I remember reading about her years ago and then I just stumbled on this YouTube video of her. That she was a French Collaborator for the Germans is undeniable however how deep her collaboration went is still debated today.
Because of a Youtubue which includes the statement that histotians do not agree about her collaboration? And do you realy think that killing french prostitutes who had to have cumstomers of the rong “race” is antinazi, because the customer had been German?
The YouTube video is subjective and the opinion of the author.
Oh she was definitely a collaborator as there is plenty of evidence of that especially in the early years of WW2 but as the war dragged on towards the end of her life is where many historians can’t agree. Did she participate in the killing of partisans or was she just an informant, was she complicit in the death of Jews or not? Did she kill and torture prisoners or did she use her reputation to make her feared by the populace? Rumour and hearsay has a powerful voice and this is why you will find different accounts of what she might or might not of done later in life and the difficulties in ascertaining what she might or might not of done.
Depending on what book you read or video you watch the narrative of her life during occupation changes with the viewpoint of the writer or person posting the video.
This is why history can be so frustrating as fact can become rumour and rumour can become fact years after the what took place. (IE. the parachutist hanging from the building during Dday)
The video was not ^“opinion”. The author was promoting his “facts”. But I have no access to French information, because I am absolute illiterate in French so I have no information to add.