" were long gone and, for example, firebombing of civilians was considered ok. But also - axis airmen shot down over their own territory were still viewed as combatants, so fair game. But as you point out, certain individuals on both sides maintained their sense of decency and would not kill a defenseless enemy.

The US pilots did it, not the RAF (according to a diary by Johann Twietmeyer JG 77/7.).

With respect, I don't agree. His various sceptical opinions may or may not be true, but they offer food for thought. He provides a necessary foil, which, in my opinion, only improves the documentary.

Halliday is generalizing and is clearly a cynic. Galland and Bader became friends with mutual respect after the war. Enough said.

lol