Thursday, July 25, 2024

The Ruling Elite

Volume III     Source

volume 3 cover

The Ruling Elite - Death, Destruction, and Domination

Providing a general overview of the accurate history of World War II-which was essentially a continuation of World War I with the same saber-rattling participants-The Ruling Elite describes the circumstances leading up to World War II. Author Deanna Spingola discusses how the diaspora-distributed international bankers living and prospering in Britain, France, and America influenced greedy, compromised, and complicit politicians in those nations. The Ruling Elite explains that through deceptive propaganda, those politicians persuaded naive citizens to wage war against Germany, a peace-loving nation whose leaders were uncooperative with the bankers, which led to World War I. Following that war, German officials rejected the bankers and their money-lending scheme to save their nation and its citizens from the burden of debt. The aftermath of World War II-a deadly war that killed millions and imposed communism in numerous countries-impacted every banker-occupied country in various ways: culturally, morally, politically, and economically. Researched through historical documents and scholarly works, The Ruling Elite describes how warmongers regularly project their criminal activities onto others, frequently blaming the victim, whether an individual or a nation. Spingola offers an unbiased look at World War II beginning with Hitler and the rebirth of Germany through the aftermath of the war.

Part 1 ◊ Hitler And The Rebirth Of Germany..............................1

  1 ♦ The Advent of Adolf Hitler
  2 ♦ Hitler’s Assumption of Power
  3 ♦ The Worldwide Masonic Brotherhood
  4 ♦ The Official History of Adolf Hitler
  5 ♦ The Dictator, Adolf Hitler
  6 ♦ “We Are Going to Lick that Fellow Hitler”

1
12
22
31
40
48

Part 2 ◊ Prewar Maneuvers.........................................................55

  7 ♦ Birobidjan, a Jewish Sanctuary
  8 ♦ The Ha’avara Agreement
  9 ♦ FDR, a Red in the White House
10 ♦ The Genesis of Factory Farming
11 ♦ Reporting the “News” from Europe

55
63
73
87
99

Part 3 ◊ World War II In Europe .................................................110

12 ♦ Ukraine: Assault against the Middle Class
13 ♦ Economic Assault against Germany, 1933
14 ♦ Apprehending Dangerous Aliens
15 ♦ Kristallnacht, a False Flag
16 ♦ Dangling the Czechoslovakian Carrot
17 ♦ Winston Churchill, the Warmonger
18 ♦ Immigration, Not Extermination
19 ♦ Stage-Managing Perceptions to Create Victimization
20 ♦ The Deceptions behind the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact
21 ♦ Establishing Guilt: The Gleiwitz Incident
22 ♦ The Resumption of World Revolution
23 ♦ The Creation of Poland
24 ♦ The Germans Shoot Back
25 ♦ The Peace Mission of Rudolf Hess
26 ♦ The Duke of Kent, Royal Peacemaker
27 ♦ Churchill and Roosevelt, Longtime Cohorts
28 ♦ Lend-Lease: Warfare Welfare
29 ♦ Operation Barbarossa
30 ♦ Stalin’s Forced Labor Camps
31 ♦ Soviet Scorched-Earth Warfare: Facts and Consequences
32 ♦ Germany’s Elite Traitors
33 ♦ Marketing Mass Murder
34 ♦ Jewish Claims of Genocide
35 ♦ Manipulating the Numbers for Maximum Exploitation
36 ♦ Bomber Command: Victory through Air Power
37 ♦ Warfare by Firestorm, Germany
38 ♦ Famine and Genocide

110
124
138
148
160
174
182
190
197
209
216
229
239
256
270
281
287
298
311
319
327
336
343
352
358
366
378

Part 4 ◊ Post-World War II...........................................................384

39 ♦ Women: Prize Plunder for the Allies
40 ♦ The Holocaust: Central to the New World Order
41 ♦ The Morgenthau Extermination Plan
42 ♦ Publicizing the German Camps
43 ♦ Eisenhower, Baruch’s Man in Europe
44 ♦ General Patton, a Credible Witness
45 ♦ Raphael Lemkin and the Etymology of “Genocide”
46 ♦ Preparing for Nuremberg
47 ♦ Nuremberg, the Victors’ Vengeance
48 ♦ Obedience, a Psychological Mechanism
49 ♦ Slave Laborers Working for the Allies
50 ♦ The London Cage and the Germans
51 ♦ Torturing the Germans for Revenge
52 ♦ One Man Fighting, Two Men Looting, Three Men Painting Rainbows
53 ♦ The Allies’ Ethnic Cleansing in Europe

384
393
406
418
433
442
449
458
467
481
487
492
496
502
511

About the Author

Deanna Spingola is a student of accurate history as opposed to the mandated government-approved history for general consumption. Rather than media sound bites and popular movie portrayals, she researches historical documents, scholarly works, and current circumstances to draw conclusions about the significant historical events that impact mankind. She currently lives in Illinois.[LINK]

Deanna Spingola (born February 17, 1944) is an American author, historian and radio host, prominent in the alternative media. Spingola has released three books specialising in the ruling elites of Western society, particularly during the 20th century and the seizure of world power by Zionists. Spingola hosts a regular radio show on BlogTalkRadio (presently aired on a weekly basis) called Spingola & Friends, she previously hosted Spingola Speaks on the Republic Broadcasting Network from 2012-2014, and The Spingola Zone on the American Free Press Network from 2013-2014. Her website also features a chatroom, a collection of articles she has authored since 2005, and even a guide to genealogy.[LINK]

Deanna Spingola

Deanna's Research Background

First, before anyone makes the faulty assumption that I am targeting and criticizing the efforts of others who have "investigated" Sandy Hook or any other event, I wish to share a bit of my background so that one may understand why I look at videos and other data with a very critical eye. I believe that I have experience and a skill set that compels me to think critically and evaluate what others have claimed or concluded about such events. I am not an "expert" and I would never claim to be, although others have referred to me as such, but I do have some proficiency in a few unrelated fields, some of which require critical thinking and arriving at accurate conclusions. Other activities that I have engaged in require precision and patience. As a geeky teenager, I developed a lifelong interest in family history research or genealogy. I am incredibly detail-oriented which lends itself well to that activity as well as other endeavors that I have pursued. People who engage in genealogical research, to be successful, must learn how to read official records which includes vital records (birth, death, marriage and divorce records), court, probate, estate, tax, voter's registrations, church, census, land, passenger lists and educational and group affiliation records. These are all primary sources, records that a researcher should access first because such records were created at the time of or very close to the time of the event. Secondary sources would include books, databases, newspapers, indexes (such as census index) and data that individuals, often paid employees, have put together, frequently without any verifiable sources. These sources regularly contain simple human errors; we all make them. Genealogical researchers also have to gain an understanding of which jurisdiction has custody of the specific record. For instance, counties, as soon as they were created, devised and had jurisdiction of marriage licenses. Later, some states assumed control of marriage records. Jurisdiction also depends on the state. New England states initially created records on a town rather than a county basis. One would not visit a state library to find vital records and most certainly should not expect to freely find recent vital records on the Internet due to privacy laws.

Essentially, there are two kinds of sources 1) primary or original and 2) secondary or compiled. Primary sources are records that were created at the time of the event or shortly thereafter by someone who has personal knowledge of the event. This might be a birth or death certificate. However, even if a death certificate contains the date of birth; it is not the primary source for that birth. Even if the date is correct, it is not the primary source. The primary source is the birth certificate. A marriage record is the primary source for a marriage. Family historians and other researchers should always use primary sources, when available, when they compile a written account of a family or event. If a researcher uses an image or photo, he/she needs to state the source and date of the image. If it is part of a set of images, he/she needs to provide the number, relative to the other images.

Secondary sources are typically compiled sources that are sometimes based on memory, speculation or circumstantial evidence. Every researcher should cite their sources so that others might verify them by viewing the same information. Without verifiable sources, people may regard the information as hearsay or merely an opinion, which, like a smile, everyone possesses. Currently, one of the biggest collections of secondary sources include compiled data on Internet, such a YouTube videos, some of which are very professional and created and presented by unknown entities, people who use pseudonyms, and by others who may identify themselves.

If one just compiles and presents a lot of "information" without citing sources or viewing any official records, then that person certainly cannot completely interpret an event. Naturally, there are many "official" records that are nothing but stacked commissions such as the Roberts Commission regarding Pearl Harbor, the Warren Commission and the 9/11 Commission wherein the federal government chose certain people on whom they could count on to arrive at predetermined conclusions determined by the consensus of the comprised members. Using the basic criteria, a commission constitutes a compiled source: hearsay, opinion, or deliberately subjective information designed to influence public perceptions. Other compiled sources include but are not limited to census records, databases, family histories, probate records, land records, pension files, etc. A census record is only the primary source for the census, not for a birth. In addition to college, in order to gain further specific proficiency, I took numerous classes and was very close to obtaining a degree in the field of family history. Family obligations prevented me from finishing the final two courses which had to be accomplished onsight, several states away. For ten years, from 2000 to 2010, I was the director of a genealogical research center which had forty volunteers. I took a class at the local college in MS Access in order to create an integrated database of the records of that repository. During that 10-year period I taught numerous classes in beginning and advanced research as well as specialized areas such as probate or census records at the center and at various conferences where I was invited to speak. One of the key principles that I learned and taught was CITE YOUR SOURCES!!!! Otherwise, your work is just rumor or hearsay. I started conducting family history research in my teens. For decades, I visited various courthouses, repositories such as state libraries and state historical societies around the country.

I have spent hundreds of hours in the National Archives branch in Chicago and other repositories looking at rolls of microfilmed records. In as much as I have some Quakers in my background, I attended one of the annual Quaker conventions at Quaker Hill in Richmond, Indiana. While there, I researched some of the Quaker records at Earlham College. Italian officials standardized the records in 1809 in a more easily-read format. Prior to that baptismal, marriage and other records were in "long form," obviously in Italian. Therefore, I attended an Italian language class two nights a week at a local college for a year so that I could read the microfilmed vital records from a particular area of Italy in which some of my husband’s ancestors had resided.

I had sewn most of my clothes from the age of twelve and knew a lot about fabric. As a young wife, and because of a limited budget, I took a tailoring class and learned how to make men's suits. I made several custom-tailored suits for my husband and of course sewed for my children and myself. I taught myself cake decorating from a book in order to make interesting birthday cakes and later gingerbread houses for the family. In the early 80s, under my then-married name, I made porcelain German and French dolls, for which I designed heirloom clothes using antique laces. I was featured twice in Dollcrafter Magazine, once on the July-August 1987 front cover and in the March-April 1988 issue in an article about Machine French Hand Sewing. My background with fabric, sewing and design helped me get a job as a representative in the textile industry. From 1988 to 1994, I was a sales person/consultant and represented from five to seven companies. During that time, I created about 30-40 heirloom-style garments to promote the lace company that I represented. I created a replica of an 1890s wedding dress that I wore in several style shows and it appeared in a magazine. When I was on the road, traveling in the five-state area that I covered, I took my sewing machine with me so that I would have something to occupy my time in the evening. I took up quilting, then devised a new method of producing a particular style of quilt. I wrote two books, the first of which, because of the anticipation in the quilt world for this new method, sold out the first run in nine days. I designed thirty mathematically-intricate quilt patterns for each book. I then designed a quilt pattern line. I designed some patterns that I never marketed because of their difficulty but instead just made them for myself. I am very precise, detail-oriented and tend to be a perfectionist. I have an A-type personality. In quilting, all of the fabric intersections should match and the quilting, some of which is 1/4 inch apart in this example gives motion and texture to the piece. In my porcelain work, the eyelashes and brows on a doll had to look like those on an antique. I studied old images and practiced until I could duplicate the look. The reason I have shared this history and some of my experiences is to give some understanding regarding my attitude of what can only be considered shoddy speculative information that many people have introduced as factual "research."

With regard to Sandy Hook, much of what is on the Internet was created before the official investigation concluded and before officials presented a report. As I mentioned, I am obsessively detail-oriented as my activities might demonstrate. I have a lengthy history in actual on-site records research. I have filing cabinets full of documents and certificates that verify, not only my family history, but other subjects. In research, if one continues to work on a specific research problem, there is a natural progression if evidence exists. Now, if warfare has destroyed an area, then many records are lost. If one continues the research, going from question to question, verifying each and every clue, finding supportive evidence, not just circumstantial evidence, he/she may establish a fact. Research, if done properly, is NOT static. It is also not based on suspicions, speculation, suppositions, circumstantial evidence and obvious fabrications. Because anyone may post their opinions on the Internet, people may post and promote nonsensical theories that many ignorant and/or gullible people accept because they lack research skills themselves. People with integrity who are sincerely seeking answers readily accept evidence that addresses their issues, even if it contradicts their previously-held views. However, change agents whose objective is to impose their key talking points upon a gullible, suspicious population never change their positions. They ask questions, not because they want information but to generate a lack of confidence in public officials who admittedly often deserve our distrust. If people ask public officials for specific information that those officials have already provided in the formal reports, then there is no need for further queries, IF answers are the real objective. One might accusatorily suggest that the official reports associated with Sandy Hook are devised and deceptive. Then why ask for more information from the very people who ordered those reports to begin with if one fails to believe what is in the original reports? If the inquirer is really seeking information, the reports are quite adequate and more than satisfactory.

That leaves another possibility! Are some of the purported researchers actually cognitive infiltrators contributing to a virtual feeding frenzy known as the Sandy Hook hoax? Cass Sunstein, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, in office from September 10, 2009 to August 21, 2012, suggested that the government should attempt to discredit the "truth movement," with preposterous propaganda disguised as legitimate information presented by seemingly credible people, only to be shown later for what they actually are. Then those who may have believed the fabrications would lose all confidence and faith in the so-called movement. They may then move on to believe in what the government wants them to believe, such as the Israelis did not attack the USS Liberty, and that the US government and Israel did not collaborate, along with some well-connected corporations using highly-developed weaponry, did not orchestrate 9/11 and other events. These provocateurs seem to be drumming up dissent, division, and distrust within the so-called “truth” movement. Repetition of those seemingly reasonable questions on various radio shows lends an air of credibility to them. Thus, change agents who never actually change their static positions, find it essential to have others embrace and redistribute those easily-remembered propaganda phrases. The already-answered questions, really talking points, remain the same, retaining the same basic implication that the officials have lied to the population and that astute truth-seekers need to courageously demand answers at all costs as if, officials had not previously supplied all of the answers.

from: https://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Articles/index.php?n=57&row=1

Economic Woes, a Consequence of Free Trade

Free TradeDeanna Spingola | 2010-10-07 - One cannot claim to cherish both sovereignty and accept free trade, through "multinational trade organizations and global financial conglomerates." Marx, a mouthpiece minion for the elite, advocated both the income tax and free trade. He said of free trade, "it breaks up old nationalities" and eliminates the "bourgeoisie" (small businessmen). Free trade functions to equalize the masses while elevating the elite and their acquiescent political devotees.

By Way of Deception, We Shall do War

By Way of DeceptionDeanna Spingola | 2010-09-19 - Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) said, "The establishment of a central bank is 90% of communizing a nation." Worldwide control obviously requires extraordinary organization, superior weaponry and high technology (like HAARP), political power and monopoly control of all the resources. On February 17, 1950, James P. Warburg declared to the U.S. Senate, "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." In Russia and China and other countries, the elite used thugs for their violent conquest of existing leaders.

Cannon Fodder for the New World Order

Cannon FodderDeanna Spingola | 2010-08-25 - Given the manner in which individual governments exploit soldiers to enrich the bankers, those troops are evidently expendable. Their bloodied bodies create massive profits for the international bankers, the original advocates of globalism, acquired through warfare, usually followed by sanctions, reparations and finally obedience to an international entity.

The USS Liberty, a Flubbed-up False Flag

USS LibertyDeanna Spingola | 2010-06-06 - By 1948, under David Ben Gurions direction, the Israeli government developed the Israeli Terrorist Cell, Unit 131. In the mid 1950s, the U.S. was friends with Gamal Abdel Nasser and Egypt. Ben Gurion, an avid Zionist and the Israel's first Prime Minister, envisioned an Egyptian terrorist attack against the U.S. in order to destroy that alliance. However, that wasn't a probability, given the relationship between the two countries. So the Israeli government developed a pattern of using young Israelis who disguised themselves as terrorists of whichever country they were attempting to implicate. This concept would be applied during Operation Cyanide, involving the USS Liberty, in an attempt to initiate World War III.

False Flag Operations: The Crisis Route to the New World Order

False FlagDeanna Spingola | 2010-05-10 - David Rockefeller said, "All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." Rahm Emanuel said, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." In the Project for a New American Century document Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century we find the following: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

Barack Obama, Former CIA Agent

ObamaDeanna Spingola | 2010-03-14 - I recently had the pleasure of talking with Dr. James David Manning who has been ministering to the people of Harlem since 1981. He is now the Senior Pastor at ATLAH which stands for All the Land Anointed Holy, Mannings inspired name for Harlem as of September 14, 1991.

Dr. Manning heads the Columbia Obama Treason Trial which is scheduled for May 14-19, 2010 at the ATLAH building at 38 West 123rd Street in ATLAH, New York, 10027.

The Bush Family's Project Hammer

PNAC, Vulcans, Russia, MENATEP, YukosDeanna Spingola | 2010-02-09 - In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union. Those resources would subsequently be turned over to international bankers and corporations. On November 1, 2001, the second operative in the Bush regime, President George W. Bush, issued Executive Order 13233 on the basis of "national security" and concealed the records of past presidents, especially his father's spurious activities during 1990 and 1991. Consequently, those records are no longer accessible to the public. The Russian coup plot was discussed in June 1991 when Yeltsin visited with Bush in conjunction with his visit to the United States. On that same visit, Yeltsin met discreetly with Gerald Corrigan, the chairman of the New York Federal Reserve.

Depopulation by Government Edict

Stop EugenicsDeanna Spingola | 2010-01-31 - In 1922, Margaret Sanger wrote The Pivot of Civilization with an introduction by eugenicist H. G. Wells. The Rockefeller Foundation “enthusiastically supported the concept of ‘eugenics,’ which encourages the reproductive efforts of those deemed to have ‘good’ genes, while discouraging or stopping procreation by undesirables. But Rockefeller and others were anxious to go even further to mold America’s breeding patterns along evolutionary lines.” John D. Rockefeller Jr., per the advice of Raymond B. Fosdick, provided financial backing for Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood movement. Sanger, a feminist and birth control activist established the first family planning clinics in New York City. Several U.S. foundations financed eugenic research, including the Carnegie Institution, which funded Davenport’s eugenic studies at Cold Spring Harbor, and the Rockefeller Foundation, which gave grants in the 1930s for eugenic research at the Galton Laboratory at University College in London and to the Cornell Medical School in New York.

Seizing Power and Property

Rumsfeld SaddamDeanna Spingola | 2009-05-31 - Individuals cannot transfer rights or powers they do not inherently possess to an artificial government entity. One cannot bestow a right or privilege that one does not possess - those powers that each and every person possessed prior to the establishment of said government. Individuals may not legally plunder the property or resources of others, kill people, impose moral sanctions, or a plethora of other regulations, public and private extortions that governments regularly engage in.

Bailouts, Stimulus Packages or Redistribution of Assets? Part Two of Two

Eagle sculptor for Houston FedDeanna Spingola | 2009-02-24 - Unconstrained, the bankers have financed all of the profit-producing, declared and undeclared wars.

Bailouts, Stimulus Packages or Redistribution of Assets? Part One of Two

Roosevelt in masonic regaliaDeanna Spingola | 2009-02-20 - To establish a world government, it is necessary to incrementally eradicate the constitution, bring the U.S. to her knees economically, and shackle the taxpayers to perpetual debt through bailouts and stimulus packages funded by printing billions of dollars of interest and debt-bearing Federal Reserve Notes to drastically devalue the currency in circulation thus impoverishing the taxpayers. The only benefactors are the extant banks, certain corporations and the individuals who concocted the financial disaster.

The Power Elite Playbook, Controlled Conflict and Staged Incompetence Part 20

Stimson, Truan, A-BombDeanna Spingola | 2008-12-29 - The war conspirators included a Standard Oil attorney, Henry L. Stimson (Skull & Bones), who was a Thomas Lamont ally, and partner with Elihu Root in a law firm on Wall Street, the nucleus of the powerful American Establishment. Following Washington's proverbial revolving door collusion strategy between corporate oligarchies and government, Stimson held the following strategic positions: civilian Secretary of War under fellow Skull and Bonesman Taft (1908-1912), Governor General of the Philippines (1926-1928), Secretary of State under Hoover (1929-1933) and civilian Secretary of War under Roosevelt and Truman (1940- 1946), where he managed the drafting and training of 12 million soldiers and airmen, and directed the purchase of 30 percent of the nations industrial output to the battlefield. He was responsible for the internment and subsequent property seizure of thousands of Japanese-American citizens.

The Power Elite Playbook, Establishing Precedents Part 19

Presentation of the Filipino FlagDeanna Spingola | 2008-12-14 - The exploitation of the Philippine Islands' vast mineral reserves, so strongly encouraged by President McKinley, gave one particular American Expeditionary soldier, First Lieutenant John William Haussermann (1867-1965, discharged September 1, 1899), an Ohio-born attorney from Leavenworth, Kansas, a (literally) golden opportunity. Since Philippine law didn't recognize the American entity known as a "corporation," the U.S. Congress passed a law on July 1, 1902 which enabled Haussermann, then city attorney for Manila, to organize a corporation on June 1903, which became known as the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company by 1906.3 In 1927, Benguet bought out its competitor, Balatoc Mining, giving it 80% of the Philippine gold industry. Philippine gold made Haussermann "the Gold King" and his associates a massive fortune which would later be selectively shared with influential political puppets like General Douglas MacArthur, who comfortably identified with the Philippine oligarchy.

The Power Elite Playbook, Corporate Generals Part 18

'Kill all over ten'Deanna Spingola | 2008-12-03 - Coincidentally or not, at about the same time that the international bankers were promoting and funding Japan's war-hawk behavior under Emperor Meiji (Hirohito's grandfather) against Korea, China and Manchuria, banker-backed U.S. imperialists were looking for ways to seize productive land and control in Cuba (achieved by the Platt Amendment on March 2, 1901), banish the Spanish and expand into the resource-rich Philippines.

The Power Elite Playbook, Fascism and False Flags = War Part 17

Marco Polo BridgeDeanna Spingola | 2008-11-24 - On July 7, 1937 there was another false flag attack at the Marco Polo Bridge, outside of Peking. This incident, similar to the Mukden Incident, escalated into a Japanese invasion of China which allegedly would be over in three months.

The Power Elite Playbook, Japan, Land of Western Industrialization Part 16

Morgan; Lamont; MatsumotoDeanna Spingola | 2008-11-17 - In Japan - "For a thousand years, it was the policy of emperors and shoguns to keep the people ignorant, and to keep taxes high enough so families had to struggle to survive, because this kept them fully occupied and harmless."

J. P. Morgan was involved in Japan during the Meiji Restoration (1867-1912) which replaced the ruling Tokugawa Shogunate with the restored imperial family. This trade-off of power was merely a cosmetic change.

The Power Elite Playbook, China: Shanghaied by Communism Part 15

Sun Yat-senDeanna Spingola | 2008-11-04 - Who and what motivated Japan's brutal activities against its neighbors as described in part 14? Britain detrimentally meddled in Asia in the 19th century and America meddled in Asia in the 20th century - who was behind their actions?

The Power Elite Playbook, Burn All, Steal All, Kill All!

SchiffsDeanna Spingola | 2008-09-29 - The Power Elite prototype, in most nations, reveals their consistent goal of depopulating the earth (to 500 million) and seizing all resources. "Those nations who ignore history are doomed to repeat its tragedies." Or, those U.S. citizens who ignore readily-available history are doomed to suffer the consequences of their deception and ignorance.

Booz, Allen & Hamilton: the Army's Accomplice in Southeast Colorado

Booz, Allen & HamiltonDeanna Spingola | 2008-07-11 - Booz, Allen & Hamilton (hereafter Booz Allen), a privately held corporation owned by about 300 senior executives, is the Army's accomplice in their attempted private property seizure in southeast Colorado. Their expertise, they declare, is strategy and public sector mission effectiveness.

Booz Allen contracted with the Army for $500,000 to maneuver the ranchers out of their property rights. Skillful facilitators (provocateurs), despite their friendly demeanor, very likely use an advanced version of the deceptive Delphi Method, mind-games developed by the U.S. Air Force's RAND Project, financed by the Ford Foundation. Project RAND became the "premier think tank" and "purveyor of American imperialism" and facilitated the Cold War façade. Their activities contributed to the exponential growth of the military-industrial complex. RAND encouraged numerous U.S.-backed military dictatorships in third world countries.

Agenda-Driven Response: HAARP and the Army's Land-Grab in Colorado

Weird WeatherDeanna Spingola | 2008-06-22 - Unfortunately, despite the government's responsibility to protect citizen's rights, it is blatantly obvious that the government is following an alternative, deliberately destructive agenda including: rural cleansing of the resource-producing population, economic destabilization, runaway inflation, unrestrained immigration, illegal surveillance, the NAU, deteriorating infrastructure, ethnic disparity, de-population through war, disease, toxicity, and chemtrails.

Politicians: Corporate Courtesans

Corporate CourtesansDeanna Spingola | 2008-06-04 - George W. Bush has done to America what he did to Texas! Bush is another politician on a serial list of corporate courtesans. Clinton preceded him. Who will follow him?

U.S. Military Targets Southeast Colorado Part 3

Military Targets Southeast ColoradoDeanna Spingola | 2008-05-28 - Private property rights, via numerous tactics, have been abused, altered and are in the process of being abolished (the first plank of the Communist Manifesto). The U.S. Constitution, a protective document, has been surreptitiously supplanted by the U.N. Charter, the vehicle to global governance - the real objective of the dismantling of the middle-class through property, job and lifestyle seizure.

U.S. Military Targets Southeast Colorado Part 2

Military TargetsDeanna Spingola | 2008-05-12 - Foundations have no voters, no clientele, and no investors. They enable the elite to reshape civilization using billions of tax-exempt dollars. Congressman Cox's investigation, starting in 1952, failed as most of the witnesses were "officers and trustees of large foundations" and their associates. Cox unexpectedly fell "gravely ill during the investigation and died before a report could be filed." The Reece Committee, facing obstacle after obstacle, resumed the investigation with Norman Dodd as research director. Almost immediately, instructions from a complicit "White House" to "kill the committee" ended all inquiries.

U.S. Military Targets Southeast Colorado Part 1 of 3

Pinon CanyonDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-24 - Property seizures in other countries are considered totalitarian. When they occur at the hands of the corporate-controlled U.S. government they are apparently condoned and even facilitated by the courts whose job it is to reign in this kind of abuse. The monopoly media, including "conservative" talk radio, is an information filtering system masquerading as "news." They habitually conceal government land grabs and other privatization schemes like the current controversy in southeastern Colorado.

The Power Elite Playbook, Oil War One, 1914-1918 Part 13

Oil WarDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-21 - Like today, propaganda was rampant! The Times of London declared that "four-fifths" of the Lusitania's passengers were U.S. citizens instead of the actual proportion. That fabrication was calculated to ignite American outrage. Additionally, the British produced and circulated a medal purportedly created by the Germans which they claimed had been presented to the submarine crew for their actions. A French newspaper published a photo taken much earlier, under different circumstances, of German crowds supposedly "rejoicing" over the news about the sunken Lusitania.

The Power Elite Playbook, Beating the Oil War Drums Part 12

Oil War DrumsDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-17 - During the first few years, Britain "extracted millions of barrels of oil in Iran," treated thousands of indigenous workers like slaves, "established a network of filling stations throughout the United Kingdom and sold oil to countries across Europe and as far away as Australia." Britain, experts at imperial exploitation, all but drained the life's blood out of that desert land. The company has been known by various names: Anglo-Iranian, British Petroleum, or just BP (merged with Standard Oil)

The Power Elite Playbook, Recruiting Willing Puppets Part 11

Willing PuppetsDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-14 - An examination of unrevised history, through elective reading, provides ample evidence of the long-term diabolical deeds of America's ruling class. Alternative information exists despite their dedicated efforts to control information through compulsory education and the "free" press.

The Power Elite Playbook, Government by Gunpoint Part 10

Government by GunpointDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-08 - America's long-term foreign policy, including passive and/or aggressive regime change, is driven by corporate greed. ...Though foreign interventions became even more frequent after the creation of the CIA, they began over a century ago.

Listen Up, Eye Rollers! - Part 2 of 2

Listen UpDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-04 - Highly profitable corporate broadcasters, through government complicity, and with the protection of the court, have seized the public airways and erroneously, but conveniently, shield themselves with the First Amendment. Well-compensated, often arrogant and belligerent, persuasive "pundits," without impunity, feign sincerity, propagate the party line and increase profits for their corporate employers. Contrary to the myth, they are not government watchdogs.

The Power Elite Playbook, Viet Nam - Plundered Part 9

PlunderedDeanna Spingola | 2008-04-02 - [...] the U.S. wanted to build a military base at strategic Cam Ranh Bay, great for aerial surveillance of South Vietnam's coastal waters. That did it - Diem and his brother Nhu were assassinated on November 1, 1963 on the instructions of W. Averell Harriman. The airfield at Cam Ranh Bay was opened on November 1, 1965.

Listen Up, Eye Rollers! Part 1 of 2

Eye RollersDeanna Spingola | 2007-12-20 - People who rely on broadcast media and/or government education to formulate their perceptions often roll their eyes in exasperation and conspiracy-nut-contempt when exposed to reliable information that challenges their beliefs. For the majority, easy prey for predatory propagandists and history revisionists, the possibility that they have been blatantly deceived by their own government is unthinkable, despite the monstrous evidence of pandemic corruption. Denial is the proverbial mental comfort zone; it is an easy refuge. It requires nothing! Schopenhauer said: "All truth goes through three stages, first it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally it is accepted as self-evident."

The Power Elite Playbook, Viet Nam - Democratized and Ready to Plunder Part 8

Elite Playbook, Viet NamDeanna Spingola | 2007-12-12 - It only took three million slaughtered Vietnamese, almost 58,000 Americans, Agent Orange, napalm, the destruction of Viet Nam's infrastructure, billions of American tax dollars, about 30 years of American intervention, and almost 20 years of economic sanctions. Viet Nam is now democratized and safe for corporate plunder.

The Power Elite Playbook, Killing the Competitors Part 7

Killing the CompetitorsDeanna Spingola | 2007-11-26 - The Power Elite look for certain unscrupulous characteristics in their potential political pawns: opportunistic, dishonorable, manipulative, ruthless, conscienceless and indifferent to the consequences of their actions; they must be willing to totally subvert established laws that define individual freedoms and be prepared to turn their countries into tyrannical police states using newly-created Gestapo-style enforcement agencies. These candidates must also be hypocritical enough to conceal these traits when necessary. Effective speech writers provide counterfeit, charisma-deficient "deciders" a modicum of credibility. "The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force." (Adolf Hitler) Nearby Power Elite handlers make the real decisions.

The Power Elite Playbook, Population Reduction Through Genocide Part 6

Reduction Through GenocideDeanna Spingola | 2007-11-18 - Biological and chemical weapons were banned on June 17, 1925 at the Geneva Convention and entered into force on February 8, 1928. However, under Operation Ranch Hand, from 1961 to 1971, the U.S., in a historically unprecedented level of chemical warfare, abhorrent when utilized by others, began a full-scale "defoliation" project in Viet Nam. Defoliation, simply stated, is chemical genocide.

The Power Elite Playbook, Bankers & Their Bombers Part 5

Power Elite PlaybookDeanna Spingola | 2007-11-12 - Especially from the inception of the Council on Foreign Relations and its multitude of minions and spin-off organizations, personal freedoms have been under world-wide attack. Instigating tyrannical control in the Far East began in 1925 with the establishment, in twelve countries, of the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR), financed by the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations which were controlled by an alliance of Morgan and Rockefeller interests in Wall Street. Other financing came from Standard Oil, IT&T, International General Electric, National City Bank and Chase National Bank and private individuals with Wall Street connections.

Trickle-down Tyranny in DuPage County

Trickle-down TyrannyDeanna Spingola | 2007-10-21 - There are reasons people support war - our government "leaders" resort to perpetual lying. A regular "department of lying" was established under Woodrow Wilson in April 1917 but abolished by Congress in June 1919. Truman created the Office of War Information. Lying was further perfected under actor Ronald Reagan with the Office of Public Diplomacy to disseminate "white" and "black" lies and "smear" truth-telling journalists.

The Power Elite Playbook, the Anglo-American Chessboard Part 4

Anglo-American ChessboardDeanna Spingola | 2007-10-16 - Some of the most manipulative games in the Power Elite Playbook are orchestrated mass migrations or depopulation of desirable strategic locations for the purpose of confiscation. These terrorist tactics are akin to Chess except people are the pawns.

Diego Garcia, Swept Clean & Sanitized

Diego GarciaDeanna Spingola | 2007-10-16 - The indigenous population of Diego Garcia was considered expendable by the Power Elite who routinely seize prime real estate, either for resources or location - inhabited or not. Dispassionate depopulation and genocidal slaughter are standard procedures.

The Power Elite Playbook, Creating & Controlling Chaos Part 3

Power Elite PlaybookDeanna Spingola | 2007-10-15 - In June 1954, while the Geneva Conference was still in session, the CIA's Saigon Military Mission (SMM) arrived to establish a campaign of undercover military and psychological warfare against the Viet Minh. They had a hefty checkbook and unlimited American taxpayer dollars. Yes, our government commits acts of terrorism with your money!

The Power Elite Playbook, Promoting War Part 1

Power EliteDeanna Spingola | 2007-10-11 - Ever since Lincoln's "Civil War," America has been "transformed from a limited, constitutional government to a highly centralized welfare-warfare state." War is allegedly initiated for "national security" reasons - "newspeak" for resource seizure and/or control by multinational corporations/banks through their financial grip on governments.

The Power Elite Playbook, Viet Nam, a Prototype Part 2

Viet NamDeanna Spingola | 2007-10-11 - From October 1944 to May 1945, Hanoi and the surrounding area suffered a horrific famine that resulted in the starvation deaths of nearly two million people, out of a population of about ten million. There were many reasons for the famine, the first and foremost was war!

© Copyright 2014 Deanna Spingola

Order this bookonline at www.trafford.com
or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Most Trafford titles are also available at major online bookretailers.

© Copyright 2014 Deanna Spingola.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written prior permission of the author.

ISBN: 978-1-4907-3474-3 (sc)
ISBN: 978-1-4907-3475-0 (hc)
ISBN: 978-1-4907-3476-7 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2014908718

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only. Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Trafford rev. 05/23/2014

traffordwww.trafford.com
North America & international
toll-free: 1 888 232 4444 (USA & Canada)
fax: 812 355 4082

 AAA:
 ACNP:
 ADL:
 AGNA:
 AIC:
 AJC:
 AJCm:
 AMG:
 BBC:
 BEF:
 BUF:
 CIO:
 Comintern:
  Agriculture Adjustment Administration
American Commission to Negotiate Peace to investigate Jewish matters in Poland 
Anti-Defamation League
Anglo-German Naval Agreement
American International Corporation
American Jewish Congress
American Jewish Committee
American Military Government
British Broadcasting Corporation
British Expeditionary Force
British Union of Fascists
Congress of Industrial Organizations
Communist International
 DAP:
 DEF:
 DOD:
 DOJ:
 DPR:
 DRVH:
 ECA:
 ESE:
 FEA:
 GPU:
 HMM:
 ICD:
 ICRC:
 IHR:
 IJA
 IMT:
 IRC:
  Domestic Allotment Plan
Disarmed Enemy Forces
Department of Defense
Department of Justice
Defence Policy and Requirements Committee
Days of Remembrance of Victims of the Holocaust 
Economic Cooperation Administration
Economic Staff East
Foreign Economic Administration
State Political Directorate
Holocaust Memorial Museum
Information Control Division
International Committee of the Red Cross
Institute for Historical Review
Institute of Jewish Affairs
International Military Tribunal
Intergovernmental Refugee Committee
 JDC:
 JOINT:
 JTA:
 JWV:
 LICA:
 MI:
 MOI:
 MP:
 NAACP:
 NIRA:
 NRA:
 NS:
 NSDAP:
 NWO:
 OKH:
 OKW:
 OSS:
 OWI:
  American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee
American Joint Distribution Committee
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
Jewish War Veterans
Ligue International Centre l’Antisémitisme
Military Intelligence
British Ministry of Information
Member of Parliament
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 
National Industrial Recovery Act
National Recovery Administration
National Socialist, National Socialism
National Socialist German Workers’ Party
New World Order
Supreme High Command of the German Army
Oberkommando der Wehrmacht
Office of Strategic Services
Office of War Information
 PAC:
 PM:
 PWD:
 PWE:
 RAF:
 SA:
 SCU:
 SD:
 SPD:
 SHAEF:
 UNRRA:
 UPA:
 USAID:
 USDA:
 USHMM:
 WJC:
 WRB:
 WZO:
  Political Action Committee
Prime Minister
Psychological Warfare Division
Political Warfare Executive
Royal Air Force
Sturmabteilung (militia)
Share Croppers Union
German Security Service
Social Democratic Party
Supreme Allied Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force 
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration
United Palestine Appeal
United States Agency for International Development
United States Department of Agriculture
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
World Jewish Congress
War Refugee Board
World Zionist Organization

  PART I: Hitler And The Rebirth Of Germany

Chapter 1 ♦ The Advent of Adolf Hitler
01 Adolf Hitler
Adolf Hitler

On October 14, 1918, in Flanders, the British military, using mustard gas as the First World War drew to a close, assaulted German soldiers in Regiment Sixteen of the Bavarian Reserve Infantry, including Adolf Hitler. He was a message courier who had spent four years dodging bullets in France and Belgium. In addition to the First Battle of Ypres, he took part in the battles of the Somme, the Arras, and Passchendaele. He was decorated twice for bravery, with the Iron Cross, Second Class, in 1914 and with the Iron Cross, First Class, in 1918, a medal rarely awarded to enlisted men.1 After the Kaiser’s abdication, Germany was led by a new coalition government that included Friedrich Ebert; Philipp Scheidemann, a Freemason; and other top members of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). While recovering in a military hospital in Pomerania from the effects of gassing, Hitler learned of the armistice signed on November 11, 1918.

William L. Shirer reports that with more than two million Germans dead, Hitler, burned and temporarily blinded, said, “Did all this happen only so that a gang of wretched criminals could lay hands on the Fatherland?”2 In December 1918, Hitler volunteered for guard duty at a POW camp at Traunstein where Germany held more than a thousand civil and regular prisoners. By the end of January 1919, authorities released them and closed the camp. Then Hitler went to Munich.3

In April and May 1919, Hitler was with List Regiment, part of the Bavarian Reserve Infantry, domiciled on Munich’s outskirts in the Maximillian II Barracks. The communists seized power in Bavaria on April 12. A few of the disgruntled men in his regiment joined them, while others, including Hitler, refused to join Germany’s real enemy.4 The communists sent men to arrest him, but he managed to avoid them.5 In seizing power, the communists did not disturb one Jewish house, perhaps following a pattern, as in Paris in 1871, where they destroyed a huge amount of property, except Rothschild homes, which remained completely intact.6 Because many Jews embraced communism, anti-Semitism became more prevalent in Germany.


1 William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany, (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1960), 29-31

2 Ibid. 29-31

3 Alan Bullock, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 61. Though Bullock writes an anti-Hitler book, he does not claim, as some writers do, that Hitler was complicit with the communists in their overthrow of the government in Munich

4 Charles Bracelen Flood, Hitler, the Path to Power (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1989), 3.

5 Alan Bullock, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1971), 34-35.

6 Dietrich Eckart, Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin: A Dialogue Between Adolf Hitler and Me, trans. by William Pierce (1923), 3

Hitler was a perceptive student of history but had not yet developed his political ideas. His avid reading probably made him more knowledgeable than many university graduates. While living in Vienna, he observed the communist expansion.7 From 1919 to 1921, he borrowed and read books from Krohn’s library at the National Socialist Institute, along with works by German writers and philosophers, many of which he would cite in Mein Kampf. 8 He attended a political instruction course designed for the troops and was then given the job of “inoculating the men” against the propaganda disseminated by socialists, pacifists, and other destructive groups. During this period, he recognized that he had some political ability and interest.9 Hitler obtained a job in the Press and News Bureau of the Army Political Department, where he met Major-General Franz Ritter von Epp and his adjutant, Captain Ernst Röhm. In April 1919, von Epp created a volunteer military group, the Freikorps, which ultimately quashed the Red Republic in Munich and brought down its revolutionary Councils Republic in April/May 1919. Röhm and many other discouraged soldiers joined the German Workers’ Party that Anton Drexler had established on March 7, 1918, for the working class and nationalists.

When German troops recaptured Munich, Hitler began working for the military Commission of Inquiry, an agency that tried those soldiers who had joined the communists. He testified against these men, and firing squads soon began executing the traitors. His superiors considered him an “exemplary soldier” who had proven his readiness to support the government against the Marxists. In early June 1919, Captain Karl Mayr, part of an army intelligence division, recruited Hitler as an undercover agent, a job that required him to attend anti-Bolshevik lectures and later, with the knowledge acquired in those lectures, to act as an “anti-Bolshevik educational speaker,” instructing soldiers in the Munich barracks.10

In those classes, Professor Karl Alexander von Muller, a lecturer, observed Hitler’s rhetorical skills in his animated discussion with other students and told Captain Mayr that he was “a natural-born speaker.” In June 1919, the same month that the Versailles Treaty was imposed, Muller presented his historical ideas and claimed that Germans were a “master race,” as opposed to the Jews. This echoed what Hitler had heard in the Austrian schools that he had attended. Europe, at the time, promoted nationalism over internationalism. Muller’s negative ideas about the Jews offended a fellow student. When it was Hitler’s turn to participate, he passionately defended the professor’s theories, and most of the other students supported him.


7 James Pool and Suzanne Pool, Who Financed Hitler: The Secret Funding of Hitler’s Rise to Power 1919-1933 (New York: The Dial Press, 1978), 6-7

8 Timothy W. Ryback, Hitler’s Private Library: The Books That Shaped His Life (New York: Vintage Books, 2010), 126

9 Alan Bullock, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1971), 34-35

10 Charles Bracelen Flood, Hitler: The Path to Power (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1989), 3

Scheidemann proclaimed the Weimar Republic (1919-33) to replace the imperial form of government. German nationalists referred to Ebert, Matthias Erzberger, and Walther Rathenau as the “November criminals,” and now they were leading the newly formed Weimar Republic. Its first president, Ebert, signed the Weimar constitution into law on August 11, 1919. Captain Mayr instructed Hitler to attend a meeting of Drexler’s German Workers’ Party, which the military feared might be promoting a Marxist revolution. On September 12, he attended his first party meeting in a Munich beer cellar with about twenty-five other people.11 He recognized that this party’s political philosophies—nationalism and anti-Semitism—were compatible with his own but felt that the party was ineffectively organized.

One attendee suggested that Bavaria secede from Germany and become a part of Austria. Hitler denounced the proposal and in doing so favorably impressed Drexler, who gave him a copy of his autobiographical pamphlet and invited him to join the fifty-three-member party, something that Captain Mayr encouraged him to do. Drexler sent Hitler an invitation to attend the party’s next committee meeting. After considering the matter for two days, Hitler accepted Drexler’s invitation to serve on the executive committee. Drexler then appointed Hitler as the party’s propaganda manager. On April 1, 1920, Hitler would leave the army and dedicate his full time and energy to the party.12

At a party meeting, Gottfried Feder presented his monetary views. Hitler later wrote, “For the first time in my life I heard a discussion which dealt with the principles of stock-exchange capital and capital which was used for loan activities… When I heard Gottfried Feder’s first lecture on The Abolition of the Interest-Servitude, I understood immediately that here was a truth of transcendental importance for the future of the German people.

The absolute separation of stock-exchange capital from the economic life of the nation would make it possible to oppose the process of internationalization in German business without at the same time attacking capital as such, for to do this would jeopardize the foundations of our national independence.”13 He perceived how international financiers had enslaved entire populations by controlling a nation’s currency and credit.14 Feder, an economist, studied the relationship of finance and politics particularly during World War I. He developed a growing antagonism to what he called “Jewish finance capitalism” and wealthy bankers. He wrote a “manifesto on breaking the shackles of interest.” He was an early member of the German Workers’ Party and was its economic theoretician. He believed that the state should generate and regulate the money supply, using a national bank. At that time, privately owned banks printed and controlled money and charged usurious rates for the use of their currency. Feder’s views were similar to the stipulations contained in the US Constitution.


11 Alan Bullock, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1971), 34-35

12 Ibid. 34-35

13 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (London, New York: Hurst and Blackett, Ltd., 1939), 132, 134

14 Stephen A. Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money: The Mythology of Money, the Story of Power, (Valatie, New York: American Monetary Institute, 2002). 590-91

The Beer Hall Putsch

On June 11, 1922, the Jewish-owned Viennese newspaper Neue Freie Presse, which employed Theodor Herzl, published an article by Friedrich Meinecke about the roots of the claims of treason behind the armistice. From 1922 to 1923, as the inflated Reichmark was bottoming out due to monetary manipulation, Hitler and his followers encouraged nationalism, a feeling to which a discouraged yet hopeful populace could readily relate. His group, which battled the communists, often in bloody street fighting, had its own militia, the Sturmabteilung (SA), superseded on April 4, 1925, by the Schutzstaffel (SS) under Heinrich Himmler. Hitler’s group countered the strength of the communists throughout Bavaria. Meanwhile, the Bavarian government did little to prevent the communists’ seizure of power.15

Hitler easily assumed political leadership of several patriotic associations in Bavaria, composed of many former soldiers and known collectively as the Kampfbund. He and other Kampfbund leaders believed that they had to seize power in Berlin or their followers would turn to the communists for solutions to economic problems. The Bavarian government opposed Berlin’s resolution to abandon its struggle against the Franco-Belgian occupation of the Rhineland and the Ruhr. On September 26, 1923, Bavarian Prime Minister Eugen von Knilling declared a state of emergency and gave Gustav von Kahr, the state commissioner, authority. On September 27, Hitler announced that he would hold fourteen public meetings. Kahr, with the support of Colonel Hans von Seißer, head of the Bavarian State Police, and General Otto von Lossow, banned Hitler’s meetings. Hitler and General Erich Ludendorff wanted von Kahr’s support, but he, Seißer, and Lossow planned to establish a nationalist regime without Hitler.

With the support of his nationalist group, Hitler contemplated a march like Benito Mussolini’s march on Rome from October 22-29, 1922. In this march on Berlin, he was counting on the military or those working in Berlin’s Weimar government to “do the dirty work” and get rid of the “hated republic” and create an “authoritarian regime.” The Bavarians would benefit from a putsch while retaining an autonomous Bavaria. Kahr, Seißer, and Lossow considered their own assault against Berlin and convened on the night of November 8, 1923, in the Bürgerbräu Keller in Munich to strategize.16 Some people claim that Hitler worked with the Bolsheviks and that he selected this date to commemorate their revolution in Russia. Yet it was Kahr, Seißer, and Lossow who chose the date. It was also the date when the November criminals, now part of the Weimar government, had sold out Germany.


15 Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P., trans. by E. T. S. Dugdale and Frz. Eher Nachf (Munich, Germany, 1932), 4-5

16 Holocaust Encyclopedia, “Beer Hall Putsch (Munich Putsch),”
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007884; verified 05 Jan 2022

Hitler intended to use Munich as a base for a greater offensive against the Weimar government. However, he quickly perceived that Kahr had decided to usurp the movement. Hitler, with about six hundred Sturmabteilung, marched on the beer hall where Kahr was speaking to three thousand people. Hitler’s forces surrounded the hall and directed a machine gun at the doors. Hitler, Hermann Göring, Alfred Rosenberg, Rudolf Hess, Ernst Hanfstaengl, Ulrich Graf, Johann Aigner, Adolf Lenk, Max Amann, Wilhelm Adam, and others entered the building at 8:30 p.m. and marched through the crowd. Hitler fired a pistol shot into the ceiling and announced that his group was going to form a new government in Berlin.

Hitler, Hess, Lenk, and Graf took Kahr, Seißer, and Lossow into another room and pleaded for their support, since their influence could bring in the military and the police. Kahr refused to collaborate. Meanwhile, Göring and others delivered speeches in the main hall in an attempt to keep everyone calm, barring anyone from leaving, though some escaped through the kitchen. Hitler, Hess, and Lenk returned to the auditorium where Hitler delivered a speech while Ernst Pöhner, Friedrich Weber, and Hermann Kriebel guarded Kahr. In his extemporaneous speech, Hitler assured his highly receptive listeners that he did not oppose Kahr and encouraged them to support him, Seißer, and Lossow in a combined battle to save the Fatherland.

He returned to the room where his companions were holding the three men, who had heard what had transpired in the auditorium. Hitler directed Göring and Hess to take Knilling and several other officials of the Bavarian government into custody. Pöhner, Weber, and Kriebel, in Hitler’s absence, tried to persuade Kahr to consider his options, but he remained unaffected. Ludendorff arrived and finally convinced Kahr, Seißer, and Lossow to honor their sense of duty. After Hitler left the hall, Ludendorff, based on their promises, allowed the three men to leave at about 10:30 p.m. Once free, they reneged. When Hitler returned to the hall and realized that the momentum had ceased, he vacillated for several hours about a march on Berlin and failed even to occupy Munich. During that time, Bavarian authorities organized their forces. Units of Kampfbund, a movement with more than fifty thousand members, attempted to seize and to occupy buildings. However, they did not select the right buildings, such as the state offices and the communications centers.

Meanwhile, perplexed military, police, and civilian leaders tried to determine whom to follow. At about 3:00 a.m., officers from the local unit of the Reichswehr observed some of Röhm’s men leaving the hall and called for reinforcements. Hitler ordered the seizure of Munich city council members as hostages. By midmorning on November 9, he recognized that the putsch was not going as planned and that many were ready to abandon it. However, Ludendorff said, “We will march!” Röhm and Hitler had about two thousand men. The general proposed that they go to Munich and take over. He assumed, because of his position during World War I, that no one would obstruct him or fire on him. He also believed that the police and many in the army would join them. However, about a hundred armed policemen halted their march. Both sides fired shots, and within minutes, sixteen NSDAP members and four police officers were dead. The scuffle also injured Hitler and Göring. Hitler’s bodyguard, Ulrich Graf, attempting to shield Hitler, died in the battle.

The nationalist group scattered, but many were arrested, including Ludendorff and Hitler, two days later. Göring, Hanfstaengl, and Hess escaped to Austria. On Wednesday, about three thousand students from Munich University rioted until they learned of Hitler’s arrest on Friday. They referred to Kahr, Seißer, and Lossow as traitors. In 1937, Shirer claimed that Ludendorff “refused to have anything to do with” Hitler following the putsch. Yet the Landsberg prison visitors’ book indicates that he visited Hitler numerous times, as reported in Der Spiegel on June 23, 2006.

The authorities of the Bavarian People’s Court charged Hitler with high treason. The head judge, Georg Neithardt, was impressed by Hitler during the five-week trial. Hitler said that Berlin’s government betrayed Germany by signing the Versailles Treaty. Local newspapers daily reported his words, giving wide exposure to his views, which may have influenced the court. On April 1, 1924, he received the lightest “allowable sentence” of five years. He served eight months and paid a fine of five hundred Reichmarks. In Landsberg prison, Hess transcribed and assisted in the editing of Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf. Professor Karl Ernst Haushofer, Hess’s mentor in college, visited them about eight times. Hitler assured Hess that it would require seven to twelve years for the NSDAP to create a new government for Germany.

Göring, who suffered severe wounds in his leg and his groin, ultimately became morphine dependent. During his incarceration, Hitler concluded that revolution was ineffective in producing lasting change and that to legitimize his approach and win the hearts and minds of the German people, he had to seek political office instead of using force. In April 1924, authorities released Röhm from jail, where he possibly discovered his homosexual proclivities, which Hitler later acknowledged. Hitler appointed him commander of the Sturmabteilung. Preferring to make his own policies, Röhm abandoned Hitler, began gathering allies, spies, and informants, and founded the Frontbann, a new version of the pre-putsch Combat League.

On May 4, 1924, Germany held elections, and despite its leader being incarcerated, the NSDAP, banned by the government and renamed the National Socialist Freedom Movement (NSFB), won 1,918,329 votes and thirty-two seats in the 493-member Reichstag. Two of those seats were held by Ludendorff and Röhm. Under the leadership of the leftist Strasser brothers, Otto and Gregor, the party lost eighteen of those seats in the election on December 7, 1924.17 Hurt by the Strassers’ ideology, the party gained only 907,300 votes.

While at Landsberg, Hitler wrote, “We must not forget that the rulers of the present Russia are low, blood-stained criminals, that here we are concerned with the scum of humanity, which, when favored by circumstances in a tragic hour overran a large state, killed and rooted out millions of its leading intelligentsia in a wild thirst for blood, and which now for almost ten years has exercised the most cruel rule of tyranny of all times.”18 Hitler dedicated Mein Kampf to Dietrich Eckart, who had participated in the uprising and had died of his wounds on December 26. He had been the editor of the anti-Semitic periodical Auf gut Deutsch, published with the assistance of Rosenberg and Feder. In March 1924, using notes found after his death, friends published the pamphlet Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin: A Dialogue between Adolf Hitler and Me, which revealed an extensive Jewish-Bolshevist relationship. Eckart had helped found the NSDAP. He had met Hitler on August 14, 1919, and had introduced him to Rosenberg, who had published a copy of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in the Münchener Beobachter, a newspaper he edited that formerly belonged to the Thule Society.


17 Election to the Reichstag December 7, 1924,
http://www.axishistory.com/whats-new/174-germany-unsorted/elections/4856-election-to-the-reichstag-7-december-1924; verified 05 Jan 2022

18 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 125

On December 20, 1924, Hitler was released and immediately began to strengthen the party, which he reformed in February 27, 1925, after the ban expired in January. He separated the SA from the Frontbann and removed Röhm. They would part ways in the spring of 1925, reuniting in the autumn of 1930, when Hitler wrote to Röhm, inviting him to be the chief of staff of the SA, a job he would assume on January 5, 1931. By April 1931, Röhm would direct Georg Bell to create an SA intelligence service with the intention of menacing politicians within the NSDAP who desired to manipulate his homosexuality for their benefit.

On February 27, 1925, Hitler gave his first speech since his release. In December, officials seized all of the party’s assets, yet it had twenty-seven thousand members. Paul von Hindenburg, running against the KPD’s candidate, Ernst Thälmann, was voted in as Germany’s president on April 26, 1925, and took office on May 12. The Centre Party and the Social Democrats (SD) attempted to keep Hitler quiet for two years. In 1926, the NSDAP published a series of pamphlets to educate Germans on the party’s political and financial policies and to answer questions. On August 31, 1927, Hitler emphatically announced, “Questions of Programme do not affect the Council or Administration; the Programme is fixed, and I shall never suffer changes in the principles of the movement, as laid down in its Programme.” Germans placed their trust in the NSDAP’s ability to fight international bankers and the Dawes Pact, adopted in August 1924, a plan to impoverish Germany. The NSDAP did not want to “barter the liberty of the German nation” through the League of Nations or the Locarno Pact or through lack of courage or by compromise.19

Officials warned Hitler against speaking publicly but rescinded the order in 1927, and he addressed mass audiences and exposed the deceptions behind the Dawes Pact. SD leaders and the Centre Party, enemies of National Socialism, probably benefited financially from their acceptance of the plan. The Marxists also favored the Dawes Pact, which would have insured their domination but would have destroyed Germany. In retaliation for his exposure of them, they vilified Hitler.20 The NSDAP maintained twelve seats in the elections of May 20, 1928, while Hitler concentrated on building the party. Meanwhile, the KPD won fifty-four seats.


19 Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P., trans. by E. T. S. Dugdale and Frz. Eher Nachf (Munich, Germany, 1932), 6-9

20 Ibid. 6-7

In 1929, the NSDAP gained its own press to promote National Socialism, which would penetrate into the “national consciousness.” By the end of 1929, the party had 178,000 members. Hitler continued the fight against the Young Plan, foisted on Germany by bankers, including Hjalmar Schacht. Hindenburg favored the plan, saying that it would revitalize the economy. Hitler described these views as fatal to Germany. The NSDAP continued to reveal these deceptions to the public while its opponents responded with falsehoods and animosity. By the end of 1930, the NSDAP had 389,000 members. On Election Day, September 14, 1930, the NSDAP gained 6,406,379 votes and won 107 seats in the Reichstag. By the end of 1931, it had 806,000 members; a month later, there were 862,000, and in another month, the total was 920,000.21 The most popular party was the SPD, followed by the NSDAP, and then the KPD.

The Party Manifesto of March 6, 1930, addressed the country’s agricultural situation. Before the war, Germany paid for a considerable portion of foreign foodstuffs through industrial exports, trade, and deposits of capital abroad. After the war, Germany paid for imported food with foreign loans, driving the nation deeper into debt “to the international financiers who provided credits.” The only way of altering this situation was for “Germany to produce essential foodstuffs at home.” It was a “question of life and death” for the nation. “An efficient agricultural class was an essential plank” in the NSDAP platform, because the party “considered the welfare of all our people in the generations to come.”22 Further, the NSDAP said that Germans deserved good health and that the nation’s young were the source of its strength.

Hitler felt that current fiscal policies burdened German agriculture and benefited wholesale intermediaries. Farmers also paid excessive fees for electricity and labor, and bank loans left them sinking deeper into poverty to the point where they often had to forfeit their land to the moneylenders. The party wanted to revive agriculture and to improve the conditions of the poor, not with handouts but with opportunities. The NSDAP viewed farmers as the foundation of national identity.23


21 Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P., trans. by E. T. S. Dugdale and Frz. Eher Nachf (Munich, Germany, 1932), 6-9

22 Ibid. 10-11

23 Ibid.

Hitler wanted to relieve the poverty of the farmers and insisted that bankers decrease the interest on loans to prewar levels and that the government use tariffs to protect agriculture. He wanted to regulate imports and to provide free training to farmers to increase productivity. He also wanted to avoid using foreign labor, to exempt agricultural prices from corporate exploitation and intermediaries, to reduce farm expenses, and to give assistance to organizations that provided agricultural supplies. Germany’s farmers were poor because the whole nation was poor. He felt that economic aid did not produce a permanent improvement. He said, “Political slavery is at the root of our people’s poverty, and political methods alone cannot remove that. The old political parties, which were, and are, responsible for the national enslavement, cannot be the leaders on the road to freedom.”24

Hitler opposed the dole system and the policy of providing aid to those who did not work. He believed that as many as three hundred thousand people would readily return to work if the government removed the dole. He thought that current foreign and domestic policies were idiotic and that citizens should sweep away a state that was unable to produce an economic environment that would allow millions of men to work. The NSDAP did not intend to attack religion or the clergy.25

The NSDAP wanted to revive agriculture and to improve the conditions of the poor not with handouts but with opportunities. The party stipulated that German land must serve the German nation as a home and as a means of livelihood; that only Germans should possess land; that land should be regarded as inheritable; that landowners had an obligation to use their property in the national interest, and that German land should not become an object of financial speculation.26


24 Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P., trans. by E. T. S. Dugdale and Frz. Eher Nachf (Munich, Germany, 1932), 12-13

25 Ibid. 17-19

26 Ibid. 10-11

The NSDAP had twenty-five points:

  1. The union of all Germans to form a great Germany on the basis of the right to self-determination enjoyed by nations.
  2. Quality of rights for the German people in dealing with other nations and abolition of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.
  3. Land and territory for the nourishment of the people and for settling Germany’s superfluous population.
  4. Only Germans could be citizens of the nation. No Jew could qualify.
  5. Anyone who was not a citizen could live in Germany, but only as a guest subject to foreign laws.
  6. Only citizens had the right to vote or to accept official appointments. The party opposed the parliament’s corrupt custom of filling posts merely with a view to party considerations and without reference to character or capability.
  7. The state’s first duty was to promote the industry and livelihood of its citizens; officials had the right to exclude foreign nationals if it was not otherwise possible to nourish the entire population of the state.
  8. Officials should prevent all non-German immigration; all non-Germans who had entered Germany after August 2, 1914, should be required to depart.
  9. All citizens of the state should be equal as regards rights and duties.
  10. The first duty of each citizen was to work; the activities of the individual could not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good. Several demands followed from this.
  11. Officials should abolish all unearned incomes.
  12. Officials should regard personal enrichment due to war as a crime against the nation, and all war gains should be ruthlessly confiscated.27
  13. All businesses formed into companies (trusts) should be nationalized.
  14. All profits derived from wholesale trade should be shared.
  15. The state should make extensive provision for old age.
  16. A healthy middle class should be created and maintained, with communalization of wholesale business premises and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders; the state should show extreme consideration to all small purveyors.
  17. Land reform suitable to national requirements, with a law allowing confiscation without compensation of land for communal purposes; abolition of interest on land loans and prevention of all land speculation.
  18. Prosecution of those whose activities were injurious to the common interest; criminals against the nation, usurers, and profiteers should be punished with death, whatever their creed or their race.
  19. The replacement of Roman law, which served the materialistic world order, with a legal system for all Germany.
  20. The possibility of higher education for all citizens; thorough reconstruction of the national education system. Educators should bring the curricula of all educational establishments into line with the requirements of practical life; gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, should be nurtured at the state’s expense.
  21. The raising of the standard of health by protecting mothers and infants, prohibiting child labor, and increasing bodily efficiency by obligatory gymnastics and sports, especially for the physical development of the young.
  22. Abolition of a paid army and formation of a national army.
  23. Legal warfare against conscious political lying and its dissemination in the press; the creation of a German national press.
  1. All editors of newspapers and their assistants, employing the German language, should be German citizens.
  2. Non-German newspapers, even those printed in German, should be required to obtain special permission from the state to appear.
  3. Non-Germans should be prohibited by law from participating financially in or influencing German newspapers, and the penalty for contravention of the law should be suppression of any such newspaper and immediate deportation of the non-Germans concerned in it; the state should stamp out all tendencies in art and literature of a kind likely to disintegrate national life and suppress institutions that militate against these requirements.
  1. Liberty for all religious denominations if they were not a danger to the state and did not militate against the moral feelings of the Germans. The party stands for positive Christianity, but would not bind itself to any particular confession. It would combat the Jewish-materialist spirit within and without the nation and is convinced that Germany could achieve permanent health from within on the principle of the common interest before self.
  2. To realize all of the foregoing, the party demands the creation of a strong central state power. a politically centralized parliament with unquestioned authority over the entire Reich and its organization and formation of chambers for classes and occupations to carry out the general laws promulgated by the Reich in the states of the confederation.28

27 Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P., trans. by E. T. S. Dugdale and Frz. Eher Nachf (Munich, Germany, 1932), 18-20

28 Ibid.

Chapter 2 ♦ Hitler’s Assumption of Power

In May 1932, the NSDAP printed six hundred thousand copies of its twenty-page emergency economic program before the July Reichstag elections. It had three main points.

  1. “Unemployment causes poverty; employment creates prosperity. Just as the individual sinks into poverty when he no longer has a job, so also must a whole people sink into poverty when it does not use its productive strength and tolerates a political-economic system that hinders people’s comrades who are willing and able to work to support themselves.”
  2. “Capital does not create jobs, but rather jobs create capital. The ‘brilliant’ capitalist economists maintain that we cannot work because we lack the means. That is nonsense. The less we work, the less must be our means, and the greater the unproductive waste and destruction of our national resources. The more we work, the greater our capital, and therefore the greater the results of our labor.”
  3. “Unemployment benefits burden the economy, but job creation stimulates the economy. Tolerating unemployment means: With less labor, less is produced, and therefore less can be consumed. The result [is] hunger, poverty, and wage cuts. The fewer who work, the fewer who pay taxes. To get the same tax revenues, therefore, individuals must bear a heavier burden. The result: tax increases. Decreasing purchasing power and increased taxation forces more firms into bankruptcy. The result [is] an increase in unemployment. The unemployed must be supported by the community, which means an increase in public expenditures. The result [is] the collapse of public finance, despite an increase in taxation.

“Contributions to the unemployment fund decrease, while poverty forces more to depend on it. The result [is a] collapse of the unemployment compensation system, despite increases in contributions and cutting of benefits. Private industry collapses under the increased burdens. Small firms become bankrupt. Independent people are ruined. Big capitalist firms, trusts, etc., are rescued by the state, since their collapse would throw hundreds of thousands of people into poverty. Billions go for rescuing banks, hundreds of millions for supporting the big industrial and shipping concerns. All of these sacrifices are useless. Unemployment, poverty, and deficits have to get worse, the general situation ever more hopeless, as long as there is not a complete change. Only a systematic program of job creation can bring that change.”29 The program had the solutions for Germany’s economic woes.


29 Emergency Economic Program of the NSDAP,
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/sofortprogramm.htm#jobs; verified 05 Jan 2022

Heinrich Brüning’s policies caused massive unemployment in both blue-and white-collar industries. Even resorting to Article 48 and implementing emergency legislation did not resolve matters. He failed to acquire parliamentary backing and resigned at the end of May 1932. On July 20, using a presidential decree, Franz von Papen, the new chancellor, ousted Otto Braun’s SPD-led government, and dissolved the Reichstag, bringing the collapse of the Weimar Republic. Chancellor Papen scheduled new elections for July 31. On July 27, Hitler told a crowd in Eberswalde that the NSDAP was never a parliamentary party, unlike other parties. His legal goal, which was constitutional, was to eliminate the thirty-four other parties. The other parties could not claim ignorance; they knew that Hitler intended to create a one-party state. Like the US Constitution, the Weimar Constitution made no provisions for political parties. Article 76 required a two-thirds majority of the Reichstag to eliminate the republic. Hitler refused to participate with other parties in a coalition government. He wanted to end the political status quo and to make the nation independent of foreign money, which would not only destabilize Germany’s economy, but the world’s economic structure.30

General Kurt von Schleicher, friends with President Paul von Hindenburg’s son, Oskar, had suggested Papen for the chancellor’s post. Papen hoped that he could persuade Hitler to accept a subordinate position in the government. On July 31, the NSDAP won 230 seats, with 13,745,000 votes, becoming the most influential party in parliament. Papen had two choices: create a coalition government with the NSDAP or form a minority government and continue to govern under Article 48. Papen considered making a major alteration to the constitution, which would have resulted in the formation of a divisive two-party, left-right regime, with a monarchial figurehead.31 Because Hitler was the head of the most popular party, he had a legal right to be appointed the chancellor.

Sixty percent of voters did not want leadership by the KPD, which held eighty-nine seats, as this might lead to a civil war. Poland might then exploit this domestic situation and attempt to grab more territory. In the national elections of November 6, 1932, Papen attempted to gain a majority in the Reichstag or to win enough seats to form a political alliance and maintain his cabinet. Although the NSDAP lost some votes and wound up with 196 seats, it remained the most influential party. Meanwhile, the recession continued. Papen, disappointed by the elections, resigned, and Kurt von Schleicher became the chancellor on December 3. He intended to incrementally discard Brüning’s policies in hopes of gaining SPD and left-wing trade union support. When that failed, he sought a way to fracture the popular NSDAP. He offered the offices of vice chancellor and prime minister of Prussia to Gregor Strasser, hoping to attract the NSDAP’s leftist faction and to marginalize Hitler’s influence. He wanted the NSDAP in the government, but without Hitler. When Hitler rejected this, Strasser resigned from the NSDAP.32


30 Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, ed., Aspects of the Third Reich (London: Macmillan Publishers, LTD, 1985), 44-45

31 Ibid. 44-45

32 Ibid. 49-51

Hindenburg wanted to end presidential cabinets and the exploitation of Article 48 and emergency decrees. Nineteen governments functioned during the fourteen-year existence of the Weimar Republic. The right and the left disapproved of Schleicher, and Germans consequently embraced the NSDAP. The political and military elite, who pursued a military dictatorship, supported Schleicher, even if this meant staging a putsch. Hindenburg, adamant about observing the constitution, wanted a cabinet supported by a majority in the Reichstag. Meanwhile, the communists increased their influence and power.33

By now there were six million unemployed people and Germany was in economic chaos, the perfect environment for the communists, whose ideology appealed to the desperate masses. It was also an opportune time for the NSDAP to increase its influence. Papen, banker Kurt von Schroeder, Alfred Hugenberg, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Oskar von Hindenburg, and Hitler began negotiating in early January 1933 in an effort to create an operational constitution-based government. Hindenburg wanted to appoint Papen as chancellor again, but was willing to have NSDAP representation. He opposed Hitler’s appointment even though he led the strongest party and justifiably demanded the chancellorship. Papen was willing to accept the vice chancellorship, anticipating that he could dictate policy to Hitler. General von Hammerstein-Equord begged Hindenburg not to appoint Papen, due to the possibility of civil unrest. He also opposed Hitler, as this might result in a National Socialist influence in the army.34

Without the NSDAP and the German National People’s Party (DNVP), Hindenburg could not achieve a majority. Thus he felt compelled to appoint Hitler, who had very modest demands, along with his cabinet, which included ministers Wilhelm Frick and Hermann Göring. Papen would accompany Hitler when he visited Hindenburg. Because Schleicher’s desire for a military putsch was widely known, General Werner von Blomberg, who favored National Socialism, was named the new Reichswehr minister. On January 28, Schleicher and others agreed with army chief General Hammerstein to give Hindenburg an ultimatum not to appoint Hitler. If he refused, Hammerstein would proclaim a state of military emergency. On January 29, he telephoned Hitler to tell him that the Reichswehr opposed his appointment.35

However, a coalition of the NSDAP, Hugenberg’s DNVP, and the Centre Party provided a majority in the Reichstag, and a conservative government, Hindenburg’s objective. On January 29, 1933, without consulting members of the Reichstag as that was not a constitutional requirement, he agreed to appoint Hitler as chancellor. Hitler obtained power legally although some people accused Hindenburg of making concessions to him that he had denied Schleicher. But conceding to Schleicher would not have achieved a majority-supported government, something that a Hitler cabinet would do. People underestimated him, assuming that his many duties would overburden him and that he would take direction from Papen.36 On January 30, Hindenburg appointed Hitler as chancellor, supported by Hugenberg and Papen.37


33 Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, ed., Aspects of the Third Reich (London: Macmillan Publishers, LTD, 1985), 49-51

34 Ibid. 51-54

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid.

The Reichstag Fire Myth

During World War I, Willi Münzenberg, a young left-wing radical, was living in Switzerland where Leon Trotsky discovered him. He soon joined Lenin’s Bolshevik group, whose members were biding their time until they could return to their revolutionary activities in Russia.38 In In 1918, Münzenberg was a propagandist and a founding member of the KPD during the Weimar era. In 1924, he was elected to the Reichstag and at the same time worked closely with Lenin’s Comintern and Cheka. He was in the Reichstag until the KPD was banned in 1933. He created numerous Trotskyite front organizations, which aided in the establishment of the Münzenberg Trust, a huge media conglomerate.

On February 22, 1933, Alfred Cohen, the president of B’nai B’rith, and prominent Jewish leaders held a special meeting in New York to plan how to wage economic warfare against Germany. The American Jewish Congress (AJC) advocated public protests in America and elsewhere.39 The National Socialists acknowledged that the communists were trying to achieve in Germany what they had accomplished in Russia. On February 23, Göring ordered a police raid on their offices to collect evidence of this but authorities found nothing. On February 27, a fire erupted in the Reichstag’s debating chamber and soon the whole building was aflame.40

Marinus van der Lubbe set the fire, which became the impetus for emergency legislation. Officials had not planned the resulting suspension of civil rights, but improvised as the Reichstag burned. The NSDAP and KPD blamed each other, but Fritz Tobias through exhaustive research verified that van der Lubbe was the culprit. No one has refuted his findings. The new government, with Hitler as chancellor, expected the SPD or the KPD to initiate military action. President Hindenburg, not Hitler, issued the Reichstag directive in response to the fire. This emergency legislation was intended to prevent the excesses of 1932.41


38 Michael Newland, “The Life and Influence of Willi Münzenberg,”
http://heretical.com/miscella/munzen.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

39 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 7-8

40 Fritz Tobias, The Reichstag Fire (London: Martin Secker & Warburg Limited, 1964), 3-4

41 Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, ed., Aspects of the Third Reich (London: Macmillan Publishers, LTD, 1985), 55-58

The Reichstag passed the enabling bill by a two-thirds majority. The article expressly gave the Reichstag the power to cancel the emergency decree by a simple majority vote. The SPD did not have enough seats to prevent ratification of the legislation, which gave extra powers to the government. The SPD opposed the act while the government was in the process of outlawing the KPD, an action it would formalize on July 14, 1933. The enabling laws allowed the government the right to temporarily legislate. Such laws were part of Germany’s constitutional history and were used during World War I and during the first coalition government in the Weimar period. Officials passed enabling laws on October 13 and December 8, 1923, in an attempt to halt inflation. From 1930 to 1932, the government operated on 239 emergency or enabling laws. Hitler, as a condition of his chancellorship, wanted to use enabling or emergency decrees. He did not trick anyone, since Article 76 of the Weimar Constitution allowed for changes if two-thirds of the Reichstag approved. More than two-thirds of the Reichstag did.42

The elections took place as scheduled on March 5, 1933. While the NSDAP failed to obtain the majority it had hoped for, it won 288 seats while the SPD won only 120.43 Germans overwhelmingly revealed their acceptance of the economic policies of the NSDAP, which emerged as the largest party. In response, on March 12, AJC leaders again met in New York for three hours to plan a national program of protests, parades, and demonstrations.44 On March 21, Munich Police Chief Heinrich Himmler announced the opening of the Dachau camp for the incarceration of communists, many of whom were Jews, to stop them from executing their conspiracy within Germany, especially with so much encouragement from abroad.45

While the NSDAP was struggling against the Bolsheviks, Münzenberg and his staff manufactured “evidence” claiming that the NSDAP had set the Reichstag fire. In 1933 and in 1934, the Münzenberg Trust would publish two books, The Brown Book of the Reichstag Fire and Hitler Terror and The Second Brown Book of the Reichstag Fire. Historians accepted these books until 1960 when Fritz Tobias uncovered abundant false information in the two works. He revealed that the so-called secret tunnels that NSDAP members supposedly used to leave the Reichstag were actually for water piping.


42 Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, ed., Aspects of the Third Reich (London: Macmillan Publishers, LTD, 1985), 55-58

43 Ibid.

44 Udo Walendy, The Transfer Agreement and the Boycott Fever 1933, Historical Facts No. 26, (Verlag für Volkstum und Zeitgeschichtsforschung, 1987), 10

45 Münchener Neueste Nachrichten, The Munich Latest News, March 21, 1933

In 1919, Albert Norden, a rabbi’s son, had joined the Free Socialist Youth, later called the Young Communist League of Germany, a faction of the KPD. Starting in 1923, he edited several communist publications and was the editor of Rote Fahne (Red Flag) (1931-33). In 1933, he left Germany for France where he wrote for Popular Front publications and contributed several chapters to The Brown Book of the Hitler Terror and the Burning of the Reichstag, written by the World Committee for the Victims of German Fascism and published in August 1933 by Victor Gollancz. It was the primary source of the myth that Hitler seized power by orchestrating the Reichstag fire.

Münzenberg’s books contained purported documentation, persuasive-looking photos, and lists of victims, which served as the model for the falsified IMT documents. Unbiased researchers have since evaluated the books and have discovered that they are fabrications using forged photos and documents. Yet court historians continue to exploit the material in them despite the verifiable findings. In the 1970s, to reaffirm the dubious allegations, a West German communist firm republished the brown books with all of the previous documents, including several papers that look like an NSDAP circular letter of June 7, 1933, complete with a semblance of the NSDAP letterhead.46

In June 1934, Münzenberg visited America where he met with SPD lawyer Kurt Rosenfeld. He also spoke at a rally at Madison Square Garden and at the Bronx Coliseum along with Sinclair Lewis and Malcolm Cowley. Otto Katz, Münzenberg’s assistant, visited America to gain support for pro-Soviet and anti-NSDAP causes as part of the 1935 Comintern Seventh World Congress’s proclamation. In July 1936, Katz journeyed to Hollywood where he formed the Anti-Nazi League for the Defense of American Democracy with Dorothy Parker and other Hollywood personalities who also joined similar groups. Paul Muni, Melvin Douglas, and James Cagney sponsored the Hollywood league. Münzenberg was in Paris conducting anti-NSDAP broadcasts in June 1940 but fled to escape the advancing German forces.


46 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 85-88

NSDAP Funding

The iron, coal, and steel industries readily accepted Hitler’s policies while Germany’s export-oriented businesses, particularly the chemical and electrical industries, did not. Historian Henry Ashby Jr. had access to West and East German archives and to the records of industrial conglomerates and found that industries from late 1930 onward made donations to Hitler while also donating to the Centre Party and other right-wing parties. Hugenberg and his party would have served the interests of big business much better than Hitler, whose greatest financial support came from NSDAP members. Though often unemployed, they still made personal sacrifices for the party. Krupp, part of Germany’s heavy industry, did not support Hitler until he became chancellor.47

According to Joseph Goebbels’s diary, the NSDAP coffers were almost empty by late 1932. Yet, according to Marxist propagandists, the party had plenty of money. By 1923, industrialist Fritz Thyssen, impressed by Hitler, began making large donations to the NSDAP. By 1928, Thyssen’s United Steelworks controlled 75 percent of Germany’s iron ore reserves and employed two hundred thousand people. In November 1932, Thyssen and Hjalmar Schacht urged Hindenburg to appoint Hitler. Thyssen joined the NSDAP in 1933.

Hitler also had financial support from Emil Georg von Stauss, who sat on the board of at least thirty companies and was on the committee of the supervisory board of the Deutsche Bank from 1915 to 1932. On November 1, 1906, he helped found the European Petroleum Union to oppose the dominant Rockefeller interests. Members hoped that the new union would compel Standard Oil to “reduce its price or come to some agreement with the new company.”48 Stauss, like most businessmen, attempted to build political ties to whatever government was in power and was especially close to Göring. He had initially introduced Schacht to Hitler and to Göring.49


47 Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, ed, Aspects of the Third Reich (London: Macmillan Publishers, LTD, 1985), 55-58

48 “German Trust to Oppose Standard Oil,” New York Times, November 11, 1906

49 Harold James, The Nazi Dictatorship and the Deutsche Bank (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 92-94

For an elaboration on Hitler’s funding, read Who Financed Hitler: The Secret Funding of Hitler’s Rise to Power 1919-1933 by James and Suzanne Pool. A myth perpetuated by Sidney Warburg holds that Jewish bankers funded Hitler. Warburg claimed that Hitler received $10 million from Kuhn, Loeb and Company in 1929 and another $15 million in 1931 and $7 million in 1933.50

On August 7, 1933, the New York Times published the text of a radio address by Samuel Untermeyer in which he said that Jewish bankers in New York had lent money to Germany. He claimed that Hitler’s regime was using part of this money in a “reckless, wicked campaign of propaganda to make the world anti-Semitic.” He claimed that the Germans had invaded “Great Britain, the United States and other countries where they have established newspapers, subsidized agents and otherwise are spending untold millions in spreading their infamous creed.” Untermeyer said that the German government should use the money to pay its “honest debts.” Instead, he said, the government was using the funds in an “infamous campaign” with “ever increasing intensity” to “the everlasting disgrace of the Jewish bankers who are helping to finance it.”51

Speaking of an “infamous creed,” Cyrus I. Scofield had access to big money from among others Untermeyer and Lyman Stewart, an American executive and the cofounder of Union Oil. Stewart, a Christian philanthropist and cofounder of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, funded The Fundamentals, a twelve-volume publication that provided the foundation for the fundamentalist Christian movement. Scofield, a member of in the non-Christian Lotus Club of New York, announced his intention to create a new Christian Bible concordance. Untermeyer, a dedicated Zionist, supported his efforts and introduced Scofield to other Zionists and socialists, such as Samuel Gompers, Fiorello La Guardia, Abraham Straus, Bernard Baruch, and Jacob H. Schiff who helped fund Scofield’s research trips to Britain where he met purported Bible scholars. They also assisted in the publication and distribution of his concordance.52


50 San Jose Mercury News, September 25, 1982 as cited in Sidney Warburg, Hitler’s Secret Backers, introduction

51 Text of Samuel Untermeyer’s address broadcast by station WABC on August 6, 1933, New York Times, August 7, 1933, Audio file:
http://archive.org/details/SamuelUntermyerAugust71933; verified 06 Jan 2022

52 Don Nicoloff, “A Little History: Cyrus I. Scofield and the Tribulation,” Idaho Observer, May 2009,
http://proliberty.com/observer/20090507.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

Untermeyer and other Jews believed that, if they promoted an imminent rapture or second coming with Christian churches that Christians would relinquish their moral influence on the culture, education, and politics. Their absence would allow an influx of charismatic Jewish writers, political leaders, and crypto Jews to replace them with the goal of presenting the Zionist idea that those who called themselves Jews would have to “return” to Palestine before the rapture or the second coming could occur. The Scofield Bible changed Christian theology and paved the way for a plethora of Christian Zionist churches that would hail the founding of the Israeli state, facilitated by tales of discrimination, persecution, and a deadly Holocaust.53

In an example of psychological projection, Untermeyer further claimed that the Hitler regime, through a one-day boycott, intended to “exterminate the Jews” by warning Germans to avoid shopping in Jewish shops or otherwise “dealing with them.” He also claimed that officials were imprisoning Jewish shopkeepers and “parading them through the streets by the hundreds under guard of Nazi troops for the sole crime of being Jews.” He said that they were “ejecting them from the learned professions in which many of them had attained eminence” and that the Germans were excluding Jewish children from schools and kicking Jewish men out of labor unions. He said that the Nazis had deprived the Jews of earning a living and were locking them in “vile concentration camps, starving and torturing them, murdering and beating them without cause.” He claimed that the Germans were using every “conceivable form of torture, inhuman beyond conception, until suicide has become [the Jews’] only means of escape and all solely because they are or their remote ancestors were Jews, and all with the avowed object of exterminating them.”54

In 1933, Emery Reves founded the Cooperation Publishing Service, which published anti-Nazi propaganda. British officials sent Reves, Churchill’s literary agent, to New York to strengthen their propaganda operation in North and South America. In 1941, Reves, an advocate of world federalism, wrote I Paid Hitler, attributing the information to Fritz Thyssen. Reves saw Thyssen as “one of the men most responsible for the rise of Hitler and for the seeking of power by the National Socialists in Germany.” In 1940, Thyssen and his family traveled to France where Vichy authorities arrested them, then deported them to Germany where they were incarcerated for the rest of the war. After the war, Thyssen disputed the authenticity of the book. It is similar in nature to Andreas Niebuhr’s Those Who Bought Hitler. Reves wrote The Anatomy of Peace in 1945 to popularize world federalism and international law. The book was endorsed by Albert Einstein and numerous other prominent figures.


53 Don Nicoloff, “A Little History: Cyrus I. Scofield and the Tribulation,” Idaho Observer, May 2009,
http://proliberty.com/observer/20090507.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

54 Text of Samuel Untermeyer’s address broadcast by station WABC on August 6, 1933, New York Times, August 7, 1933, Audio file:
http://archive.org/details/SamuelUntermyerAugust71933; verified 06 Jan 2022

President Hindenburg died on August 2, 1934. By unanimous decision, Hitler merged the offices of chancellor and president, a move legalized by a plebiscite. Hitler renewed the enabling act in 1937, 1939, and 1942. Then, as he had promised for years, he eliminated the other political parties. Members of the SDP and the Centre Party and their deputies in the Reichstag were well aware that Hitler would use the enabling act, due to expire when another government replaced the current one, to make changes. One of the first changes was the dismissal of Hugenberg, who at the World Economic Conference made demands, assumed to be from Hitler, that may have alienated his potential ally, Britain. Hitler was given the power to govern by 82 percent of Reichstag members. Alan Bullock and others would have us believe that he used trickery and deception to end the Weimar Republic, get the enabling bill passed, then institute a reign of terror. Further, there was never any recrimination against those, such as the ninety-four Social Democrats, who voted against the enabling act. Hitler wanted the enabling law to suspend the multi-party state. On May 17, 1933, even the SPD unanimously endorsed Hitler’s foreign policy resolution and, along with the NSDAP, gave him a standing ovation.55

Marquis W. Childs, a journalist and author of Sweden: The Middle Way (1936), reports that, while he was in Europe, he discovered that “a man named Davis, with a grudge against Standard Oil, for allegedly ruining him, conspired to form a giant combine to ship oil to Germany.” Apparently, Standard and Shell tankers had refused to transport oil to Germany. According to Childs, Sir Henri Deterding, of Royal Dutch Shell, was working with Hitler and backed him with “a huge sum of money when the NSDAP was about to fail.” Deterding supposedly supported Hitler because he hoped that Hitler would attack Russia, allowing Royal Dutch Shell to seize the Baku oil fields.56


55 Hannsjoachim Wolfgang Koch, ed., Aspects of the Third Reich (London: Macmillan Publishers, LTD, 1985), 58-61

56 Marquis Childs, “Reporter Tells What He Saw; Marquis Childs Covers Wide Front in Newest Opus,” Write from Washington, October 25, 1942

Chapter 3 ♦ The Worldwide Masonic Brotherhood

Albert Mackey’s Lexicon of Freemasonry states that “the religion of Freemasons is not Christianity.” Author Jüri Lina and other researchers verify that the Freemasons participate in occult demonism-Satanism.57

Rabbi Stephen S. Wise affirmed, “Freemasonry is a Jewish establishment, whose history, grades, official appointments, passwords, and explanations are Jewish from beginning to end.”58 Albert Pike admitted that the Jewish philosophy found in the Kabbalah is the foundation of Freemasonry.59

In 1903, Hjalmar Schacht joined the Dresdner Bank where he was a deputy director from 1908 to 1915. For years, his father lived in the United States where he worked for the Morgan-controlled Equitable Trust Company on Wall Street and then in its Berlin office. Because of this, the younger Schacht spoke fluent English. In 1905, during a business trip to the United States with the bank’s board members, he met J. Pierpont Morgan and President Theodore Roosevelt. In 1908, Schacht became a Freemason when Montagu Norman, his protégé, invited him to join the order. Schacht’s father was also a Freemason.

In October 1914, General Karl von Lumm, a former member of the board of directors of the Reichsbank and then generalkommissar for the bank in Belgium, had assigned Schacht to the staff of the banking commissioner for occupied Belgium to supervise the financing of Germany’s purchases in Belgium. Von Lumm dismissed him in July 1915 when he discovered that Schacht, in payment for that merchandise, had channeled 500 million francs through the Dresdner Bank at a significant discount. In November 1918, along with Walther Rathenau, Schacht would help found the German Democratic Party.60


57 Jüri Lina, Architects of Deception, (Referent Publishing, Stockholm, Sweden, 2004), 134

58 Andrew Carrington Hitchcock, The Synagogue of Satan: Updated, Expanded, and Uncensored, 2012, Kindle Locations 4535-37

59 Ibid. Kindle Locations 1166-67

60 Guido Giacomo Preparata, Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich (London/Ann Arbor, Michigan: Pluto Press, 2005), 160

Dieter Schwarz wrote that “Freemasonry is an ideological form of hostility to National Socialism” and that it “corrupts the principles of all forms of government based on racial and Folkish considerations, enables the Jews to achieve social and political equality, and paves the way for Jewish radicalism through its support for the principles of freedom, equality, and brotherhood, the solidarity of Folks, the League of Nations and pacifism, and the rejection of all racial differences. With the help of its international connections and entanglements, Freemasonry interferes in the foreign policy relationships of all Folks, and pursues, through governmental leaders, secret foreign and world policies which escape the control of those in government.”61

During World War I, German Freemasons created field lodges where members could meet for lodge work. Some of the top German brothers met with Freemasons in a Belgian lodge. Reportedly, Captain Adolf Hetzel met with Belgian brothers in Liège where they expressed their mutual brotherhood despite the war. Captain Hetzel apparently had greater loyalty to Freemasonry than to Germany inasmuch as he fraternized in a foreign lodge as a German officer with Germany’s enemies. The Grand Lodge did not disapprove of this obvious conflict of national interest. On March 15, 1915, German Freemasons founded a field lodge in France to fraternize with their French brothers, making their Masonic commonality more important than the people who were dying and killing in the war.62

During World War I, Baron Rudolf von Sebottendorff founded the Munich branch of the Thule Society, a völkisch, nonoccult Germanic study group, named for a mythical northern country from Greek legend. The baron and Walter Neuhaus, the society’s founder, recruited 250 Munich residents—doctors, lawyers, judges, police officials, industrialists, professors, and other respectable aristocrats—and about 1,500 people from throughout Bavaria. Many of the founders were former members of the Progressive People’s Party. According to Sebottendorff, members were more concerned about racism and preventing Jewish and communist influence than they were interested in pursuing Germanic studies. In October 1918, the Thule Society bought a local newspaper and soon changed its name to the Völkischer Beobachter (People’s Observer).63


61 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 9

62 Ibid. 34-35

63 James Pool and Suzanne Pool, Who Financed Hitler: The Secret Funding of Hitler’s Rise to Power 1919-1933 (New York: The Dial Press, 1978), 7-8

In December 1918, Sebottendorff planned to kidnap Kurt Eisner, the Bavarian prime minister and a Jew, but the plan fell through. Eisner had organized the socialist revolution that toppled the Wittelsbach monarchy in Bavaria in November 1918. During the Bavarian revolution of April 1919, officials accused Thule Society members of attempting to infiltrate the state government. On April 26, Munich’s communist government entered the Thule facility and took seven members into custody, including Neuhaus, executing them on April 30.

The Thule Society sponsored the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP), founded January 5, 1919, by Karl Harrer, a Thulist, and Anton Drexler, Gottfried Feder, and Dietrich Eckart, one of numerous parties in postwar Germany. Drexler had strong connections to right-wing workers’ organizations in Munich. By then, Sebottendorff had left the society and did not join the DAP or the NSDAP. There is no evidence that Hitler ever joined or even attended a Thule Society meeting, though many of its members were enthusiastic about him. Harrer, the editor of Völkischer Beobachter, left the party on January 5, 1920. Harrer, unlike Hitler, wished to maintain the DAP as a secret group like the Thule Society. By the end of February 1920, Hitler had transformed the party into the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP).

Dietrich Bronder, a Jew, wrote Before Hitler Came, which was probably one of the original sources of the deceptive claim that Eckart, Feder, Hans Frank, Hermann Göring, Professor Karl Haushofer, Rudolf Hess, Heinrich Himmler, and Alfred Rosenberg were among numerous members of the Thule Society who became prominent in Germany. However, Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke in his research found that Feder, Eckart, and Rosenberg visited the group only as guests during the Bavarian revolution of 1918. Hess and Frank belonged to the society prior to their association with the NSDAP. Hitler expended little time on esoteric activities. In fact, a speech he made on September 6, 1938, shows that he disapproved of occultism. He attempted to obliterate Freemasonry in Germany and Austria.

Rosenberg wrote numerous articles about Freemasonry and commented on it in his book, Myths of the Twentieth Century. In 1922, he wrote an article titled “The Crime of the Freemasons.” After Hitler came to power in 1933, Reich Marshal Göring began taking measures against German Freemasonry and informed the Old Prussian lodges that they must discontinue their activities in National Socialist Germany.64 The NSDAP initiated policies against Freemasonry and would not employ former Freemasons as officers or military officials or in any state or municipal capacity. While the party did not dismiss Masonic personnel, it monitored their activities. National Socialism systematically sought to have Freemasons willingly dismantle their lodges. In other instances, police prohibitions limited their activities.65

Benito Mussolini, though an honorary Freemason, acknowledged that the worldwide brotherhood, a politically motivated entity, answerable to the Grand Orient of France, was not as benign as he had originally thought. He told the Freemasons in the Fascist Party to choose between the party and the brotherhood. In late 1925, he disbanded Freemasonry in Italy.66

On February 13, 1923, the Grand Council of Fascists in Italy opposed “the Green Snake” and required all Fascists to sever their Freemasonry connections. Then the government imposed laws, like the Anti-Masonic Law of 1925, to destroy Freemasonry, causing many Italian Freemasons to emigrate. Grand Master Torrigiani responded by attempting to ignite the animosity of international Freemasonry against Fascist Italy. In 1925, Mussolini explained to the Italians, “Freemasonry is combated by Fascists because it is an international organization which conducts its activity in Italy on the basis of orders which are issued in foreign countries… one cannot be a good Italian and simultaneously a Freemason, because the Palazzo Giustiniani follows foreign directives.”67 With regard to its past, Italian Freemasonry made claims similar to German Freemasonry’s, contending that the Freemasons implemented Italian unification. But Freemasonry had no part in the Italian nationalistic movement of the nineteenth century.68


64 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 62-63

65 Ibid. 63-64

66 Jüri Lina, Architects of Deception, (Referent Publishing, Stockholm, Sweden, 2004), 261-62.

67 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 60-61

68 Ibid.

Walther Rathenau was an influential advocate of Jewish assimilation in Germany. He maintained that Jews should resist Zionism and socialism and unite within the society, a course he felt would eventually eliminate anti-Semitism. In 1921, the government appointed him as minister of reconstruction, and in 1922, he became foreign minister. He insisted that Germany should satisfy the obligations that the Versailles Treaty imposed while seeking a modification of its conditions. His attitude regarding this issue enraged German nationalists. On November 13, 1923, during the nation’s hyperinflation, Hjalmar Schacht, never more than an honorary member of the NSDAP, became the special commissioner to stabilize the economy. Shortly thereafter, he became president of the Reichsbank, a post he held from 1923 to 1930.

Schacht led the German delegation that negotiated the Young Plan for settlement of reparations after World War I. Owen Young, J. Pierpont Morgan Jr. and his partner, Thomas W. Lamont, represented the United States. The meetings concluded on August 31, 1929, and the delegates officially adopted the plan at a second Hague Conference in January 1930. One of the provisions of the plan was the establishment of an international bank of settlements to manage reparations transfers, appropriately called the Bank for International Settlements.

From May 4 to 13, 1933, Schacht, again the president of Reichsbank because he had credibility with world bankers, was in the United States visiting President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull regarding Germany’s economic situation. Roosevelt expressed his concerns about the alleged persecution of Jews but wanted to repair financial ties. Schacht told Roosevelt that Germany, out of money, might default on its loans. This disturbed Hull, since this might affect the already depressed economy. During his visit, Schacht also met with David Sarnoff, president of RCA, and other leading Jews, including Rabbi Stephen S. Wise. Sarnoff was Owen Young’s assistant at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference.69


69 John Coleman, Conspirator’s Hierarchy: The Committee of 300, (Carson City, Nevada: World in Review, 1991), 118

Schacht knew that whatever he said would not end the Jewish boycott that was crippling Germany’s economy. Acting on behalf of the Foreign Policy Association, James McDonald contacted Schacht toward the end of his visit. He warned Schacht that France was considering invading and dividing Germany if the Germans continued their policies toward the Jews. Schacht relayed this information to Hitler after he boarded a ship to return to Germany. Hitler would dismiss Schacht from the Reichsbank presidency on January 20, 1939, and replace him with Walter Funk. The Allies later acquitted Schacht at Nuremberg.

Elsewhere, outraged citizens rioted and destroyed lodge buildings. Large segments of the population were well aware of the threat that Freemasonry posed to the welfare of citizens. Freemasonry’s ideology placed the security of the state in jeopardy. Lodges began closing their doors, often involuntarily. Some of them closed as early as March 1933, recognizing Hitler’s animosity toward their activities. Freemasons also destroyed their lodge archives. Many still hoped to obtain influential government positions and expected that National Socialism was temporary.70

Many of the humanitarian grand lodges had Jewish majorities. Government authorities made it patently obvious that they would not tolerate their activities and that Freemasons would have to dissolve their lodges or the state police would take action. Some of the Old Prussian grand lodges altered their names and pretended to operate outside of Freemasonry, but these attempts proved unsatisfactory. By July 1935, the Freemasons had agreed to dissolve the Old Prussian lodges. After changing many of the lodges to orders, grand masters told their charges to repudiate their Masonic affiliation when they joined the NSDAP. To integrate, many lodge members by January 30, 1933, had denied their affiliations, a key Masonic characteristic. Others accused the state of anti-Semitism and claimed that great men in German history had been champions of authentic Freemasonry.71


70 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 64-65

71 Ibid.

Freemasonry was hostile to fascism and to National Socialism. Freemasons waged a hate campaign against National Socialist Germany, especially after Hitler came to power. Jewish and other German immigrants joined the criticism of National Socialism. Prominent among the critics were Georg Bernhard, a Jew and the publisher of Vossische Zeitung and the emigrant newspaper Parisian Daily, and Emil Julius Gumbel, a former professor in Heidelberg.72 Freemasons in America endorsed and promoted the anti-German defamation. Freemasons in France controlled the international body. They opposed the amalgamation of Austria and Germany, the return of the Sudetenland to Germany, and the creation of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. They were also behind the hateful attacks on Germany and Hitler.73

Freemasons in France also waged a rhetorical war against National Socialism. During international Masonic congresses, officials created resolutions against National Socialist Germany, which they passed to the League of Nations. The Rothschilds failed to establish a world government at the Congress of Vienna in 1814 and 1815, but they established the League of Nations on April 28, 1919, during the Versailles Peace Conference. Many countries refused to accept this entity, with its pretense to end all wars, or to implement the stipulations of the treaty. While it existed, the future president of the World Zionist Congress, Nahum Sokolow, admitted, “The League of Nations is a Jewish idea. We created it after a fight of twenty-five years.”74 “For the peace of the world a League of Nations let us have by all means; but for the Humanity of the World, to give justice to the Jew.”75

The NSDAP’s official policy for party membership required that the applicant state, upon his honor, that he had never been a Freemason or a member of a Masonic lodge. The same prerequisite applied to NSDAP subsidiary organizations like the SA, the SS, and the NSKK (motorized SA). Hitler, through an amnesty decree, dated April 20, 1938, made it possible for former Freemasons to remain in the party and its subsidiaries if they joined the party after January 30, 1933, and prior to the regulation. This stipulation did not apply to the higher-degree Freemasons or to those who held high lodge positions. The NSDAP did not permit them to remain in the party or its subsidiaries or allow these people to apply for membership.76


72 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 65-66

73 Ibid. 66-67

74 Andrew Carrington Hitchcock, The Synagogue of Satan: Updated, Expanded, and Uncensored, 2012, Kindle Locations 3158-63

75 Ibid. Kindle Locations 3209-10

76 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 63-64

Freemasons in America, under the direction of a special committee in Paris, spent thousands of dollars to facilitate the immigration of Freemasons from Central Europe. Individuals in other nations collected huge sums, which they funneled to Freemasons in Spain to finance the communists. The organization in France demonstrated Freemasonry’s predominant influence when numerous political factions, including republicans and Marxists, combined to reach an objective. During Spain’s civil war, Freemasons in France demanded their country’s armed intervention on the side of the communists.77

After the Munich Accords, reached on September 29, 1938, by Neville Chamberlain, Édouard Daladier, Mussolini, and Hitler, Freemasons in Britain demanded war with Germany and had the constant cooperation of Freemason Franklin D. Roosevelt. The Versailles Treaty mandated American intervention to back its stipulations. The Jewish-controlled press, closely linked with Freemasonry, fought against National Socialist Germany. In 1939, the war erupted as a continuation of those efforts using military force.78 Chamberlain and Daladier approved Germany’s annexation of the Sudetenland. Hitler vowed that he would not demand any further territory in Europe. Thus Hitler, Chamberlain, Daladier, and Mussolini signed the Munich Pact. Edvard Beneš, Czechoslovakia’s head of state, objected to the decision. Chamberlain reminded Beneš that Britain would not go to war over the Sudetenland issue.

Jews, with their unique exclusivity, constitute a state within a state. A government cannot serve the best interests of its citizens if Freemasonry exists within its borders. Freemasonry is incompatible with national independence. Freemasons, unified by their international objectives, infiltrate and hold prominent positions in economic, political, and spiritual organizations. This is dangerous because every Freemason is required to be a Freemason first, always acting in accordance with his Masonic instruction. A Masonic politician is always a Freemason first and a politician second and thus is not accountable to his constituents or to the nation.79 National Socialism was different in that it embraced “unconditional racial nationalism” as opposed to the internationalism of Freemasonry and Judaism. German National Socialism focused on basic concepts of education beneficial to students and to the country rather than on Masonic internationalism.80


77 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 66-67

78 Ibid.

79 Ibid.

80 Ibid. 67-68

A recruit must pledge the solemn Masonic oath, which requires obedience and secrecy even before one becomes a lodge member. This appears unethical as it requires compliance with unknown obligations. According to Dieter Schwarz, National Socialism represents duty and responsibility and views its philosophy as Nordic while Freemasonry represents Jewish internationalism. National Socialists give priority to nationalism while Freemasonry is antiracial, pro-Jewish, and international and includes a caste system.81 Christians should not swear oaths, especially open-ended oaths. This applies to any blank-check promise such as a pledge of allegiance to a government that might require a citizen’s participation in offensive wars in foreign countries. A citizen-created government owes allegiance to its citizens, not the other way around. A vow to the state essentially concedes permission for whatever the state decides to impose on its citizens—unjust taxes, wealth redistribution, media censorship, restrictive regulations, imprisonment without cause, and numerous other unjust laws.

Incrementally, Hitler’s policies destroyed Freemasonry’s influence in Germany. The lodges in Austria soon waned as well, breaking “the Masonic world chain.” As Germany occupied Poland, Norway, Belgium, and Luxembourg, members dissolved the lodges. The French government recognized that Freemasonry was partially culpable for France’s defeat, and France eventually prohibited Masonic activity. War’s disruption limited activity in southeastern Europe. However, Freemasons in Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, Britain, and especially in America maintained considerable power. Freemasons in America exercised extensive influence in driving “political opinion against National Socialism’s New Order in Europe.”82 Freemasons collaborated “with other enemies of National Socialism, with World Jewry, the political churches, and international Marxism.” Many countries throughout history have forbidden Freemasonry, but in a time of crisis, members of the brotherhood had introduced the craft, like “poison” with its “liberalistic” mentality, into Germany.83


81 Dieter Schwarz, Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy (Berlin: Central Publishing House of the NSDAP, 1944), 66-67

82 Ibid. 67-68

83 Ibid.

Chapter 4 ♦ The Official History of Adolf Hitler

To put the right spin on America in the aftermath of World War I, a Committee on Public Information (CPI) press team, including Edward Bernays, attended the Paris Peace Conference in 1918. George Creel wrote a book in 1920 titled How We Advertised America in which he recounted how “he and his committee used the principles of advertising to convince Americans to go to war with Germany.”84 Federal agencies were established, funded, and approved to work with the news media, Hollywood film studios, and magazines—virtually every communication vehicle. Those friendly, smiling TV and radio personalities of today may, in fact, be on the government’s payroll. Inspiring, patriotic, pro-war movies or Disney’s animations evoke a predictable response. Many media personalities belong to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), an organization devoted to destroying America.

The Rockefeller and Sloan foundations financed the official histories of World War II, paying CFR-associated establishment historians to develop these accounts to neutralize and discredit the facts revealed by nonestablishment researchers. The revisionists could easily produce reasonably acceptable rhetoric for people eager to believe the best about their leaders regardless of the overwhelming facts to the contrary. Citizens asked too many questions after World War I, an embarrassing situation that officials wanted to avoid after numerous discrepancies exposed by documents released during the Pearl Harbor investigations strongly suggested that Roosevelt deceived America into war despite assurances that he would keep the country out of battle.85

Hermann Göring and his wife Carin, a Swedish baroness, entertained some notable people at their residence on the outskirts of Berlin in the first week of January 1931. Their guests included Adolf Hitler, Fritz Thyssen, Ernst Tengelmann, Hjalmar Schacht and his wife, and the Prince and Princess zu Wied, influential people who had not yet met Hitler. The prince joined the NSDAP on November 1, 1929. Tengelmann was the director of a major coal mining operation in Ruhr. In their book Who Financed Hitler: The Secret Funding of Hitler’s Rise to Power, James and Suzanne Pool repudiate the contention by other authors that Hitler was uncomfortable and even incapable of carrying on a conversation in small groups or with individuals.86


84 Anthony Pratkanis and Elliot Aronson, Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1992), 9-10

85 Thomas A. Breslin, “Mystifying the Past: Establishment Historians and the Origins of the Pacific War,” Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, Vol. 8, Issue 4, 1976, 18-35

86 James Pool and Suzanne Pool, Who Financed Hitler: The Secret Funding of Hitler’s Rise to Power 1919-1933 (New York: The Dial Press, 1978), 4-5

Even before the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) launched a smear campaign against Hitler, The Literary Digest of August 26, 1933, compared him to Charles Chaplin, with his “characteristic mustache and his bouncing way of walking.” A writer in the London New Statesman commented, “He was so funny; I inquired who he might be” and suggested that Hitler was “probably a trifle mentally deranged.” Hitler’s reputation was growing stronger in Germany, yet many European newspapers highlighted what they viewed as “the comic aspects of Germany’s dictator,” portraying him as a “comedian” with “an indefatigable sense of the theatre,” like an “actor—manager, staging his big show with scraps of discarded ideas and unconsidered trifles.”87

Hermann Rauschning joined Hitler and the NSDAP, believing that they offered the only way out of Germany’s troubles and could bring the return of Danzig to Germany. In 1933, after Hitler came to power, the NSDAP in Danzig won control of the Free City’s government. Rauschning then became the third president of the Free City of Danzig and functioned in that office from June 20, 1933, to November 23, 1934, when Hitler dismissed him. Rauschning went to Poland in 1936, then to Switzerland in 1937, to France in 1938, and to England in 1939. From 1938 to 1942, Rauschning wrote anti-Nazi propaganda, including the defamatory 1940 book The Voice of Destruction, published in New York by G. P. Putnam’s Sons and printed seventeen times in the United States. In 1941, Rauschning moved to America, where he resided on a farm near Portland, Oregon.

Rauschning claimed that Hitler planned to send German peasants to Bohemia and Moravia and that he was going to transport Czechs to Russia. In 1934, Hitler allegedly told Rauschning that he was going to systematically deport the Slavs to the “east of Germany.” According to Rauschning, Hitler said there was no need for “mass murder” when “there were other ways of accomplishing the same object.” Rauschning also claimed that Hitler said in 1934 that he was going to partition Poland. He said that Hitler told a group of Danzigers that he planned to drive the Jews ahead of the German attacking lines in the next war because “they’d be the best protection for our soldiers.” Rauschning claimed that Hitler had a “Nazi blueprint of the world” if he won the war. Further, he claimed that Hitler, whom he described as “abnormal” and “emotionally unstable,” said, “We may be destroyed, but if we are, we shall drag a world with us—a world in flames.” Rauschning called the members of Hitler’s movement “the apocalyptic riders of world annihilation.”88


87 Office of Strategic Services, Hitler Source Book, “Comic Aspects of Hitler’s Career,” Literary Digest, August 26, 1933,
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/oss-papers/text/oss-sb-comic.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

88 “Herman Rauschning’s Talks with Hitler,” review of The Voice of Destruction, by Herman Rauschning, New York Times, February 18, 1940

In 1940, Rauschning wrote another book, Hitler Speaks: A Series of Political Conversations with Adolf Hitler on His Real Aims, based on the dozens of conversations that he claimed to have had with Hitler from 1932 to 1934. Other books included Hitler’s Aims in War and Peace (1940), published in London, and Hitler Wants the World (1941), a series of articles, allegedly by the “man who knows Hitler’s mind,” also published in London. Serious and even court historians totally discredit Rauschning’s work and would never cite it.

For five years, Swiss researcher Wolfgang Hänel examined Rauschning’s work, especially Hitler Speaks, supposedly Rauschning’s memoir, and concluded that it was a fraud that had absolutely no value “except as a document of Allied war propaganda.” Hänel presented his conclusions in West Germany in 1983. Rauschning claimed to have met and spoken with Hitler “more than a hundred times,” yet they had met only four times, always in the company of others. He invented the stories and lied about what Hitler did and said. He claimed that Hitler would awake shrieking at night, hearing voices and pointing to imaginary images in the corner of his room.89 To think Rauschning could possibly have known personal details, such as sex and sleep habits, is absolutely ridiculous. Even more ludicrous is that anyone would accept such nonsense. In 1939, Emery Reves, the Jewish publisher of the original French edition of Hitler Speaks, assigned the book just as the German army was invading France. Rauschning, apparently destitute at the time, agreed to fabricate Hitler’s personality traits in order to discredit him.

William J. Donovan, head of the OSS, an agency filled with communists, initiated another malicious anti-German propaganda campaign when he commissioned psychoanalyst Walter C. Langer to evaluate Hitler from any available information, true or not, and to create a subjective report. The OSS surveyed all of the newspapers in Europe for negative articles about Hitler and created the thousand-page Hitler Source Book, presented as valid material. According to this book, Hitler “left Vienna early in 1912 and obtained work in Munich as a house painter and decorator.”90 Contrary to that myth, Hitler was never a house painter but rather a talented artist who also demonstrated a knowledge of architecture. The falsifications covered every aspect of his life, with the goal of marginalizing him and making people question his qualifications.


89 Hermann Rauschning, The Voice of Destruction (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1940), 256

90 Office of Strategic Services, Hitler Source Book,
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/oss-papers/text/oss-sb-ahitler.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

Langer and his collaborators could use derogatory newspaper accounts, second- or third-hand reports, malicious hearsay, and interviews with enemies of Hitler. Langer submitted his report, A Psychological Profile of Adolph Hitler: His Life and Legend, in late 1943 or early 1944. It was one of two reports prepared for the OSS. The other, Analysis of the Personality of Adolph Hitler, was an attempt to calculate Hitler’s personal traits. Langer collaborated with three other clinicians—Professor Henry A. Murray of the Harvard Psychological Clinic, Dr. Ernst Kris of the New School for Social Research, and Dr. Bertram D. Lewin of the New York Psychoanalytic Institute—as well as several research associates.

Skeptics raised justifiable questions, prompting a letter from Secretary of War Robert Patterson, dated December 16, 1945, to Dr. Troyer S. Anderson of Army intelligence, requesting that “sound scholarship” be applied to “recent history,” which he said was important to the “future of American policy.” Professor Allan Nevins gathered a small group of historians who, with a four-year grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, were charged with writing something to “dispel the notion that this country was tricked into war by its own government.” They took a new official approach to American diplomatic history suggested by a Council on Foreign Relations commission. One of the authors, William L. Langer of Harvard University, was the director of the OSS research and analysis section and in 1946 served as a special assistant to the secretary of state. He recruited another OSS veteran, S. Everett Gleason Jr., also associated with the CFR. Other establishment historians included CFR member George F. Kennan, former ambassador to Russia and head of the State Department’s policy planning staff.91

Kennan began his analysis with the Spanish-American War. In his version, warmongers forced the conflict upon “an unwilling President William McKinley and a disapproving business and financial community.” He said that American imperialism could be blamed on the American people who wanted to see our flag flying on distant tropical isles and to bask in the “sunshine of recognition as a great imperial power.” He did not mention the thousands of Americans who opposed both the war and an American empire. He claimed that leaders could not stand up to the demands of citizens.92 He did not provide adequate explanations for the Filipino death toll.

In 1972, when the media was popularizing stories about a holocaust of Jews, Basic Books, of New York, published The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report. Walter C. Langer, the author, based the book on his World War II report. The book included a foreword by historian William L. Langer, his brother, and an afterword by psychoanalytic historian Robert G. L. Waite. William Langer had worked with Donovan throughout the war.93


91 Thomas A. Breslin, “Mystifying the Past: Establishment Historians and the Origins of the Pacific War,” Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, Vol. 8, Issue 4, 1976, 18-35

92 Ibid. 18-35

93 Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, (New York: Basic Books, 1972), v.

Walter Langer and his cronies drew most of their information from what Langer called the “screening of raw material.” Citing Sigmund Freud, Langer said that “Hitler’s actions as reported in the news were sufficient to convince us that he was, in all probability, a neurotic psychopath.” Later, in the book, he wrote, “There was general agreement among the collaborators that Hitler is probably a neurotic psychopath bordering on schizophrenia. This means that he is not insane in the commonly accepted sense of the term, but a neurotic who lacks adequate inhibitions.”94 As for “raw material,” Langer cited Rauschning so often, at least thirty-three times, that he should have listed him as a coauthor.

Hitler allegedly revealed his objectives for world dominion, along with his most intimate secrets, to Rauschning, an insignificant regional official. Rauschning claimed that Hitler told him of his plans for a world empire in which Germany would control Africa, South America, Mexico, and ultimately the United States. Many court historians cite his work. The late Leon Poliakov, a Russian Jew and a historian, wrote extensively about the Holocaust and anti-Semitism. He frequently cited Rauschning and praised him for his accuracy.

It is patently obvious which ethnic group seeks to conquer and to control the world. That cabal will use anyone with sufficient talent to help accomplish its goal. In 1939, a few months before his appointment as prime minister, Winston Churchill wrote to Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Were I to become Prime Minister of Britain we could control the world.” In a speech on October 21, 1944, FDR said, “We must play a leading role in the community of Nations.”95 On August 21, 1907, Dr. David Wolffsohn, of Cologne, in closing remarks to the Eighth International Zionist Congress, said that the Jewish people “must yet conquer the world.”96

In Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity, Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke admitted that Rauschning falsified most of his information, but nonetheless cited him, saying that “he wrote several books exposing the vulgar leadership and base methods of the Nazis for English, French and American publication.” Goodrick-Clarke wrote, “Although recent scholarship has almost certainly proved that Rauschning’s conversations were mostly invented, his record has an uncanny note of veracity, recording the authentic voice of Hitler by inspired guesswork and imagination.” He said that Rauschning’s work was important as it testified to “Hitler’s demonic possession.”97


94 Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, (New York: Basic Books, 1972), 19, 140

95 Udo Walendy, Truth for Germany: The Guilt Question of the Second World War, (Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review Books, 2003), 4

96 “Says Jews Must Conquer, Dr. Wolffsohn Delivers Closing Speech at Zionist Congress,” New York Times, August 22, 1907

97 Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity, (New York: New York University Press, 2002), 110-11

Regarding those who would manage postwar Germany, the report said, “They cannot content themselves with simply regarding Hitler as a personal devil and condemning him to an Eternal Hell in order that the remainder of the world may live in peace and quiet. They will realize that the madness of the Fuehrer has become the madness of a nation, if not of a large part of the continent. They will realize that these are not wholly the actions of a single individual but that a reciprocal relationship exists between the Fuehrer and the people and that the madness of the one stimulates and flows into the other and vice versa. It was not only Hitler, the madman, who created German madness, but German madness that created Hitler.”98

The report, classified as top secret until 1968, claimed that a Rothschild fathered Alois Hitler, Adolf’s father, who was illegitimate, when Hitler’s grandmother, Maria Schicklgruber, purportedly worked as a servant in Vienna. Following World War I, Marxists, the greatest threat to National Socialism, sought whatever means possible to discredit and demonize Adolf Hitler. They discovered that Hitler’s father was born out of wedlock, not atypical at the time and place, and instigated a public smear campaign against Hitler’s peasant grandparents in the cafes of Munich. The international press, wholly controlled by Jews, began printing the ignominious story. Propagandists in London and New York repeated the story about Georg and Maria Anna Hiedler having an illegitimate son, Alois, who would become Hitler’s father.99

As soon as they had planted that story, they followed up by claiming that not only was Alois “Illegitimate,” but that his mother, Maria Anna, was a servant in the home of Baron Anselm Salomon de Rothschild, a Jewish banker in Vienna, and that he had fathered the child. This was interesting, given that National Socialist policies mandated the removal of the “Jewish-Marxist menace” from Germany. Rothschild was a known womanizer. However, over the years, because a story about this particular Rothschild was too implausible, smear mongers selected other more acceptable Rothschild candidates.100


98 Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, (New York: Basic Books, 1972), 154

99 Alfred Konder, Adolf Hitler’s Family Tree, the Untold Story of the Hitler Family (Salt Lake City, 2000), 7, Konder is a professional genealogist living and working in Salt Lake City.

100 Ibid. 7

To appear helpful and compliant during the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Hans Frank, the former National Socialist governor of Poland, created “numerous absurdities” for the Allies. Unlike a civilian court, a military tribunal hears only one side of the story. He claimed that Maria Anna Schicklgruber had been working at the home of a Jewish family in Graz, Austria, when she gave birth to Alois. Numerous writers picked up the story and disseminated it to any newspaper or publisher that would print it.101 On September 21, 1950, several newspapers reported the claims by Frank who, in 1946, while standing trial as a war criminal and hoping for leniency, testified that he learned of Hitler’s Jewish ancestry when working as his attorney in 1930. According to the newspapers, Frank repeated some of the details of the account of Maria Anna becoming pregnant while working in the home of Mr. Frankenberger in Graz. He said that Hitler had denied the story. Reportedly, Frank said, “Nothing has been proved, either on the one side or the other, simply because the only people who could definitely provide the truth are long since dead. But, I must say that the probability that Hitler’s father was a half Jew cannot be dismissed.”102

At the Nuremberg Trials, Soviet officials presented two extracts from Thd Voice of Destruction as evidence. Dr. Pelckmann, for the defense, asked that the court summon Rauschning as a witness to testify about the NSDAP and its deadly solution of the Jewish question. However, for some reason, the court did not call him as a witness.103

Psychological warfare experts were responsible for demoralizing the enemy by using lies. Hitler’s presumed last name, Schicklgruber, a lie, sounds ridiculous, but the tale has endured. Hans Habe, born Janos Békessy, a Hungarian-Austrian Jewish writer and newspaper publisher, leader of the Broadcasting Companies, and post-World War II novelist, first reported that Hitler’s original name was Schicklgruber. Even Alan Bullock, an unfriendly biographer, in Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, dismisses this myth, saying that Hitler’s father, Alois, had been born out of wedlock to Maria Anna Schicklgruber. Johann Georg Hiedler married Maria but never legitimized his son. In 1876, the late Johann’s brother legitimized Alois and legally changed his name. When Adolf was born, his father called himself Hitler, and Adolf never used any other name, certainly not his grandmother’s maiden name of Schicklgruber.104


101 Alfred Konder, Adolf Hitler’s Family Tree, the Untold Story of the Hitler Family (Salt Lake City, 2000), 7, Konder is a professional genealogist living and working in Salt Lake City, 7

102 Reading Eagle, September 21, 1950,
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955_and_dat=19500921_and_id=TxgrAAAAIBAJ_and_sjid=Q50FAAAAIBAJ_and_pg=58150003173858; verified 05 Jan 2022

103 One Hundred and Eighty-Fifth Day, Wednesday, 24 July 1946,
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/07-24-46.asp; verified 06 Jan 2022

104 Eric Leif Davin, Pittsburgh, April 20, 1990, New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/06/opinion/l-hitler-never-really-was-schicklgruber-016390.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

Habe, a foreign correspondent for the Prager Tagblatt (Prague Daily News), covered the League of Nations and was present at the Evian Conference in 1938. He described the details in his novel The Mission (1965) in which he skewed Germany’s offer to facilitate the relocation of Austrian Jews to other countries. In 1940, he immigrated to America. The US Army drafted him and he studied psychological warfare at the Military Intelligence Training Center at Camp Ritchie, Maryland. In 1944, he taught psychological warfare methods at Camp Sharpe in Pennsylvania. Later that year, in anticipation of Germany’s defeat, he selected a group of German writers and newspaper editors for propaganda work and to publish new newspapers in Germany. In 1945, Habe went to Germany and by November, he had created eighteen newspapers in the American Occupation Zone for the de-Nazification process.

Writing about Hitler, whom he called a lazy Vienna beggar who turned into an energetic politician,105 Langer said, “Almost everyone who has written about Hitler has commented upon his rages. These are well-known to all of his associates, and they have learned to fear them. The descriptions of his behavior during these rages vary considerably. The more extreme descriptions claim that at the climax he rolls on the floor and chews on the carpets.” Further, he said, “Even without this added touch of chewing the carpet, his behavior is still extremely violent and shows an utter lack of emotional control. In the worst rages, he undoubtedly acts like a spoiled child who cannot have his own way and bangs his fists on the tables and walls. He scolds and shouts and stammers, and on some occasions foaming saliva gathers in the corners of his mouth.” In describing one of these uncontrolled exhibitions, Rauschning said, “He was an alarming sight, his hair disheveled, his eyes fixed, and his face distorted and purple. I feared that he would collapse or have a stroke.”106

The report exploited several people, including Hitler’s nephew, William Patrick Hitler; his family physician, Dr. Eduard Bloch; Ernst Hanfstaengl, Otto Strasser, Kurt Ludecke, and others. The OSS attached the Hitler Source Book to the wartime report. It functioned as an index for offender profiling and political psychology. The Strasser brothers embraced a leftist philosophy and had a greedy desire for power and gain at the expense of the NSDAP. Like others, Otto Strasser, a Jewish puppet, left Germany and lived elsewhere while becoming anti-Hitler and anti-NSDAP. He might be called a useful idiot, a term that Lenin frequently used.


105 Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, (New York: Basic Books, 1972), 156

106 Ibid. 83-84

Langer implied that Hitler was probably impotent and unable to have heterosexual relations, writing, “Hitler has for years been suspected of being a homosexual, although there is no reliable evidence that he has actually engaged in a relationship of this kind. Rauschning reports that he has met two boys who claimed that they were Hitler’s homosexual partners, but their testimony can scarcely be taken at its face value.”107 Langer’s official report may be the source of the book The Pink Nazis.

Langer quoted Rauschning a saying, “Most loathsome of all is the reeking miasma of furtive, unnatural sexuality that fills and fouls the whole atmosphere around him, like an evil emanation. Nothing in this environment is straightforward. Surreptitious relationships, substitutes and symbols, false sentiments and secret lusts—nothing in this man’s surroundings is natural and genuine, nothing has the openness of a natural instinct. One of Hitler’s hobbies that is carefully hidden from the public is his love for pornography.” Langer wrote, “His perversion has quite a different nature, which few have guessed. It is an extreme form of masochism in which the individual derives sexual gratification from the act of having a woman urinate or defecate on him.”108

Authors intent on exposing the facts surrounding World War II, whether they concern the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hitler’s response to the Polish persecution of ethnic Germans, or any other event, have had difficulty getting their books published. Those who have succeeded have suffered attacks on their credibility, scholarship, and motives. Things have not changed since the Civil War. Establishment historians have always sanitized decision-makers, vilified alleged or made-in-America enemies, and provided an official history of every event—a war, an act of terror, or an assassination. The elite exercise control over the media, the textbook industry, academic forums, and government schools, guaranteeing that the official version receives wide dissemination and positive reviews. Continuous control of the media also allows the elite to maintain a plausible cover story over the decades.

It’s a catch-22. First, the warmongers victimize a group. Then they blame the victims. There is always a lone gunman or some patsy group to blame. Gullible citizens acquiesce and are goaded by the media into demanding retribution for the latest Pearl Harbor-style event. The assigned targets may be the illegal immigrants who have seized jobs, the ignorant applicants who accepted subprime loans, the Nazis, the Muslim terrorists, the homosexuals, the drug addicts, or the communists. Citizens fail to glance behind the curtain to discover the origin of their perceptions; they just tune in to the daily hate message. Of course, the media mouthpieces, just trying to earn an income, do not announce the day’s hate target—not when atrocity stories will suffice. The propagandists prey and play upon citizens like the proverbial keyboard. People are Pavlovian participants in their own indoctrination.


107 Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, (New York: Basic Books, 1972), 195

108 Ibid. 103, 149; taken from Hermann Rauschning’s The Voice of Destruction, 256-57

Chapter 5 ♦ The Dictator, Adolf Hitler

Before World War I, while the hard-working, skilled Germans were building and progressing, many hopeless British citizens were living in the slums of London, Liverpool, and other large cities. Americans subsisted in substandard housing in New York, Chicago, and other urban areas. As late as 1945, the Illinois State Housing Board reported that more than seven hundred thousand homes had no private bath while more than five hundred thousand had outside toilets and more than four hundred thousand had no running water.109 Surely, people had sufficient wage-earning projects in America without their government deploying them as soldiers to enforce its foreign policy against others for the benefit of corporations and bankers.

Author Francis Neilson wrote, “People who have witnessed the wreckage where there was once a community living under free conditions know that to re-establish order there must be totalitarian rule.” He compared World War I to a cyclone and said a dictator was required in the aftermath to tell people what they must do to restore society. Expertise, not patronizing political rhetoric, was essential. World War I caused devastating disruption in several European countries. The banker-funded Bolsheviks perpetrated a lethal revolution that altered Russia beyond recovery.110

The Versailles Treaty was an economic cyclone for Germany and demanded immediate action. The nation’s financial situation, which affected other Central European countries, required urgent attention before the whole region slid into the abyss. This crisis created the perfect environment for the Bolsheviks to assault every other European country, probably according to a worldwide plan. For ten years, the Weimar Republic made feeble attempts to accommodate the punitive restrictions imposed by the Allies and their conniving advisers upon Germany.111


109 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 136-37

110 Ibid. 104-05

111 Ibid. 104-113

After World War I, unemployed Germans were starving and living in cellars because so many had lost their homes. Foreign loans, a politician’s panacea supplying plenty of interest for bankers, did little to lessen the destitution. The stock market crash of 1929 increased the global hardship and government insolvencies. Americans, also economically undermined, looked to the government for solutions. Marxist authors promoted Soviet-style programs like the New Deal while soup lines got longer and the federal bureaucracy dramatically increased. Politicians in Britain and America had wonderful slogans like “Keep wages up!” and “Prosperity is just around the corner.” In 1933, two provocative leaders emerged—Hitler in Germany and Roosevelt in the United States.112

Their ideological differences probably resulted from their dissimilar backgrounds. Hitler was born into poverty while Roosevelt, like many politicians, enjoyed life among the financial elite, with their social, business, and political prerogatives. Hitler, popular with the common man, was often at philosophical odds with Germany’s political and military establishment. Roosevelt’s popularity was artificial, manufactured by the press. The people elected him based on false promises after the staged economic catastrophe. His Marxist New Deal accelerated the growth of the bureaucracy while the common people remained desperate and unemployed. The elite privately venerated Roosevelt because he fulfilled his obligations to them at a very steep price to others. Hitler and Roosevelt promised to rescue their nations. Only one of them succeeded, at least temporarily.


112 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 104-113

The Chancellor

Adolf Hitler accepted the position of chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. He made bitter enemies when he decided to try to reverse the restrictions of the Versailles Treaty and to raise his people from debt and depression, all without staggering bank loans under the burden of the Dawes and Young plans. The crucial question was whether American politicians would collaborate with the parasitical bankers or National Socialist Germany. The Germans had found a new nationalism that did not depend on the bankers but on their own strength and determination, allowing them to escape the bondage of Versailles. When American officials selected the bankers, they also abandoned American citizens to tyranny and debt-slave destitution.113

On February 1, 1933, in Berlin, Hitler said, “The National Government will regard as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life.”114

Regarding communism, Hitler said, “Never forget that the rulers of present-day Russia are common blood-stained criminals; that they are the scum of humanity which, favored by circumstances, overran a great state in a tragic hour, slaughtered and wiped out thousands of her leading intelligentsia in wild blood lust, and now for almost ten years have been carrying on the most cruel and tyrannical regime of all time.”115

Within two years, the economic situation in Germany was looking better, to the point where Churchill and others credited Hitler for his measures. Germany had no gold and little or no credit when he introduced a primitive but effective barter system. Bernard Baruch and other bankers were stunned. This economic turnabout threatened America and Britain. As in 1907, when Germany was advancing, General Robert E. Wood testified before Congress and admitted that in November 1936 Churchill said, “Germany is getting too strong and we must smash her.”116 The impending war was the bankers’ retaliation against those economic programs. If Germany could lift the bankers’ burden from the people, other nations would follow her example.


113 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors, The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 72-75

114 Adolf Hitler, “My New World Order: Proclamation to the German Nation at Berlin,” February 1, 1933

115 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (London/New York: Hurst and Blackett, Ltd., 1939), 393

116 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 104-113

Hitler began a series of reforms designed to reduce massive unemployment. His methods, a bit on the totalitarian side and perhaps intolerable in a democracy, were effective. Within three short years, Hitler dramatically changed life for the Germans. In 1937, Churchill, awed by him, wrote in Great Contemporaries, “Whatever else may be thought about these exploits, they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole history of the world.” In Step by Step, Churchill wrote, “If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among nations.”117

Following World War I, the Allied countries, without the restrictions of the Versailles Treaty, were free to reconstruct, rearm, and make repairs. The treaty not only constrained German actions but required the country to pay huge, onerous reparations for more than a dozen years. Abject poverty, hunger, and unemployment were pandemic. The housing situation became even more desperate as tens of thousands of hungry refugees congregated in the larger cities like Berlin. The mark was all but worthless, made even worse by the world economic crash of 1929-30.118

Hitler assumed control of the economy and decided that the government should issue its own money rather than submit to debt slavery. He initiated a public works plan including flood control, public building maintenance, and construction of buildings, roads, bridges, canals, and port facilities. The anticipated cost of these projects was set at one billion units of the national currency. Then the government issued one billion noninflationary labor treasury certificates against the cost of the projects. Millions of people quickly had employment, and their employers paid them with the treasury certificates, which they could spend on goods and services, creating more jobs for even more people. The certificates were not totally debt-free since they were issued as bonds, but the government paid the interest on them. They circulated as money and were renewable indefinitely, and Germany did not have to depend on loans from international bankers.119

Germany managed to get equipment and commodities by exchanging directly with other countries, circumventing international bankers. This direct exchange system occurred without debt and without trade deficits. However, the system was short-lived despite some permanent memorials to its tremendous success like the celebrated Autobahn, the world’s first extensive expressway.120


117 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 100-02

118 Ibid. 104-05

119 Ellen Hodgson Brown, Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System and How We Can Break Free (Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Third Millennium Press, 2008), 233-38

120 Ibid.

Farmers were surrendering their debt-laden land in America, but Hitler had another agricultural ideal for Germany. He appointed Walther Darré, fluent in four languages, as minister of food and agriculture, succeeding Alfred Hugenberg. Darré, who held the post from 1933 to 1942, promoted the ideal of “Blut und Boden” (blood and soil), one of National Socialism’s major slogans. Darré said, “The peasant is the life-spring of our Reich and our race.” As a young man, Darré belonged to the Artaman League, a Völkisch youth group devoted to the back-to-the-land movement. Later, he and others developed the idea that the future of the Nordic race was connected to the soil, the concept of “Blut und Boden.” Blood represented race or ancestry, while Boden epitomized the productiveness of soil, territory, or land. The concept involved the enduring relationship between a people and the land that it occupies and cultivates.

Darré concentrated on the technical aspects of animal breeding. In his first book, Peasantry as the Life-Source of the Nordic Race (1928), he argued that the best farmers should manage German farms despite inheritance laws that had discouraged this ideal. He advocated the restoration of ancient traditions. Regarding National Socialist agricultural policies, Darré said, “When we came to power in 1933, one of our chief endeavors was to save German agriculture from impending ruin. However, our agricultural program went far beyond mere economic considerations. It was based on the idea that no nation can truly prosper without a sound rural population. It is not enough that the farmers shall be tolerably well-off; they should also be aware of their place in the national life and be able to fulfill it. Here are the three big factors in the problem, 1) to assure an ample food supply; 2) to safeguard the future by a healthy population increase; 3) to develop a distinctive national culture deeply rooted in the soil. This ideal logically implies an aim which goes far beyond what is usually known as an agrarian policy.”121

German officials passed three agricultural significant laws: the National Food Estate Law, the Hereditary Farmlands Law, and the Market Control Law. The Food Estate, a quasi-public corporation, encompassed everyone who had anything to do with production or distribution of foodstuffs. This included large landowners, small farmers, agricultural laborers, millers, bakers, canners, intermediaries, butchers, and grocers, many of whom were previously working at cross purposes. The government viewed them as equals, all essential to the objective of a coordinated effort to solve production and distribution problems.122


121 Lothrop Stoddard, Into the Darkness: An Uncensored Report from Inside the Third Reich at War, A Sympathetic Report from Hitler’s Wartime Reich (Neport Beach, California: The Noontide Press, 2000), 109-113.

122 Ibid.

They designed the Market Control Law to provide a sound economic structure and a “just price” for all. Producers were allowed to make a profit but were not to exploit their position just because they had something that everyone needed. The law protected the consumer from profiteering. The Hereditary Farmlands Law reinstituted the idea that the landowner was inherently and closely connected to the land. According to the government, “The idea engendered by Roman law that land was so much merchandise to be bought and sold at will is profoundly repugnant to German feelings. To us, soil is something sacred: the peasant and his land belong to inseparately together.” The English word peasant is from the German word Bauer, a self-respecting, independent landowner similar to the English yeoman.123

After visiting Germany in September 1936, David Lloyd George said, “I have never seen a happier people than the Germans. Hitler is one of the greatest of the many great men that I have ever met.”124 By that month, he had reduced unemployment from about seven million to one million. Germany’s national income increased from forty-one billion marks to fifty-six billion marks. The middle class and the trades were experiencing prosperity. Germany was producing automobiles and ships, and deficits were disappearing in the cities and the provinces. Meanwhile, in Washington on October 5, 1937, FDR talked about “quarantining the aggressors” and had suddenly decided to take a strong hostile stand against the Axis powers. Baruch repeated his threat about getting Hitler, who had allegedly broken his promise when he allied with Austria.

Germany had a stable currency without inflation at the same time that millions of people in the United States and other Western nations were confounded and overwhelmed by economic depression and unemployment and stood in soup lines. Germany restored foreign trade, but the bankers denied the nation foreign credit and it faced a massive boycott.125 The Pilgrims Society, a front for the international bankers, supported the boycott.

Gottfried Feder believed that the state should coin and regulate money through a nationalized central bank instead of through privately owned banks, which charged interest. Hitler concluded that finance enslaved a population by seizing control of a nation’s money and credit. Feder arrived at his conclusions, according to author Stephen Zarlenga, through German theorists who had studied America’s Greenback movement. Hitler equated the financial enslavement of the population with the ethnicity of the chief bankers of the time, which generated another wave of anti-Semitism. The plan was not necessarily limited to one ethnic group, but was a scheme that privatized the money creation powers allotted to the government. Hitler rescued Germany from the English economic gold standard theory.126


123 Lothrop Stoddard, Into the Darkness: An Uncensored Report from Inside the Third Reich at War, A Sympathetic Report from Hitler’s Wartime Reich (Neport Beach, California: The Noontide Press, 2000), 109-113.

124 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 124-28

125 Ellen Hodgson Brown, Web of Debt; The Shocking Truth About Our Money System and How We Can Break Free Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Third Millennium Press, 2008), 233-38

126 Stephen A. Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money: The Mythology of Money, the Story of Power, (Valatie, New York: American Monetary Institute, 2002), 594-98

Germany’s treasury had no gold. Hitler said, “We’re not foolish enough to try to make a currency [backed by] gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done or goods produced… we laugh at the time our national financiers held the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank.”127

Hitler was immensely popular in Germany because he rescued the country from England’s economic theory, which was actually Rothschild’s European Plan. His move benefited German citizens and not the bankers. Germany’s abandonment of the gold standard threatened vested interests, which did not sit well with countries using the gold standard, like America and Britain. Those countries now militarily targeted Germany. Countries that borrowed from the bankers relinquished their domestic and foreign policy to those external powers. The bankers waged war, using American and British soldiers, to try to control Germany.128

If the international bankers had not beleaguered Germany and had allowed the nation to prosper, their huge Ponzi scheme would have been exposed and they would have been out of business. Other countries would have copied Germany’s economic example. Germany was accomplishing extraordinary economic feats and transforming itself into an independent entity free of foreign interference. The NSDAP, demonized for other alleged activities, resurrected Germany’s ruined economy without exploiting other countries, since Germany no longer had colonies. By 1937, Germany had the strongest and most productive European economy.129

In Billions for the Bankers, Debts for the People, Sheldon Emry wrote, “Germany issued debt-free and interest-free money from 1935 and on, accounting for its startling rise from the depression to a world power in five years… it took the whole Capitalist and Communist world to destroy the German power over Europe and bring Europe back under the heel of the bankers. Such history of money does not ever appear in the textbooks of public, government schools today. Issuing money which does not have to be paid back in interest leaves the money available to use in the exchange of goods and services, and its only continuing cost is replacement as the paper wears out. Money is the paper ticket by which such transfers are made and should always be in sufficient quantity to transfer all possible production of the nation to ultimate consumers.”130


127 C. C. Veith, “Thinking Outside the Box: How a Bankrupt Germany Solved Its Infrastructure Problems,” Citadels of Chaos, Meador, 1949,
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/bankrupt-germany.php; verified 05 Jan 2022

128 Stephen A. Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money: The Mythology of Money, the Story of Power, (Valatie, New York: American Monetary Institute, 2002), 596-97

129 Ellen Hodgson Brown, Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System and How We Can Break Free (Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Third Millennium Press, 2008), 233-38

130 Rev. Sheldon Emry, Billions for the Bankers and Debts for the People (Sandpoint, Idaho: America’s Promise Ministries, 1984), 21-22

Samuel Untermeyer and his banker friends were angry and planned retaliatory action.131 From 1933 to 1939, politicians ranted about attacking Hitler’s totalitarian state. For more than twenty years, the bloodthirsty Soviets actually did operate a totalitarian state, but British and American politicians did not clamor to eliminate Stalin and his brutal regime. Their blather had nothing to do with Hitler’s ruling style and everything to do with the fact that he would not cater to the international bankers and borrow high-interest money, enslaving the Germans with debt.132

National Socialism was a target from its inception. It was a system at odds with bolshevism and world capitalism, both directed by the same elite. In The Answer of the German, Hans Grimm wrote, “Between 1933 and 1939 more was done for public health, for the mother and child, as well as for the promotion of social welfare than before and, perhaps we might admit, than ever before!”133 Louis Marschalko wrote, “National Socialism, after coming to power undertook to fulfill, under various slogans, those tasks that ought to have been performed by Christianity.”134 People accused the famous aviator Charles Lindbergh Jr. of treason when he stated his positive opinion of National Socialism.135

Charles Lindbergh Sr. criticized the banking trust in his book Why Is Your Country at War, attempting to explain the corruptness of the banking trust and its complicity with Congress. Several large Wall Street-controlled newspapers vilified Lindbergh for calling attention to the banking trust.136


131 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 202-06

132 Ibid. 202-06

133 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 68-69

134 Ibid. 65

135 Ibid. 77-81

136 John Remington Graham, Blood Money: The Civil War and the Federal Reserve (Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing Company, 2006), 45-46

Chapter 6 ♦ “We Are Going to Lick that Fellow Hitler”
02 Bernard Baruch
Bernard Baruch

Bernard Baruch advocated war against Germany. He wrote, “I emphasized that the defeat of Germany and Japan and their elimination from world trade would give Britain a tremendous opportunity to swell her foreign commerce in both volume and profit.”137

Adolf Hitler became chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933, and president on August 2, 1934, when Hindenburg died. Franklin D. Roosevelt became president on March 4, 1933. On February 7, Churchill gave a speech titled “Prepare” in which he criticized the results of the disarmament conference of 1932-34. He referred to “the sudden uprush of Nazism in Germany, with the tremendous covert armaments which are proceeding there today.”138

On October 16, Hitler, in a radio broadcast said, “The German people and the German government have demanded absolutely no weapons.” Further, regarding equal rights, he said that “if the world decided that only certain nations may arm, but others may not, then we are not ready to allow ourselves to be excluded as a people with fundamentally fewer rights.”139

Germany tried to establish cooperation and partnership with its neighbors, those dedicated to nationalism in their countries. Germans thought they could help liberate other European countries from capitalist exploitation. They had experienced the power of foreign money, the usurpation of their press by that same power, and the domination of the country. They had eliminated that power in Germany through their National Socialist revolution.140


137 Bernard M. Baruch, Baruch: The Public Years; My Own Story (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960), 347

138 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 98.

139 A. V. Schaerffenberg, Hitler: Bungling Amateur or Military Genius?, (Preuss Printing, Giddings, Texas, 2003), 29

140 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 72-75

The bolshevics wanted to obliterate Christianity from every country in Europe. To do that, they had to eliminate Germany’s influence, because if the National Socialist plan succeeded, every other country would also remove itself from the bankers’ grip. Therefore the bankers intended to discredit or to destroy any attempts at European unity. This was relatively easy to do in America since the bankers, through their affiliates, owned 85 percent of the print media and 100 percent of the films produced in Hollywood. They launched an aggressive propaganda campaign, probably larger than any operation previously executed. This misinformation predictably spilled over into Europe.141

In an act of psychological projection, propagandists disseminated misinformation about Germany’s racial concepts by claiming that Germans viewed their race and their nation as superior, estranging them from the neighbors they hoped to work with. The biggest distortion the bankers broadcast was that Germany wanted to conquer the world. German officials wanted to be a first-rate power for the benefit of their people. Clever politicians and bankers often use the distracting tactic of accusing others of the very things they are guilty of themselves. They accused Germany of plotting a war to seize all of the land in which German minorities resided—Yugoslavia, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Slovakia, Bohemia, Romania, and other neighboring states. These countries then immediately regarded Germany as untrustworthy.

On May 17, 1933, Hitler appealed to the major powers, saying, “Germany will be perfectly ready to disband her entire military establishment and destroy the small amount of arms remaining to her if the neighboring countries will do the same thing with equal thoroughness… Germany is entirely ready to renounce aggressive weapons of every sort if the armed nations, on their part, will destroy their aggressive weapons within a specified period, and if their use is forbidden by an international convention… Germany is at all times prepared to renounce offensive weapons if the rest of the world does the same. Germany is prepared to agree to any solemn pact of nonaggression because she does not think of attacking anybody but only of acquiring security.”142 Britain and France did not respond.


141 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 75-78

142 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 110-11

Initially, Churchill said, “Bolshevism is not a policy, it is a disease. It is not a creed, it is a pestilence. It presents the characteristics of a pestilence. It breaks out with great suddenness, it is violently contagious; it throws people into a frenzy of excitement; it spreads with extraordinary rapidity; the mortality is terrible.”143 On July 21, 1933, Baruch left for Europe where he would meet with Churchill, a man who accommodated, socialized, and schemed with the world’s war planners. According to the New York Times of September 10, Churchill hosted a lavish dinner party for Baruch. Attendees included Admiral Sir Roger Keyes, John Spencer-Churchill, the Duke of Marlborough, Sidney Herbert, Sir Frederick Leith-Ross, and Henry L. Mond, who advocated the development of the resources of the Dead Sea.144

Other countries continued to accumulate the weapons of death. Meanwhile, the League of Nations mandated that Germany go through a “probation” period before inquiring about the disarmament of other countries. On October 14, 1933, Hitler suspended Germany’s relationship with the league. On December 18, he suggested that Germany enjoy “full equality of rights” and that the European nations “guarantee one another the unconditional maintenance of peace by the conclusion of nonaggressive pacts, to be renewed after ten years.”145

On March 6, 1935, France reinstated military conscription. Ten days later, Hitler also instituted the draft, violating provisions of the Versailles Treaty. He wanted to create a unified front against bolshevism and hoped that Germany and Britain could reach an understanding in that regard. The British did not object when Hitler allowed the German naval fleet to attain 35 percent of the Royal Navy’s strength. On March 16, in an effort to liberate Germany from the prohibitions of the Versailles Treaty, Hitler issued a declaration of Germany’s sovereign power. He hoped that Britain would forsake any political hostility and abandon its relationship with the powers that had inflicted that inequitable treaty. Still constrained by the treaty, Germany, unlike the victorious powers, had disarmed. On June 18, Britain and Germany signed the Anglo-German Naval Agreement under which Germany agreed to restrict its naval capacity to 35 percent of what Britain possessed. Germany therefore lacked the capability of waging a sea battle. Hitler hoped that this agreement was proof that Germany had no aggressive intentions against England, a powerful nation free from European threats because of its sea power and international influence.


143 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 99

144 Ibid.

145 Ibid. 110-11

On May 21, 1935, Hitler had said, “The German Government is ready to take an active part in all efforts which may lead to a practical limitation of armaments.” On March 3, 1936, he proposed the following peace plan:

  1. A prohibition on dropping gas, poison, or incendiary bombs.
  2. A prohibition on dropping bombs of any kind on open towns and villages outside the range of the medium-heavy artillery on the fighting fronts.
  3. A prohibition on the bombardment with long-range guns of towns more than twenty kilometers distant from battle zones.
  4. Abolition and prohibition of the construction of tanks of the heaviest type.
  5. Abolition and prohibition of artillery of the heaviest caliber.146

American taxpayers did not know about any of Hitler’s proposals. They just believed what their government and the media told them. Many Anglo-American politicians recognized and praised the tremendous advances Hitler had made for Germany but denounced him for rearming. Churchill admitted that Hitler had done for Germany what the politicians in France, Britain, and the United States had failed to do for their people. On August 14, 1936, in Chautauqua, New York, FDR said, “I wish I could keep war from all nations, but that is beyond my power. I can at least make certain that no act of the United States helps to produce or promote war.”147

In 1938, Bernard Baruch said, “We are going to lick that fellow Hitler. He isn’t going to get away with it.” In 1938 and 1939, politicians continued to agitate for an attack on Hitler’s totalitarian state but maintained their silence about Stalin and his bloody Soviet regime.148


146 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 112-13

147 Harry Elmer Barnes, ed., Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace: A Critical Examination of the Foreign Policy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Its Aftermath Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Printers, 1953), 79

148 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 202-06

Roosevelt sent Hitler a telegram on April 15, 1939, accusing him of aggression. In response, possibly viewing this as an opportunity to avoid warfare in Central Europe, Hitler gave a speech in the Reichstag on April 28 in which he said, “I took the leadership of a state which was faced by complete ruin thanks to the promises of the outside world and the evil of its democratic regime… Billions of German savings accumulated in gold or foreign exchange during many years of peace were extorted from us. We lost our colonies. In 1933, I had in my country 7,000,000 unemployed, a few million part-time workers, millions of impoverished peasants, trade destroyed, commerce ruined; in short, general chaos.149

“Since then, Mr. Roosevelt, I have only been able to fulfill one single task. I cannot feel myself responsible for a world, for this world took no interest in the pitiful fate of my people. I have regarded myself as called upon by Providence to serve my own people alone and to deliver them from their frightful misery. Thus, for the past six and one half years, I have lived day and night for the single task of awakening the powers of my people in face of our desertion by the rest of the world, and of developing these powers to the utmost and for utilizing them for the salvation of our community.”150

The speech was printed in a booklet, available in Germany, America, and elsewhere. Radio stations broadcast it, and people heard it over much of the world. German consulates distributed translations of the speech.151

Hitler’s speech addressed several issues that FDR raised in his cable. As sincere as President Woodrow Wilson might have appeared, Hitler pointed out that most of his Fourteen Points were never implemented anywhere.


149 Harrell Rhome, ed., A Few Minutes Before Midnight Ein Paar Minuten vor Mitternacht, Communications Between Germany and the USA Directly Preceding WW II, 2008, 16-17;
A_Few_Minutes_Before_Midnight.pdf; verified 10 Jan 2022

150 Ibid.

151 Ibid. 3

World War I brought death and disaster and left behind only the burdensome policies and the retaliation of the Versailles Treaty, which did not appear to benefit anyone. Hitler elaborated on the many opportunities wasted or sabotaged. He recognized that Poland, even under a military dictatorship, had a right to the sea. He said, “That politics should be controlled by men who had not fought in the war was recognized for the first time as a misfortune. Hatred was unknown to the soldiers, but not to those elderly politicians who had carefully preserved their own precious lives from the horrors of war, and who now descended upon humanity as in the guise of insane spirits of revenge.”152

Further, Hitler said, “Hatred, malice and unreason were the intellectual forebears of the Treaty of Versailles. Territories and states with a history going back a thousand years were arbitrarily broken up and dissolved. Men who had belonged together since time immemorial were torn asunder… No one knows this better than the German people. For the Peace Treaty… imposed burdens on the German people, which could not have been paid off in a hundred years, although it has been proved conclusively by American teachers of constitutional law, historians and professors of history that Germany was no more to blame for the outbreak of the war than any other nation. It is hard to imagine a clearer and more concise summary of the massive errors at the end of the war, setting the stage for the next one.”153

In mid-March 1939, Baruch invited Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins to Hobcaw Barony, his huge plantation near the coast in South Carolina. Baruch, an elder statesman, was not the least bit concerned about political or business issues but was thinking about the gathering storm in Europe. On March 10, he had ridiculed Chamberlain’s remark that “the outlook in international affairs is tranquil.” Baruch and Churchill knew that war was on the horizon. Churchill told Baruch, “War is coming very soon. We will be in it and you will be in it. You will be running the show over there, but I will be on the sidelines over here.” He was not on the sidelines but was in the thick of things. Baruch and Hopkins discussed the imminent events in Europe, and Hopkins then privately conferred with FDR. The previous year, Hopkins had complained to FDR about the amount of misinformation coming out of Europe. Later, Baruch said, “I think it took Harry a long time to realize how greatly we were involved in Europe and Asia—but once he did realize it, he was all-out for total effort.”154 That total effort meant total war against Germany.


152 Harrell Rhome, ed., A Few Minutes Before Midnight Ein Paar Minuten vor Mitternacht, Communications Between Germany and the USA Directly Preceding WW II, 2008, 4-5;
https://media.128ducks.com/file_store/aaa716fbc99715d9924bcc4f32b0f5be49d974ea209b5739b5fad856dabb35de.pdf; verified 10 Jan 2022

153 Ibid.

154 Robert E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History (New York: Harper, 1948), 113-14

According to Britain’s calculations, America should refrain from fighting for at least three years to allow Germany to war against and exhaust the Soviets without the difficult diversion of fighting on another front. In exchange for restraining the United States, the Germans agreed to recall their troops from and to abandon their interests in the Mediterranean basin. Britain then abandoned its ruse against the primary victim of its thirty-year plot for Anglo-American supremacy and began large-scale warfare against Germany, the country it had targeted for ultimate collapse. Germany’s enemies intended to crush the country and financially ruin two enormous military forces by the end of the war.155

Germany had acquired trading partners and increased its commercial opportunities. The worldwide media claimed that Germany’s living standard increased due to its rearmament in preparation for another war. In fact, German industry, minus the banks, disproved the Marxist theory of inevitable class struggle and showed that by taking the right steps any country could prosper without exploitation by capitalism or bolshevism, both funded by the same international bankers. Germany prospered without the bankers’ press and their culturally and morally degenerating entertainment.

Not only did Germans exist without this influence, but their culture flourished. If the rest of the world had discovered Germany’s secret, the international bankers, along with their enslaving usury, would have become extinct. To avoid fading into the dust and being exposed as liars, the bankers had to destroy Germany and all evidence of its accomplishments. They had to extinguish the new homes, the lush gardens, the new factories, hospitals, and transportation systems, and above all, Germany’s revitalized hope and faith. Total war would be the most effective way.156 Massive war deaths would prevent future efforts and make the Germans resent Hitler, the person who had invigorated their country.

To preserve their empire, the British elite were quite willing to partner with the United States, whose government antagonists had usurped a few decades earlier. The elites in both countries belonged to the same imperialistic secret associations like the Pilgrims Society. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote, “The ends justify the means,” a maxim applied to government-authorized mass murder for plunder and profit.


155 Guido Giacomo Preparata, Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich (London/Ann Arbor, Michigan: Pluto Press, 2005), xvii-xix

156 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 77-81

  PART II: Prewar Maneuvers

Chapter 7 ♦ Birobidjan, a Jewish Sanctuary

In 1939, David Bergelson, a Hasidic Jew born in a Ukrainian shtetl who became a member of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee during World War II, wrote the pamphlet The Jewish Autonomous Region. He said that the Jews had suffered tremendously under the czarist government but that with the establishment of the communist system, “every trace of national oppression was destroyed on the territory of the Soviet Union.” The government wiped out “every vestige of national and racial inequality,” “swept away all artificial barriers,” and helped a backward people to advance culturally and economically. He said this was especially true for the Jewish people, “the most oppressed and persecuted in the Russia of the Czars.” With the Soviet takeover, Jews participated in every “phase of economic life and activity,” Bergelson said.157

Contrary to popular myth, top Soviet officials were not anti-Semitic. Vyacheslav Molotov’s wife, Polina Zhemchuzhina, was Jewish. Lazar Kaganovich, one of Stalin’s key men, was Jewish. Stalin told a Jewish reporter, “Anti-Semitism is cannibalism.” People accused of it received the death penalty in Russia.158 After the revolution, Russia became the world’s first country to criminalize anti-Semitism.159 On July 27, 1918, Lenin outlawed all anti-Semitism; the law, if broken, might result in execution.160 The reason for this law may have been to prevent skeptical citizens from openly associating the Jews with what had befallen the nation.

Bergelson wrote, “In the twenty-one years of Soviet power the Jews, like every other people in the Soviet Union, have enjoyed every opportunity of developing all branches of their national culture, literature, theatrical art, science, etc., throughout the territory of the Soviet Union, as well as in their own national districts in the Ukraine and Crimea.”161 Jews were disproportionately represented in supervising government agencies and in the government-controlled media. As in other communist countries, Jews reigned supreme in every aspect of perception management.


157 David Bergelson, The Jewish Autonomous Region (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1939), 5-9

158 John Sack, An Eye For An Eye: The Story of Jews Who Sought Revenge For the Holocaust, (Internet, AAARGH, 1993/2007), 38-39
https://archive.org/details/AnEyeForAnEye; verified 05 Jan 2022

159 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors, The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 77-81

160 Udo Walendy, review of “The Jews in the Soviet Union, Part 2 of 200 Years Together, by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn,” The Barnes Review, Vol. 15, No. 5, September/October 2008

161 David Bergelson, The Jewish Autonomous Region (Mosow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1939), 10-11

The Soviet Union’s collectivization of agriculture intrigued many American agriculturists. The Soviet farm crisis of the 1920s gave them a chance to reevaluate agricultural production. The Soviets advertised in the American farm press, looking for farm experts who would be willing to reside in the Soviet Union for a year or more to help the country modernize its farming techniques and upgrade its antiquated technology. The postwar economic slump had taken a terrible toll on many farmers, and they were eager for the chance to work in the Soviet Union. Soviet officials visited America and placed orders for farm machinery with companies like Caterpillar Tractor and International Harvester. These companies provided individuals such as Edward J. Stirniman, an engineer from the University of California, and Leonard J. Fletcher, an engineer from Caterpillar, who agreed to go to the Soviet Union for two years to instruct the Soviets on how to assemble and use the machinery.162

In 1923, to reconstruct the Jewish agricultural colonies destroyed by warfare, the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC) had eighty-six American tractors delivered to Ukraine. Inspired by the success of this project, Dr. Joseph Rosen, the director of the JDC’s Russian branch, and Soviet officials devised a program to facilitate the transition of hundreds of thousands of poverty-stricken Jews into farmers. In 1924, the JDC and the Soviet government created the American Jewish Joint Agricultural Corporation (Agro-Joint) to agrarianize the Jews.163

In 1917, Julius Rosenwald established the Chicago-based Rosenwald Fund for “the well-being of mankind.” Rosenwald, along with philanthropists Henry H. Rogers, John D. Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie, funded educational efforts for blacks in the South. Rosenwald was a part-owner of Sears, Roebuck and Company, a founder of the Museum of Science and Industry, and a founder of the NAACP.164 In 1926, he and other American Jews created the organization Jewish Colonization in the Soviet Union (ICOR), possibly tied to the American Communist Party. Their goal was to raise funds for Jewish collectives in the Crimea, a peninsula of Ukraine on the northern coast of the Black Sea. Rosenwald gave more than $2 million to ICOR, whose main objective, long before Hitler came to power, was the creation of Birobidjan to “save the European Jews from the future Holocaust.”165 How did ICOR leaders know in 1926 about a holocaust to come? Were they reviving a story from World War I?


162 Deborah Fitzgerald, “Blinded by Technology: American Agriculture in the Soviet Union, 1928- 1932,” Agricultural History Society, Vol. 70, No. 3, Summer 1996, 459-60

163 Michael Beizer, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 2010
http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/American_Jewish_Joint_Distribution_Committee; verified 06 Jan 2022

164 NAACP History,
http://www.naacp.org/about/history/index.htm; verified 06 Jan 2022

165 “A Gift to Birobidjan: Chicago, 1937, From Despair to New Hope, Birobidjan and American Support,”
http://www.oakton.edu/museum/biroamer.htm, verified 05 Jan. 2022

Paul Scheffer, the Moscow correspondent of the Berliner Tageblatt, wrote about the bread riots and food shortages in Russia that began in 1928. By early 1930, he could envision a developing catastrophe. He wrote, “The days of famine are already sounding their approach. The present disorganization will not show its full effects till the coming harvest. It is still five months till that time, months in which hunger can only increase.” He added that Stalin’s “brutal policy of beating down all opposition everywhere shows that at that early date he had already foreseen the economic crisis that would result from the collapse of the New Economic Policy (NEP), and that he had discounted it.”166

The Committee for the Settlement of Jewish Laborers on the Land, working on behalf of the government, dispensed free land, along with tax benefits, to Jews in Crimea and Ukraine. In 1928, the JDC appointed James N. Rosenberg as chairman of its newly created American Society for Jewish Farm Settlements in Russia to acquire financial sponsorship. Julius Rosenwald was the society’s principle backer. Despite the worldwide depression, Agro-Joint, with sufficient financing from the society, maintained its project in Soviet Union even when though the JDC had to terminate its endeavors in other countries.167

On March 28, 1928, to accommodate the Jews in the Soviet Union, the Central Executive Committee of the Soviet Union officially designated Birobidjan, in the Russian Far East, away from the area designated for imminent warfare, as a socialist republic for Jewish settlement. The government, with the first Five-Year Plan (1929-33), also conspired to collectivize, demoralize, and starve the independent middle-class farmers in Ukraine where the Jews were then living. The Soviets formalized this decision for the safe settlement of Jews on August 20, 1930. The Birobidjan site was a virtually vacant area of 22,369 square miles, much larger than Palestine. The town of Birobidjan, the administrative center of the Jewish Autonomous Region (JAR), borders Khabarovsk Krai and Amur Oblast of Russia and the Heilongjiang province of China.


166 Paul Scheffer and Arthur Livingston, Seven Years in Soviet Russia: With a Retrospect, (New York: Macmillan, 1932), 64, 83, 294

167 Michael Beizer, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 2010
http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/American_Jewish_Joint_Distribution_Committee; verified 06 Jan 2022

In 1929, Milburn L. Wilson spent six months instructing the Soviets on large-scale collectivized wheat farming. As many as four hundred thousand acres of wheat were planned at a time when the average American farmer still used animals to plow and to harvest and typically had a farm of 160 acres. Few American farmers had industrial-size or corporate-style farms. Agricultural machine manufacturers would sell more equipment to those with industrial-size farm. Other interests desired to get rid of farmers and replace them with machines.168

John Q. McDonald taught Soviet farmers the proper use of machinery for each crop. J. Brownlee Davidson of Iowa State College went to Birobidjan to determine the area’s agricultural suitability for an autonomous Jewish state.169 Franklin S. Harris, an agricultural scientist with a doctorate from Cornell, served as president of Brigham Young University from 1921 to 1945 and was also president of Utah State University; he was president of the Utah State Agricultural College from 1945 to 1950. In 1929, as chairman of the American delegation evaluating the prospective territory for Jewish colonization, Harris led the ICOR Commission to the Soviet Union and was involved in the founding of Birobidjan. Kiefer B. Sauls, BYU’s purchasing agent, was Harris’s secretary for the trip.170

The Soviet-based Organization for Jewish Colonization and an American-based Jewish Communist organization encouraged Jewish immigration. More than a thousand immigrants from outside of Russia immigrated to the area. George A. Koval, later a Soviet intelligence officer, born to Jewish immigrants in Sioux City, Iowa, moved with his parents to the JAR as an adult in 1932. He later returned to the United States where he infiltrated the Manhattan Project. According to the Russian government, he transmitted information about the project and descriptions of weapon production sites. He also sent the Soviets huge amounts of polonium, plutonium, and uranium. Following World War II, he went to Europe for a vacation and never returned to America.


168 Deborah Fitzgerald, “Blinded by Technology: American Agriculture in the Soviet Union, 1928- 1932,” Agricultural History Society, Vol. 70, No. 3, Summer 1996, 459-60

169 Ibid. 459-60

170 “Kiefer B. Sauls, Presidential Assistant, Financial Anchor of BYU for 50 Years,”
http://www.byhigh.org/Alumni_P_to_T/Sauls/KieferB.html; verified 07 Jan 2022

On February 27, 1934, at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in New York City, William W. Cohen, a banker/stockbroker serving as a congressman from New York, and others organized the American Committee for the Settlement of Jews in Birobidjan, with an office on Madison Avenue. Speakers at that meeting included Lord Marley, Dudley Aman, who was a British MP and a leading spokesman for the Birobidjan project in Britain. He was the honorary president of the organization with Cohen as vice president. Jacob M. Budish, author of The Changing Structure of the Working Class: The New Unionism in the Clothing Industry, and People’s Capitalism; Stock Ownership and Production, and other books, played a key role behind the scenes in Birobidjan. He was a member of the Communist Party USA and an employee of Amtorg, the New York-based Soviet foreign trade office in the United States.

On May 7, 1934, Josef Stalin officially created the autonomous Jewish state in Birobidjan as an alternative to Theodor Herzl’s vision of a socialist state in the British mandate of Palestine. The American Birobidjan Committee, with Albert Einstein as president, promoted Birobidjan as a Jewish homeland. A Jewish homeland in Palestine ran counter to Soviet views of nationalism. Rather, Stalin’s regime envisioned a new “Soviet Zion,” where Jews could create a proletarian Jewish culture, speak Yiddish instead of Hebrew, and develop new socialist literature and arts to replace religion as the principal feature of their identity.

In February 1936, Chicago attorney Jacob Grossberg, a founder of the American Jewish Congress (AJC), and other leading Chicago Jews established a local chapter of Ambijan, the New York-based organization supporting Birobidjan. While many Jews promoted and funded settlement in Palestine, Grossberg and other Ambijan leaders and the founders of ICOR, such as Julius Rosenwald, “believed that moving Jews from Europe to Birobidjan would protect them from persecution and future disaster.”171 Later, the Ambijan (Birobidjan) Committee for Emergency Aid to the Soviet Union pressured the JDC to assist in the care and rehabilitation of 3,500 Jewish war orphans whom the Soviets planned to evacuate from other parts of Russia to Birobidjan. The JDC declined to participate.172


171 A Gift to Birobidjan: Chicago, 1937, From Despair to New Hope, Birobidjan and American Support,
http://www.oakton.edu/museum/biroamer.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

172 Records of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee: New York office, 1921-32, Sub- collection 4, File 513: USSR: Agro-Joint, General, Birobidjan, 1926-29

The American-based Agro-Joint, with access to millions of dollars, provided agricultural equipment, seed, and cattle to 150,000 Jewish settlers in 250 newly founded communities while skilled agronomists taught them modern farming techniques. Agro-Joint constructed a factory in Dzhankoy to maintain and repair the agricultural machinery. In addition to spending at least $16 million, Agro-Joint extended long-term credits. In the 1930s, as the Soviet system increased collectivization, unemployment decreased, reducing the number of Jewish farmers. Concurrently, Agro-Joint, with access to 370 funds, provided loans and credits to Jews in urban areas to help them develop industry, medical facilities, and technical schools. Agro-Joint also subsidized Jewish organizations devoted to cultural and religious activities. Agro-Joint discontinued its work in the Soviet Union in 1938 after authorities arrested some of its participants.173

The JDC did not favor the Birobidjan proposition. However, with the advent of National Socialist power in Germany, locating new homes for Jewish refugees became a major issue. Therefore Agro-Joint, consisting of Paul Baerwald, M. B. Hexter, Joseph Hyman, M. A. Leavitt, Evelyn M. Morrissey, R. Pilpel, E. C. Ropes, Dr. Joseph A. Rosen, James N. Rosenberg, and M. C. Troper, reassessed resettlement projects in Birobidjan. In 1936, the Soviet government took full responsibility for the operation and management of all activities there and restricted all foreign assistance and supervision. During the Stalinist purges of 1936 to 1938, officials liquidated several Jewish leaders in Birobidjan.174

A representative at the Zionist Institute of Jewish Affairs wrote, “In numerous cities and towns, particularly in the Ukraine and White Russia, Jews were among the first to be evacuated.” The institute admitted that Jews received preferential treatment from the Soviet government, which devoted thousands of trains for evacuation of Jews from such cities as Kiev, Odessa (which had the second-largest Jewish community after Warsaw), and Smolensk. After warfare erupted, but before Germans invaded Russian cities and towns, the Soviet government transported troops to the western front and then used the same trains to evacuate the majority of the Jewish population from those areas. Joshua Rothenberg of Brandeis University said, “Much of the Jewish population of the conquered territories escaped annihilation by fleeing before the invading armies arrived.”175


173 Michael Beizer, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 2010
http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/American_Jewish_Joint_Distribution_Committee; verified 06 Jan 2022

174 Records of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee: New York office, 1921-32, Sub- collection 4, File 513: USSR: Agro-Joint, General, Birobidjan, 1926-29

175 Walter N. Sanning, The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1983), 91-92

When war began, the JDC helped Jews emigrate from Europe. In 1941, the JDC facilitated Jewish immigration from German-occupied areas and from Lithuania to Palestine and Japan. The JDC also worked with the International Red Cross to help Jews leave Europe. On July 30, 1941, the Soviet Union and the Polish government arranged to have the JDC send packages to Polish Jews whom the Soviets had evacuated to Central Asia. From 1942 to 1945, the JDC spent $2.2 million on assistance. In 1943, the JDC delivered food, clothing, and other essentials, which the Soviet Red Cross distributed.176

Zionist sources admit that the evacuation of the Baltic Jews and the native population began before the war began. Following the war, German investigators discovered that the Soviets had carried out massive arrests, deportations, murders, and other atrocities on June 13 and 14, 1941, just prior to the German invasion. The Soviets evacuated nearly all of the Jews from the towns in the west closest to the border long before the Germans took control of them. Zionist sources disclosed that this was possible only because the Soviets had already devised an evacuation plan, facilitated by the fact that the Jews resided in just four cities, Kiev, Odessa, Kharkov, and Dnepropetrovsk, all in Ukraine. About 85 percent of the Jews living in Ukraine lived in those cities in 1939. In White Russia, present-day Belarus, 87.8 percent of the Jews lived in big cities.177

In 1941, the Red Army evacuated a reported 80 percent of the 3,597,000 Jews who resided in Soviet territory that Germany would soon occupy. Eighty percent would be 2,877,000, leaving roughly 720,000 Jews under German jurisdiction, many of them older and resistant to moving. This suited the Soviets, who did not want additional eaters who were unable to work in their camps. Given their experience during World War I, the Jews also believed that they would fare better under the Germans than under the Soviets. However, they were most likely to perish during the hardships of war such as hunger, cold, epidemics, and lack of medical attention. In 1944, Arthur R. Davies, a war correspondent in Europe, said that Shachne Epstein of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee reported that the Soviets evacuated 3.5 million Jews from German-occupied territory to Siberia, including 750,000 Jewish refugees from Poland in the spring of 1940.178


176 Michael Beizer, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 2010
http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/American_Jewish_Joint_Distribution_Committee; verified 06 Jan 2022

177 Walter N. Sanning, The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1983), 93-94

178 Ibid. 100-04

The Soviets were intent on saving Jews living in areas that the Germans conquered. The Soviets awarded Jews influential positions in the government where many of them functioned as party officials and specialists. In late 1942, David Bergelson said, “The evacuation saved a decisive majority of Jews of the Ukraine, White Russia, Lithuania, and Latvia. According to information coming from Vitebsk, Riga and other large centers which have been captured by the Fascists, there were few Jews there when the Germans arrived… This means that a majority of the Jews of these cities were evacuated in time by the Soviet government.” Germany occupied an area in the Soviet Union where 2.03 million Jews had previously resided. Only one-fifth of those Jews fell into German hands. Gerald Reitlinger, author of Holocaust: The Final Solution (1953; revised edition, 1967), one of the first books promoting the idea of a holocaust, and The SS: Alibi of a Nation, said that the “bulk” of the three million Jews living in prewar Russia, and 1,800,000 Jews residing in the annexed areas escaped into the interior of the Soviet Union.179 His figures contradict the propaganda that the Zionists and the communists disseminated, especially after the war when the media distracted the masses with threats of nuclear war.

Following the war, David Ben-Gurion, chairman of the Jewish Agency Executive, arranged for the JDC to take care of Jews in displaced-persons camps. The JDC also financed the program Relief in Transit, which accommodated legal and illegal Jewish emigration from Europe to Palestine. The program, with access to millions of dollars, provided food, clothing, and transportation. From 1945 to 1952, the JDC spent $342 million to assist Holocaust victims. Starting in May 1945, the Central Committee of Jews in Poland distributed huge shipments of goods that the JDC sent to Polish Jews who had arrived in Warsaw from the Soviet Union. The JDC financed Jews who wanted to stay in Poland as well as those who wished to leave. Most wanted to leave, so the JDC furnished trucks, food, and clothing and subsidized Zionist kibbutzim for youths.180


179 Walter N. Sanning, The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1983), 100-04

180 Michael Beizer, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 2010
http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/American_Jewish_Joint_Distribution_Committee; verified 06 Jan 2022

Chapter 8 ♦ The Ha’avara Agreement

According to Jewish law, a Jew should be loyal to the country in which he or she lives. However, a Zionist, according to the World Zionist Organization (WZO), owes “unqualified loyalty” to the Israeli state. If a conflict exists, a Zionist must choose the Zionist state.181 Most assimilated American German Jews did not want “hordes of Russian Jews” inundating America. These Eastern European Jews were of a different culture and were scorned for their traditional ways, including their black clothes, beards, and mannerisms, all distinctively foreign. Their presence in America might generate anti-Semitism and call into question the standing of assimilated Jews in the communities where people had accepted them.182

The Reverend William Blackstone, of Oak Park, Illinois, a dispensational Christian, influenced by John Darby and Dwight Moody, devised the Blackstone Memorial, which called for the restoration of Jews to Palestine and an end to Jewish suffering in Russia. He acquired the signatures of 413 prominent Americans, including executives, politicians, Jewish and Christian leaders, editors, publishers, and even the chief justice of the Supreme Court. He presented the document to President Benjamin Harrison on March 5, 1891. The Chicago Tribune printed its text, and many major newspapers publicized it for several weeks. Yet Harrison did not act upon the memorial. Next, Blackstone presented the document to President Theodore Roosevelt, who also did not respond as Blackstone had hoped.183

In 1897, leaders of the Central Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR) declared, “We totally disapprove of any attempt for the establishment of a Jewish state. Such attempts show a misunderstanding of Israel’s mission, which from the narrow political and national field has been expanded to the promotion among the whole human race of the broad and universalistic religion first proclaimed by the Jewish prophets.”184


181 The Difference between Judaism and Zionism by G. Neuburger, Jews Not Zionists,

182 Jerry Klinger, “Judge Brandeis, President Wilson and Reverend William E. Blackstone Changed Jewish History,” The Jewish Magazine,
http://jewishmag.com/146mag/brandeis_blackstone/brandeis_blackstone.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

183 Ibid.

Jacob de Haas, secretary of the First Zionist Congress and from 1892 to 1900 editor of the newspaper Jewish World in London, introduced Theodor Herzl to influential people in Britain. In 1899, the Third Zionist Congress elected Leopold Greenberg, a British journalist, and de Haas to its propaganda committee. Greenberg, a friend of David Lloyd George, invited Herzl to his home and introduced him to prominent British Jews to persuade them to accept Zionism. De Haas, a propagandist, moved to America in 1902, where he became editor of the Boston Jewish Advocate. Herzl recommended de Haas to Richard Gottheil as the new ZOA secretary to replace Stephen S. Wise. De Haas soon befriended Harvard-educated Louis D. Brandeis, who by 1908 was committed to Zionism.

American Zionists assumed the major responsibility for the Zionist Organization when World War I began. They established the Provisional Executive Committee for Zionist Affairs in New York on August 20, 1914, and elected Brandeis to lead the fifteen thousand-member organization. Brandeis, as the head of American Zionism, conducted a speaking tour in the fall and winter from 1914 to 1915 to gain support for the creation of a Jewish homeland. He suggested that this would solve anti-Semitism and the Jewish problem in Europe and in Russia. He urged Jews to unite. Organization is essential, especially for a minority ideological group. Under his leadership, the organization grew to more than 250,000 members.

Nathan Straus, co-owner or R.H. Macy & Company, along with his brother Isidor, was a close friend to Brandeis. Straus, a devoted Zionist, dedicated most of his fortune to the Zionist cause. He told Brandeis about the Blackstone Memorial. On April 21, 1916, Brandeis wrote to the State Department to get a copy of the memorial, but someone had lost or misplaced it.185 On May 8, Brandeis asked Straus to contact Blackstone, who responded favorably. On May 22, Brandeis then wrote to Blackstone, who agreed to furnish him with an updated document that he hoped to present to President Woodrow Wilson. Because Brandeis had traversed the country urging support for Zionism and because the media had publicized the pogroms in Russia, many non-Jews were now associated with the Zionist organization.186


184 Alan R. Taylor, The Zionist Mind: The Origins and Development of Zionist Thought (Institute for Palestine Studies, 1974), 72.

185 Jerry Klinger, “Judge Brandeis, President Wilson and Reverend William E. Blackstone Changed Jewish History,” The Jewish Magazine,
http://jewishmag.com/146mag/brandeis_blackstone/brandeis_blackstone.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

186 Ibid.

In August 1912, during the presidential campaign, Brandeis and Wilson had met privately for three hours in New Jersey to discuss economic issues. Afterward, Brandeis supported Wilson and urged his friends to do likewise, and Wilson began using Brandeis’s term “regulated competition.”187 Although he took a seat as an associate justice on the Supreme Court on June 1, 1916, Brandeis continued to work for the Zionist cause.188

Though close to Wilson, Brandeis was still uncertain about Blackstone presenting his revision. So on May 8, 1917, he wrote to Jacob de Haas, who encouraged him. On June 7, Brandeis, still hesitant, again wrote to de Haas, saying he thought it unwise and untimely to attract unwanted publicity for the memorial. America was neutral about the war in Europe. From 1916 to 1918, Brandeis met regularly with Wilson to discuss the economy, Zionism, Palestine, the Blackstone Memorial, and the Balfour Declaration. Brandeis urged Blackstone to wait for the most opportune moment to present his document. Impatient, on June 14, Blackstone wrote to Wilson, enclosing a copy of the original memorial. One of the endorsees of the document was William E. Dodge, the father of Cleveland Dodge, Wilson’s Princeton classmate and a big financial supporter.189

At the end of June, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise ceremoniously gave the Blackstone Memorial to Wilson. On June 30, 1917, Wise wrote to Blackstone, telling him that he had unofficially presented the petition to Wilson, who graciously accepted its concepts because of his religious propensities as the son of a Presbyterian minister. But Wise agreed with Brandeis that it would be best to delay any publicity about the memorial. They also agreed that Wilson’s biblically based faith assured success for the Zionists,190 perhaps the reason for their initial support of his presidency.

Brandeis had already talked about the memorial with Wilson, who agreed with the document’s ideologies. But the British, not yet in possession of Palestine, were still negotiating with the Zionists over the disposition of Palestine and the Turks. Therefore a public announcement of the memorial was critical. Brandeis, in his travels throughout the country, had built faith-based grassroots support for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, an early basis for Christian Zionism. Wilson and Brandeis had to assure the public that they had not adopted British policies and that their objectives were compatible with national interests. They never officially presented the memorial to Wilson, since it recommended that every nation convene a conference to resolve the “Jewish Problem.” Such a conference was incompatible with the relationship that the US government had with Britain, which had jurisdiction over Palestine following the Great War.191


187 W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, (Cutchogue, New York: Buccaneer Books,1970), 20-21

188 Jerry Klinger, “Judge Brandeis, President Wilson and Reverend William E. Blackstone Changed Jewish History,” The Jewish Magazine,
http://jewishmag.com/146mag/brandeis_blackstone/brandeis_blackstone.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

189 Ibid.

190 Ibid.

191 Ibid.

Before he accepted it, Prime Minister David Lloyd George wanted assurance from American politicians that they would support the Balfour Declaration. On October 16, 1917, Edward M. House, a key Wilson adviser, told the British intelligence chief in New York that the president favored it, with reservations, on the condition that the British not disclose his acceptance. To provide legitimacy, Wilson arranged to have key Jews ask him to approve of it before a public announcement. The British issued the declaration on November 2. On August 31, 1918, Wilson wrote to Rabbi Wise, saying that he was gratified by the success of the Zionist movement. On June 30, 1922, Congress would adopt a resolution “favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” Congress also guaranteed that it would do nothing to alter the rights of any of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine.192

On July 20, 1921, a New York Times headline asked America to save six million Jews in Russia from a potential massacre. The paper referred to Dr. Joseph Kreinin, a noted Jewish social worker and president of the Russian Joint Board of Jewish Societies, who said, “Russia’s 6,000,000 Jews are facing extermination by massacre. As the famine is spreading, the counter revolutionary movement is gaining and the Soviet’s control is waning. This statement is borne out by official documents presented to the Berlin Government, which show that numerous pogroms are raging in all parts of Russia and the Ukraine.”193

According to Kurt Klein, about 523,000 Jews lived in Germany in January 1933, less than 1 percent of the population, with about a third of them living in Berlin. Almost thirty-eight thousand Jews emigrated when Hitler came to power, going to France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Czechoslovakia, and Switzerland.194

Despite the claims of some people, including Klaus Polkehn, a Soviet-bloc writer, Hitler did not formalize anti-Semitism as a government policy when he became chancellor in 1933. Polkehn admitted that in early 1933, German officials began cooperating with the Zionists to “increase the inflow of German Jewish immigrants and capital to Palestine.” The Zionists concealed this fact until the 1960s, insisting that they were trying to save Jewish lives. Interestingly, they devised this arrangement with Germany at the same time that the AJC and numerous other entities were waging economic war against the country.195


192 Jerry Klinger, “Judge Brandeis, President Wilson and Reverend William E. Blackstone Changed Jewish History,” The Jewish Magazine,
http://jewishmag.com/146mag/brandeis_blackstone/brandeis_blackstone.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

193 “Begs America Save 6,000,000 in Russia; Massacre Threatens All Jews as Soviet Power Wanes, Declares Kreinin, Coming Here for Aid,” New York Times, July 20, 1921,
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9900E3DB1731EF33A25753C2A9619C946095D6CF; verified 5 Jan. 2022

194 Kurt Klein, “German Jewish Refugees, 1933-1939,” Holocaust Encyclopedia, Holocaust Museum, Washington, D.C.,
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005468; verified 06 Jan 2022

195 Klaus Polkehn, “The Secret Contacts: Zionist-Nazi Relations, 1933-1941,” Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2, Spring/Summer 1976, 54

In Jewish Emigration from the Third Reich, Ingrid Weckert, says that Jews certainly did not have to “sneak out” of the country, leaving all of their property and assets behind, as so many court historians claim. Reich officials naturally welcomed this emigration, particularly after international Jewry declared a worldwide economic boycott against Germany, a catastrophic blow at a time of massive unemployment and economic stress. This economic war led to the protective legislation that the Reich enacted. German and Jewish authorities, especially the Zionists, collaborated to facilitate the emigration process, making it easy for Jews to leave the country. Despite the actions of a few Jews representing all Jewry, thousands of them had resided in Germany for decades and still considered it their home.196

Frederic Morton, the Rothschilds’ biographer, maintains that Emile and Isaac Péreire, early Jewish bankers and Rothschild competitors, were not the worst enemies that the infamous banking family would ever have. Morton says that Hitler was the most determined, powerful foe that the Rothschilds would face.197 Until his advent, the Rothschilds were the power in Frankfurt.198

In early 1933, the Rothschilds hired IBM to identify German Jews because the family had lost control over them and wanted to single them out in order to relocate them to Palestine whether they wanted to go or not. Thomas Watson of IBM traveled back and forth to Germany, a fact the New York Times failed to mention. The German government awarded him because he was doing it a huge favor in identifying Jews. While many Germans disliked the Jews and their predatory behavior, it was Jewish financiers who funded the IBM project.


196 Ingrid Weckert, Jewish Emigration from the Third Reich, trans. by Fredrick Töben (Chicago: Castle Hill Publishers, 2004), 7-8, 10-12

197 Frederic Morton, The Rothschilds: A Family Portrait, (Atheneum, New York, 1962), 127-28

198 Ibid. 218

In Jewish History and Jewish Religion, Israel Shahak said that the rabbis in the ghettos controlled and exploited the Jews, but then the Jews began to intermarry, intermingle, and assimilate. To retain control, especially of the poorer Jews, the rabbis had to identify and then somehow compel them to move to Palestine. Perhaps the Jews, with their extensive communications networks, could coordinate a few Kristallnacht-style pogroms, then arrange for officials in other countries to halt Jewish immigration. Then the Jews could gain sympathy on a number of levels, and the Zionists could move the Jews to Palestine and continue to construct the basis for a religious requirement—the Holocaust—while blaming Hitler and the hardworking Germans who resented people who exploited the efforts of others. Most Jews resisted leaving Germany since this would mean fighting the Arabs for the rest of their lives. Yet what choice did frightened Jews have? Some of the first ships to Palestine complete with swastikas and Hebrew phrases on the sides, came from Germany under the government’s direction.

Arthur Ruppin of Berlin’s Bureau for Jewish Statistics and Demography wanted to establish a WZO branch in Palestine; he opened the Eretz Yisrael Office in Jaffa. At the Ninth Zionist Congress in 1909 in Hamburg, he and Max Nordau anticipated that the Young Turk revolution would drastically enhance expectations in Palestine.

In May 1933, during a closing session of the AJC at the Hotel Willard in Washington, D.C., former US Representative Meyer Jacobstein introduced a resolution for an integrated worldwide program to deal with the persecution of Jews in Germany. One of the conference objectives was to plan the World Jewish Congress in 1934 in Geneva. Attendees called on American Jews to elect delegates to the congress, which re-elected Stephen S. Wise as the honorary president. Other officers included Bernard S. Deutsch, Nathan Perlman, Louis Lipsky, and Samuel Margoshes. They unanimously endorsed a resolution saying that “Palestine alone offered a permanent solution to the problem of Jewish homelessness, particularly with reference to those Jews in Germany who are seeking a refuge in flight.”199

In 1933, Sam Cohen, the manager of a Palestinian citrus company, signed an agreement with the German Ministry of Economics to facilitate the transfer of one million marks to Palestine. People in Palestine would use the funds to purchase agricultural equipment from Germany for sale in Palestine. This was the precursor of the transfer (Ha’avara) agreement. Jews angrily attacked the accord, viewing it as a traitorous attempt to incapacitate Zionist efforts to boycott German exports. This was somewhat accurate in that the National Socialist government agreed to this arrangement “to make a breach in the wall of the anti-German boycott.”200


199 “Ask Government Stand on Nazi Persecutions at Final Session of American Jewish Congress,” JTA, The Global Jewish News Source, May 24, 1933;
http://www.jta.org/1933/05/24/archive/ask-government-stand-on-nazi-persecutions; verified 05 Jan. 2022

200 Walter Laqueur, A History of Zionism, From the French Revolution to the Establishment of the State of Israel, (New York: MJF Books, 1972), 502-503

The parties signed the Ha’avara Agreement on August 25, 1933, after three months of negotiations between the Zionist Federation of Germany, the Anglo-Palestine Bank (under the direction of the Jewish Agency), and the Reich Ministry of Finance. They designed the agreement to help expedite Jewish immigration to Palestine. The document in the German archives, dated August 28, says the goal was to “further the cause of Jewish emigration to Palestine through allocation of the necessary sums of money, without putting too much strain on the currency reserves of the Reich and simultaneously increasing German exports to Palestine.” To start a new life in Palestine, individuals had to have a minimum of a thousand Palestine pounds. The Emigration Advisory Office offered a sum in excess of fifteen thousand Reichmarks on the condition that recipients pay it at the Reichsbank, which would credit the money to a special trust company in Palestine. This account would be used to pay for German goods delivered to Palestine. German Jewish nationals relocating to Palestine could deposit up to fifty thousand Reichmarks per person and have the money credited to the German-Jewish trust company in Palestine.201

On August 31, 1933, in Berlin, the Finance Ministry issued a document describing the transfer of Jewish assets from Germany to Palestine. The decree, dated August 28, promoted Jewish emigration to Palestine. The Reichsbank created two special accounts for the Bank of Temple Society in favor of the Anglo-Palestine Bank.202 This agreement enabled the transfer of about sixty thousand Jews and $100 million (in 1933 dollars) to Palestine.203

From August 21 to September 4, the Zionist Organization, which had “quasi-governmental status,” convened its eighteenth Zionist Congress in Prague, with a Jewish population of forty thousand. The congress was held at the Lucerno Concert Hall, with a seating capacity of five thousand. Prague looked forward to the event, which would draw ten thousand attendees, many of whom would hear the proceedings outside of the hall. Signs welcoming the visitors, in six different languages, were displayed along the main streets. Czechoslovakia’s first president, Thomas Masaryk, opposed anti-Semitism and enjoyed close ties to Louis D. Brandeis and Stephen S. Wise. The actions committee chairman Leo Motzkin, a participant in the first Zionist Conference in 1897 and a key organizer of the Jewish delegation at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, led the speakers, including David Ben-Gurion and Vladimir Jabotinsky, the creator of the Haganah, to their seats.204


201 Circular 54/1933, Reich Ministry of Finance, Documentarchiv.de, August 28, 1933

202 Lenni Brenner, ed., 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis, (Barricade Books, Inc., Fort Lee, New Jersey, 2002), 47

203 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), xiii

204 Ibid. 298-300

Zionist Organization president Nahum Sokolow, also president of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, directed a group of diplomats including Masaryk, an official from the British embassy, and Greek and Spanish officials from the League of Nations to their seats. Sokolow then called the meeting to order and delivered his opening remarks. He said, “It is dangerous to talk, but even more dangerous to be silent.”205

“We come together on this occasion in a time of tribulation and suffering,” Sokolow said. “Emancipation has been shaken at its foundations… thrown into confusion as by an earthquake. We are suddenly faced with the ruins of Jewish emancipation in one of the greatest countries in Europe. The falsehood of assimilation and mimicry endeavored to make our people believe that anti-Semitism was a passing episode which would be quickly overcome, a bogey to frighten children… It is a bitter irony that the assimilationist movement should have been strongest in Germany… Jewish people! How long can we go on like this? Time presses, the ground gives way beneath our feet. Whatever it is not too late to save must now be saved… Zionism must in these days become the concern of the entire Jewish people and of the human race… The maintenance of the status quo has become impossible.”206

Samuel Untermeyer was angry when he heard that the WZO was negotiating with the Hitler “bandits” for “permission” to remove as many Jews, along with their money, from Germany as Palestine could hold. Rabbi Wise and others were more concerned about their boycott than about their fellow Jews. Germany managed to get along well despite the Jewish efforts against it. Untermeyer claimed that Hitler carried out his plan, as outlined in Mein Kampf, after the people duly elected him. There were really only two political philosophies in Germany—National Socialism and communism—since the Bolsheviks had infiltrated so many parties.207


205 Walter Laqueur, A History of Zionism, From the French Revolution to the Establishment of the State of Israel, (New York: MJF Books, 1972), 501-02

206 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 298-300

207 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 202-06

People who favored the agreement viewed the boycott as temporary since non-Jews generally did not advocate such drastic economic policies. Author Walter Laqueur, a Jew, claimed that the Western powers and the Soviet Union had no intention of supporting the boycott against Germany and wanted to continue trade relations with that nation, which of course was not the case. The transfer agreement allowed thousands of Jews to settle in Palestine, which would generally strengthen their status there and in the Middle East. Germany soon realized that the agreement facilitated Jewish industry in Palestine and would therefore advance Jewish aspirations for a state in the area, something that Germany did not want. Laqueur, citing a memo from Adolf Eichmann, affirmed that Germany’s policy was “to keep the Jews dispersed all over the world rather than promote the establishment of even a minute state. Accordingly, Berlin decided to phase out the transfer agreement. The sum involved had been thirty-seven million marks in 1937; it was reduced to nineteen million in 1938 and to eight million in 1939.”208

In 1937, citing the situation in Germany, the Central Conference of American Rabbis changed its opinion about Zionism, a move that generated another anti-Zionist Jewish organization. In 1943, ninety-two Reform rabbis, along with several influential American Jews, formed the American Council for Judaism to oppose Zionism. The council’s leadership included Rabbi Morris S. Lazaron of Baltimore. Lessing Rosenwald, chairman of Sears, became the group’s president. He was the son of Julius, a founder of the Jewish Colonization in the Soviet Union and the former head of Sears. Rabbi Elmer Berger was the executive director. Arthur Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times, and Sidney Wallach of the AJCm were also part of the council, which grew to more than fifteen thousand members. This influential group incensed the Zionist leadership, which wanted the Jewish community to unite on the Palestine question.209

Kurt Klein says about thirty-six thousand Jews left Germany and Austria in 1938 and seventy-seven thousand in 1939.210 In the 1930s, approximately one million Jews relocated to Palestine and to North and South America from Central and Eastern Europe. At the beginning of World War II, there were sixteen million Jews in the world: five million in the United States, 5.3 million in the USSR and the Baltic States, 2.9 million in European countries that would be occupied by Germany during the war, four hundred thousand in Palestine, and 2.4 million in the rest of the world.211


208 Walter Laqueur, A History of Zionism, From the French Revolution to the Establishment of the State of Israel, (New York: MJF Books, 1972), 502-03

209 Evan M. Wilson, Decision on Palestine: How the U.S. Came to Recognize Israel (Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1979), 27

210 Kurt Klein, “German Jewish Refugees, 1933-1939,” Holocaust Encyclopedia, Holocaust Museum, Washington, D.C.,
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005468; verified 06 Jan 2022

211 Walter N. Sanning, The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1983), 14-15

Klein says that 282,000 Jews had left Germany by September 1939 and another 117,000 had emigrated from Austria. About 95,000 Jews immigrated to America, 60,000 to Palestine, 40,000 to Britain, and 75,000 to Central and South America, mostly to Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Bolivia. More than 18,000 German Jews went to Shanghai. By the end of 1939, about 202,000 Jews remained in Germany and 57,000 in Austria, mostly the elderly. Germany halted emigration in October 1941. The number of Jews in Germany was then 163,000.212

World War II curtailed further immigration to Palestine. Hitler still favored the expulsion of the Jews.213 After the war, allegations of German atrocities against the Jews inevitably increased Zionist support. The Allies mangled the truth to gain cooperation from well-intentioned people who would otherwise have resisted and abhored the slaughter of thousands of innocent Arabs. A large Jewish population, once refugees, then settled in the area to ensure control of the territory for the benefit of the bankers, who preferred profits to people. Long-term planners succeed because, generation after generation, indoctrinated citizens fail to recognize the reasons for the ongoing worldwide genocide. The corporate media justify and glorify warfare, and citizens habitually fail to scrutinize the egregious behavior of those who have infiltrated and seized control of the government and who legislate exclusively for the benefit of the banking cartel.

Less than 15 percent of the Jews living in the USSR and the Baltic States at the start of World War II came under German occupation. At least one million Jews died in Soviet labor camps or while fighting in the Red Army. The data from Jewish sources differ from the numbers acquired through census figures and other official records. At the end of the war, there were 14.7 million Jews: 5.2 million in the United States, 4.3 million in the USSR, 2.4 million in European countries occupied by Germany during the war, six hundred thousand in Palestine, and 2.2 million in the rest of the world.214


212 Kurt Klein, “German Jewish Refugees, 1933-1939,” Holocaust Encyclopedia, Holocaust Museum, Washington, D.C.,
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005468; verified 06 Jan 2022

213 John Mahoney, Jane Adas, and Robert Norberg, eds., Burning Issues: Understanding and Misunderstanding the Middle East: A 40-Year Chronicle, (Americans for Middle East Understanding, 2007), 18-20

214 Walter N. Sanning, The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1983), 14-15

Chapter 9 ♦ FDR, a Red in the White House

In 1841, Clinton Roosevelt, of the New York banking family, wrote The Science of Government Founded on Natural Law, which advocated a network of highly structured, regulated communities. He supported the communization of America and the incremental elimination of the Constitution. The Rothschilds financed a committee, which included Clinton Roosevelt, to facilitate those objectives. Franklin D. Roosevelt may have derived inspiration for his New Deal from his cousin’s book.215 In this book, Clinton Roosevelt defined a strategy for a select group of chosen people to supervise the world’s population.216

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, members of the Communist League and both 32nd degree Freemasons,217 drafted what became The Communist Manifesto (1848), a blueprint for elitist control, borrowing heavily from Clinton Roosevelt’s book. The Manifesto called for a graduated income tax, the removal of all rights to inheritance, a central bank, centralized communication and transportation systems, the cultivation of wastelands, free public education, and abolition of child labor. The manifesto had appeal for the middle class, which favored some of these reforms. However, Marx did not demand land nationalization, which would have alienated many wealthy landowners and farmers whose funding he sought.218

The American Communist Party was established on September 1, 1919, with the goal of overthrowing the government by infiltration and stealth. Many of its members were Bolsheviks who had emigrated from Russia, Poland, and other Eastern European countries from 1880 to 1914. Marxist immigrants flooded America after 1917 until Congress passed a restrictive law in 1924. During that period, about three million people arrived, many of them Soviet agents.219 After pushing four constitutional amendments through the House,220 Representative Emanuel Celler worked for the next forty years to repeal the 1924 Immigration Act. By the time the act took effect in 1929, millions of Jews had already arrived. In the House, Sol Bloom, Samuel Dickstein, and Celler led the Foreign Relations, Immigration, and Judiciary Committees, respectively.221


215 Fitzwilliam Byrdsall, The History of the Loco-Foco, or Equal Rights Party: Its Movements (New York: Clement & Packard, 1842), 89, 92

216 Des Griffin, Descent into Slavery (Clackamas, Oregon: Emissary Publications, 1980), 131

217 Robert Freedman, The Marxist System: Economic, Political, and Social Perspectives (Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House Publishers, 1990), 142-144

218 Ibid. 142-144

219 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 46-47.

220 Kurt F. Stone, The Jews of Capitol Hill: A Compendium of Jewish Congressional Members, (Scarecrow Press, Kindle Edition), 119

221 Ibid. 130

These immigrants, Marxist and non-Christian, influenced national policy, embraced and transformed the Democrat Party into a leftist coalition, and helped elect Franklin D. Roosevelt when he ran against Herbert Hoover in 1932. Previously, the party consisted of rural Protestant Southerners and northern Catholics who championed Christian fundamentals and traditions.222 Communists established a presence in almost every country, including Britain, France, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Austria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Greece, and in Asia.

After the failed Bolshevik revolution of 1905, Sidney Hillman, a dedicated Trotskyite educated as a rabbi, relocated to America to direct “world operations.” In 1910, he organized a workers’ strike. In 1921, he visited Russia and met with Lenin and the Supreme Council and from 1922 took direction from Lenin.223 He helped found and became the president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, serving in that role from 1914 to 1944. In that capacity, he persuaded laborers to vote for FDR in 1932.224 Roosevelt regularly told people to “clear everything with Sidney.” In 1944, Hillman was FDR’s special assistant and the person who told him, at Max Lowenthal’s suggestion, to select Harry Truman as his vice presidential candidate.225 Hillman led communists in America while he was president of the Russian-American Industrial Corporation.226 Lowenthal was the chief adviser on Palestine to Clark Clifford, who from 1947 to 1952 was an adviser to President Truman. The president credited Lowenthal as the key influence behind America’s recognition of Israel.

Roosevelt, who served as New York’s governor from 1929 to 1932, asked his friend, Jesse I. Straus, the president of Macy’s department store, to be the chairman of the state’s Temporary Emergency Relief Administration, created in October 1931. Straus asked Harry L. Hopkins, the executive secretary of the Bureau of Child Welfare, to be the executive director. Hopkins became chairman when Straus was named ambassador to France. Hopkins maintained that the federal government should administer relief, and after FDR’s inauguration, he suggested this to the president. Hopkins, who headed the federal program, gave away $5 million to seven states on his first day on the job.227


222 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 46-47

223 Sidney Hillman, “Reconstruction of Russia and the Task of Labor,” an address before the fifth biennial convention of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, Chicago, May 11, 1922, 3

224 “Say Rykoff Acts for Lenin; Soviet Concession Policy Unchanged, Says Hillman; Speed Urged,” New York Times, June 26, 1922

225 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 61.

226 Ibid. 18

227 Thomas Fleming, The New Dealers’ War: Franklin D. Roosevelt and the War within World War II, (New York: Basic Books, 2001), 52

As governor, FDR promoted old-age pensions and an allegiance to the welfare state. He would do the same with his New Deal programs, which the Jewish community advocated and endorsed. Jews overwhelmingly supported him in 1932 and in 1936. Even when others withdrew their backing in 1940 and 1944, at least 90 percent of Jews voted for him.228 Advocates of the New Deal supported:

  1. Repudiation of the United States Treasury’s promises to pay.
  2. Confiscation of the people’s gold by trickery.
  3. Debasement of the currency.
  4. Deliberate inflation.
  5. Spoliation of savers, whose little rainy day funds melted away
  6. Deficit spending to create buying power by conjury.
  7. Monetization of debt.
  8. The doctrine of a planned economy.
  9. Taxation, class subsidies, federal grants, and the redistribution of wealth for social justice. This would reduce millions of citizens to subservience; make provinces out of the forty-eight sovereign states; create an executive-style government with extensive powers, including the ability to impose regulations through bureaucratic agencies, all having the force of law, and the capacity to punish the disobedient through fine or imprisonment.229

228 Henry L. Feingold, “Franklin Delano Roosevelt,”
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0017_0_16902.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

229 Garet Garrett, The People’s Pottage: The Caxton Printers (Caldwell, Idaho, 1953), 7-8

Dwight D. Eisenhower left the New Deal intact and expanded it. In the 1960s, Lyndon B. Johnson used New Deal policies to shape his Great Society. Richard M. Nixon retained many of Johnson’s programs. Numerous New Deal regulations and programs remain intact, even using the original names, such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Administration, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. The largest programs still in existence are the Social Security system and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Roosevelt took office on March 4, 1933. Title 12, U.S. Code, Section 95 (b), states, “The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, pursuant to the authority conferred by section 95a of this title, are approved and confirmed.”230 This refers to executive orders. According to this code, members of Congress are not required to read or vote on bills proposed by the president, because since 1933 this legislation has been automatically “approved and confirmed.” This code applies to many controversial acts including Obama’s health care law. Members of Congress simply go through the charade of debate and deliberation to maintain the illusion.

On March 6, 1933, several of the states “pledged the faith and credit” of their governments and citizenry “to the aid of the National Government.” On March 10, FDR called a bank holiday. On April 5, the government prohibited the hoarding of gold. On April 20, it prohibited the exportation of gold by individuals. On May 23, Representative Louis T. McFadden attempted to impeach the board of governors of the Federal Reserve Bank, the comptroller of the currency, and the treasury secretary for treason. Members of Congress, who had all sworn an oath, refused to act on his charges. On June 5, FDR, with Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111, and 6260, declared the United States bankrupt.

During the Depression of the 1930s, America suffered high unemployment. Isaac Rubinow was particularly concerned about the extent of Jewish unemployment and predicted that Jews, even educated ones, would be able to find only temporary employment, which would lead to growing maladjustment. Furthermore, there would be “a small minority in the field of big business, an increasing number employed in the hectic field of salesmanship, an unwilling drift to factory work, and a growing intellectual proletariat without permanent occupational status.” Jews, a minority in America, were disproportionately represented among people leading most of the left-wing groups that embraced the dogma of the Democratic Party. Most Jews enthusiastically supported FDR’s New Deal as a solution to the nation’s economic ills. They backed the unions, which offered job protection and assumed influential government positions.231


230 12 U.S.C. § 95b: US Code - Section 95B: Ratification of acts of President and Secretary of the Treasury under section 95a,
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/12/2/IV/95b; verified 07 Jan 2022

231 Hasia R. Diner, The Jews of the United States, 1654 to 2000, (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 2004), 235-37

According to the Labor Department, about eleven million people were out of work when FDR took office. He installed radicals, Fabian socialists, Stalin apologists, and communists in his administration. In addition to the Soviet communists, Roosevelt and his wife Eleanor were friendly toward the Chinese communists.232 Harry Hopkins, an FDR adviser, influenced significant decisions and policies. He represented Bernard Baruch and the international Jewish banking cartel. From 1937 through May 1944, Hopkins and Baruch were in continuous communication.233

Whittaker Chambers, a Soviet agent who later defected,234 claimed that FDR was merely a puppet and that a group of Jews and communists was actually running the country. This group included Baruch, Samuel Rosenman, Raymond Moley, Felix Frankfurter, Henry Morgenthau Sr. and Jr., Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, Benjamin J. Cardozo, Charles W. Taussig, Nathan Margold, Charles Wyszynski, Leo Wolman, Rose Schneiderman, Isador Lubin Jr., Sol Rosenblatt, Jerome Frank, Mordecai Ezekiel, Herbert Feis, David E. Lilienthal, Sidney Hillman, Albert Taussig, Alexander Sachs, Maurice Karp, Robert Freshner, Robert Strauss, Donald Richberg, Ferdinand Pecora, Samuel Untermeyer, James Landis, Samuel Dickstein, Herbert Lehman, James P. Warburg, David Stern, Henry Horner, Louis Kerstein, Benjamin V. Cohen, Walter Lippmann, William C. Bullitt, Adolf Berle,235 Joseph Proskauer, Nathan Margolin, Abe Fortas, Saul Padover, Albert Arent, Felix Cohen, and hundreds of other Jews.236 FDR appointed Harvard Law professor Felix Frankfurter, born in Vienna, as a Supreme Court justice. He was FDR’s legal adviser in the creation of national policies and decisions on whom to appoint to influential government positions. Washington insiders often referred to Frankfurter as the president.237

In 1933, Roosevelt gave Rose Schneiderman a position on the Labor Advisory Board, created under the National Recovery Act. Anna Rosenberg was on the board of the National Recovery Administration and on the War Manpower Commission in the Defense Department during the war. Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins named Dorothy Jacobs Bellanca to head the Maternal and Child Welfare Committee. In 1936, Eleanor Roosevelt invited Pauline Newman and a delegation of female garment and textile workers to spend a week at the White House.238 Rosenberg, President Harry S. Truman’s assistant secretary of defense, ultimately became a wealthy public relations professional for corporate America.239


232 Hamilton Fish, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin; How We Were Tricked into World War II (Life and Liberty Publishing, Murrieta, Georgia, 2005), 7-8

233 The Harry L. Hopkins Papers: Series I—Correspondence
http://www.library.georgetown.edu/dept/speccoll/hops1s1.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

234 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 38-44

235 Donn de Grand Pré, Barbarians Inside the Gates: The Black Book of Bolshevism, Book 1, The Serpent’s Sting (San Pedro, California: G S G & Associates Publishers, 2000), 89-90

236 Hasia R. Diner, The Jews of the United States, 1654 to 2000, (Berkeley, California, University of California Press, 2004), 237

237 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 58-59

238 Hasia R. Diner, The Jews of the United States, 1654 to 2000, (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 2004), 237

239 Public Relations, Jewish Virtual Library,
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0016_0_16178.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

The United States had severed diplomatic relations with Russia on December 6, 1917, because the Bolsheviks had refused to honor debts that the czarist government had incurred. Henry Morgenthau and Dean Acheson, both Felix Frankfurter protégés, invited Maxim Litvinov (born Litvinov Finkelstein) to the White House to finalize recognition of the Soviet Union with FDR, something the Soviets had sought for seventeen years.240 Litvinov was one of the Bolshevik conspirators who held a strategy session with Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin, and Kaganovich in Switzerland before going to Russia just prior to the revolution.241 Acheson, formerly a law clerk for Justice Brandeis, was one of Stalin’s lawyers, even before FDR recognized the Soviets.242

One of Roosevelt’s first official acts was welcoming Litvinov to the White House. FDR, from a prominent, wealthy capitalist family, began transforming America into a communist state. He legitimized the Bolsheviks after they had plundered Russia and starved and slaughtered millions of Russians. Litvinov had several strategies for communizing the American hemisphere, and now the Bolsheviks had a president who would gladly cooperate with their objectives. Many patriotic organizations and individuals implored FDR not to develop allegiances with Moscow. However, he took advice from Marxists, including intellectuals, labor union radicals, and university professors. Dean Acheson and Henry Morgenthau, both Felix Frankfurter protégés, convinced FDR, without congressional approval, to sanction the establishment of a Soviet Embassy and to recognize the Soviet government, which he did on November 16, 1933.243 Acheson, founder of the Atlantic Council, is considered responsible for creating NATO and imposing it on Europe. FDR then appointed Acheson and Morgenthau to “study” trade opportunities with the Soviets.244

FDR’s advisers, most of them Jews, all advocated communism. They were close to the international bankers and anxious to destroy Germany.245 Russian-born Isador Lubin was a US representative to the United Nations. Russian-born Leo Pasvolsky held an influential position in the State Department and was the executive director of the Committee on the Postwar Program. Samuel Rosenman, as “special counsel,” wrote most of FDR’s speeches. Herbert Lehman, director of the UN Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA), directed funds, mostly from the United States, to Soviet satellite countries, as a consequence of the Yalta and Potsdam decisions.246 Lehman had been Roosevelt’s lieutenant governor in New York.


240 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty, The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 4

241 Des Griffin, Descent into Slavery (Clackamas, Oregon: Emissary Publications, 2001), 64-69

242 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 51-52

243 Ibid. 52-53

244 Ibid.

245 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 95-96

246 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 58-59

Roosevelt’s Ethnic Background

The Daily Citizen of Tucson, Arizona, published a genealogical pedigree of FDR on February 29, 1934. In addition, Dr. H. H. Laughlin directed the preparation of a genealogical chart of FDR for the Carnegie Institution, which the Associated Press news agency dispatched to its membership on March 7, 1934. Both documents claim to substantiate Roosevelt’s Jewish ancestry, which provides an explanation for many of his radical policies and his administration’s legislation. It also reveals why he favored hundreds of Jews, socialists, and communists for high positions within the government. On March 14, 1935, The New York Times quoted him as saying, “In the distant past my ancestors may have been Jews. All I know about the origin of the Roosevelt family is that they are apparently descended from Claes Martenszen van Roosevelt, who came from Holland.”247

FDR’s mother was Sarah Delano, probably from a family that may have been part of the migration of Sephardic Jews who fled from Spain to Portugal and from there to Antwerp. After the closure of Antwerp’s harbor in 1585, the Jews went to Amsterdam and through the generations became part of the community’s business class. However, by choice, they remained a separate ethnic minority.248 FDR’s wife was a distant cousin and a niece of Theodore Roosevelt. The Universal Jewish Dictionary of 1943 states, “After Sarah Delano Roosevelt’s death, in 1941, the B’nai B’rith Hillel Foundation purchased the Roosevelt home in New York City and converted it into the Sarah Delano Roosevelt Interfaith House for students of Hunter College.”249

The Associated Press, on May 8, 1937, reported, “President Roosevelt will receive the tenth award of the Gottheil Medal for ‘Distinguished services to Jewry.’” On December 23, 1938, he was awarded another Jewish medal, according to the New York Herald-Tribune of that date. Some Jewish organizations referred to him as the “new Moses.” On May 14, 1939, Professor Johann van Leers of Berlin conducted an “exhaustive analysis” of FDR’s ancestry and concluded that Sarah Delano was from a Jewish-blood family. He said that the Delano family descended from an Italian or Spanish Jewish family. A large number of Jewish settlers emanated from Holland. New York Jews on the East Side regularly referred to the president as “Rosenvelt.”250

FDR’s decisions at the Yalta conference (February 4-11, 1945) accommodated Stalin and the Soviets and helped spread communism in China, in Eastern Europe, and especially in America. He accomplished more for the communists than anyone else outside of the USSR did.251


247 Watchman Willie Martin Archive,
http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/ROOSEV~1%20%5bD%5d.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

248 Huibert Schijf, “International Jewish Bankers Between 1850 and 1914: An Example of Internationalization Along Ethnic Lines,” paper prepared for Session X: Diaspora entrepreneurial networks, Economic History Congress XIII, Buenos Aires, July 22-26, 2002, 5

249 Watchman Willie Martin Archive,
http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/ROOSEV~1%20%5bD%5d.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

250 Ibid.

251 Hamilton Fish, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin; How We Were Tricked into World War II (Life and Liberty Publishing, Murrieta, Georgia, 2005), 37-38

Targeting the National Socialists

Lithuanian-born Samuel Dickstein, a liberal Jew,252 a good friend to Rabbi Wise,253 originated the idea of establishing the House Un-American Activities Committee, allegedly to investigate communist activities in America, but more important, to target right-wing seditionists, especially National Socialists. Dickstein served in the New York Legislature from 1919 to 1922) and sponsored the state’s first kosher food laws. Thereafter, twenty other states adopted similar laws. In 1933, he had called for a congressional investigation of anarchists. Interestingly, he was, for many years, a Soviet agent nicknamed “Crook.”254 He gave committee transcripts and names of possible double agents to the Russians, for which he received about $183,000 (2010 dollars).255,256

To further take the focus off of what the Jews were doing, on January 3, 1934, Dickstein, as the chairman of the Committee on Naturalization and Immigration, introduced and got passed a resolution to initiate an official investigation of pro-Nazi activities in America. Dickstein, who was breaking new ground, claimed to have numerous “smuggled documents,” letters, and an individual, a Mr. X, who was willing to testify. During floor debate on the resolution, a representative from Nebraska suggested that “the whole thing (is) a scheme by Jews to offend German-Americans like those in [my] state who admire the Führer.” Others opined that the real danger facing America stemmed from communists and their fellow travelers—in those days, a buzzword for Jews and foreigners. However, Congress passed Dickstein’s resolution by a vote of 168-31.257

German Americans were becoming so influential and effective that Moscow was concerned. Therefore, the Soviets strengthened their counterattack against pro-German activities and organizations in America. They were so effective that, according to Soviet intelligence, they triggered William Randolph Hearst’s antagonism toward the Soviet Union, which they viewed as a big problem. They sought to obtain incriminating material on him and his potential relationship with Nationa Socialist Germany. They also attempted to position an “internal source” inside the Hearst organization. The New York Post had a Soviet agent who revealed information gathered from one of Hearst’s journalists.258


252 Kurt F. Stone, The Jews of Capitol Hill: A Compendium of Jewish Congressional Members, (Scarecrow Press, Kindle Edition), 75, 120

253 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 17

254 Kurt F. Stone, The Jews of Capitol Hill: A Compendium of Jewish Congressional Members, (Scarecrow Press, Kindle Edition), 120

255 Ibid. 120-21

256 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 120-21

257 Kurt F. Stone, The Jews of Capitol Hill: A Compendium of Jewish Congressional Members, (Scarecrow Press, Kindle Edition), 38-39, 153-55

258 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 30-32

In September 1935, Soviet officials considered German influence in the United States to be so powerful that they had to counter it, using their agents, with the following objectives:

  1. Exposure of German work directed against Soviet interests with respect both to worsening Soviet relations with the United States and intelligence work directed against Soviet institutions in America and in the USSR.
  2. Exposure of German agents in US institutions, first of all in the State Department and intelligence organizations.
  3. Exposure of German work against the Communist Party of the United States.259

The Soviets decided that their best strategy was to direct public attention to anti-Semitism. Given that several Jewish organizations were already in place to fight anti-Semitism, this would be efficacious. Many Jewish politicians, some of them working as Soviet agents within the government, would augment the material produced by the Jewish factions.

In the 1930s, there was rampant anti-Semitism in America, particularly in the Midwest. Father Charles Coughlin of Detroit, dubbed the Radio Priest, and William D. Pelley of Minneapolis, among others, openly called for dismissing Jews from positions of responsibility, if not driving them from the country itself. Organized Brown Shirts in New York and Silver Shirts in Minneapolis outraged and terrorized American Jewry. While the older and more respectable Jewish organizations pondered a response that would not alienate non-Jewish supporters, others—including a few rabbis—asked gangsters to break up American Nazi rallies.

Jewish leaders, according to Robert Rockaway in the journal of the American Jewish Historical Society, had a difficult time with the German-American Bund rallies in New York City. Despite their efforts to halt them, there were no legal grounds. New York State Judge Nathan Perlman requested the help of Meyer Lansky, an organized crime leader, in breaking up the rallies. Perlman’s only stipulation was that Lansky’s cronies beat the Bundists but not kill any of them. Lansky declined any payment for the assignment but later said, “I was a Jew and felt for those Jews in Europe who were suffering. They were my brothers.” His accomplices disrupted numerous National Socialist rallies. They broke lots of arms, legs, ribs, and skulls but did not kill anyone.260

Fifteen of Lansky’s boys broke up a Brown Shirt demonstration in Manhattan. A swastika and a photo of Hitler were on the stage. They threw some of the attendees out of windows and chased and beat many others. Jews wanted to show that they would not sit back and “accept insults.” Pelley planned a Silver Shirt Legion rally in Minneapolis to save “America from an imaginary Jewish-Communist conspiracy.” Minneapolis gambling czar David Berman and his Jewish cronies interrupted the rally held at an Elks lodge. The National Socialist leader referred to the invaders as “Jew bastards” whom the city should expel. Berman and others rushed into the meeting room and began busting heads, ultimately emptying the hall. Berman, covered with blood, grabbed the microphone and declared, “This is a warning. Anybody who says anything against Jews gets the same treatment. Only next time it will be worse.” He disrupted two other rallies, ending the Silver Shirt meetings in Minneapolis.261


259 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 30-32

260 “Jewish Gangsters,” Jewish Virtual Library,
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/gangsters.html; verifieded 09 Jan 2022

261 Ibid.

Following World War II, Jewish gangsters aided in the establishment of the Israeli state. In 1945, Benjamin “Bugsy” Siegel, part of the Lansky crime syndicate, met with Reuven Dafne, a Haganah emissary, and paid him fifty thousand dollars in cash with which he acquired guns and ammunition to forcibly persuade the British to leave Palestine. Siegel was under the erroneous impression that Jews were docile and submissive and unwilling to fight. Dafne assured him that the Jews were fearless fighters.262 In fact, Jews had engaged in terrorism for decades.

The lengthy history of Jewish criminality, whether on the streets, in the casinos, or in their efforts to take over countries and steal natural assets, is well recognized. Israel misrepresented itself in the worldwide media as the Middle East’s “bulwark of democracy” throughout the Cold War, especially after the dissolution of Israeli-USSR relations. The Trotskyites, otherwise known as neocons, like Bill Krystal and his associates, introduced the term “Islamofascists” to refer to the Muslims, this era’s version of the Nazis, a group they have destined for destruction.263

Dickstein investigated and began harassing the German American Bund, formally established in March 1936, calling it a subversive organization. On February 20, 1939, at New York’s Madison Square Garden, twenty thousand people attended a rally at which Fritz Kuhn delivered a speech criticizing FDR, referring to him as Frank D. Rosenfeld and blasting his “Jew Deal.” He said that America’s leadership was under Bolshevik-Jewish control. The German American Bund was closely associated with Father Coughlin. The FBI investigated its relationship to the National Socialist party in Germany.

The Bund issued several publications, one titled What Price [the] Federal Reserve: Read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to Understand the New Deal. In this open letter, dated January 14, 1938, to Secretary Chester Morrill of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve System, N. W. Rogers pointed out that a massive number of Jewish immigrants had taken positions of authority in the government. “In March, 1935, some $647,000,000 was, by Executive Order, withdrawn from circulation by calling in the bonds backing National Bank notes in exchange for Federal Reserve notes,” Rogers wrote. “But, the Federal Reserve banks, in turn, surrendered the bonds for gold notes. It would seem that in the transaction there was something suggestive of swindling… The Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended in 1935, extracted some 290 million dollars more from the taxpayers.”264


262 “Jewish Gangsters,” Jewish Virtual Library,
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/gangsters.html; verifieded 09 Jan 2022

263 K. R. Bolton, “The Red Face of Israel,” August 2, 2010,
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/08/02/the-red-face-of-israel/4; verified 07 Jan 2022

264 N. W. Rogers, What Price Federal Reserve, Open Arraignment of the System Addressed to Secretary Morrill, Declares Hordes of Jews Have Swarmed into Government Posts in Position of Control, 2-3

Rogers described the “cruel and merciless” process of farm foreclosures and mortgages that “rob industrious, thrifty, peaceable country-loving, law-abiding American citizens of years of weary toil, to turn over to men who never performed a day’s labor, produced a dollar’s worth of wealth, rendered any useful services to society, who have done nothing, in fact, to aid the advancement of a true civilization or to furnish the slightest pretext for their own existence.” He compared them to “parasites that fatten on other organisms,” but said they were worse than parasites, which “do not intimidate, discriminate, or deceive their prey,” using “ruthless indifference to extract the very lifeblood of their helpless victims.”265

Rogers said that Congress through legislation had “permitted the predatory privileged interests” to seize and enjoy all of the “industrial progress and material achievements” and all of “the benefits, advantages and blessings” inherently belonging to the people. The predators imposed laws on the people “to enrich themselves, at the expense of the real wealth producers of the Nation.” This caused a “decline of the purchasing power of the farmer, resulting from the rapid and unwarranted decline in the prices of farm produce.” This, he said, was “evidently the chief cause of the depression, which started with the basic industry, communicated itself to every other branch of the industrial organization, causing a dislocation of the various parts of the whole intricate network of production.”266

NKVD records made public after the collapse of the Soviet Union revealed Dickstein’s role as an agent. The Roosevelt administration and the Jewish-controlled media collaborated with the congressman in demonizing and incarcerating Fritz Kuhn, the Bund’s chairman, on a fabricated embezzlement charge in 1939.267 Author Philippa Sturm failed to mention Dickstein’s investigation and harassment of the group, but explained that the Bund ended its activities because the American media were “carrying stories of Hitler’s troops rampaging through Europe and with the American military draft in place, the Nazis had stopped marching.”268


265 N. W. Rogers, What Price Federal Reserve, Open Arraignment of the System Addressed to Secretary Morrill, Declares Hordes of Jews Have Swarmed into Government Posts in Position of Control, 2-3

266 N. W. Rogers, What Price Federal Reserve, Open Arraignment of the System Addressed to Secretary Morrill, Declares Hordes of Jews Have Swarmed into Government Posts in Position of Control, 2-3

267 William Pierce, “Lies and the History Channel,” Free Speech, February 2000, Vol. VI, No. 2,
http://www.natvan.com/free-speech/fs002a.html; verified 07 Jan 2022

268 Philippa Strum, When the Nazis Came to Skokie: Freedom for Speech We Hate (University Press of Kansas, 1999), 6-7

Martin Dies’ Committee

Martin Dies, chairman of the House Committee for the Investigation of Un-American Activities, asked the new Congress for $1 million to fund a probe of the Works Progress Administration and the Public Works Administration. He stated his determination to rid the government of such saboteurs as Harry Hopkins, Harold Ickes, Frances Perkins, and other “Communists and fellow-travelers.”269 The investigation failed, as FDR stacked the government with people who would not censure their cohorts. Baruch mentored Hopkins and advised him to try to become secretary of war. Baruch saw war looming and believed that the War Department would become the most significant of all agencies.270 He devised and was the key author of an industrial mobilization plan that would enable the country “to pass from a peace to a war status with a minimum of confusion, waste and loss.”271

FDR told Dies to stop annoying the communists because “We need those votes!” Roosevelt endeavored to squelch the congressman’s investigation, which found that there were at least two thousand communist subversives working within the federal government.272 FDR allowed the strategic placement of many European “refugees” at the beginning of World War II and let these noncitizens obtain important government positions without official investigation. This initiated the policy of arbitrary hiring, which dictated that the government could not deny employment to individuals based on race, creed, or national origin, a policy detrimental to American security, especially involving the atomic projects.273

There were numerous Soviet operatives within the Roosevelt Administration—some directed by American Community Party leader Earl Browder—in addition to the infiltrators who staffed the growing number of bureaucratic agencies. Some operated in the Ware Group and later, during the war, in the Silvermaster Network under Soviet agent and economist Nathan G. Silvermaster, who kept tight control over the officials who were collecting and transferring intelligence to the Soviets while implementing programs beneficial to Moscow.274

In recent times, government infiltrators like Jonathan Pollard and Ben-ami Kadish have shared strategic intelligence with the Israeli state. Like the Rosenbergs, they received punishment just to keep up the appearance that the US government frowns on such behavior—unapproved espionage versus the kind in which the government routinely engages. Yet American taxpayers fund Israeli programs including terrorism throughout the Middle East. The most overt agents are in Congress. Three hundred members formally professed their allegiance to the Israelis in a letter sent in March 2010 to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, reaffirming their commitment to “the unbreakable bond” that exists between the United States and the Israeli state.275

Marxists seek to obliterate Christianity and church-operated organizations wherever they can. In 1939, Edwin D. Schoonmaker, editor of American Hebrew, in Democracy and World Dominion, wrote, “According to such information that the writer could secure while in Russia a few weeks ago, not one Jewish synagogue has been torn down, as have hundreds—perhaps thousands of the Greek Catholic Churches… In Moscow and other large cities, one can see Christian churches in the process of destruction… the Government needs the location for a large building… Apostate Jews, leading a revolution that was to destroy religion as the ‘opiate of the people’ had somehow spared the synagogues of Russia.”276

US immigration laws were deplorably inadequate, and politicians failed to address the issue and were negligent in enforcing the immigration laws that they passed. After World War II, illegal entry increased. At least five million aliens were identified under the Alien Registration Act of 1940. Because of official laxity in upholding the nation’s laws, communists found exercising influence relatively easy, and this led to the infiltration of the government. In 1950, hundreds of thousands of foreigners were arrested but subsequently released because the government did not have provisions for deporting them.277

In October 1941, communist apologists Eleanor Roosevelt, Wendell Willkie, George Field, Dorothy Thompson, Herbert Swope, and other prominent journalists, academics, trade unionists, theologians, and public officials would create Freedom House, a CFR front. FDR encouraged the group’s covert propaganda activities, hoping this would persuade Americans to accept entry into World War II. Freedom House was also instrumental in facilitating and supporting postwar policies like the Marshall Plan, NATO, and the UN.278


269 Robert E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History (New York: Harper, 1948), 104

270 Ibid. 98

271 Ibid. 280

272 Hamilton Fish, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin; How We Were Tricked into World War II (Life and Liberty Publishing, Murrieta, Georgia, 2005), 37-38

273 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 55-56

274 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 38-39, 153-55

275 Natasha Mozgovaya, “Nearly 300 Congress members declare commitment to ‘unbreakable’ U.S.-Israel bond; letter to Clinton underscores Biden remarks that there is ‘no space’ when it comes to Israel’s security”
http://www.haaretz.com/news/nearly-300-congress-members-declare-commitment-to-unbreakable-u-s-israel-bond-1.266652; verified 06 Jan 2022

276 “Birobidjan—The First Jewish State,”
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/06/13/birobidjan-the-first-jewish-state

277 John Beaty, The Iron Curtain Over America, (Chestnut Mountain Book, Barboursville, Virginia, 1968), 45-46.

278 Freedom House statement on the passing of George Field, Washington, D.C., June 1, 2006,
http://freedomhouse.org/article/freedom-house-statement-passing-george-field?page=70&release=384; verified 05 Jan 2022

Reorganization of the Government

In 1936, FDR created the President’s Committee on Administrative Management, chaired by Louis Brownlow, to devise ways to implement sweeping changes in the executive branch to enable him to usurp and exercise almost limitless power. Brownlow coauthored a report that led to passage of the Reorganization Act of April 3, 1939, and the creation of the Executive Office of the President. The chaos and massive deaths of World War II completed the draconian bureaucratic changes and constitutional distortions. Roosevelt and his communist cronies changed the entire government structure. The executive branch grew exponentially with a plethora of cabinet seats and unelected bureaucrats answerable only to the president.

Federal officials formed numerous entities to deal with any economic “emergency.” These included the Social Security Administration and the Council of State Governments. Within a few years, these agencies operated as “trustees” for foreign creditors under the umbrella of the Declaration of Interdependence, dated January 22, 1937.

Lawyers associated with these agencies function under a different set of rules, an alternative Constitution, in order to “help implement international treaties of the United States or where world uniformity would be desirable.” Thus, senators and representatives are not permitted to represent the people’s best interests. Robert Bork wrote, “We are increasingly governed not by law or elected representatives but by an unelected, unrepresentative, unaccountable committee of lawyers applying no will but their own.”279 These lawyers and their agents are the “trustees” for the bankruptcy, acting in the interests of foreign creditors and powers.

Under the reorganization of the bankruptcy, individuals representing foreign creditors appointed the treasury secretary as the “receiver” (Reorganization Plan No. 26, 5 U.S.C.A. 903, Public Law 94-564, Legislative History, p. 5967). A bankrupt entity forfeits control of a business to the office of receiver. The Federal Reserve and its member branches function as official depositories for the debt. The state of emergency declared by FDR still exists and is permanent due to the insolvency of America, which is now a corporator (a member of a corporation). An emergency does not justify abuse of constitutional power. Because the US government is now a corporation, ruled by a corporate charter, it assumes the characteristics of a private citizen and is no longer a sovereign. America is no longer a nation but is under the bank’s jurisdiction, the head corporate power.


279 Robert H. Bork, The Tempting of America: the Political Seduction of the Law (New York: The Free Press, 1990), 130

On February 16, 1939, FDR wrote, “A thorough and comprehensive study should be made of existing practices and procedures with a view to detecting any existing deficiencies and pointing the way to improvements.” He approved of independent regulatory commissions, which in effect create a “fourth branch of the government for which there is no sanction in the Constitution.” Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Bill, but surprisingly, Roosevelt vetoed it on December 18, 1940, since he opposed the Supreme Court’s defense of property rights and its rulings that many aspects of the New Deal were unconstitutional. Among these was the Agricultural Adjustment Act, passed on May 12, 1933, and drafted by Henry A. Wallace, secretary of agriculture from 1933 to 1940 and vice president from 1941 to 1945. This law restricted agricultural production by paying farmers subsidies not to plant on portions of their land and encouraged them to kill off excess livestock. The court also questioned the National Industrial Recovery Act, which protected collective bargaining rights for unions. FDR wanted an “exponential increase in legal duties and a vast new centralized apparatus of federal law enforcement—a bureaucratized regulatory state.” He called for a broader understanding of the Constitution and hoped to reshape the court with justices more sympathetic to the New Deal.280

On June 11, 1946, Truman, picking up the Marxist gauntlet for expansion of the executive office, approved the Administrative Procedures Act that Roosevelt initiated on February 16, 1939. An administration report described a federal agency as a governmental unit with “the power to determine… private rights and obligations.” The report elaborated on fifty-one agencies. Government officials created eleven of those agencies just before and following Lincoln’s war. From 1865 to 1900, officials created six additional agencies. With every war or choreographed crisis, the federal government seizes extraordinary power, otherwise unattainable and wholly unsanctioned by the Constitution.281

The Congressional Record of 1946 states, “We have set up a fourth order in the tripartite plan of Government which was initiated by the founding fathers of our democracy. They set up the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches; but since that time we have set up a fourth dimension, if I may so term it, which is now popularly known as administrative in nature. So we have the legislative, the executive, the judicial, and the administrative. Perhaps there are reasons for that arrangement. We found that the legislative branch, although it might enact law, could not very well administer it. So the legislative branch enunciated the legal precepts and ordained that commissions or groups should be established by the executive branch with power to promulgate rules and regulations.”282 Administrative agencies publish and promulgate regulations in the Federal Register, arranged by topic in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Truman supervised the categorical shift from a representative government to a military dictatorship. The United States is now a fully militarized war machine, prepared to forcefully impose obedience to global governance. The American populace, with little dissent, has tolerated the intolerable and has accepted the unacceptable. We have proven our gullibility and steadfast devotion to the idolatrous state. We have gradually relinquished our will and abandoned the essential loyalties that characterized us as caring, compassionate citizens. How could a country, ostensibly guided and therefore supposedly preferred by God, possibly be in error?


280 United States of America, Congressional Record, Proceedings and Debates of the 79th Congress, Second Session, Vol. 92, Part 2, February 19 to March 28, 1946; March 12, 1946, 2148-149, 2155; Vol. 92, Part 5, May 23 to June 12, 1946; May 24, 1946, 5656, 5664

281 Final Report of the Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure, Senate Document No. 8, 77th Congress, First Session, 1941,
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/admin/pdfdownload/apa1941.pdf; verified 05 Jan 2022

282 United States of America, Congressional Record, Proceedings and Debates of the 79th Congress, Second Session, Vol. 92, Part 2, February 19 to March 28, 1946; March 12, 1946, 2148-49, 2155; Vol. 92, Part 5, May 23 to June 12, 1946; May 24, 1946, 5656, 5664

Chapter 10 ♦ The Genesis of Factory Farming

In 1909, Congress, with no understanding of the physical conditions on the plains, passed the Enlarged Homestead Act, offering farmers 320 acres to promote dryland farming in the more marginal lands, especially in the Great Plains. This led to an influx of new farmers who lacked the knowledge of proper cultivation techniques and ecology. A homesteader, using animal power to till and harvest, would be unable to cultivate 1,500 acres, the amount “experts” suggested for dryland farming. Beginning in 1913, Edwin L. Currier, with the Montana State College farm management program, taught farmers how to update their deficient practices and how to implement basic accounting principles.

On July 17, 1916, Congress, with the Federal Farm Loan Act, created the Federal Farm Loan Board, twelve regional farm loan banks, and thousands of farm loan associations. The Rothschilds and their political minions were concerned about the small farmers who were stockpiling and wholesaling their grain. Under the guise of assisting independent farmers, they advocated the loan system, which has cursed, indebted, and ultimately destroyed many farmers. Former Senator Richard F. Pettigrew noted in the British Guardian, “This system of banking (causing the ultimate ruin of all those who cultivate the soil) was the invention of Samuel Jones-Loyd, with the assistance of the Rothschilds, bankers of Europe.”283 In 1917, Pettigrew told a journalist that the world war was a capitalist scheme to further enrich the wealthy. He urged young men to evade the draft. The newspaper reported his remarks to a US attorney who secured a felony indictment against him on suspicion of violating the Espionage Act of 1917.284

From 1923 to 1924, the Rockefeller Foundation funded a study of scientific farming called the Montana Project: Fairway Farms Company.285 On February 24, 1925, Congress passed the Purnell Act, which permitted the first funding of agricultural economics and rural sociology in land grant universities. Using public funds, Montana State College created an agricultural economics department, the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, under the direction of Milburn L. Wilson. Leading the department from 1926 to 1933, he focused on increasing farming profits. The premise was that people could operate a dry farm like a cooperative business, using mechanized technology and better economic principles. Wilson also headed the USDA division of farm management and cost accounting from 1924 to 1926.286 Montana farmers had plowed up the natural grazing lands to plant wheat. Now they struggled to make a living in “an era of falling prices.”287


283 Eustace Mullins, The World Order: A Study in the Hegemony of Parasitism (Staunton, Virginia: Ezra Pound Institute of Civilization, 1985), 12

284 John Andrews, “Pettigrew’s Redemption: Might a sculptor vindicate Sioux Falls’ forgotten father?” South Dakota Magazine,
http://southdakotamagazine.com/article?articleTitle=pettigrew’s+redemption—1306430013—12—histor; verified 05 Jan 2022

285 Guide to the Montana Study research collection, 1943-54,
http://nwda.orbiscascade.org/ark:/80444/xv88931; verified 05 Jan 2022

286 Deborah Fitzgerald, “Blinded by Technology: American Agriculture in the Soviet Union, 1928-1932,” Agricultural History Society, Vol. 70, No. 3, Summer 1996, 459-60

287 “The New Dealers’ Subsistence Homestead Plan, Opposed by Labor, Agriculture and Industrialists, Represents Broad Social Dream,” Pittsburgh Press, May 31, 1934
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=djft3U1LymYC&dat=19340531&printsec=frontpage&hl=en; verified 05 Jan 2022

George N. Peek, who worked with Bernard Baruch on the War Industries Board, conceived the plan for the first national system of agricultural price supports as early as 1922. Baruch and Otto H. Kahn fully supported the idea. Baruch promoted it to Senator Tom Walsh and others, and suggested that they try it on just one commodity, wheat. The McNary-Haugen Farm Relief Bill, supported by Henry C. Wallace, secretary of agriculture from 1921 to 1924, did not pass.288 Kahn was on the board of directors of American International Corporation (AIC), a huge conglomerate created by John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon, Andrew Carnegie, and others, that devoted $50 million to building up the Bolsheviks.289,290

Peek, Hugh S. Johnson, part of FDR’s Brain Trust, and Chester Davis, Montana’s commissioner of agriculture, advocated the first McNary-Haugen Farm Relief Bill. Despite pressure from the American Council of Agriculture and other groups, President Calvin Coolidge vetoed it on February 25, 1927, and again on May 23, 1928. Meanwhile, Charles L. Stewart, an agricultural economist at the University of Illinois, developed the export debenture plan, which would have placed an indirect bounty on exports. Congress did not pass it.291

Harry N. Owen introduced the domestic allotment plan for farm relief originally propounded by William J. Spillman of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. In 1927, Spillman proposed a modification of the McNary-Haugen plan. It allowed for the payment of a free-trade price plus a tariff duty for a part of a farmer’s crop if consumed in America and a free-trade price if the farmer exported part of the crop. On June 15, 1929, the government adopted the plan, allowing it to create marketing cooperatives and to control surpluses by orderly production and marketing. Before the 1929 crash, President Hoover signed a bill to create the bureaucratic Federal Farm Board, established on July 15 to provide financial aid to farmers.292 The board soon established the Grain Stabilization Corporation, which began to buy up “surplus” wheat.293


288 Bernard M. Baruch, Baruch: The Public Years; My Own Story (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960), 61, 165-67. Henry C. Wallace was the father of Henry A. Wallace, the agriculture secretary under FDR.

289 Financial News Association, Manual of Statistics, Stock Exchange Hand-book, New York, 1917, 369

290 Frank A. Vanderlip and Boyden Sparkes, From Farm Boy to Financier (Appleton-Century Co., Incorporated, 1935), 267-71

291 Gladys L. Baker, Wayne D. Rasmussen, Vivian Wiser, and Jane M. Porter, Century of Service, the First 100 Years of the United States Department of Agriculture (Centennial Committee, US Department of Agriculture,1963), 135-36. Abraham Lincoln signed the act establishing the department on May 15, 1862

292 Ibid. 135-36

293 Paul Keith Conkin, A Revolution Down on the Farm: The Transformation of American Agriculture since 1929, (Lexington, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky, 2008), 56

In June 1930, Congress enacted the farmer-backed Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which turned a bad recession into a worldwide depression. The farm board had a $500 million budget. The Agriculture Department became a permanent lobby for “socialism in one industry.” The board killed the market for cotton, America’s biggest cash export, when, in 1931, it urged Southern farmers to destroy every third row of cotton. In 1932, Governor Harvey Parnell of Arkansas complained that the board had “done more to destroy the cotton market” than any other factor except high tariffs. The government drove crop prices above world prices, then closed the borders. In 1931, American foreign trade decreased by more than 50 percent. Without this trade, Germany and other European powers defaulted on their debts to the United States, causing bank failures and panic throughout the country.294

The Rothschild-owned Creditanstalt, which controlled 70 percent of Austria’s industry, collapsed on May 11, 1931. Although the Rothschilds and the government bailed it out, anxious depositors made a run on the bank. To compensate, Austrian banks pulled their funds from German banks, which began to collapse. The German banks then called for their funds in London banks, which, like dominoes, began to fail. Europe’s gold disappeared. On September 21, 1931, England abandoned the gold standard. The Reichsbank lost a huge percentage of its gold reserve, nearly destroying German industry.295 The events in Europe rocked Wall Street institutions, causing a severe crisis just as America was emerging from the crash of 1929. In 1930, the unemployment rate in America was about 8.9 percent.296 By 1931, it had increased to 16.3 percent, with a high of 25.2 percent when FDR was inaugurated in 1933.297

In the spring of 1931, in Alabama, mostly black sharecroppers, tenant farmers, and farm laborers, coping with large-scale evictions and acreage reductions, formed the Share Croppers Union (SCU), an underground movement. They had asked for and received the help of Birmingham’s Communist Party. Within two months, the union had about eight hundred members. In July 1931, the sheriff at Camp Hill, Alabama, initiated a violent confrontation with union members, killing one of their leaders, Ralph Gray, and forcing others into hiding. By the summer of 1932, the SCU had six hundred members but spread into other Alabama counties. In December 1932, another shootout, near Reeltown, Alabama, resulted in the deaths of several SCU members, including Clifford James, and the wounding of many others. The confrontation occurred when local authorities, in behalf of James’s creditors, attempted to seize his livestock and he resisted. By the fall of 1934, the union had almost eight thousand members, many of whom were victims of mass evictions.


294 James Bovard, Hoover’s Second Wrecking of American Agriculture, Lew Rockwell,
http://www.lewrockwell.com/bovard/bovard25.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

295 Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), 307-12

296 F. William Engdahl, “Some unconventional reflections on the Great Depression and the New Deal,”
http://oilgeopolitics.net/History/New_Deal/new_deal.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

297 Ibid.

Communist Clyde Johnson, the SCU leader, tried to shift the organization from its underground status and transform it into a legitimate agricultural labor union. He attempted to negotiate a merger with the newly formed, socialist-led Southern Tenant Farmers Union, but its leadership rejected the proposition, claiming that the SCU was a communist front. Despite efforts for legitimacy and the growth into Louisiana and Mississippi, the SCU faced continued violence, including the jailing and beating of dozens of strikers and the deaths of at least six people. Even with twelve thousand members by 1936, the union failed to halt the proletarianization occurring in the South, shown by mass evictions and the mechanization of agriculture. Ultimately, Johnson abolished the SCU and directed sharecroppers and tenant farmers to join the National Farmers Union. He told agricultural laborers to join the Agricultural Workers Union, an affiliate of the American Federation of Labor. Some SCU chapters in Alabama and Louisiana refused to affiliate with another organization and operated well into World War II.

In early 1932, some economists adopted Milburn Wilson’s domestic allotment plan, and the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Fund financed its research.298 Others also continued to promote the plan. Beardsley Ruml of the Memorial Foundation, John D. Black of Harvard University, and Wilson of Montana State College continued to urge additional legislation for the plan. During the winter of 1931-32, Wilson and Rexford Tugwell promoted the plan to the Federal Farm Bureau and refined it for FDR’s presidential campaign. It was the backbone of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the basis of bureaucratic programs to control the production and costs of cotton, wheat, hogs, and other products.299

During 1932, to develop ideas, Wilson worked with Chester C. Davis, Gerard Swope (General Electric), Charles M. Schwab (Bethlehem Steel), Edward H. Harriman (Union Pacific), and Henry I. Harriman, president of the US Chamber of Commerce. The Federal Farm Bureau brought Wilson to Washington and assigned Mordecai Ezekiel, an economist for the agency, to work on the proposal. After November 1932, Ezekiel met with FDR, Tugwell, Wilson, Hugh S. Johnson, Raymond Moley, Donald Richberg, Jerome Frank, Baruch, and Henry Morgenthau to discuss the new administration’s farm policy.


298 George Clark, Pittsburgh Press, May 31, 1934

299 “The New Dealers, Subsistence Homestead Plan, Opposed by Labor, Agriculture and Industrialists, Represents Broad Social Dream,” Pittsburgh Press, May 31, 1934
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=djft3U1LymYC&dat=19340531&printsec=frontpage&hl=en; verified 05 Jan 2022

Ezekiel then drafted legislation and Congress held hearings, modified it, and included it in the Agricultural Adjustment Act, effective May 12, 1933,300 which created the Agriculture Adjustment Administration (AAA). Ezekiel participated in the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. The Marxists in FDR’s administration established a bureaucracy to control farm produce prices. Later, the bankers sitting on corporate boards, using debilitating legislation, compelled credit-poor farmers to relinquish their land to the control of politically connected corporations that would rapidly gain influence following World War II.

Harold G. Moulton, the first president of the Brookings Institution, and Representative Meyer Jacobstein, author of The Tobacco Industry in the United States (1907) and an Aldrich Plan advocate, initiated the idea of the National Recovery Administration (NRA). Jacobstein, a former director of emergency employment management in the War Industries Board and a former congressman, drafted a detailed plan for business recovery in early 1933.301 FDR signed the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) into law on June 16, 1933, the same day that the Banking Act of 1933 was enacted. Roosevelt appointed Johnson, named Time Magazine’s Man of the Year for 1933, as head of the NRA.

The NIRA, a unique experiment in American history, led to the creation of the NRA, Roosevelt’s primary New Deal agency, to administer provisions of Title I of the NIRA, and the Public Works Administration. The act also created the National Labor Relations Board on June 29, 1934. This independent federal agency was charged with conducting elections for labor union representation and with investigating and remedying unfair labor practices. The board may require an employer to engage in collective bargaining with a union. The act generated hundreds of new regulations, suspended antitrust laws, and allowed unions to expand after 1935 when the Supreme Court abolished the NRA. The National Labor Relations Act, effective July 5, 1935, protected employee rights in the private sector, enabling workers to organize and to discuss workplace issues with coworkers, to engage in collective bargaining, and to participate in strikes and other concerted activities.302


300 Gladys L. Baker, Wayne D. Rasmussen, Vivian Wiser, and Jane M. Porter, Century of Service, the First 100 Years of the United States Department of Agriculture (Centennial Committee, US Department of Agriculture, 1963), 135-36

301 Kurt F. Stone, The Jews of Capitol Hill: A Compendium of Jewish Congressional Members, (Scarecrow Press, Kindle Edition), 124-25

302 Transcript of National Industrial Recovery Act (1933),
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=66&page=transcript; verified 07 Jan 2022

Permitting unions to bargain for industry-wide wages probably contributed to cartelization in numerous industries. FDR’s New Deal initiative authorized him to regulate industry, which included the development of cartels and monopolies allegedly to help stimulate economic recovery. Johnson, Tugwell, Baruch, Raymond Moley, Donald Richberg (law partner of Harold L. Ickes), and Jerome Frank claimed that unrestrained competition helped instigate the Depression. They felt that the government had to play a major part in planning the national economy.

The act required businesses to decrease production while increasing prices and wages during a time when people were unable to purchase essentials. Authorities arrested those who decreased their prices, and castigated intermediaries as criminals. It appeared that the government designed its objectives and its policies to implement an industrial economy. In 1934, Richberg, head of the NRA, said, “A nationally planned economy is the only salvation of our present situation and the only hope for the future.”303

Under the NRA, more than two million employers signed FDR’s Re-Employment Agreement, pledging that they would limit hours to thirty-five to forty hours per week for most employees and pay minimum wages to approximately sixteen million nonagricultural workers out of a total workforce of some twenty-five million workers. The NRA, with presidential approval, over the next year and a half imposed approximately five hundred codes of “fair competition,” on industries and trades. The NRA enticed employers by promising exemption from antitrust laws. Agents from trade organizations managed to negotiate and gain approval from the NRA for hundreds of codes applicable to more than three-quarters of private, nonagricultural employment.304


303 Rohit Gupta, “Why America and Canada Doesn’t Need Another New Deal,” Frontier Centre for Public Policy, March 2009, www.fcpp.com; verified 09 Jan 2022

304 Transcript of National Industrial Recovery Act (1933),
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=66&page=transcript; verified 07 Jan 2022

NRA policies had disastrous consequences, increasing business costs by 40 percent. Five months before the legislation passed, there was evidence of recovery—an increase in factory employment and payrolls by 23 and 35 percent respectively as the economy naturally adjusted. Requiring shorter work hours and increased wages and imposing new costs on doing business, the NRA reduced production by 25 percent six months after taking effect. The AAA, under the guise of fighting deflation, compelled farmers to cut production by destroying extra crops and livestock. In 1933, farmers slaughtered six million piglets and 220,000 pregnant cows, with most of the meat going to waste. Many cotton farmers razed between one-quarter and half of their acreage.305 In 1936, the Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional.

Higher prices and the destruction of food affected hungry Americans. Under the AAA, Agriculture Secretary Henry A. Wallace (son of Henry C. Wallace, a former agriculture secretary) initiated a system that benefited those owning large farms by paying them not to farm certain areas, primarily the lands of the tenant farmers that they had evicted. They received more from the government than they would have received in rent from their tenants.

In eastern Arkansas in 1934, the Depression and the New Deal crop reduction programs caused mass evictions of black and white sharecroppers. In 1935, aided by socialist leaders, sharecroppers formed the Southern Tenant Farmers Union and attempted to lobby the federal government to get a share of crop reduction payments and to prevent landowners from displacing them. The union, with twenty-five thousand multiracial members by 1936, sent representatives to lobby officials in Washington. Landowners used terrorism against the members, including murders, beatings, and arrests, making it impossible to maintain their headquarters or to operate safely outside of Memphis. They formed other organizations, but the poorest people of the South, both blacks and whites, united by common goals, failed in their efforts.


305 Rohit Gupta, “Why America and Canada Doesn’t Need Another New Deal,” Frontier Centre for Public Policy, March 2009, www.fcpp.com; verified 09 Jan 2022

Hungarian-born Joszef Peter, master of a large spy network, transferred Whitaker Chambers from New York to Washington. Many members of Peter’s network worked in New Deal agencies and in the Navy, State, Interior, and other departments. In testimony before the House in 1948, Chambers pinpointed Soviet agents who worked for the AAA including Harold Ware, who operated his own spy network. Other policy-makers for America’s farmers working as Soviet spies included Alger Hiss, John Abt, Henry Collins, John Hermann, Victor Perlo, Lee Pressman, Nathaniel Weyl, and Nathan Witt, many of whom stole government documents.306 Wayne C. Taylor, later the undersecretary of commerce and assistant treasury secretary, was the AAA’s assistant administrator in 1933.307

In 1933, George Peek became the first administrator of the AAA. Wilson was the agency’s chief wheat production secretary from May to September 1933. Peek was the president of the two banks that would become the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the official export credit agency of the US government. On February 2, 1934, FDR signed Executive Order 6581, creating the Export-Import Bank with the immediate goal of making loans to the Soviet Union.

In May 1934, FDR obtained $25 million from Congress to establish subsistence farms. A century before, people lived on subsistence homesteads that provided families with food, while industrial employment provided money for clothes, taxes, and incidentals. This system worked well. FDR said that he wanted to establish subsistence “dwellings equipped with gardens sufficient to enable a worker to grow food for his family after factory hours.” He assigned the new unit in the Interior Department, headed by Wilson, to institute the program. Wilson directed its first major experiment, a “combined farm-and-factory community” in West Virginia for the benefit of coal miners. Wilson was an authority on the two extremes of agriculture: subsistence farming and large-scale farming.308


306 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 38-39

307 “Wayne Chatfield Taylor Dead; Roosevelt and Truman Aide, 73; Banker Held Major Posts in Commerce, Treasury and the Export-Import Bank; In Many Public Posts Envoy at Trade Meetings,” New York Times, November 23, 1967

308 “The New Dealers’ Subsistence Homestead Plan, Opposed by Labor, Agriculture and Industrialists, Represents Broad Social Dream,” Pittsburgh Press, May 31, 1934
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=djft3U1LymYC&dat=19340531&printsec=frontpage&hl=en; verified 05 Jan 2022

Wilson would direct the Division of Subsistence Homesteads in the Interior Department until June 30, 1934, when FDR appointed him assistant secretary of agriculture. In 1937, Wilson was named undersecretary of agriculture. On February 1, 1940, he would become director of extension work at the USDA where he also functioned as the chief of nutrition programs. He wrote two books, Farm Relief and the Domestic Allotment Plan and Democracy Has Roots.309

The NIRA, specifically Title II, Section 208, allowed the president to expend up to $25 million to develop ninety-nine model communities across the nation. The project functioned to redistribute the population, moving the urban poor—factory workers who had lost their jobs with the 1929 crash and the Depression and were unskilled in farming—to isolated rural areas. The total construction cost for these so-called self-sufficient towns was actually $108,095,328.310 The first project to receive a federal loan was the Dayton Homestead Unit in Ohio.311 The concept served to alter society, based on a few factors, 1) the increased exploitation of the land; 2) the progressive monopolization of farming, and; 3) the gradual decentralization of industry. There are now fewer than 2.2 million farmers, many part-time. A century ago, thirty million people were involved in agriculture. Big conglomerates have replaced the family farm.

Another project was the Jersey Homesteads, a prototype, an agro-industrial cooperative including a farm, factories, and retail stores fourteen miles east of Trenton. After FDR’s death, residents renamed the community Roosevelt, which just celebrated its seventy-fifth year.312 Benjamin Brown, a Jewish immigrant, became wealthy by establishing such rural cooperatives, inspired by Birobidjan. He created the Provisional Commission for Jewish Farm Settlements in America. Albert Einstein and others linked to Jewish charitable and labor organizations participated. In just one example, the Division of Subsistence Homesteads awarded Brown $500,000 to establish Jersey Homesteads. He purchased land in Monmouth County and began taking applications for two hundred settlers. He appointed Max Blitzer as project manager, while Samuel Finkler selected families from the applicants.313


309 Russell Lord, “The Rebirth of Rural Life, Part II,” Survey Graphic, Survey Associates, Inc., December 1941, Vol. 30, No. 12, 687

310 National New Deal Preservation Association. See the list of towns:
http://newdeallegacy.org/new_deal_towns.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

311 Ralph Borsodi, “President Roosevelt’s New Land and Population Policy,”
http://newdeal.feri.org/survey/34011.htm; verified 06 Jan 2022

312 History of Roosevelt, New Jersey, Rutgers University Libraries: Special Collections and University Archives: Manuscripts,
http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/libs/scua/roosevelt/rstory.shtml; verified 05 Jan 2022

313 History of Roosevelt, New Jersey, Rutgers University Libraries: Special Collections and University Archives: Manuscripts,
http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/libs/scua/roosevelt/rstory.shtml; verified 05 Jan 2022

Local homesteads were subsidiaries of the Federal Subsistence Homesteads Corporation. The federal government, in the person of Interior Secretary Harold Ickes, held the stock. Brown and members of his commission sat on the board of directors for the Homesteads project. David Dubinsky, president of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union, opposed the project because it would remove jobs from New York City. On May 27, 1935, the Supreme Court, in the Schechter case, declared that the National Industrial Recovery Act, enacted June 16, 1933, was unconstitutional, so officials shifted Section 208 to the Resettlement Administration, established by the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act passed April 8, 1935.314 Rexford Tugwell directed the administration. The garment workers agreed that the Jersey Homesteads factory would be a new cooperative run by the settlers, to prevent job loss in New York.315

Alfred Kastner was the principle architect for the Homesteads project. He hired Louis I. Kahn as his assistant. A triple cooperative, Tripod, managed the project, each with a board of directors. The Jersey Homesteads Agricultural Association managed the poultry and dairy units. The Jersey Homesteads Consumers’ Cooperative Association managed the retail end, consisting of a clothing store, a grocery and meat market, and a tea room. The Workers’ Aim Cooperative Association, with a showroom and office space in Manhattan, had jurisdiction over the factory, which produced women’s coats and suits.

In 1937, to promote and distribute garments nationwide, Brown poured $50,000 into creating a network with outlets throughout the country. A year later, the federal government awarded the settlement another loan, for $150,000, with the stipulation that the factory restructure itself as the Jersey Homesteads Industrial Cooperative Association, representing the workers, and the Consumers Wholesale Clothiers, Inc., representing management and distribution. The factory also increased production to include men and children’s clothing.316


314 Records of the National Recovery Administration, National Archives,
http://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/009.html#9.2.1; verified 06 Jan 2022

315 Ibid.

316 Ibid.

The Farm Security Administration (FSA), previously known as the Resettlement Administration, wanted to sell the houses at the Jersey Homesteads and relinquish the water and sewer plants, since many of the houses were still empty and numerous residents were unemployed. In April 1939, the FSA acknowledged the failure of the factory and attempted to sell the fixtures. However, the FSA was finally able to rent many of the houses to others, which generated animosity among the original Jewish families, many of whom were destitute after their initial investment. The borough council created an economic planning committee that negotiated with Kartiganer and Co., which began operating the factory in 1940. By then, the insolvent clothing factory and agricultural cooperative had ceased operations. Despite these failures, the grocery and meat market continued for a few more years.317

The residents, many of whom spoke Yiddish, built a strong, cohesive community. They were concerned about the refugees in Europe. In 1938, the council heard about the alleged atrocities that the Germans were committing against Jews. In 1948, the community would ask the president to support the Zionists in their efforts to make Palestine a Jewish state. The community manager, via the Works Progress Administration, created adult education and recreational programs and helped found a library. Residents worshiped at various locations until they built a synagogue in 1956.318

In 1936, Kastner asked artist Ben Shahn to create a mural in the school portraying the establishment of Jersey Homesteads. Shahn and his wife, Bernarda Bryson, moved to the community in 1939, drawing other artists, such as Jacob Landau, the former chairman of the Pratt Institute’s fine arts department. Others included painter Gregorio Prestopino, Liz Dauber, David Stone Martin, Stefan Martin, Edwin and Louise Rosskam, Anita Cervantes, Laurie Altman, Joshua Hecht, Benjamin Appel, Shan Ellentuck, and Franklin Folsom. In 1945, Shahn proposed building a monument to Franklin D. Roosevelt, but was never able to raise sufficient money. In 1960, individuals formed a new Roosevelt memorial committee to raise funds to create the memorial. Jonathan Shahn, Ben’s son, sculpted a bust of Roosevelt, and Marvin Feld designed the amphitheater and park where the bust resides.319


317 History of Roosevelt, New Jersey, Rutgers University Libraries: Special Collections and University Archives: Manuscripts,
http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/libs/scua/roosevelt/rstory.shtml; verified 05 Jan 2022

318 Ibid.

319 Ibid.

By 1938, unemployment was 19.1 percent, and in 1939, it was 17.2 percent. In 1938 and 1939, the League of Nations conducted the World Economic Survey, comparing the major industrial economies. In 1932, American unemployment was average compared with other major countries. By mid-1938, after five years of New Deal policies, only the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark suffered greater unemployment than America. In 1938, America’s industrial production attained just 65 percent of what it was in 1929. The UK in 1937 achieved 124 percent of its 1929 production rate, without artificial Keynesian deficit spending. Germany attained production of 117 percent, Sweden 149 percent, and Japan 170 percent compared with their 1929 rates. The league evaluated twenty-two nations and determined that nineteen experienced a higher industrial recovery rate than America.320 The Federal Reserve abruptly contracted the money supply in 1937, probably expanding unemployment.

Donald Worster sees a close connection between the Dust Bowl and the Depression (1929-39) and claims that the same entity created both for comparable motives. The Dust Bowl, like the economic crisis of the 1930s, was the result of greed and monopoly capitalism and was part of the same crisis.321 Worster contends that certain monopoly capitalists used their influence and money against nature, with no thought about the consequences. The 1929 stock market crash led to factory closures, while the unsuitable use of technology triggered the Dust Bowl, a manmade calamity that struck a segment of the population that could least afford it.322 Karl Marx, as quoted by Worster, pointed to “a vicious class order in which a few owned the means of production and the rest sold their labor to stay alive.”323


320 F. William Engdahl, “Some unconventional reflections on the Great Depression and the New Deal,”
http://oilgeopolitics.net/History/New_Deal/new_deal.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

321 Donald Worster, Dust Bowl: The Southern Plains in the 1930s (Oxford University Press, Kindle Edition), locations 133-37

322 Ibid. 143-46

323 Ibid. 150-51

Chapter 11 ♦ Reporting the “News” from Europe
03 Walter Duranty
Walter Duranty

Cambridge-educated Walter Duranty, after finishing college with a trust from his grandfather, moved to Paris where he met Aleister Crowley, who was eight years his senior. Crowley, who practiced black arts and magical-sexual rituals, referred to himself as “the wickedest man in the world.” The two men had much in common. They both enjoyed smoking opium and engaging in sexual escapades with numerous women. Duranty, though physically unattractive, was “highly sexed” and used his skills—intelligence and conversational abilities—to advance his sexual activities and to satisfy his “intense attraction for the opposite sex.” He preferred his women dumb and in a recreational mood and endorsed the ideas of the Jewish misogynist Otto Weininger, the author of Sex and Character: A Fundamental Investigation.324

Duranty was creative, took liberal poetic license, and turned any event or circumstance into a useful subjective story in which he would ambiguously combine truth and fiction. In 1917, the Allied propaganda apparatus asked him and several of his colleagues to “write a fake story.” After a night of drinking in a local bar, he created a story that cited the “eyewitness account” of how Allied naval forces had thwarted a German submarine attack. He had some temporary moral misgivings about the falsified story but ultimately rationalized that “a noble end” justified “somewhat doubtful means.”325

During World War I, Duranty was a reporter. In 1919, he wrote a story about the Paris Peace Conference, which apparently drew the attention of certain people. In 1921, he went to the Soviet Union as a journalist, the same year as veteran reporter Donald Day. In 1929, Soviet officials granted Duranty, a willing participant in communist expansion, an exclusive interview with Josef Stalin. He portrayed the Soviet dictator in glowing terms. Duranty won a Pulitzer Prize in 1932 for thirteen articles analyzing the Soviet Union under Stalin. He was the Moscow bureau chief of the New York Times until 1934 when he returned to America. The Times kept him on a retainer, which required him to live in Moscow for several months each year. He reported the details of the show trials in the late 1930s.


324 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 29-33

325 Ibid. 47-48

After Day obtained a Soviet visa, the Chicago Tribune offered him a job as the newspaper’s Northern Europe correspondent. He began work in August 1921 and was the only American reporter in the region, covering events in the Soviet Union, the Baltic States, and Finland. He also reported on the communist subversion of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Day, a committed anticommunist, was unlike most other Western reporters in his uncompromising reports on the Soviet Union. He opposed the compulsory collectivization of agriculture in the 1920s, which caused death and famine. The Soviets withdrew his visa when he refused to report favorably on their system. Thereafter, lacking direct access, he relied on refugee reports and the correspondents he sent across the Soviet border.

Americans were unaware that Jews living in the United States had accumulated vast sums of money to facilitate the emigration of Eastern European Jews to America. Meanwhile, Jewish journalists in Europe submitted reports about persecution and pogroms to Jewish newspapers in Germany, America, Britain, and France. These journalists received reports from Jews who had bribed their way out of Russia and were attempting to bribe their way into other countries, using sympathy to attract funds to aid in their relocation. Many Jewish journalists asked Day to transmit similar stories, but after investigating the veracity of the reports, he refused to participate. However, dozens of Jewish newspapers all over the world eagerly published these fallacious stories.326

Day discovered that two of the most prominent Jewish fund-raising organizations, the Hebrew Immigrants Aid Society and the American Joint Distribution Committee (JOINT), were funding and promoting mass immigration “contrary to the law of the United States.” These agencies advertised in the Soviet press, urging people to apply if they wanted help in arranging passage to a country of “unlimited opportunities.” JOINT also disbursed tens of millions of dollars to fund Jewish business ventures, such as banks, factories, and workshops, in Eastern Europe following World War I. Consequently, Jews in Poland, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, and elsewhere in Europe had significant advantages and could acquire dominance in trade and industry over Christian war sufferers who did not benefit from foreign assistance.327


326 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 14-15

327 Ibid. 14-17

JOINT amassed millions of dollars from Jews and sympathetic Christians who thought they were helping Jewish war victims. In 1923, eighty thousand Jews in Riga applied for American visas; in Warsaw more than 350,000 applied. European applications just for that year totaled one million. Within fifteen years, hundreds of thousands of Jews had emigrated to the United States despite the immigration law enacted May 26, 1924. The Jews circumvented it by lobbying furiously to alter domestic policies. They also appealed to other minority groups, such as the Poles, Lithuanians, Czechs, Slovaks, and Italians, which joined them in pressuring Congress to allow massive immigration rather than voting for reasonable restrictions. Immediately following World War I, millions of Jews from Russia began to relocate to America, Germany, Austria, France, and other areas. Rabbis, a big part of the immigration swindle, offered bogus birth certificates and other fabricated documents to individuals who also used bribery to obtain passports.328

The Polish government thought that the United States should accept its Jewish and other minorities who were not particularly interested in assimilation there or anywhere else. The corrupt Roosevelt administration was open to immigration and to foreigners who were not interested in integrating into the culture but rather in changing it. Donald Day wrote, “New York City has always contained the largest percentage of foreigners of all American major cities. It is largely because of this that the administration of New York City is the most dishonest and corrupt in the United States.” Unassimilated aliens have long committed the majority of the crimes in America. The criminals include the lawbreakers themselves and the lawyers who defend them in court, enabled by corrupt politicians. The Roosevelt administration exemplified the dishonesty exhibited in New York.329

Day interviewed the Polish minister of the interior who told him that Poland had granted permission to 350,000 Jews to leave the country. However, Poland would not give 180,000 Poles permission to emigrate. The minister said that America was a great country and that if it would accept Poland’s Jews, it would solve “one of Poland’s most pressing problems.” Day asked him why Poland refused to issue exit visas to the Poles, and the minister responded that “Poland had decided to prevent Polish emigration to swell the Polish majority in the country.” Day pointed out to the minister that if Poland, in five hundred years, had not been able to assimilate its Jewish population, America could not perform such a feat.330


328 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 14-17

329 Ibid. 96-99

330 Ibid. 14-17

Unassimilated Jews in America made every effort to annul or amend the immigration laws to allow others to enter the country. The Nathan Perlman Amendment, backed by Meyer Jacobstein and Emanuel Celler, attempted to grant visas to the relatives of Jews in America. Day reported that Jews specialized in falsifying immigration documents. There are two kinds of rabbis; one is a religious leader and the other is a butcher. The three special rabbi schools in Kaunas, Lithuania, graduated hundreds of butchers who qualified for the special American religious immigration exemption. Consequently, hundreds of black-garbed “rabbis,” skilled in butchery, entered the United States in the 1930s.331

In The Fate of Man, Herbert G. Wells wrote, “The hostile reaction to the cult of the Chosen People is spreading about the entire world today. In the past the Jews have been subjected to much resentful treatment and much atrocious cruelty and injustice, now here, now there, but there has never been such a world-wide I will not use the word anti-Semitism because of the Arab I will say anti-Judaism. Now, because of the physical unification of the world, the resentment against the theory and practice of a Chosen People is much quicker and more contagious than it used to be; it is becoming world-wide and simultaneous. The idea is becoming everywhere more and more intolerable than it has ever been before.”332

The Soviets invaded and occupied Latvia on June 16 and 17, 1940, entering Riga, the capital, where Donald Day was living. On June 17, Andrei Vishinski, the deputy chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the Soviet Union, introduced himself to President Kārlis Ulmanis as the Soviets’ special envoy. The Soviets arrested Ulmanis. Vilhelms Munters, the Latvian foreign minister, seemed to have inordinate influence over Ulmanis. Day said this about Munters: “I had little to do with Munters. I instinctively mistrusted him. All indications point to Munters as an arch traitor who sold his country to Moscow.” Within a week or so, Mrs. Munters returned to Riga and packed their belongings, and soon the entire family relocated to Moscow where Munters became an official of the Soviet Commissariat of Foreign Affairs.333

331 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 14-17

332 H. G. Welles, The Fate of Man, (New York: Alliance Book Corporation, Longmans, Green and Co., 1939), 107

333 Ibid. 34-37

On February 12, 1940, Munters had delivered a speech to academicians and students at the Latvian University during which he referred to Latvian-Soviet relations. He said, “The agreement of October 30, 1939, regarding the repatriation of citizens of German nationality, was an event of enormous domestic-political, foreign-political, and, one might say, also historical significance. The agreement embraced in all six important tasks: 1) the actual repatriation; 2) the liquidation of movable property; 3) the liquidation of rural immovable property; 4) the liquidation of immovable property in towns; 5) the liquidation of trading and industrial enterprises; and 6) the liquidation of nonprofit-bearing organizations.” Authorities completed the deportation of forty-five thousand Germans and their allowable moveable property on December 15. Officials would dispose of the remaining property by May 15, 1940.334

Rabbi Mordecai Dubin, a member of the Latvian Parliament and head of the religious Orthodox party, had massive influence among Latvian Jews and fanatically defended their rights.335 Dubin exercised “an unusual influence” over Ulmanis and was largely responsible for the increase of the Jewish minority in Latvia. Dubin persuaded Ulmanis to allow many thousands of Russian Jews to enter Latvia. Dubin also helped thousands of other, often revolutionary, Jews from Germany to relocate to Latvia. These Jews “were delirious with joy when the Red Army tanks rolled into Riga.” They joined in the perpetration of the Red Terror against the freedom-loving Latvians who had given them refuge in their beloved country.336

Dubin rescued the famous Hasidic Lubavicher Rabbi Joseph Schneerson from the Nazis in Poland. He was the father-in-law of Menachem Schneerson. He was close to Ulmanis and gained prominence during his dictatorship.337 Menachem Schneerson, also a Lubavicher and a Hasidic rabbi, was the seventh and last rebbe of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement.


334 Vilhelms Munters, “Munters Speaks on Sovietisation and Repatriation,” Latvian Economic Review, No. 2 (18) April 1940; ; viewed 6/10/2013

335 Maris Goldmanis, The Jews in Latvia, Latvian History, 2010;
http://latvianhistory.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/the-jews-in-latvia; verified 06 Jan 2022

336 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 34-39

337 Maris Goldmanis, The Jews in Latvia, Latvian History, 2010
http://latvianhistory.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/the-jews-in-latvia; verified 06 Jan 2022

On January 31, 1991, Representative Robert Michel introduced a resolution designating March 26 as Education Day in honor of the eighty-ninth birthday of Rabbi Schneerson. The Senate and the House passed the resolution with an attachment called the Noahide Laws, and President George H. W. Bush signed the bill into law on March 20, 1991.338

On June 13, 2013, while at Moscow’s Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center, Vladimir Putin said that the first Soviet government was 80 to 85 percent Jewish. Putin decided to nationalize the library of Rabbi Joseph Schneerson, the former leader of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. Chabad representatives in the United States began moving books to the Moscow museum in June 2013. Putin also said that the predominantly Jewish Soviet government was “guided by false ideological considerations.”339 This decision has certain implications concerning Jewish influence in Russia today.

Authorities gave Donald Day twenty-four hours to leave the country. As soon as the Bolsheviks occupied Poland, they exterminated all police officials. In Latvia and other Baltic countries, the Soviet State Political Directorate (GPU) forced the top police officials to resign and then recruited and armed the criminal element to assist the remaining local police. When GPU officials came to arrest him, Police Inspector Kissels of Riga killed himself rather than suffer at their hands. Other government authorities fled to Finland where they volunteered to serve with the Finnish military.340


338 Bill Dannemeyer, U.S. Congressman, 1979-1992, “Now the Government Can Legally Kill Christians,”
http://www.spingola.com/Dannemeyer.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

339 JTA, “Putin: First Soviet government was mostly Jewish; speaking at Moscow’s Jewish Museum, Russian president says politicians ‘were guided by false ideological considerations,’” Haaretz Daily, June 20, 2013,
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/putin-first-soviet-government-was-mostly-jewish-1.530857; verified 06 Jan 2022

340 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 34-39

In Kaunas, the capital of Lithuania, the Soviets compelled the citizens—men, women, and children—to crawl on their hands and knees like animals through the streets to the railroad station where the Soviets separated families, then forced them into cattle cars destined for the east, a journey of many days. In Riga, the capital of Latvia, the Soviets arrested thousands of men and women and transported them to standing-room-only cells in secret prisons where they tortured them to extract confessions for acts that the prisoners had never committed or for news about those fighting bolshevism. Prisoners were flayed alive and shot in the back of the head. Their bones were broken, and men were castrated, among other vicious treatment. Jewish members of the Cheka regularly violated women and girls.341

In Tallinn, the capital of Estonia, the Bolsheviks placed men, women, and children in freight cars for two to three days without food, water, or bathroom facilities. They separated the men from the women and children. Ultimately, despite the efforts of fellow citizens, the Bolsheviks exiled the people to the east to forced labor camps and certain extermination. Most of the people were the relatives of army officers, government officials, executives, factory owners, lawyers, doctors, dentists, writers, and journalists. The Bolsheviks exempted only one group of educated citizens, the engineers and building contractors, whom they needed to manage the factories that they had confiscated and to supervise the construction of fortifications.342

The Bolsheviks destroyed the replaceable infrastructure of hundreds of towns, but the tens of thousands of people slaughtered, the lifeblood of those nations, were irreplaceable. The Bolsheviks killed entire families in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, eastern Poland, Polish Ukraine, Bessarabia, and Bukovina. Even the communists referred to their massive work of death in these places as the Red Terror. They liquidated every class of people except the working class. They used the same sadistic tactics against the outlawed classes in the Baltic countries as they did during the revolution in Russia.343


341 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 34-39

342 Ibid.

343 Ibid.

The guillotine used during the French Revolution would certainly be a quicker, more humane means of death than the methods used by the Soviets. Racial hatred is obvious in the way the Jews treated the Baltic populations.344 The Jews controlled the Bolshevik Revolution and all of the terrorist activities leading up to that horrific period. After they seized the government, the Jews supervised the death squads that terrorized millions of Russians, who lived in fear for their lives. Felix Dzerzhinsky, with his assistants, Henry Yagoda and Vyacheslav Menzhinsky, created and headed the Cheka, which, beginning on September 2, 1918, perpetrated the mass murders of the Red Terror and the Russian Civil War, complete with concentration camps, even for children. Dzerzhinsky, under Lenin and Stalin, was the “architect of the gulag system” and helped to enforce and strengthen the Bolsheviks’ power.345

Survivors of the Red Terror in the Baltic countries testified that most of the leaders of the GPU, the ultimate power in Russia, were Jews. Donald Day regularly reported on Jewish power in the Soviet government. On June 16, 1940, President Ulmanis, in his last public address, notified Latvians of the nation’s capitulation to Moscow’s ultimatum and the imminent occupation by the Red Army, which had already established itself in Riga. About three thousand people, at least 90 percent of them from every level of Riga’s Jewish community, cheered the arrival of the Soviet tanks. In their enthusiasm and their disregard for the local police, they threw one officer over a cliff to his death and shot others. The Soviets disarmed the Latvian police, arrested and then released many of the Jewish rioters. The Soviets set a 10 p.m. curfew and ultimately the rioting stopped.346

Day reiterated that the Jews, not the Latvians, cheered the Red Army tanks and attacked the police during the rioting in Riga. However, newspapers failed to mention that it was the Jews who provoked the riots, murdered policemen, were arrested, and then released. Consequently, readers erroneously assumed that the Latvians welcomed the Bolsheviks. Day interviewed some of the Jewish rioters and asked them about their seemingly spontaneous reception of the Soviets. They responded, “Now the Germans will never come here.” The Jews considered the Soviets liberators, while the Latvians viewed them with panic and fear. The Soviets expelled Day from Riga a month later.347


344 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 34-39

345 Alexander N. Yakovlev, Anthony Austin, and Paul Hollander, A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2002), 15-16

346 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 34-39

347 Ibid.

George Seldes accused Day of viewing the Soviet Union as a threat and manufacturing stories to support that view. William L. Shirer, an embedded court historian reporting on Germany, claimed that many of Day’s dispatches and their “speculative nature” embarrassed his associates. Shirer, a biased reporter, wrote, “As I recall, he spent most of his time in the Chicago Tribune office in Riga, Latvia, faking stories about the outbreak of revolution.” Allegedly, Day visited the Soviet consulate with copies of his stories, saying that if the Soviets permitted him to enter their country he would write the truth. Obviously, there was a reason that the Soviets denied him a visa. People like Seldes claimed that Day had an unwarranted vendetta against the Soviets.348

Walter Trohan, the former chief of the Tribune’s Washington bureau, disputed Seldes’s deceptive depiction of Day. Trohan wrote the introduction of Day’s 1981 memoir, Onward Christian Soldiers (originally published in 1942). He defended Day who, for twenty-one years, had tried unsuccessfully to obtain another visa to the Soviet Union. The Soviets regularly approached him, promising him a visa if he would write complimentary articles and would agree to report on “the activities of governments with which he was familiar.” He refused to participate in their malevolent machinations. The Soviet foreign office required all correspondents to report quarterly to obtain visa extensions. The Soviets withdrew the visa of anyone who dissatisfied them. The Tribune removed the sycophantic Seldes from Moscow and left Day in Riga, Latvia, to cover Russia.349

Day’s outstanding book mentioned the Jewish fear that the USSR would collapse. They knew people would hold them responsible, and many were desperate to emigrate. The Jews in the US government undoubtedly worked a variety of programs to help them exit Europe for greener pastures. Duranty was the subject of Sally J. Taylor’s Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow. Some people credit him with laying the groundwork for the Roosevelt administration’s recognition of the Soviet regime. Taylor says that he had predicted the success of the Bolshevik state and that he perpetrated some of the biggest lies in history. His propaganda-filled dispatches denied or minimized the horrors suffered by Ukrainian Christians, whom the Soviets were starving into submission. He whitewashed Stalin’s reign of terror in Russia.


348 John Carver Edwards, Berlin Calling: American Broadcasters in Service to the Third Reich, (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1991), 155-56

349 Ibid.

Shirer called Duranty “the greatest of foreign correspondents to cover Moscow.”350 In March 1939, Polish authorities prohibited Donald Day from releasing reports about the persecution of the country’s ethnic German minority. Day also covered the Finnish-Soviet Winter War of 1939-40. In July 1940, when the Soviets invaded Latvia, officials gave him twenty-four hours to leave the country. He reported that Latvia’s Russian and Jewish minorities facilitated the invasion, noting that on June 17, a flag-waving mob at the railway station shouted in Russian or Yiddish, not in the Latvian language.

Day believed that the Third Reich was the only safeguard against Soviet tyranny. He questioned America’s entry into the war and maintained that Germany’s cause against Russia was justified. In his broadcasts, he denounced Roosevelt, the Jewish instigators of atheistic communism, and America’s military-political alliance with the USSR. He believed that in fighting the Jewish-Bolshevik regime of Russia, Germany was performing a valiant service for Western civilization. In 1940, British officials added Day’s name to the list of people whom they wanted to detain at the war’s conclusion. Referring to Finland, which, along with Germany, fought bolshevism, he said, “There is something radically wrong in this world war lineup. Finland has not changed, but the American Government has changed.” He said that “Stalin stands for the destruction of Lithuania, Poland, Latvia, etc. Roosevelt’s war aims are the same… The Roosevelt policy is the policy of J. Pierpont Morgan.”351

To prepare Americans for war, the Roosevelt Brain Trust, including Harry Hopkins, succeeded in transforming all news originating in Europe into disinformation, portraying starving, diseased, and oppressed populations entirely controlled by the Axis powers. On August 14, 1941, before Pearl Harbor, Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt met at the Atlantic Conference in Newfoundland and under the pretense of “international security,” drafted a charter to clarify that America supported Britain in the war against Hitler and Germany. FDR was accompanied by Hopkins, who promoted war against the Germans. On January 1, 1942, through a declaration by the United Nations, the Allies pledged adherence to the charter’s principles. The Atlantic Charter defined the Allied goals for the postwar world and inspired other international agreements, such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.


350 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 2

351 “U.S. on Wrong Side says Berlin Radio; Broadcaster claims to be Donald Day, Correspondent of Chicago Tribune,” The Montreal Gazette, September 1, 1944,
http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers?id=nHYtAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hJgFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3747,164137&dq=donald-day&hl=en/; verified 05 Jan 2022

On September 18, 1944, Time Magazine reported that on September 6, the Chicago Tribune carried ten “hate” stories about Roosevelt and his administration along with two stories about Sidney Hillman, the CIO, and its PAC which mobilized voters in election districts all across the country but none against Hitler, the Nazis, or Hirohito and the Japanese.352

After the USSR annexed the Baltic States, the Chicago Tribune relocated Day to Sweden to continue reporting as its Stockholm correspondent. Day accompanied Finnish troops in 1941 as they advanced into Soviet territory in the Continuation War of 1941-44. His passport had expired, and he attempted unsuccessfully to renew it. Technically, he was a stateless person. Toward the war’s end, he felt that it was essential for reporters to alert the West about the communist expansion into Eastern Europe behind the advancing Red Army. He relocated to Berlin where he became a commentator for the Reichs-Rundfunk-Gesellschaft, a German state radio station. He broadcast to American forces in Europe from August 31, 1944, until April 1945.

In the last weeks of the war, during a broadcast on March 29, 1945, Day said, “It is hard to believe that a Christian people should gang with a barbaric nation to try to exterminate another Christian nation, solely because the victim of this conspiracy expelled the Jews from its country.”353 Counterintelligence Corps officials arrested Day in May 1945 and incarcerated him along with Mildred Gillars and Herbert Burgman at Camp King, Oberursel, conditionally releasing him on December 24, 1946. Day then returned to his home, a single room, in Bad Tolz, Bavaria. On January 22, 1947, the Justice Department said that it was not interested in prosecuting Day for his anti-Soviet broadcasts during the war. On January 12, 1949, officials arrested him and charged him with treason, but the Justice Department soon dropped the case.


352 “The Press: Hoax & Hate,” Time Magazine, September 18, 1944,
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,796732,00.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

353 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), vii

  PART III: World War II In Europe      

Chapter 12 ♦ Ukraine: Assault against the Middle Class

Russian Empress Catherine the Great issued an invitation on October 15, 1762, offering numerous incentives—freedom of religion, temporary tax exemption, interest-free loans, internal self-government, and eternal immunity from military conscription—to all foreigners who would come and populate the Volga region, developing the area and creating a buffer zone between the Russians and the Mongols to the east. In the first five years, almost thirty thousand German farmers and artisans settled in the area and founded three hundred villages. Over the next century, steppe nomads raided the region, and it took years for the Volga Germans to enrich the soil sufficiently to harvest abundant crops.

04 Volga Germans
Volga Germans

Following Czar Alexander II’s liberation of twenty-three million serfs on March 3, 1861, many acquired title to their land, accelerating agricultural production. Ukraine, Europe’s breadbasket, was the home of traditional farmers, ethnic Ukrainians, and many Volga Germans who still owned and farmed the land. In 1871, Alexander II revoked the right of the German settlements to enjoy self-government. In 1874, he revoked their immunity from military conscription.354 The Volga German community numbered about 1.8 million by 1897.

According to the 1914 census, there were 2,416,290 ethnic Germans in Russia when World War I erupted. The government viewed them as possible enemies or as having enemy sympathies and sought to purge all ethnic Germans from the empire. In 1915 and 1916, when Russia started losing the war, the government deported about two hundred thousand Germans from Volhynia, a historic region in Eastern Europe straddling Poland, Ukraine, and Bessarabia, to the German colonies in the lower Volga River. The government exiled many Germans to Siberia as enemies of the state. The chaos created by the Bolshevik Revolution of February 1917 prevented the deportation of the remaining Russian Germans.355

World War I fractured the Austria-Hungary Empire, and thereafter various factions fought for Ukrainian territory, spurring the Ukrainian nationalist movement. During World War I, Russian Prime Minister Ivan Goremykin said that Russia was not just against the German Reich but also against the German people and said that they deserved to suffer discrimination and persecution.


354 J. Otto Pohl, Ethnic Cleansing in the USSR, 1937-1949, (Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, 1999), 28-36

355 Ibid. 29-36

During the Ukrainian-Soviet War (1917-21), the Bolsheviks fought to prevent Ukraine’s independence. They invaded Ukraine on December 11 and 12, 1917, and brought the predominantly Christian nation under their control. In 1919, the Soviets began sending Christian pastors to the Siberian gulags. The Christian Volga Germans were of a different mentality than the atheistic revolutionaries.

In 1921, officials divided Ukraine between the Soviet Union and Poland, with small areas going to Czechoslovakia and Romania. Partisan fighting continued against the Soviets until mid-1922. In response, the Red Army terrorized the countryside. The Bolshevik Revolution, followed by a civil war, halted the production of food and its distribution. Bolshevik expropriations created a horrific famine in 1921 and 1922 during which a quarter of the population starved to death. The Bolsheviks then imposed collectivization in the agricultural regions.356 Some Volga Germans enlisted with the White Army against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War. The Red Army conducted fierce attacks on the Volga German communities.

The 1921 famine affected twenty-five million people, particularly the Germans of the Lower Volga valley. Edgar Gross, using official government documents from the Ninth All-Russian Congress of Soviets in December 1921, found that the famine had “hit the Volga German Commune especially hard.” Bernhard Bartels said that the German commune was the “center of the famine.”357 The famine led to the deaths of a third of the Volga German population. On February 20, 1924, the Soviet government upgraded the Volga German Workers’ Commune to the status of Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, the first national autonomous unit in the Soviet Union. The government divided the ASSR into fourteen cantons.

The Soviets relaxed their policies through the New Economic Policy (NEP), issued on March 21, 1921, which permitted the trade of foodstuffs but also included a food tax. Trotsky disapproved of the NEP and preferred the immediate suppression of the kulaks because of their widespread opposition to bolshevist policies. The change temporarily invigorated the country.358


356 Prof. Hartmut Fröschle, Johannes Schleuning (1879-1962), Volga-German Pastor, Activist and Journalist, “German Pioneers Across the World,”
http://www.volgagermans.net/norka/johannes_schleuning.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

357 James W. Long, “The Volga Germans and the Famine of 1921,” The Russian Review, Vol. 51, October 1992, 510-25

358 Viktor Suvorov, The Chief Culprit, Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, (Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 2008), 23-27

By 1923, because of the NEP, there was enough grain to feed the population and to export. However, Stalin’s industrialization process brought dire results. While the USSR had abundant produce, the peasants, who had suffered because of the scarcity of essential commodities, were reluctant to sell their products. Even if they received rubles for their products, they wondered if there would be merchandise to purchase. There were plenty of tanks, airplanes, and rounds of ammunition, but there were no refrigerators, washing machines, or toilets. By 1927, the discouraged peasants decided either to retain their products or simply to stop producing. In response, Stalin and his cronies decided to eliminate the hardest-working peasants, those they deemed smarter and wealthier, the middle class, by abolishing private land ownership and establishing collective farms. Stalin tasked units of the Red Army to occupy regions where high-producing farmed peasants resided.359

In implementing the NEP, the Soviets ceased compulsory grain seizure and permitted the peasants to store and trade their grain. They forced the collaboration of workers and peasants. Some historians view this as a temporary cessation between the first Bolshevik assault against the peasantry (1919-22) and the final deadly onslaught (1928-33).360 In 1928, Stalin replaced the NEP with the first of thirteen five-year plans, implemented on January 5, 1930, which imposed a shift from independent to collectivized farming. American firms, with US government knowledge and approval, were involved in this new development in Russia.361

By the end of the first plan, the USSR had more than 4,538 tanks, the foundation of Soviet industrialization and militarism. The program continued with the second five-year plan. The Soviets produced furnaces, dug coal ore mines, and established huge electricity and oxygen plants. Under the first two plans, the Soviets produced 21,573 warplanes. Under the third five-year plan, scheduled for completion in 1942, they intended to maintain massive production of high-quality armaments. Stalin, using terrorism, closed the country’s borders to prevent escape from the USSR. The secret police launched an assault against alleged “malevolent saboteurs,” factory workers found guilty of any production-line accident, breakage, or failure to meet production requirements.362


359 Viktor Suvorov, The Chief Culprit, Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, (Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 2008), 23-27

360 Norman M. Naimark, Stalin’s Genocides (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2010), 53

361 Antony C. Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones (Walterville, Oregon: Trine Day, 2002), 163

362 Viktor Suvorov, The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, (Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 2008), 23-27

This terror improved discipline and suppressed opposition since workers would not initiate strikes or demand better wages. The Soviets imprisoned millions in slave-labor camps where they received no wages and were not provided housing, food, or clothing. They somehow had to acquire or build whatever they needed. They worked long hours and had no holidays, and officials could execute anyone for failure to fulfill production quotas. Soviet development of remote areas of Siberia and the Far East would have been impossible without slave-labor inmates and “special settlers,” millions of exiled deportees. The government determined the number of necessary workers, and then the People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) arrested a sufficient number of people to meet the quota.363

The Soviets were prepared to use brute force in their collectivization and dekulakization efforts. To meet their objective of kulak elimination, they employed death sentences, labor settlements, and deportation from the areas of collectivization. They executed tens of thousands of kulaks and expropriated their property for the collective farms. They deported hundreds of families to desolate, unpopulated areas of Siberia where there were no buildings. The deportees had to work day and night to build shelters to keep from freezing to death.

To meet his industrialization objective, Stalin used Russia’s enormous resources and treasures, including its gold reserves, acquired during more than a century and found in churches, monasteries, libraries, imperial vaults, museums, czarist palaces, and in the homes of the rich. The Soviets confiscated and then exported and/or sold icons, paintings, statues, medals, books, antique furniture, Renaissance paintings, furs, gold, platinum, diamonds, and jewelry to people outside of the Soviet Union, all within a relatively short time. Russia also had massive natural resources in virtually unlimited quantities, including timber, which the Soviets assigned millions of people to cut down as the foundation for export efforts. Stalin also sent slave laborers to mine gold.364


363 Viktor Suvorov, The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, (Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 2008), 23-27

364 Ibid.

Stalin said, “Now we have the opportunity to carry out a resolute offensive against the kulaks, break their resistance, eliminate them as a class and replace their production with the production of kolkhozes [the collectives] and sovkhozes.”365 On January 30, 1930, the Soviets sanctioned the extermination of the kulaks as a class, divided into three categories—those they would send to the gulags, those they would relocate to distant areas of the USSR, and those they would send to other parts of their province. There were twenty-five million Russian peasants, not including their families. There were fifteen million to eighteen million middle-income peasants, five million to eight million poor peasants and between 1.5 million and two million kulaks. Stalin wanted to incite the “village poor” against the kulaks by assuring them a reliable existence as workers in a kolkhoz, where the state would provide them with machinery and livestock seized from the kulaks. The peasants did not want collectivization, and the middle class bitterly opposed it. They gathered and concealed huge quantities of food in hidden storerooms. In despair, they slaughtered cattle, burned crops, and broke implements, conducting one of the biggest peasant revolts against a state power.366

When Stalin’s new system was in full operation in February and March 1930, the number of collective farms grew from 59,400 with 4.4 million families to 110,200 farms with 14.3 million families. The government confiscated the land owned by the peasants who resisted collectivism and murdered them or exiled them to remote areas. People refer to this as “the liquidation of the kulaks,” a process that affected five million families. Instead of relinquishing their animals to the collective farms, many peasants killed them, while state policies reduced the number of cattle from 30.7 million in 1928 to 19.6 million in 1933. During this time, the number of sheep and goats fell from 146.7 million to 50.2 million, hogs from 26 million to 12.1 million, and horses from 33.5 million to 16.6 million. State activity disrupted the planting season in 1930 and the years thereafter, dramatically reducing food production. The Soviets, like the British in India and Ireland, insisted on seizing food from the rural population to support the urban population. With insufficient food, the peasants starved.367

Stalin used the nation’s resources—coal, nickel, manganese, petroleum, cotton, and other riches—to pay for foreign technology. In 1930, the Soviets’ main export was grain, along with timber and timber products and oil and oil products. Due to America’s overproduction, grain prices plummeted. In 1933, grain sales constituted only 8 percent of all Soviet export revenue. Just half of the grain that the Soviets exported in 1932 and 1933 would have fed millions and saved them from starvation and death, particularly in Ukraine. During the Soviets’ first five-year plan, America and soon Europe suffered an economic crisis. This contrived crisis contributed to Stalin’s expansion.


365 Robert Service, Stalin: A Biography, (Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2006), 266

366 Georg von Rauch, A History of Soviet Russia, trans. by Peter and Annette Jacobsohn (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1957), 18-81

367 Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (San Pedro, California: G. S. G. & Associates, Incorporated, 1975), 398-99

During the collectivization campaign of 1929-33, Stalin’s forces targeted farmers who owned more than one cow or five or six more acres than their neighbors did. Agents now referred to those farmers as kulaks, or enemies of the poorer peasants. Vladimir Lenin called them “bloodsuckers, vampires, plunderers of the people and profiteers, who batten on famine.”368 The government divided the peasantry into poor (bedniak), middle (seredniak), and wealthy (kulak) households. Then the government officially targeted the wealthy peasants for persecution and “dekulakization.” The Soviets applied the labels flexibly to punish any resistance to the government’s program. They also interchanged the term kulak with phrases like “anti-Soviet elements” or “anti-Soviet activities.”369

Soviet officials enforced a systematic starvation of thousands of the previously self-sufficient souls who opposed collectivism. The confiscation of all grains and stock from personal and national supplies created a famine. Conservative estimates indicate that about 4.8 million people perished while others estimate the number as high as ten million. FDR granted the Soviets diplomatic recognition on November 16, 1933. In 1945, Stalin admitted to Winston Churchill that twelve million peasants died during the transition to collective farming.370 After World War I, all newly created nations were obligated to sign minority rights treaties as a condition for diplomatic recognition, and this requirement applied to the recently reorganized nation of Russia under the Soviet thugs.371 The starvation in Ukraine was similar to the desperate situation during the Dust Bowl in the United States.

The Soviet government reduced bread rations, bringing great suffering since more and more families had no access to bread cards. Meanwhile, Soviet agents, seizing grain from farmers, including ethnic Germans, left many without supplies, grain, and seed reserves. If the farmers failed to provide the grain, the government fined them or sentenced them to forced labor, ordering the forfeiture of all property. In two villages, not one of the thousand farms had any cows. Even the collective farm had only forty starving cows and sixty pigs. The ethnic Germans regularly appealed to the government for German citizenship rights. Those exiled Germans were in Ukraine as a result of the Versailles Treaty. Desperate villagers ate ersatz food or went to the closest town and traded clothes or whatever else they had for bread. A kilogram of bread was almost ten rubles. The Soviets deceived the villagers, forced them to relinquish their livestock and grain, and promised there would be plenty to eat if they joined the collective farms. But the rations were insufficient, and the underfed workers ended up begging for food.372


368 Vladimir Lenin, “Comrade Workers, Forward to the Last, Decisive Fight!,” August 1918, published January 17, 1925, in Rabochaya Moahva No. 14, Lenin’s Collected Works, Progress Publishers, Moscow, Vol. 28, 1965, 53-57

369 Lynne Viola, ed., Contending with Stalinism: Soviet Power and Popular Resistance in the 1930s (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002), 29, 87

370 Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (San Pedro, California: G. S. G. & Associates, Incorporated, 1975), 398-99

371 Antony C. Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones (Walterville, Oregon: Trine Day, 2002), 163

372 Ruslan Pyrih, Holodomor of 1932-33 in Ukraine: Documents and Materials, trans.by Stephen Bandera (Kyiv: Kyiv Mohyla Academy Publishing House, 2008), No. 3 Report from German Consulate in Kharkiv (or Kharkov) to the Embassy of Germany in the USSR on the agricultural situation,
http://faminegenocide.com/resources/hdocuments.htm; verified 06 Jan 2022

Reports of the Mass Genocide

In 1932 and 1933, writer Arthur Koestler was living in Kharkov, then the capital of Ukraine. He described the famine during that terrible winter when starvation killed many children in the countryside. Prior to a horrific death, they resembled “embryos out of alcohol bottles.” In his travels by rail through the countryside, he saw crowds of begging peasants with swollen hands and feet. He saw mothers extending their starving infants with “wobbly heads” and swollen bellies. Soon thereafter, the authorities required train conductors to pull down window shades on all trains traveling through the North Caucasus, Ukraine, and the Volga basin. Despite the circumstances, the local newspapers were full of positive reports about industrial progress with no mention of a famine. Koestler said, “The enormous land was covered with a blanket of silence.” At the same time Walter Duranty, Moscow bureau chief of the New York Times from 1922 to 1936, was pushing for recognition of the USSR.373

Toward the end of March 1933, Malcolm Muggeridge began writing articles for the Guardian about the desperate situation, criticizing collectivism and the Soviets’ “vastly over-optimistic estimates for the spring harvest” when in fact there was insufficient grain to properly feed the people. Muggeridge documented his claims of a “widespread famine” by traveling in the affected areas and describing the starving population. “I mean starving, in its absolute sense, not undernourished as, for instance, most Oriental peasants… and some unemployed workers in Europe, but having had for weeks next to nothing to eat.” The peasants said, “We have nothing. They have taken everything away…” Muggeridge wrote. “It was true, the famine is an organized one.” It was more than a famine. It was “a military occupation, worse, active war.”374

Although people had been starving and dying during the winter, official reports indicated that deaths on a massive scale began in early March 1933 when the snow melted. People had swollen stomachs, faces, and legs. They were unable to contain their urine. They consumed anything that they could fine—mice, rats, sparrows, marmots, and other small animals, ants, earthworms, and boiled snails. They had consumed all of the dogs and cats in the villages. If they lived near a river, they caught fish. They ground up animal bones to create flour and ate weeds and other items.375


373 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 202-03

374 Ibid. 202-05

375 Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine (Oxford University Press, 1987), 243-45

Muggeridge reported that the occupying soldiers and Soviet representatives in each community consumed whatever food that the government sent. These well-fed agents continued to control and coerce the kulaks while “searching their barns and cellars for hidden grain and hoarded food.” Muggeridge saw “fields choked with weeds, cattle dead, and people starving and dispirited, no horses for plowing or for transport, not even adequate supplies of seed for the spring sowing.” He saw “deserted villages,” leading him to believe that the government had deported masses of people and that collectivization was a colossal, deliberate failure. Other villages reeked of death. Lethargic people could be seen dressed in rags with swollen bodies, evidence of advanced starvation. They told Muggeridge that the government had taken the food away, causing famine in the “most fertile parts of Russia.”376

Muggeridge alerted Ambassador Esmond Ovey at the British Embassy in London, who conveyed the message to Sir John Simon, Britain’s foreign secretary. Apparently, there were also numerous stories of suicide and cannibalism. The embassy smuggled these reports out in its diplomatic pouches. The Manchester Guardian, a British newspaper, printed some of Muggeridge’s reports but where readers would have to search to find them. He left the Soviet Union and returned to England where his reports were greeted with skepticism, especially from Beatrice Webb, his wife’s aunt, who called his coverage “a hysterical tirade” and publicly scorned him. Others vilified and slandered him. Consequently, he was unable to obtain work.377

The first five-year plan included a collectivization policy in agriculture to facilitate the rapid industrialization of the Soviet Union, helping to make it a leading nation. Initially it had just seventy-nine tanks. The Soviets created collective farms on which peasants worked cooperatively on the same land, using the same equipment. Stalin wanted to increase the efficiency of agriculture and eradicate the hostile landowning kulak class. Collectivization was a main cause of the famine of 1932-33, which resulted in millions of deaths. From 1928 to 1940, the number of laborers in the USSR increased from 4.6 million to 12.6 million. They worked in construction, industry, and transport, mostly focusing on the militarization of the USSR.


376 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 205-08

377 Ibid.

Gareth Jones, a young Welsh journalist who first visited Russia in 1930, reported on the last three years of Stalin’s first five-year plan. The London Times published his first three articles. Jones kept a diary detailing the suffering of the Soviet peasants in Russia and Ukraine.378 He took a three-week walking trip through the famine area and on March 29, 1933, delivered a report about the starvation to a press conference in Berlin. He later gave a conference in London at Chatham House. Hubert R. Knickerbocker heard Jones and cabled The New York Evening Post, saying he believed him because “of his position, because of his reputation for reliability and impartiality and because he is the only first-hand observer who has visited the Russian countryside since it was officially closed to foreigners.”379

The Manchester Guardian published Jones’s report, angering the Soviet press office. The Soviets clamped down on Western correspondents and demanded that they focus their coverage of Soviet events on the upcoming Metro-Vickers trial. On March 31, 1933, Duranty sprang into action, siding with the Soviets and doing everything he could to discredit Jones’s report. He admitted that there had been some “mismanagement of the collective farming” and that some “wreckers” and “spoilers” had “made a mess of Soviet food production.”380

The Manchester Guardian had just published Muggeridge’s three articles (March 25, 27, and 28, 1933), as had several American newspapers, which also published the details of Jones’s Berlin press report.381 On March 31, 1933, Jones returned from his third investigative tour of Ukraine where he had taken a forty-mile walk through villages, speaking to peasants and sleeping in their cottages. Duranty viciously attacked and defamed Jones in the New York Times with an article headlined “Russians Hungry but not Starving.” He characterized Jones as a lying scaremonger and wrote, “There is no actual starvation or death from starvation, but there is widespread mortality from disease due to malnutrition.” The Soviet press censor, Oumansky, gathered the foreign press and devised a way of discrediting Jones’s report. Duranty led the way in this endeavor with his article denigrating Jones and accusing him of falsifying the news. Eugene Lyons, author of Assignment in Utopia (1937), wrote, “Poor Gareth Jones must have been the most surprised human being alive when the facts he so painstakingly garnered from our mouths were snowed under by our denials.” In April 1933, Jones wrote twenty additional articles about the famine that numerous newspapers, including the Welsh Western Mail and the Daily Express of London, published. In 1934, he went on a lecture tour throughout Britain, Ireland, and America titled “The Enigma of Bolshevik Russia.”382


378 Experiences in Russia, 1931, A Diary, Days 1 to 13,
http://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/Experiences_in_russia_1931_days1to13.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

379 Duranty & Gareth Richard Vaughan Jones (1905-35),
http://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/duranty_revocation.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

380 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 205-08

381 Duranty & Gareth Richard Vaughan Jones (1905-35),
http://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/duranty_revocation.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

382 Ibid.

Duranty agreed that there had been “serious food shortages” but adamantly asserted that “there was no actual starvation or deaths from starvation.” He said that any deaths that occurred were due to diseases caused by malnutrition particularly in Ukraine, North Caucasus, and Lower Volga. Jones had talked with peasants and had witnessed the massive suffering, starvation, and death in twenty villages and would not retract his story that Russia was experiencing “a severe famine.” Meanwhile, other Western journalists, like Duranty, were referring to the famine as a “food shortage” and instead of talking about those who were starving to death, they cited the “wide-spread mortality from diseases due to malnutrition.” Duranty declared that the famine was “mostly bunk.”383

Maxim Litvinov, Stalin’s foreign affairs commissar, cabled the Soviets’ London Embassy, which demanded that David Lloyd George ban Jones, who was fluent in Russian, from the Soviet Union, accusing him of espionage. In letter dated May 13, 1933, Jones wrote, “Everywhere I went in the Russian villages I heard the cry; ‘There is no bread, we are dying,’ and that there was famine in the Soviet Union, menacing the lives of millions of people.” He had “conversations with peasants who had migrated into the towns from various parts of Russia.” He said, “Peasants from the richest (most fertile) parts of Russia were coming into the towns for bread. Their story of the deaths in their villages from starvation, of the death of the greater part of their cattle and horses and each conversation corroborated the previous one… I talked with hundreds of peasants who were not the ‘kulaks’—those mythical scapegoats for the hunger in Russia—but ordinary peasants. I talked with them alone in Russian and jotted down their conversations, which were an unanswerable indictment of Soviet agricultural policy. The peasants said emphatically that the famine was worse than in 1921 and that fellow-villagers were dying.”384

The government’s policies reduced the population by six million farmers, who were allowed to perish. With fewer people, there seemed to be more food. The government said this was due to an increase in production. This is how governments spin facts. Stalin, apparently unaffected by such human loss, said that “only by conducting a battle of extermination against Social Democracy can one fight fascism.” Stalin viewed the horrific manmade famine of 1933 as a triumph for communism, even if it meant certain death for children. Industrialization and the success of world communism depended on starvation, shootings, and Siberia. The government said that the deaths, in “one of the world’s worst geographical misfortunes,” were essential to establish the system. Despite the irrationality of the justification, the Soviets claimed that the global anti-Soviet conspiracy had to be “ruthlessly broken.”385


383 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 205-08

384 Duranty and Gareth Richard Vaughan Jones (1905-35),
http://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/duranty_revocation.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

385 Sir Robert Gilbert Vansittart, The Mist Procession: The Autobiography of Lord Vansittart, (London: Hutchison, 1958), 457-59

The Kremlin, intent on exterminating the kulaks, seized an abundance of food from the peasants. People suffered, starved, and perished by the millions. Stalin faked the census and inflated the statistics as the Soviets did not want “to frighten the bourgeoisie with big figures.” By early 1933, the Soviets, in an attempt to divert attention from their incompetence, failures, and “national suffering,” resorted to “sensationalism and spy scares.”386 Interestingly enough, at the same time, in the spring of 1933, international Jewry began to disseminate atrocity stories about the Germans and their alleged mistreatment of Jews living in Germany.

Miron Dolot, a Ukrainian who miraculously survived the Soviet extermination policy, wrote about his day-to-day experiences in Execution by Hunger: The Hidden Holocaust, published in 1985. The book is well worth the read. Many peasants slaughtered their livestock rather than deliver them to collective farms. In January and February 1930, the kulaks killed millions of cattle, horses, pigs, sheep, and goats. They either consumed the meat or traded it and the hides.387 Soviet officials, angered over the widespread slaughter, issued orders to prosecute “the malicious slaughtering of livestock.” Stalin instituted severe measures to halt kulak resistance. He wanted his agents to end their ability to produce sufficient food in order to eliminate them as a class.

The Jewish-owned and—controlled New York Times misrepresented and concealed Stalin’s ruthless mass murder and his deliberate starvation of millions of people. His five-year plan facilitated the calculated starvation of at least five million middle-class Ukrainians, people whom Stalin saw as a threat. The Times and its editorial staff, along with Duranty, falsely claimed, “There is no famine or actual starvation nor is there likely to be.”388 They said, “Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda.”389 On August 27, 1933, Duranty, in a special cable to the Times, said that weeds were a major problem and that their size made it impossible to use modern machinery. This, he said, was why farms were falling behind in Russia. He also claimed there was insufficient labor, creating an inability to harvest crops.390


386 Sir Robert Gilbert Vansittart, The Mist Procession: The Autobiography of Lord Vansittart, (London: Hutchison, 1958), 457-59

387 Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine (Oxford University Press, 1987), 159

388 New York Times, November 15, 1931

389 New York Times, August 23, 1933

390 Walter Duranty, “Huge State Farms Lagging in Russia; Lack of Attraction for Labor Causes Them to Drop Far Behind in Harvesting. Weeds a Major Problem; Some Grow to Such a Size as to Make the Use of the Modern Machinery Impossible,” Special Cable to The New York Times, August 27, 1933

Andrew Cairns was a Canadian agricultural expert working for the Empire Marketing Board, formed in May 1926 by Leopold Amery (the architect of the Balfour Declaration). In the summer of 1932, he conducted three tours of Soviet agricultural areas to evaluate the consequences of collectivism. Cairns said “starvation is already rampant with pot-bellied children and people dying in the streets.” He anticipated a “catastrophe for the coming winter.” Will Zuzak wrote, “Although in 1932 the people were still defiant and offered passive resistance to collectivization, the huge death toll during the winter broke their spirit.” By the summer of 1933, Stalin’s terrorists controlled Ukraine. Pavel Postyshev, the key designer of the famine, was Ukraine’s dictator. He “directed all his energies in rooting out any traces of Ukrainian independence, Ukrainian nationalism, Ukrainian culture and even the Ukrainian language. These actions clearly demonstrate the genocidal nature of the Holodomor.”391

Dr. Otto Schiller, an agricultural specialist at the German Embassy in Moscow, accompanied Cairns, whose reports reached the desk of Ambassador Ovey, who conveyed them to Sir John Simon, the British foreign secretary. Cairns cited “a record of over-staffing, over planning and complete incompetence at the centre; of human misery, starvation, death and disease among the peasantry… the only creatures who have any life at all in the districts visited are boars, pigs and other swine. Men, women, and children, horses and other workers are left to die in order that the Five-Year Plan shall at least succeed on paper.”392

Cairns and Schiller described a young boy on the verge of death, “standing holding up his little shirt displaying thighs only about three or four inches thick. As Schiller took a photograph of him, two women with tears streaming down their face, said, ‘that is what is going to happen to all of us. Will you give that picture to the newspapers in America, so that they will send us food?’” In early August, Cairns sent two telegrams, describing the “appalling loss animal draft power.” He also noted the population’s “widespread resistance” to collectivization. Cairns described the circumstances in Ukraine, Caucasus, Crimea, and Volga, where many ethnic Germans lived, exiled from the Reich by the treaties signed after World War I at Versailles. He described “acute widespread hunger.”393 So while Jewish leaders were accusing Germany of atrocities, their Soviet cronies were starving millions of exiled Volga Germans.


391 Will Zuzak, The Foreign Office and the Famine: British Documents on Ukraine and the Great Famine of 1932-1933,
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/mozuz/holodomor/carynnyk1988HolodomorBritish.html; verified 07 Jan 2022

392 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 193-94

393 Ibid. 194-95

The Empire Marketing Board, perhaps formed as a control agent in anticipation of the Soviets’ devious intentions, predictably failed to publish the results of Cairns’s agricultural study, Agricultural Production in Soviet Russia: A Preliminary Report as at May 1st, 1933.394 The British Foreign Office thought it wise to send Cairns back to the area, but his report was of such a “controversial nature” that the board withheld its publication for fear that Cairns would not get a return visa. In September 1933, before Cairns had the opportunity to return to Russia, the organization unexpectedly went into liquidation.395 Apparently, it had accomplished its aims.

Years later, when people asked Cairns why he had not self-published the report, he said that he had received numerous threats from “powerful political figures” in Britain and feared for his life. One of those who threatened him was Beatrice Webb, who, with her husband Sidney, glorified Stalin’s accomplishments in a two-volume work, Soviet Communism: A New Civilization. They blamed the peasants for the failures of collectivism. Schiller, Cairns’s associate, returned to the Soviet Union and thereafter published a report in Germany. Pravda immediately accused him of libel and of being “a tool of fascist masters.”396

In mid-November, Duranty visited William Strang at the British Embassy in Moscow, who referred to him as a “shady character.” Duranty told Strang that the USSR’s livestock population had decreased by 40 percent from 1929 to 1930 because the peasants slaughtered the animals, but he failed to tell him why. Duranty, a Pulitzer Prize winner and Stalin’s favorite reporter, deliberately concealed the obvious evidence of the famine of 1932-33. Duranty spent a lot of time at Moscow’s Metropol Hotel where he was the “reigning social host.” William C. Bullitt, the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, and George F. Kennan, who traveled to Russia with Bullitt, frequently socialized with Duranty. Kennan talked about the journalists and their “uproariously informal parties” attended by Russians and Americans.397

Romanian-born attorney Henry Shapiro grew up in New York, attended Harvard and, because he was fluent in Russian, went to the Soviet Union at the end of 1933 to study comparative law. He soon entered the newspaper business. Starting as a cub reporter with the New York Herald Tribune, the Morning Post of London, and Reuters of London, he worked his way up to Moscow bureau chief for the United Press, position he held for the next forty years. He reported on Stalin’s purge trials398 and had a special relationship with the Kremlin. Shapiro understood the role of the press in the Soviet Union where officials considered it a branch of government. Unless reporters cooperated with the Soviets, they received no news stories and were not invited to functions. Furthermore, officials subjected foreign correspondents to the country’s strict press laws, which prohibited the publication of anything until after the government published it.399 Shapiro was one of the few American reporters who remained in Moscow during the Cold War400 and covered the USSR’s space program.401


394 The Foreign Office and the Famine, British Documents on Ukraine and the Great Famine of 1932-1933,
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/mozuz/holodomor/carynnyk1988HolodomorBritish.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

395 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 195-97

396 Ibid. 195-96

397 Ibid. 239-40, 244

398 “Henry Shapiro, 84, Longtime Reporter in Moscow for U.P.I.,” New York Times, April 9, 1991.

399 Richard Harnett, “Henry Shapiro Was Legendary UP Moscow Correspondent”
http://www.downhold.org/lowry/gems3.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

400 Henry Shapiro, A Register of His Papers in the Library of Congress, prepared by Michael Spangler with the assistance of Donnelly Lancaster, Lisa Madison, and Karen Spicher, revised and expanded by Michael Spangler, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., 2000,
http://lcweb.loc.gov/rr/mss/address.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

401 Henry Shapiro, “Global Security,”
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/library/report/2007/deep-politics-b-0-1.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election almost assured the official sanction of the Soviet Union. In November 1933, Duranty, with permission from the New York Times, accompanied Soviet Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov to Washington to negotiate the conditions of this recognition. Since 1921, Duranty, with his positive coverage of Russia, had “cemented in the public’s mind” the idea that the Soviet style of governance was acceptable, even progressive, and deserved American recognition. Following Lenin’s death, Duranty described the “meteoric rise” of Stalin and the “growing strength” of the Communist Party. Bullitt, a millionaire diplomat and now the US ambassador to Russia, accompanied Duranty back to the Soviet Union.402

A month after Duranty returned to the Soviet Union, Stalin granted him a private, one-hour interview during which the dictator expressed his views on diplomatic recognition by the United States. Time published Duranty’s full-page interview, complete with his photo. The interview took place on December 25, 1933. It would be the last time that Duranty saw Stalin, who told him, “You have done a good job in your reporting the U.S.S.R., though you are not a Marxist, because you try to tell the truth about our country and to understand it and to explain it to your readers. I might say that you bet on our horse to win when others thought it had no chance and I am sure you have not lost by it.”403

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, author of The Gulag Archipelago, said of the Soviet Union, “This was a system which, in time of peace, artificially created a famine causing six million persons to die in the Ukraine between 1932 and 1933. They died on the very threshold of Europe. And Europe didn’t even notice it. The world didn’t even notice it. Six million persons!”404 Leon Trotsky’s second wife, Natalya Sedovaya-Trotskaya, unperturbed by the millions who died, was the daughter of a Zionist banker, Ivan Zhivolovsky (Avram Zhivatovzo). Her father helped finance the Bolsheviks’ seizure of Russia. He had close ties to the Warburgs and the Schiffs.405


402 Sally J. Taylor, Stalin’s Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Times’ Man in Moscow, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 190-91

403 Ibid. 191-92

404 Alexander Solzhenitsyn Speaks to the West , (London: The Bodley Head Ltd., 1978), 15-16

405 Jüri Lina, Under the Sign of the Scorpion: The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire, (Referent Publishing, Stockholm, Sweden, 2002), 169-70

Chapter 13 ♦ Economic Assault against Germany, 1933

By 1910, Alfred Milner and his London Round Table cohorts focused on initiating a war against Germany. Alfred E. Zimmern, a political scientist, specialized in international relations.406 After moving to Britain, his parents, German Jews, brought their son up as a Christian. In December 1915, Zimmern, a Zionist, was a visiting professor at the University of Wisconsin and met Louis D. Brandeis, who told him about Chaim Weizmann, the head of British Zionism.407

In 1918, Zimmern wrote The Economic Weapon against Germany in which he said, “The Central Powers are being besieged by practically the entire world and they have no means at their disposal for bringing the siege to an end.”408 In that book, he said that systematic, large-scale economic warfare was yet untried and that Germany would not anticipate its effectiveness. He and his cohorts would devise postwar plans at the Paris Peace Conference. While the blockade would ultimately end, they would make certain that Germany lacked access to raw materials, making industrial employment impossible. Without manufacturing, the returning soldiers would not find employment. The Allies, by confiscating and managing “essential supplies,” would incapacitate Germany and make recovery impossible, cutting the nation off from the seas, the markets, and the world’s supply centers.409

This would cause food shortages and famine, affecting all of civilized Europe, if not the whole world for as long as three years. Zimmern wrote, “Who more naturally than Germany? It is not as if the boycott had to be organized. It will come about almost of itself unless special provision is made in the peace.”410 Fifteen years later, when Jewish perpetrators were planning another boycott, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise said, “Every form of economic discrimination is a form of violence.”411

Edwin Black said, “With the ability to be heard, the Jews of America, especially in New York, could mobilize economic and political pressure against Germany that would make war against the Jews a campaign of national suicide.”412 Court historians would have us believe that Hitler immediately began oppressing Germany’s Jews, eventually relegating them to numerous camps to exterminate them all. Individuals or groups may have demonstrated anti-Jewish attitudes and even engaged in periodic violence, just as people had done throughout history in other countries, frequently against indigent or alien minority groups.

The American media began falsifying the news from Germany as soon as Hitler took office. Rabbi Wise admitted that the American Jewish Congress (AJC) started the boycott-Germany movement because of “cable reports” from Germany that “a nationwide pogrom” of Jews was being “planned.”413 Wise said that the reported pogrom “did not come off,” but the boycott did.414,415 A few influential Jews living in America and Britain claimed that Germany was instigating violence against the Jewish population despite the assurances of Germany’s Jewish Central Association that German citizens and the government had no intentions of harming the Jews. Zionist Jews living elsewhere decided to provoke the governments of the countries in which they lived to launch a war against Hitler and Germany.


406 Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), 144

407 Melvin Urofsky, Louis D. Brandeis: A Life (New York: Random House, 2009), 516

408 Alfred E. Zimmern, The Economic Weapon in the War Against Germany (London: Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1918), 2-3

409 Ibid. 2-3

410 Ibid. 18-19

411 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle Edition), Locations 1442-53

412 Ibid. 3

413 The Nazis always claimed that their one-day Jewish boycott of April 1, 1933, was in reply to this provocation from New York, and Rabbi Wise’s book of 1949 substantiates their statement.

414 Pogrom is a Russian word meaning “massacre.” As Douglas Reed notes, the word plays a special part in propaganda and Jews use it to signify any kind of disturbance even though it is specific. Chaim Weizmann says, “there were never any pogroms” in his native Russian countryside, but he uses the word continually, explaining, “‘It is not necessary to live among pogroms to know that the Gentile world is poisoned.” In inciting a British military governor of Palestine to harsh measures against Arabs, Weizmann said he “had had some experience with the atmosphere which precedes pogroms,” though he had previously said he never encountered one. He describes as a pogrom disorders in which five or six Jews were injured and as “‘Arab terrorism” the events of 1938, in which sixty-nine Britons, ninety-two Jews and 1,500 Arabs were killed.

415 Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion (Durban, South Africa: Dolphin Press, 1978), 222-23

The anti-German media campaign erupted again in the United States in 1932 with a full-page ad in the New York Times, which read, “Let us boycott anti-Semitic Germany.” This was ineffective, so Henry Morgenthau initiated a New York-Moscow partnership with a resumption of American-Soviet relations, beginning with the visit of the People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union, Maxim Litvinov (born Litvinov Finkelstein), a former Bolshevik revolutionary, to Washington. His arrival brought a succession of communist infiltrators into the State Department and the White House. Roosevelt sanctioned the installation of the powerful Soviet broadcasting station in the United States War Office.416

By 1933, there were three Jewish factions in the United States, what some call the Big Three defense groups. One was the American Jewish Committee (AJCm), cofounded by Jacob H. Schiff, Cyrus Adler, and Louis Marshall on November 11, 1906, to prevent the violation of the civil and religious rights of Jews in any part of the world.417 Rabbi Wise, Felix Frankfurter, and Brandeis cofounded the American Jewish Congress (AJC) in 1918. B’nai B’rith, founded on October 13, 1843, accepted the hordes of poor European Jews as lodge members when they immigrated to America in the 1880s in order to “manage” them.418 The AJCm and B’nai B’rith typically worked behind the scenes, while the AJC, led by Wise from 1928 to 1949, was more vocal in making its demands known. On January 30, 1933, the three groups united against “the greatest single anti-Jewish threat ever posed.” Edwin Black claims that Hitler, through some “unofficial policy,” encouraged, in the “first days” after his appointment, violence and persecution against the Jews living in Germany.419

During his first six months in power, Adolf Hitler briefly mentioned the Jews, but despite media propaganda, he certainly did not plan to exterminate them and was not out to conquer the world. However, David Wolffsohn, the second president of the WZO, in his closing remarks at the Eighth International Zionist Congress, pleaded for “greater unity among the Jews… eventually they must conquer the world.”420 FDR, envisioning world dominion, cabled Churchill, “You and I can rule the world!” In 1939, Churchill wrote to FDR, “Were I to become Prime Minister of Britain we could control the world.” On October 21, 1944, FDR said, “We must play a leading role in the community of Nations.”421

Hitler’s immediate concerns were the economic issues facing his depression-devastated nation. He had written extensively about the Jews in Mein Kampf, which was justifiable given the inequitable Versailles Treaty. Now that he was Germany’s leader, he would have the power to carry out measures against them. His writings, not his actions, were the reason for the “holy war.”422 When international Jewry declared war on Germany, Jews in Germany publicly protested the fabricated stories of persecution. There were isolated anti-Jewish incidents, but in a population of seventy million people, there were bound to be negative feelings about the Jews, the communists, or other groups that the Germans distrusted. At no time did the government order or provoke persecution against the Jews. The Jews, many of whom considered Germany their homeland, opposed the foreign Jews and their “declaration of war.”423

The Germans were focused on the recovery of their country after World War I and were not looking to start another war. On February 11, 1933, Treasury Secretary Morgenthau declared, “The US has entered the phase of a second war!” Meanwhile, numerous communist-run boycotts against German goods took place in the United States. These actions were obviously well coordinated. Whoever was running the warmongering program had extraordinary political power in addition to having media control in the Soviet Union, the United States, France, and England. Germans wanted only to be left alone and in peace.424


416 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 78-81

417 Boris David Bogen, Jewish Philanthropy: An Exposition of Principles and Methods of Jewish Social Service in the United States (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1917), 36

418 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.” Dialog Press, 2009), 4-5

419 Ibid. 5-7

420 New York Times, September 17, 1914

421 Udo Walendy, Truth for Germany: The Guilt Question of the Second World War, (Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review Books, 2003), 44

422 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 94-95

423 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 28-29

424 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 77-79

On February 22, 1933, in anticipation of the March 5 elections in Germany, Alfred Cohen, the president of B’nai B’rith, convened a special meeting in New York with fifteen of the most prominent Jewish leaders, five from each of the three Jewish factions, to discuss Germany. The group hoped that Hitler would not win power and that the concepts he outlined in Mein Kampf would not come to fruition. The AJC advocated “public protests” in America and elsewhere to demonstrate to the German government that people were scrutinizing its every action, particularly in relation to the Jews. There had been numerous media reports of violence against the Jews in Germany.425

On March 12, 1933, the AJC leadership met for three hours to consider a national program of protests, parades, and demonstrations culminating in a “giant anti-Nazi rally March 27, at Madison Square Garden.” The Jewish War Veterans (JWV) first initiated resistance to Germany, a country members fought in World War I.426 Interestingly, the Jews celebrated Sunday, March 12, 1933, as Purim, a Jewish holiday memorializing the vengeful activities recorded in the Old Testament in the book of Esther, which says that Jews slaughtered seventy-five thousand Persians.427 The veterans unanimously voted for a national boycott on March 18. Several regional and national Jewish organizations scheduled an emergency meeting for March 19.428

Dr. Joseph Tenenbaum, an AJC vice president, issued a “warning to Germany,” which the major newspapers published. “Threatening a bitter boycott,” Tenenbaum said, “Germany is not a speck on Mars. It is a civilized country, located in the heart of Europe, relying on friendly cooperation and commercial intercourse with the nations of the world… (a) war against the Jews means boycott, ruin, disaster, the end of German resources, and the end of hope for the rehabilitation of Germany.” Despite the AJCm’s opposition to a boycott against Germany, the AJC moved forward with its protest. On March 13, the leaders of the AJCm, during a meeting of the Big Three, were surprised to learn of the AJC’s plans to go ahead with the protest. Brandeis, who endorsed eugenicist policies and the forced incarceration and sterilization of the “feebleminded,”429 was the best friend of Rabbi Wise. Brandeis supported the boycott and thought that Jewish leaders should bring FDR into the discussion about the “situation” of the Jews in Germany. Though Wise was a bit reticent about the protest, the newspapers had already announced it.430

The AJCm delegates wired Alfred Cohen, the president of B’nai B’rith, in Cincinnati and alerted him to the fact that the AJC was going ahead with the boycott meeting. On March 15, Morris Waldman, the AJCm secretary, contacted William Cohen and told him that the AJCm and B’nai B’rith were cutting their ties with the AJC and with any anti-Nazi protest. The smaller Jewish organizations, more connected to the “Jewish masses” and dedicated to a protest, now had to consider how to proceed. The JWV held a meeting on the night of March 18 in New York. To end the stalemate, Benjamin Sperling persuaded the attendees to move forward with a “vigorous national boycott of all German goods, services, and shipping lines.”431

On March 19, the AJC convened a planning meeting at the Hotel Astor in New York, attended by 1,500 representatives of Jewish organizations. However, only a thousand people were able to gain entrance to what turned out to be a four-hour meeting. Only two attendees opposed a boycott. Joseph Proskauer read a letter from Judge Irving Lehman that said, “I feel that the meeting may add to the terrible dangers of the Jews in Germany.” Proskauer added, “I implore you in the name of humanity don’t let anger pass a resolution which will kill Jews in Germany.” James N. Rosenberg reiterated Proskauer’s remarks. J. George Fredman, commander in chief of the JWV, advocated the boycott. Rabbi Wise, honorary president of the AJC, while praising Proskauer and Rosenberg, suggested that they revise the original resolution and that the AJC go ahead with the boycott.432

At that same time in Poland, a country with 3.5 million “economically and politically cohesive” Jewish residents, Jews in Vilna were coordinating an anti-Nazi boycott against Germany.433 By 1923, Vilna’s population was 70 percent Jewish so they had a great deal of power.434 In Poland, Jews monopolized journalism, especially from 1921 to 1933. Jews represented “almost the entire German press.” Donald Day wrote, “The Jewish journalists representing the German press and those employed in the Jewish and Polish press in Poland did much to promote dissension and mistrust between Poland and Germany. They had no love for either Germany or Poland, and their chief aim was to promote the interests of the Jewish minority in both countries.”435 The press can influence governments to accommodate the international Jewish agenda. By the early 1900s, Jews referred to their “great power” of the press by which they could “secretly” control public opinion, which they claimed was “already entirely” in their hands “with few exceptions.”436


425 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 7-8

426 Udo Walendy, The Transfer Agreement and the Boycott Fever 1933, Historical Facts No. 26, (Verlag für Volkstum und Zeitgeschichtsforschung, 1987), 10

427 Purim in the United States,
http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/us/purim; verified 06 Jan 2022

428 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 9-10

429 Edwin Black, War against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003), 120-21

430 Ibid. 9-10

431 Ibid. 10-11

432 “Nazi Foes Here Calmed by Police; Hotel Congested by Delegates Seeking to Join in Protest of Jewish Congress; National Action Planned,” New York Times, March 20, 1933

433 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 10-11

434 Donald Day, Onward Christian Soldiers: An American Journalist’s Dissident Look at World War II, (Newport Beach, California: Noontide Press, 1984, 2002), 65

435 Ibid. 70

436 World Conquest Through Jewish World Government: The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion3.htm#PROTOCOL No. 5; verified 07 Jan 2022

Vilna Jews, with media control, attracted the support of non-Jews by incorporating the Polish Corridor issue. The Vilna Jews held an anti-Nazi boycott on March 20, 1933, implying that Hitler had indicated he might occupy the Corridor to gain access to Danzig, a move the Poles unequivocally rejected. There were widespread rumors of a “preemptive” military strike by Poland against Germany.437 Poland’s highly publicized boycott was among the strongest Jewish actions against Germany. Polish Jews conducted a massive media operation to alter public opinion and to offer assistance to German Jews who had sought refuge in Poland. By early April 1933, the German Zionist delegation in London abandoned the idea of participating in an anti-German boycott movement but decided to continue its Zionist activity in Germany.438

This was not the first time that Poles had targeted Germans. In 1921, after a nationality referendum, the authorities expelled hundreds of thousands of Germans, prohibited the German language, imposed excessive taxes on Germans, and confiscated their civic buildings and newspaper offices. Attempting to inflict economic havoc, they organized a boycott of German businesses, banned cultural and occupational associations, revoked business licenses, dismissed German workers, withheld unemployment benefits, refused to appoint Germans to public-sector jobs, and denied apprenticeships to young Germans.439

On March 20, 1933, at a meeting of the executive advisory committee of the JWV at the Hotel Knickerbocker, former Congressman William Cohen, a vice president of the AJC, endorsed a strict boycott of German goods. He said, “Any Jew buying one penny’s worth of merchandise made in Germany is a traitor to his people. I doubt that the American Government can officially take any notice of what the German Government is doing to its own citizens. Our only line of resistance is to touch the German pocketbooks.” He agreed with Rabbi Wise, who said, “We must make ourselves heard all over the world.”440

On March 21, 1933, Wise, along with leading members of the AJC, went to Washington where they were unsuccessful in their attempts to see the president regarding their concerns since he was busy considering the nation’s economic woes. During this visit, Wise announced, “The time for caution and prudence is past. We must speak up like men. How can we ask our Christian friends to lift their voices in protest against the wrongs suffered by Jews if we keep silent?”441

The New York Times of March 21, 1933, quoted Lion Feuchtwanger as saying that Hitler’s regime had killed a “vast number” of Jews.442 Adolph Ochs owned the Times. He was the son of Julius Ochs, who had emigrated from Fürth, Bavaria, Germany in 1848, along with thousands of other revolutionaries.443 Julius led a Masonic lodge prior to 1861.444 Officials forced Ochs’s mother, Bertha Levy, to leave Germany after her participation in the student revolution of 1848.445 Adolph married Effie Wise, the daughter of Rabbi Isaac Wise, who immigrated to America in 1846.446 Some claim that he restricted discussion of the Nazi persecution of the Jews in the letters to the editor section. After Hitler became chancellor, people challenged the newspaper’s silence on the serious situation of Germany’s Jews. Ochs refused to deal with the issue, saying that it would require the Times to give equal coverage to the other side.447

The AJCm and the B’nai B’rith approached Secretary of State Cordell Hull on March 4, 1933. He then cabled George A. Gordon, the chargé d’affaires in Germany, as follows: “Public opinion in this country continues alarmed at the persistent press reports of mistreatment of Jews in Germany.” Hull asked Gordon if the US government could help in this situation and told Gordon about the mass meeting that the Jews had planned for March 27 in New York. He asked if Hitler could make public statements to improve the situation.448 Thus the alliance seeking to obstruct the boycott against Germany now included the US government in addition to B’nai B’rith, the AJCm, and the Jewish Agency for Palestine. Edwin Black suggests that the government was unconcerned.449

Hull requested and received a report about the allegations of persecution of Jews in Germany from Gordon. Then Hull issued a statement on March 27, saying, “A reply has now been received indicating that whereas there was for a short time considerable physical mistreatment of Jews, this phase may be considered virtually terminated… Hitler in his capacity as the leader of the Nazi Party, issued an order calling upon his followers to maintain law and order, to avoid molesting foreigners, disrupting trade, and to avoid the crisis of possible embarrassing international incidents.” Samuel Untermeyer, Louis Marshall’s law partner and the president of the World Jewish Economic Federation, rejected all such reports, even those from Jewish organizations, and insisted that they were not authentic.450


437 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Wasnhington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 10-11

438 Yf’aat Weiss, “The Transfer Agreement and the Boycott Movement: A Jewish Dilemma on the Eve of the Holocaust,” Shoah Resource Center, the International School for Holocaust Studies, 1-2

439 Udo Walendy, Truth for Germany: The Guilt Question of the Second World War, (Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review Books, 2003), 164-65

440 W. W. Cohen, New York Times, March 21, 1933

441 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 684-88

442 James J. Martin, The Man Who Invented Genocide: The Public Career and Consequences of Raphael Lemkin (Torrance, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1984), 102-03

443 Avraham Barkai, Branching Out: German-Jewish Immigration to the United States, 1820-1914 (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1994), 82

444 Jacob Rader Marcus, United States Jewry, 1776-1985 (Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press, 1991), 83-84

445 Notable New Yorkers, “Part IV, Session #1,” Interviewee: John B. Oakes, Interviewer: Mary Marshall Clark, New York, New York, December 3, 1996, 309-11

446 Richard Slotkin, Lost Battalions (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2005), 78

447 Kenneth Levin, The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege, (Smith and Kraus, Hanover, NH, 2005), 139

448 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 752-62

449 Ibid. Kindle, Locations 771-76

450 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 93

Hitler’s new government was attempting to address the increasing friction in Germany and elsewhere. Hull wired Rabbi Wise and urged caution, explaining that the “physical mistreatment of Jews” amounted to only isolated incidents and saying he felt “hopeful” that the “situation which has caused such widespread concern throughout this country will soon revert to normal.”451

Wise said, “The time for prudence and caution is past. We must speak up like men… What is happening in Germany today may happen tomorrow in any other land on earth unless it is challenged and rebuked. It is not the German Jews who are being attacked. It is the Jews.” Wise urged Hull to approach the German government and protest. Hull issued a statement to the American ambassador to Berlin, William E. Dodd, complaining that “unfortunate incidents have indeed occurred and the whole world joins in regretting them.”452 Wise apparently expected a greater response from Hull. Dodd’s daughter, Martha, was a Soviet spy working against America from before World War II. In mid-1938, she had been living with filmmaker Sidney Kaufman, but left to marry Alfred Stern, who had acquired millions as a result of his divorce from the daughter of Sears Roebuck tycoon Julius Rosenwald. According to a KGB document dated October 1975, the Sterns resided in Cuba from 1963 to 1970 after living in Mexico and other places.453

Hull’s wife was Rosetta “Rose” Whitney, a divorcée whom he married on November 24, 1917.454 She was the daughter of Isaac Witz, a prominent Bohemian-born Jewish banker and industrialist.455,456 Catherine Ethridge, Hull’s niece, reported that Rose moved into the Washington hotel where Hull lived and carried out her plan to marry him. Rose was a close friend of Woodrow Wilson’s widow, Edith Galt Wilson.457 Hull, a former federal judge and a member of the House of Representatives, received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1945 for his role in establishing the United Nations; FDR referred to him as the Father of the United Nations.458 In the 1940s, there were more than a hundred anti-Semitic organizations in America. Hull avoided Jewish issues and failed to mention his wife’s Jewish ancestry.459 However, the American Hebrew, dated February 13, 1942, published an article praising Hull as FDR’s “diplomatic chief of staff” and as “one of the greatest statesmen of the world.”

Despite the efforts of Hull and the AJCm to avoid the boycott against Germany, on March 23, 1933, the New York Times carried a story headlined “Protest on Hitler Growing in Nation,” reporting that merchants were canceling their orders for German goods.460 Rabbi Wise did not want to commit the AJC to a boycott or do anything to detract from the impending Madison Square Garden protest. Minus the support of the AJC, Morris Mendelsohn, head of the JWV’s boycott committee, was uncertain about the number of people who would march and endorse the boycott.461 Yet the media, including radio, enthusiastically supported the JWV’s parade during which the crowd showed its opposition to Hitler.462

About fifteen thousand Jewish war veterans led the seemingly spontaneous grassroots boycott, a word that people tried to avoid using. The JWV established an office to raise funds and to connect American merchants with alternate suppliers in Czechoslovakia, Romania, Britain, France, and the United States. JWV members mailed thousands of boycott letters to American businessmen and organized picket lines at major stores offering German products. The American media supplied constant publicity, including coverage of press conferences detailing the cancellation of orders totaling thousands of dollars, especially those of large companies. Predictably, the media focus created a chain reaction, and within a short time, the JWV boycott caused the loss of more than $2 million in German orders.463


451 Matthew Raphael Johnson, “The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany: The Economic Boycott of 1933,” The Barnes Review, Washington, D.C., January/February 2001, 41-45

452 Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, WJC Past President, World Jewish Congress,
http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/biography/51; verified 07 Jan 2022

453 Allen Weinstein, Alexander Vassiliev, The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—the Stalin Era, (The Modern Library, New York, 2000), 69-70

454 Obituary, from The Times-News, Hendersonville, North Carolina, March 27, 1954

455 Gregory Wallance, America’s Soul in Balance: The Holocaust, FDR’s State Department, and the Moral Disgrace of an American Aristocracy (Texas: Greenleaf Book Group, 2012), 77-78

456 “Isaac Witz Dies,” Washington Herald, January 28, 1908
http://www.newspaperabstracts.com/link.php?action=detail_and_id=98711; verified 05 Jan 2022

457 The Cordell Hull Foundation,
http://www.cordellhull.net/CordellHullBio.htm; verified 07 Jan 2022

458 Ibid.

459 Gregory Wallance, America’s Soul in Balance: The Holocaust, FDR’s State Department, and the Moral Disgrace of an American Aristocracy (Texas: Greenleaf Book Group, 2012), 77-78

460 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 777-84.

461 Ibid. 787-93

462 Ibid. 802-05

463 Ibid. 1478-92

On March 23, 1933, thousands of Jewish war veterans marched in the streets. The head of the JWV appealed for financial warfare against Germany in the midst of the Depression. On March 23, at New York’s City Hall, at least twenty thousand Jews protested while other Jews held demonstrations outside the North German Lloyd and Hamburg-American shipping lines. New York City Jews called for boycotts throughout the city against German goods. On March 24, the Daily Express of London announced in a front-page headline, “Judea Declares War on Germany,” reporting that Jews worldwide had initiated a boycott of all German goods. Their goal was to destroy Germany and Germans forever.464

In the early spring of 1933, Samuel Untermeyer launched an aggressive economic boycott against Germany. On March 24, the Daily Express reported the boycott of German goods. The statement read, “The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany. Fourteen million Jews stand together as one man, to declare war against Germany… to join together in a holy war against Hitler’s people.”465 Dr. Loewenstein, chairman of the Reich League of Jewish Front-line Soldiers, sent a letter to the US Embassy in Berlin. He said the league had heard all of the publicity about alleged atrocities against the Jews in Germany. Without minimizing the incidents, he said there had been mistreatment and transgressions, which happen in “every revolution.” He assured embassy officials that “irresponsible elements” had committed these acts and that the government condemned them. He further criticized the foreign “Jewish so-called intellectuals” who were waging an exaggerated, “irresponsible campaign of hatred” against Germany. By interfering in German-Jewish affairs from their safe distance abroad, he said, they were abandoning the very people whom they pretended to be helping.466

On March 24, the Reich League issued a statement to the front-line soldiers of the world, reiterating that the atrocity propaganda was false. The group maintained that political and economic interests were manipulating circumstances and that the defamation of Germany had been going on for fourteen years.467 The League of Red Cross Societies received a report from the German Red Cross, which said, “The reports of atrocities which have been spread abroad for reasons of political propaganda are in no way in accordance with the facts. Arbitrary and unauthorized acts, a few of which occurred in the first days of the national revolution, have been effectively stopped by energetic measures on the part of the government.” On March 25, the Central Union of German Citizens of Jewish Faith issued a statement, saying, “All such reports are pure inventions. The Central Union states emphatically that German Jewry cannot be held responsible for these inexcusable distortions which deserve the severest condemnation.”468

Meanwhile, in large American cities, people were perpetrating numerous outrageous crimes and atrocities against blacks. However, apparently exercising selective indignation, no one called for a holy war against the instigators or the United States. The NAACP, cofounded in 1909 by Julius Rosenwald, Lillian Wald, Rabbi Emil G. Hirsch, and Rabbi Wise, was supposed to counter such social injustice.469 Jewish businessmen and academics, Jacob H. Schiff, Jacob Billikopf, and Rabbi Wise, who ran the NAACP, remained silent.470 They did not declare an economic war against America, where they lived and where they controlled the major organization that could have waged such a campaign.471


464 Matthew Raphael Johnson, “The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany: The Economic Boycott of 1933,” The Barnes Review, Washington, D.C., January/February 2001, 41-45

465 Harrell Rhome, ed., A Few Minutes Before Midnight Ein Paar Minuten vor Mitternacht, Communications Between Germany and the USA Directly Preceding WW II, 2008, 5;
A_Few_Minutes_Before_Midnight.pdf; verified 10 Jan 2022

466 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 28-29

467 Ibid. 28-29

468 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 92-94

469 NAACP History,
http://www.naacp.org/about/history/index.htm; verified 06 Jan 2022

470 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 94-95

471 NAACP History,
http://www.naacp.org/about/history/index.htm; verified 06 Jan 2022

On March 26, 1933, the Zionist Organization for Germany sent a telegram to leading Jews in America, saying, “In a declaration disseminated March 17, 1933 by the Jewish Telegraphic Union to the entire Jewish world press, we set forth, with great determination, our opposition to any anti-German propaganda. We objected to the untruthful atrocity reports, and to the unconscionably sensationalized accounts. Today, we repeat our protest publicly. We object to every attempt to make the Jewish cause subservient to the interests of other states or groups… their economic position cannot and must not be tied to political actions against Germany or against the international political standing of the German Reich.”472

Göring remarked that Rabbi Wise was one of Hitler’s “most dangerous enemies.” On March 26, 1933, Hitler was at Berchtesgaden when he received word that Congress was unable to halt the boycott. He met with Goebbels to discuss an emergency plan for countering the boycott and the atrocity stories. Goebbels had already advised the London Sunday Express that the atrocity accounts were false, but such efforts failed to neutralize the massive propaganda campaign.473 On March 27, Goebbels released a statement about “legal proceedings” against German Jews if Jews in New York and London continued their anti-Reich operation. He said, “We work through [media] interviews as much as possible; but only a really extensive movement can now help us out of our calamity.” Hitler approved of Goebbels’s plan, announced on the radio, for the NSDAP’s preemptive national boycott, not an official government policy, against Germany’s Jews, scheduled for April 1.474

On March 27, Rabbi Wise called his close friend, Justice Brandeis, to ask his opinion about whether to go ahead with the rally that night. Brandeis responded, “Go ahead and make the protest as good as you can.” He confirmed Wise’s decision to proceed.475 Even though the rally would not start until 8:00 p.m., people began lining up outside Madison Square Garden by 2:30 p.m. and traffic in the area congested the streets.476 Rabbi Wise (Weisz), founder of the New York Federation of Zionist Societies in 1897 and later the president of the AJC, joined the efforts to bash Germany by announcing a “holy war.”477 He delivered a speech that night in which he called for an end to anti-Semitism in Germany and promoted the boycott. The rally attracted fifty-five thousand supporters inside and outside the arena. There were corresponding rallies in Chicago, Washington, San Francisco, Houston, and seventy other American cities. Loudspeakers were set up in another two hundred US cities where as many as another million people, both Jewish and Gentile, listened to the live broadcast. Hundreds of Europeans also heard the proceedings. AJC president Bernard Deutsch cabled Jewish leaders in Latvia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other places where anti-Reich protesters planned to hold rallies in conjunction with the one in New York. A group of rabbis held a national day of fasting in Poland, fully supported by the Polish government, which sanctioned anti-Hitler parades and extended the boycott to all of Poland. Officials banned rallies by German sympathizers. The three key Warsaw Jewish trade organizations vowed to “use the most radical means of defense by boycotting German imports.”478

Speakers at Madison Square Garden included labor union president William Green, Senator Robert Wagner, former New York governor Al Smith, and several clergymen. Rabbi Moses Margolies, from Manhattan’s Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun, read the declaration of an economic boycott against Germany. Representatives from Jewish organizations, including the AJC, the American League for Defense of Jewish Rights, B’nai B’rith, the Jewish Labor Committee, and the JWV, joined in the appeal for a boycott.

Rabbi Wise disregarded the Jewish leaders in Germany who pleaded for Jews in the United States to stop the protests. He thought that they should have fought against Nazism before Hitler became chancellor. The crowd at Madison Square Garden agreed with Wise, who said, “Every form of economic discrimination is a form of violence.” He also claimed that “racial exclusion” represented violence. Wise threatened the Third Reich that if things worsened because of the protest or if Germany imposed new penalties, then “Providence would deal good or ill fortune to nations according as they dealt well or ill by the Jews.”479


472 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 28-29

473 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 1497-1505.

474 Ibid. 1509-14, 1525-35

475 Ibid. 1352-54

476 Ibid. 1355-60

477 Louis Marschalko, The World Conquerors: The Real War Criminals, trans. from the Hungarian by A. Suranyi, (Joseph Sueli Publications, London, 1958), 77-79

478 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 1375-86, 1478-92.

479 Ibid. 1428-53

Given Jewry’s economic assault on Germany, one can certainly understand how anti-Jewish sentiment erupted in Germany. It was predictable and inevitable. Wise’s speech “turned the Jews of Germany into the Enemy inside the gates. This declaration was a Jewish initiative and the reason why the Jews of Europe were later herded into concentration camps.”480 When Chamberlain suggested that Jews go to the former German colony of Tanganyika, Wise said, “I would rather have my fellow-Jews die in Germany than live in lands which bear the imprint of yesterday’s occupation by Germany and which may tomorrow be yielded back.”481

Hitler’s revival of the German economy and eradication of massive unemployment was the most important aspect of the NSDAP program. The Jews’ economic boycott, threatening financial chaos, could produce political unrest among the German masses, which would end the NSDAP and Germany’s revival and lead the rest of Europe to reject the National Socialist economic model. But officials elsewhere would follow Germany’s lead and throw the predatory, monopolistic Jewish bankers and businessmen out of their countries.

Germany’s committee for defense against Jewish boycott agitation warned the agents involved in the effort to avoid violence or force against Jewish businesses or their customers. If businesses failed to close their doors voluntarily, officials were to seek assistance from their superiors. The defensive action would begin at 10 a.m. on April 1. The committee strictly forbade agents, SA or SS members from entering any Jewish establishment, causing property damage, or posting provocative posters. They were only to inform the public that the proprietor was a Jew, and this had to irrefutable.482

On March 28, 1933, the Berliner Tageblatt, which was edited by Jews, said, “Deeply shocked, our whole people observe the new hate campaign against us that has been raging abroad over the last few weeks.” The editorial accused the perpetrators of the grossest self-interest “in trying to make Germany appear contemptible… In opposing the senseless reports that some of the world press still publishes… we must declare emphatically that there can be no talk of pogroms or of anti-Jewish excesses in Germany. Whoever, on the outside, says otherwise, lies, or is an ignorant tool of dark powers.”483

The Jewish community in Salonika, Greece, planned a boycott against Germany’s local film business. Trade unionists in London participated in boycott activities. Groups in Paris, Warsaw, Cairo, Dublin, and Antwerp organized boycotts. By March 29, alarmed German business owners feared the expansion of what had become a worldwide anti-German boycott, which had already cost millions of Reichmarks in lost business for transportation firms, machine manufacturers, chemical companies, fur companies, and other major concerns.484

On March 29, German officials, also anxious about foreign trade, acquiesced to the Jews and opposed Hitler’s one-day campaign in an attempt to preserve Germany. Cabinet members demanded that Hitler rescind the boycott orders, but he reiterated that the boycott was a defensive measure to fight the “atrocity propaganda” and the Jewish economic onslaught. Hitler would not and could not budge, arguing that if the NSDAP had not countered the Jews, violence might have erupted among a resentful population. That evening, Goebbels devised a fourteen-point boycott program that prohibited violence and the breaking of any law. One of the stipulations forbade Jewish store owners from discharging their non-Jewish employees. In the case of store closures, owners were to pay two months’ wages.485 Edwin Black suggests that this “national boycott… within months would force Germany’s Jews into pauperism.”486 If that were so, there would have been no Jewish businesses to suffer an assault on Kristallnacht. One cannot have it both ways. If Germany forced all Jews to relinquish their business and flee the country in 1933, who would function as victims on November 9 and 10, 1938?


480 Anthony Lawson, “Holocaust, Hate Speech & Were the Germans So Stupid?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufETEsPaxc0; viewed 4/7/2013

481 Melvin I. Urofsky, A Voice That Spoke for Justice: The Life and Times of Stephen S. Wise (Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1982), 304

482 National Socialist Party Correspondence Nsk No. 359, Order 3 to 5, March 31, 1933, Document No. 2154-PS, Additional orders of the Central Committee for defense against Jewish horror and boycott agitation,
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/2154-ps.asp; verified 06 Jan 2022

483 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 28-29

484 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 1579-85.

485 Ibid. 1607-13, 1632-36

486 Ibid. 1754-63

On March 30, newspapers in Germany and elsewhere verified the anti-Jewish boycott decree. Worried German Jews begged their New York coreligionists to cancel additional boycott activities. Hamburg banker Eric Warburg asked his New York cousin, Frederick Warburg, for assistance. Frederick called Cyrus Adler, head of the AJC. Adler, whose uncle was David Sulzberger, issued a statement disavowing atrocity stories and any boycott.487 Adler worked for the Smithsonian Institution for a number of years, was a founder of the Jewish Welfare Board, an editor of the Jewish Encyclopedia, and participated in the Paris Peace Conference in 1919.

On March 30, 1933, in Berlin, the Central Verein Zeitung, the newspaper of the Central Union of German Citizens of the Jewish Faith, published an editorial saying that 565,000 German Jews lodged a “solemn protest” against the “unbridled atrocity-propaganda campaign against Germany” then “raging about the world.” The Central Union said that the anti-German boycott wounded German Jews just as “deeply” as it did every other German. Foreign elements were “slandering the honor of the German name, harming the land of our fathers and the land of our children,” the editorial said. The German Jews protested against the “monstrous accusations… before all Germany and before the world.”488

Author Francis Neilson, a former member of the British Parliament, reviewed Hitler’s speeches during the first six months he was in power and could not find a single reference to the Jews. In March 1933, some German and foreign newspapers reported that people were regularly finding the mutilated bodies of Jews at the entrance to the Jewish cemetery in Weissensee, a suburb of Berlin. They also reported that Germans were forcibly herding Jewish girls into public squares and that hundreds of mistreated German Jews, including many children, had escaped to Geneva. Those spreading this hype had an amazing amount of power and influence. Some of the top newspapers published refutations of the stories, which Untermeyer ignored. The Patriotic Society of National German Jews issued a statement against those who were pushing for a “holy war.”489

The New York Times reported that the State Department, leading members of Congress and key American Jews “have decided to take an attitude of silence toward the situation of the Jews in Germany.” However, German officials intended to implement their policies. They replaced the Jewish deputy in charge of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. They also forced a leave of absence on the head of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and twenty-five of its thirty-three Jewish members. They made plans to replace the chairman of the executive board of the Federation of German Industry.490 On March 31, 1933, the Times reported that financiers in London, fearing for their commercial interests in Germany, were “uneasy” over the German attitude toward Jews. The financiers were concerned that Hitler’s anticommunist movement might “antagonize” Russia. They were relieved when Hitler appointed Schacht as president of the Reichsbank since he would be able to maintain German credit abroad.491

Also on March 31, the Neues Wiener Journal of Vienna reported that Dr. Max Naumann, honorary chairman of the Association of National German Jews, absolutely opposed the “atrocity campaign against Germany.” He pointed out that it was merely the latest edition of the same tactics that the Allies had used in World War I. Naumann and his group were committed to opposing the “foreign atrocity propaganda” against “our Germany” and said that the hate campaign was “extraordinarily bad” for Jews living in Germany.492


487 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle), Locations 1546-53

488 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, Calfornia: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 28-29

489 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 95-96

490 Frederick T. Birchall, “Nazis See Victory in Their Boycott; Hitlerites Now Have Excuse to End Campaign Against Stores of Jews,” Special Cable to The New York Times, April 4, 1933

491 London Uneasy Over Nazis; Attitude Toward Jews Especially Disturbs Financial Circles, Special Cable to The New York Times, April 3, 1933

492 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 30-31

An economic war against Germany would serve certain interests. Bernard Baruch prompted Britain to prepare for a military assault against Germany. In his 1961 book, Baruch: The Public Years, he said, “I emphasized that the defeat of Germany and Japan and their elimination from world trade would give Britain a tremendous opportunity to swell her foreign commerce in both volume and profit.”493 He said, “I never had the slightest illusion about Hitler. At a time when most people were inclined to dismiss his boasts and threats as the hollow rantings of an excitable demagogue, I was one of that small minority in the democracies, of whom Churchill was the most prominent, who took Hitler seriously.” Baruch said he recognized Hitler as “the greatest menace to world safety,” and “from the end of World War One, the problems of preparedness, particularly those of its economic and industrial aspects, had been foremost in my mind.”494

Baruch had an enormous amount of money and used it to influence public perceptions. In 1926, he invested fifty thousands dollars to help David Lawrence found the United States Daily, which became United States News and, after World War II, USA News and World Report. He also helped Maxwell Schuster and Dick Simon to form Simon and Schuster. He invested in Vogue, Vanity Fair, the Raleigh News and Observer, Our World Magazine, and other publications. He financially backed columnists including Arthur Krock, who wrote for the Louisville Courier-Journal. Krock had attended the Paris Peace Conference with Hoover and Baruch. In 1932, Baruch convinced Adolph Ochs of the New York Times to hire Krock, who reorganized the paper’s Washington bureau.495

In April 1933, certain Zionist leaders wanted to work with the Third Reich to relocate Jews and their wealth from Germany. The International League against Anti-Semitism declared a boycott in Paris on April 1, 1933, to continue until Hitler restored civil rights to German Jews. French Cardinal Jean Verdier of the Roman Catholic Church promised to support the boycott.496 Rabbi Wise and Bernard Deutsch of the AJC, which held sessions on April 1 and 2, announced that they would refrain from commenting on the situation of the Jews in Germany in deference to a request by the State Department, which apparently was attempting to ease the situation.497

On April 2, throughout Canada, Jewish and Christian clergy held meetings to protest the “alleged mistreatment” of German Jews. They met in Toronto, Hamilton, London, Windsor, Ontario, Winnipeg, Regina, Calgary, and other cities. The groups proposed resolutions to create a fund to aid those who had suffered from the German boycott. Representatives from Christian churches and political groups spoke at most of the meetings, urging the British government to lower Palestine’s immigration limits to admit refugees from Germany.498 On the same day, Jewish shop owners in Havana, after a meeting of the Jewish Merchants Association, opted to close their businesses after 3 p.m. to protest the anti-Jewish boycott in Germany.499

On April 3, the German consul general to the governor of Polish Upper Silesia protested the burning of an effigy of Hitler in the marketplace at Katowice by a group of Polish students. They also destroyed German newspapers and magazines that they had seized from shops. Jews asked the public to join them in their boycott. Officials in Germany denied that there was any persecution of Jews in their country. Jews living in Germany informed their Polish relatives that people had greatly exaggerated such stories.500

On the same day, the New York Times reported that Jewish businesses in Germany were recovering from the one-day boycott. It said that crowds of people had reentered stores in Munich on Monday morning, April 3.501 However, under the new German welfare laws, Jewish doctors, dependent on the administration of health insurance and public welfare, anticipated that the government would no longer pay them for their services after April 1. Officials of the Berlin municipal insurance system also ousted Jewish physicians from the boards of many hospitals. The authorities allowed only thirty-five of the two thousand Jewish lawyers, also dependent on public-provided “free” legal aid, to practice within the court system. The same laws also applied to Jewish labor leaders.502


493 Bernard M. Baruch, Baruch: The Public Years (United Kingdom: Odhams Press, 1961), 347

494 Ibid. 263-64

495 Pat Riott, The Greatest Story Never Told: Winston Churchill and the Crash of 1929 (Oak Brook, Illinois: Nanoman Press, 1994), 163-66

496 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 104-05

497 “Drive Opened Here to Aid Reich Jews; Joint Distribution Committee to Avoid All Politics in Its Humanitarian Appeal; Comment on News Ended; Dr. S.S. Wise and Oeutsch Say Advice of State Department Should Be Heeded; Leaders Ask Donations; Judge Lehman Urges Hatred Be Fought With Charity and Pleads for Return of Good-Will,” New York Times, April 3, 1933

498 “Canadians Protest, Meetings Held Throughout Dominion in Behalf of German Jews,” Canadian Press, April 3, 1933

499 “Havana Jews to Protest Boycott,” New York Times, April 3, 1933

500 “Effigy of Hitler Burned in Silesia; German Consul General Asks Action Against Students of Polish City; Danzig Silences Nazis; Goebbels Unable to Speak Under Ban Against All Meetings of National Socialists,” New York Times, April 4, 1933

501 G. E. R. Gedye, Special Cable to The New York Times, April 4, 1933

502 “Jewish Business Resumes in Reich, but Professional Class and Employees Suffer from Anti-Semitic Campaign; Physicians Face Curbs; Only 35 Jewish Lawyers of 2,000 Are Expected to Be Admitted to Berlin Courts,” New York Times, April 4, 1933

On April 3, the Polish legation in Berlin confirmed a report that the Polish minister had filed with the Foreign Office charging “mistreatment of Polish Jews in Germany.”503 On the same day, four Jewish organizations in Paris—the International League against Anti-Semitism, the Committee for Jews Persecuted in Germany, the French Committee for the Jewish World Congress, and the Association of Jewish Former Volunteer Combatants—sent a telegram to Hitler promising reprisals if “all facilities are not given to German Jews for the resumption of their normal life” and “until their rights as German citizens have been integrally restored.”504

On April 3, the JDC held a meeting at Temple Emanu-El, with more than seven hundred members attending to open a campaign to raise funds to aid German Jews “suffering from political persecution and economic discrimination.” Judge Irving Lehman, Joseph Proskauer, Dr. Cyrus Adler, Dudley Sicher, and Walter Brown entreated the crowd to raise money and to repudiate any movements that called for an economic boycott. The officers of the JDC were Felix M. Warburg, Paul Baerwald, Herbert Lehman, James N. Rosenberg, Joseph Hyman, and Marco Hellman, whose father, Isaias, a banker, left an estate of $20 million. Lehman told how the JDC, since its founding, had distributed about $80 million, most of it in Germany. He said, “We Jews do not fight hatred by hatred, but we must give until the giving hurts to relieve those who suffer from hatred.” Further, he said, “Ours is the task of bringing help to the distressed in many lands. In that task, we are united.” Adler described the conditions of Jews abroad as “worse than at any time since the World War.”505

On April 3, at least seventy thousand Greek Jews protested against Hitler in Salonika, Greece.506 In The Times History of the War, David Pidcock wrote that the Spanish Jews, or Sephardim, many of whom became Freemasons, settled in and controlled key commercial centers such as Constantinople, Sarajevo, and Salonika, supplanting the area’s citizens.507 In Panama, on the same day, fifteen Jewish firms said they would no longer sell German products. On April 4, in Bombay, Jews protested against Hitler. On April 5, in New York, fifteen thousand people demonstrated against the German government and even against Jews who resisted criticizing Hitler. In Poland, on April 6, mob violence against Germans occurred during the national boycott. Reich Ambassador Hans von Moltke spoke with the Polish undersecretary of state, trying to halt the violence surrounding the boycott. The request was futile since the Polish government did not intend to cooperate with the Germans.508

Reich business firms in numerous cities received order cancellations from Holland and France while groups boycotted German goods in Belgium, Egypt, Denmark, and Finland. Retail stores displayed signs denouncing German products. German leaders ascertained that the Jewish effort could destroy the Third Reich either through bankruptcy or through claims that Germany was preparing to invade its neighbors. On April 6, Cyrus Adler and B’nai B’rith president Alfred Cohen received a cable about the “Nazi horrors” that repudiated the report that German Jewish leaders had previously sent categorically stating that the Germans were not persecuting the Jews. Adler and Cohen sent a copy of the cable to Secretary of State Cordell Hull.509

By April 9, London and Manchester police attempted to have storeowners remove “Boycott German Goods” signs from their windows. Members of Parliament heatedly debated the boycott while Home Secretary John Gilmour insisted that police acted on their own and not for the government. On April 15, the Daily Herald reported that Germany’s fur industry would lose $100 million a year. On April 13, the Romanian National Bank began declining all foreign currency for German imports. Protesters planned boycotts against German goods throughout Europe, stimulated by an organized network and supported by the press. The Berlin press reported the “dangerous decline” in Germany’s foreign trade. To strengthen Germany’s credibility and decrease its indebtedness, Reichsbank president Hjalmar Schacht presented a check for $70 million to the international bankers in Basel.510


503 “Poland Charges Persecutions,” New York Times, April 4, 1933

504 “French Jews to Press Boycott Till Reich Ends Discrimination,” New York Times, April 4, 1933

505 “Drive Opened Here to Aid Reich Jews; Joint Distribution Committee to Avoid All Politics in Its Humanitarian Appeal; Comment on News Ended; Dr. S.S. Wise and Oeutsch Say Advice of State Department Should Be Heeded; Leaders Ask Donations; Judge Lehman Urges Hatred Be Fought With Charity and Pleads for Return of Good-Will,” New York Times, April 3, 1933

506 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle Edition), Locations 2855-63

507 Satanic Voices, Ancient and Modern, a Surfeit of Blasphemy Including the Rushdie Report from Edifice Complex to Occult Theocracy by David Musa Pidcock, Mustaqim, Islamic Art and Literature, Milton Keynes, England, 1992, 47-53

508 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 2009), 104-105

509 Ibid. Kindle Locations 2992-98, 2945-51

510 Ibid. Kindle Locations 104-05

The National Socialists were making other changes that annoyed the Jews in Germany. On April 21, the government banned kosher slaughter, which Germans viewed as an incredibly inhumane ritual in which the qualified shochet severs the animal’s throat. During World War I, Germans united behind the political ideal of Volksgemeinschaft, meaning the “people’s community,” as a means of eliminating elitism and class divisions. In April 1933, Untermeyer launched a pro-war campaign at a dedication ceremony for the memorial theater at the Hebrew University in Palestine. In the summer, he presided over the World Jewish Economic Federation in Amsterdam. The purpose of the conference was to “rescue 600,000 Jews residing in Germany” who suffered “fiendish torture, cruelty and persecution that are being inflicted day by day upon these men, women and children.” He said that the program was “fearful in its barbarous cruelty… devilishly, deliberately, cold-bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people.” The Red Cross refuted the allegations as political propaganda.511

While Germany did not intend to initiate war, the nation certainly responded to the economic war that the Jews were conducting against it. The government implemented nationalist and deportation policies aimed at the people who had targeted Germany for destruction. Germany also incarcerated state enemies in camps, just as the United States would do to the Italians, Germans, and Japanese during World War II. The Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung of April 27 said, “A self-respecting nation cannot, on a scale accepted up to now, leave its higher activities in the hands of people of racially foreign origin… Allowing the presence of too high a percentage of people of foreign origin in relation to their percentage in the general population could be interpreted as an acceptance of the superiority of other races, something decidedly to be rejected.”512

In May, worldwide boycott activity increased, particularly in influential commercial centers where Jews predominated. The League against German Anti-Semitism demanded that Egyptian Jews organize an anti-German boycott. One thousand Jewish merchants in Gibraltar joined the boycott. In Paris, disorderly Jewish youths interrupted a German film. In London, Jewish passengers selected British and Italian vessels instead of German ships. Argentinian Jews destroyed German commercial interests, goods, and services in Buenos Aires. They requested that depositors shift their accounts from German to Argentine banks. The French League against Anti-Semitism called for a boycott and established offices in Lyons, Nice, and Marseilles. Groups in Amsterdam printed thousands of stamps featuring a swastika for use on envelopes and packages. Groups in other countries followed that example, making it international. The JWV disseminated its version, mailing an estimated ten million each week.513

Prior to the projected May 10 march, a vast majority of American Jews pressured Rabbi Wise to announce an official boycott. Alternatively, the smaller faction of German-American Jews, in association with the AJCm and B’nai B’rith, wanted moderation. On May 9, Albert Einstein wrote to Wise, complaining about the lack of Jewish unity in America, which he said would hinder the ability of those attending the upcoming London Economic Conference to apply pressure on the Roosevelt Administration. On May 10, thousands of Americans gathered to denounce Germany while Hjalmar Schacht was in the United States for talks at the White House. An article in the New York Times that day quoted someone as wishing Schacht “good luck” in his attempts to revitalize Germany’s thrashed economy.514


511 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 90-92

512 Saul Friedländer, Nazi Germany and the Jews; Volume 1: The Years of Persecution, 1933-1939, (New York: Harper Perennial, 1998), 30-31

513 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle Edition), Locations 4706-22

514 Ibid. Kindle 3196-3205, 3206-11

Prior to the May 10 parade, Untermeyer stole some of Wise’s thunder when he delivered a speech, printed by the local papers, urging Americans to shun all German products and services. A vast number of Americans, harkening to the propaganda, became insistent that everyone unite against Hitler. On May 10, at noon, New York Jews halted all business, dismissing employees and customers so they could prepare for the parade that afternoon. The event was more spectacular than the March 27 rally, with a hundred thousand attendees.515

According to the Global Jewish News of May 24, Senator Gerald P. Nye approved a congressional propaganda plan against Hitler. He said, “The only plan I know of in this emergency, is one which is painfully slow in the accomplishment of results. The plan is to educate and to help create an example that all the world can ultimately see and profit by. Educate people away from prejudices.” Congressman Adolph Sabath, a Jewish immigrant, emphasized the Roosevelt administration’s friendship for the Jews.516

Former Congressman Meyer Jacobstein challenged Hitler’s right to appeal to the nations of the world for fair play. He said, “The Chancellor resents and resists the effort of nations to degrade Germany to an inferior status. Yet he, in his fury and with one stroke of the pen, has disqualified, degraded and declassed 600,000 Jews.” Jacobstein said, “In the face of this greatest calamity that has befallen the Jews in centuries, we must present a united front and make a courageous attack on the common foe. To remain silent, or to submit to this degradation would not be only unfair to ourselves as Jews, but would be a desertion of the highest values in civilization. Ours is a battle, not merely for Jews but for common justice.”517

Bernard Ridder and William Margreve interviewed Hitler, who said, “The future of Germany, a nation of sixty million, is at stake and we’re not going to let this picayune issue hamper us. This new persecution aimed at Germany is as incomprehensible to us as, it seems, Germany’s awakening is to the outside world. We have excoriated Jewish Communism and we will never again let Bolshevism raise its hydra head. As far as freedom of the press for the Jewish-Marxist press is concerned, we are determined to rid Germany of this cancerous growth.” He asked his interviewers if the press would print the truth. Ridder replied that America did not have “complete freedom of the press.”518

Hitler asked, “Why does the world weep crocodile tears at the richly deserved fate of these criminals? Where was the conscience of the world when millions of Germans suffered hunger and death, when more than 200,000 Germans were driven to despair and suicide? I ask President Roosevelt and the American people who believe themselves justified, because of the atrocity stories, in sympathizing with these Jewish Bolshevist demons, I ask them, I say, are you prepared to harbor among you those who have poisoned the wells of Germany, of the whole Christian world? Gladly would we give each and every one of them a railroad pass and a thousand-mark note for pocket money to be rid of them.”519

“What does the world know of the misery of intellectual German youth during the last fifteen years?” Hitler asked. “On completion of their studies, they have for years had to accept the fate of beggars. There were no Jews in that vast army of unemployed, whereas a hundred thousand German academicians died on the streets or committed suicide. Shall I allow thousands of Germans to be destroyed so that all Jews may continue working undisturbed, to live and grow fat while millions of Germans may be driven to despair and Bolshevism by hunger? Should the German youth be sacrificed to these foreigners? No, never!”520


515 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle Edition), Locations 3215-22

516 “Ask Government Stand on Nazi Persecutions at Final Session of American Jewish Congress,” JTA, The Global Jewish News Source, May 24, 1933;
http://www.jta.org/1933/05/24/archive/ask-government-stand-on-nazi-persecutions; verified 05 Jan. 2022

517 Ibid.

518 “Hitler, ‘Man with a Holy Mission,’ Explains Jewish Stand to Ridder,” JT, The Global Jewish News Source, May 24, 1933,
"http://www.jta.org/1933/05/24/archive/hitler-man-with-a-holy-%20mission-explains-jewish-stand-to-ridde; verified 05 Jan. 2022

519 Ibid.

520 Ibid.

Four months after the Jews had proclaimed an economic war against Germany in London’s Daily Express, Untermeyer spent two weeks in Europe organizing forces against Germany. In July 1933, he founded the International Jewish Economic Federation to Combat the Hitlerite Oppression of Jews in Amsterdam.521 After his return from Europe, he spoke on a radio broadcast on WABC on August 6, reported in the New York Times the next day, saying, “Each of you, Jew and Gentile alike, who has not already enlisted in this sacred war, should do so now and here. It is not sufficient that you should buy no goods made in Germany. You must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods or who patronizes German ships or shipping… we will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.”522

Untermeyer said, “It is a war that must be waged unremittingly until the black clouds of bigotry, race hatred and fanaticism that have descended upon what was once Germany, but is now medieval Hitlerland, have been dispersed.” He said that America “has escaped the curse that has descended upon benighted Germany, which has thereby been converted from a nation of culture into a veritable hell of cruel and savage beasts.” He claimed that he had talked with “terror-stricken refugees” who were “forced to leave their property behind.” He said that if America allowed Germany to continue, “the world will confront a picture so fearful in its barbarous cruelty that the hell of war and the alleged Belgian atrocities will pale into insignificance as compared to this devilishly, deliberately, cold-bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people.” He then added, “But why dwell longer upon this revolting picture of the ravages wrought by these ingrates and beasts of prey, animated by the loathsome motives of race hatred, bigotry and envy. For the Jews are the aristocrats of the world.”523 One should listen to the whole speech.

The New York Times reported that on August 27, 1933, in Youngstown, Ohio, Untermeyer predicted that Hitler would not last more than twelve months. He also said, “The more Jews the Hitler regime can outlaw, as it is now doing, the more money it will be able to steal to replenish its bankrupt treasury. And it is indeed mad for resorting to such desperate, despicable means, for Germany is literally ‘hanging by the eyelids’ on the brink of an economic crash. It has an infinitesimal gold reserve of only 11 percent with which to support its camouflaged pretense of maintaining the gold standard for the present mark, which it issued when the now worthless billions upon billions of hard-earned money had been thrown by it into the junk heap without a penny of compensation to the holders.”524

German Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick issued orders prohibiting any persecution of Jews at the polls, contradicting the deceptive Comintern propaganda coming from Soviet agents. The Times, on November 7, added to the confusion by quoting Protestant theologian and Marxist ideologue Reinhold Niebuhr, who said that “Hitlerism” represented the first organization of the middle class in modern times. Niebuhr expected a left-wing revolt in Germany that would eradicate Hitler and his party. Meanwhile, Lion Feuchtwanger, a writer in Weimar Germany, a Stalin apologist and a Hitler critic, spun tales of Nazi brutality. The German middle class was conservative, respected law and order, and would never participate in or endorse mass murder at the hands of political thugs.525

By mid-June 1937, the AJCm, which previously opposed the AJC and denied German atrocities, published a booklet titled The Jews in Nazi Germany. In this booklet, which the New York Times popularized, the AJCm presented its report on the Reich’s anti-Jewish campaign and its brutality. The Times counseled the public to discount every single German denial.526 On July 27, 1935, in the Jewish Daily Bulletin, Vladimir Jabotinsky said, “There is only one power which really counts—the power of political pressure. We Jews are the most powerful people on earth, because we have this power, and we know how to apply it.” With their communications network and political influence, the Jews subtly controlled perceptions, casting doubt on the spontaneity of the numerous worldwide boycott rallies of 1933.


521 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries (Costa Mesa, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1991), 25-26

522 Samuel Untermeyer, text of his address broadcast over station WABC on August 6, 1933, New York Times, August 7, 1933, Audio file:
http://archive.org/details/SamuelUntermyerAugust71933; verified 06 Jan 2022

523 Ibid.

524 Francis Neilson, The Makers of War, (Appleton, Wisconsin: C. C. Nelson Publishing Company, 1950), 202-06

525 James J. Martin, The Man Who Invented Genocide: The Public Career and Consequences of Raphael Lemkin (Torrance, California: Institute for Historical Review, 1984), 102-03

526 Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, 25th Anniversary Edition: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Dialog Press, Kindle Edition), Locations 4692-98

Chapter 14 ♦ Apprehending Dangerous Aliens

World War II was not the first time that the United States incarcerated Germans during warfare. In World War I, American officials authorized the internment of 2,048 Germans at Fort Oglethorpe in Georgia and at Fort Douglas in Utah. They did not release all of these internees until a year after the signing of the Versailles Treaty on June 28, 1919, when they freed the remaining two hundred inmates. During World War II, the Roosevelt Administration carried out the forced relocation and incarceration of Japanese Americans, particularly those residing in the West. The US government has apologized to and compensated these people. However, there has been little or no publicity about the forced relocation, deportation, and incarceration of ten thousand to twelve thousand German Americans in sixty camps across the United States and Hawaii from 1941 to 1948—yes, three years after the war ended. Many of those Germans were born in the United States or were naturalized citizens. The US government targeted people who retained their culture and their language and spoke with a German accent, ignoring the length of time that a person had lived in America.527 Naturally, the selective sweep of people who met this description did not include people like Henry Kissinger or Robert Kempner. The government arbitrarily deemed certain Germans as national security threats. The government and the broadcast and entertainment industry have concealed information about these people. Three government entities were involved in this operation: the State Department, the Justice Department, and the FBI. Although they have declassified some records regarding these events, certain records remain classified and unavailable. Naturally, textbook publishers do not include this information in their books. Although newspapers of the time offered details, they were certainly not objective in their reporting, justifying the relocations as necessary for American security.528

Even before World War II, the government justified its practice of depriving certain “dangerous” citizens, actually innocent people, of their civil liberties. Government agents conducted raids, illegally searched homes, practiced discriminatory internment, and exchanged and repatriated individuals. They apprehended American citizens and lawful residents of German, Italian, and Japanese ancestry and incarcerated them in detention camps during the war and afterward. In 1936, Roosevelt, allegedly worried about Germany, began to discuss his concerns with officials in government departments.529


527 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 1-2

528 Ibid. 1-2

529 Ibid. 9-10

In September 1936, Roosevelt asked J. Edgar Hoover, the director of the FBI, to initiate a clandestine five-year plan that included identifying potential security risks among American citizens and legal residents. Hoover, strongly biased against immigrants, ordered his agents to register anyone that he or they viewed as a security risk. He directed them to collect information on certain people, without regard for its accuracy or source. FDR again exceeded his authority and sought support from politically precarious Latin American republics because he claimed that the Germans had established agencies in Central and South America. He wanted to obligate the Latin American governments to “compulsory consultation” with America in the event of any attack. On June 26, 1939, FDR issued a mandate creating an intelligence agency for espionage in Latin America under the direction of the FBI, the Military Intelligence Division, and the Office of Naval Intelligence.530

In 1939, Hoover admitted to Congress that the FBI was scrutinizing at least ten million people, mostly foreigners, all alphabetized, and categorized geographically. If war erupted, and there was a good likelihood that it would, the FBI could react and apprehend potential saboteurs. To assuage congressional concerns, Hoover merged his register to create a categorized Custodial Detention Index. The index listed everyone that the FBI should watch, those who had donated money to certain groups, and those subject to apprehension and immediate detention, regardless of occupation or political affiliation, should war begin.531

FDR directed Assistant Secretary of State Adolf Berle to prepare an official document tasking the FBI with responsibility for foreign intelligence work in the Western Hemisphere as requested by the State Department. He directed military and naval intelligence to take the responsibility for the rest of the world. On June 24, 1940, Berle presented the document. At Roosevelt’s direction, Hoover created a covert intelligence service to categorize questionable American citizens and legal residents, people who might seek to harm the United States. FDR was also concerned about German agents operating in Central and South America. Therefore, he directed Hoover to create a clandestine, albeit illegal, intelligence operation, the Special Intelligence Service, in Latin America, which he accomplished on July 1, 1940.532


530 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 2299-2378

531 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 10-11

532 Ibid. 9-11, 19

Within four months, the government had registered 4,741,971 aliens whom it prohibited from entering restricted areas. Violators of the law were subject to arrest and incarceration for the remainder of the war.533 Howard W. Smith proposed the anticommunist Alien Registration Act, enacted June 29, 1940, otherwise known as the Smith Act, which required all resident aliens to register. The law also prohibited calling for the overthrow of the US government or its political subdivisions. The government convicted Gus Hall, chairman of America’s communist party, for violating the law. However, prosecutors did not apply the law to all of the covert communists working within the government who had, in fact, already altered the government’s structure.

Working in conjunction with Britain’s William Stephenson, Hoover charged his agents with compiling a list of people, presumably sympathetic to the Nazis, who might prove to be threats to the security of the United States. Stephenson, associated with the British Security Coordination, worked out of New York. The British and the Americans placed their agents in diplomatic positions in Central and South America in exchange for technical assistance. In February 1941, Berle, in behalf of the State Department, wrote The Pattern of Nazi Organization and Their Activities in the Other American Republics, in which he indiscriminately accused several German groups of sedition. He claimed that leaders of certain German firms and all non-Jewish Germans were National Socialist supporters or part of the Nazi leadership.534

In a confidential memo dated February 6, 1941, Berle described several Latin American German groups as seditious, calling German business firms essential to the success of National Socialism. He claimed that all German-born individuals in Latin America supported the Hitler regime. Berle, a Jew, argued that “virtually every non-Jewish German citizen belongs to some branch of the Nazi hierarchy.” He asked that all ambassadors convey information about Germans engaging in business enterprises. He also told them to intimidate Latin American officials into arresting and incarcerating all citizens of Axis countries in such a way that there would be no connection to the United States.535


533 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 10-11

534 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 2299-2378

535 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 31-32

FDR’s administration pressed for enactment of the Lend-Lease Act of March 11, 1941, which allowed the president to lend or lease war materials to supportive nations like Britain despite American neutrality. The US soon offered the lend-lease program to Latin American republics on the condition that those countries cooperate in the detention and deportation of ethnic Italians, Germans, and Japanese and seize their assets.536

In April 1941, Hoover attempted to acquire legal authorization for FDR’s program from Attorney General Robert Jackson, who told Hoover that the FBI could investigate only those people who had committed crimes or who had engaged in subversive activities. Opinions based on race couldn’t justify investigations. Hoover ignored Jackson and secretly persisted in compiling a list with names of A, B, and C individuals. Officials should immediately arrest and imprison those in the A classification if war erupted, along with others whose activities officials felt warranted constant surveillance.537 The US government would begin those arrests on December 7, 1941.

Also in April 1941, Roosevelt recommended William J. Donovan as the coordinator of information for a new consolidated intelligence agency, the Office of Strategic Services. William Stephenson would function as his British counterpart. The OSS began investigating Axis support in Latin-American and Caribbean countries.538 Donovan and others in the intelligence community often recruited OSS operatives from Murder, Inc. and from Detroit’s Purple Gang.539 After all, they had the kind of experience that Donovan really appreciated, skills that he needed in numerous places.


536 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 2299-2378

537 Ibid. Kindle Locations 2299-2378

538 Ibid.

Donovan, a Buffalo, New York, native, was an assistant to the US attorney general from 1925 to 1929. He was the government’s unofficial observer in Italy, Spain, and the Balkans from 1935 to 1941. Roosevelt assigned him to a fact-finding mission in Europe. Germany had seized the Austrian-based Interpol (International Police) after its invasion and annexation of that country and had transferred all Interpol assets to Wannsee. There, under the direction of Intelligence Chief Reinhard Heydrich, it became the world’s premier intelligence force. When Donovan returned to the United States, he advised FDR to organize a similar intelligence agency. On July 11, 1941, in anticipation of entering yet another war, Roosevelt created the Office of Coordinator of Information and appointed Donovan, a millionaire Wall Street lawyer, as its head.540

Using Executive Order 9066 following the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the US government evicted nearly 120,000 Japanese residents from the Pacific coast and moved them to internment camps in more than thirty states.541 On that same day, FDR issued Presidential Proclamation 25256, authorizing the arrest and detention of individuals of Japanese descent, considered “enemy aliens,” who were living in America. The government also placed restrictions on travel and on their use of property. On December 8, FDR released two more directives, 25267 and 25278, sanctioning the apprehension and incarceration of Germans and Italians. The directive said the Justice Department could use the services of the FBI to execute those arrests. Hoover sent a memo to all of the special agents in charge with instructions.542

The so-called dangerous enemies were merely butchers, bakers, shopkeepers, and mechanics, not saboteurs but common people. The Geneva Convention of 1929 applied to all prisoners since the United States was a signatory. The inmates were kept behind barbed wire, secured by guards holding machine guns. With Executive Order 9066, ratified by Congress, FDR imposed additional constraints on the prisoners that the military would implement. The government forbade any “dangerous” Germans to live in areas that the Department of Justice, in conjunction with the secretary of war, designated as militarily sensitive zones on the East and West coasts and in the Great Lakes area. The government compelled “dangerous” people who lived in these areas to move without compensation or assistance and without remuneration for the loss of their businesses.543


539 Richard Harris Smith, OSS: The Secret History of America’s First Central Intelligence Agency, (Lyons Press, Guildford, Connecticut, 2005), 97

540 John Daniel, Two Faces of Freemasonry, (Longview, Texas: Day Publishing, 2007), 99-100

541 Institute for Research of Expelled Germans. “The US Internment of German-Americans alongside Japanese and Italians in Relocation Camps.”
http://expelledgermans.org/germaninternment.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

542 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 10-12

543 Ibid. 17-18, 57-58

On December 8, 1941, early in the morning, FBI agents began arresting Germans and Italians before there was even a declaration of war, which occurred on December 11.544 German officials were stunned when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Despite Hitler’s Tripartite Pact with Japan, he did not anticipate that Japan would initiate a war. On December 8, Japanese Ambassador Oshima approached German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop to acquire an official obligatory declaration of war against America. Ribbentrop was fully aware that another antagonist, the formidable United States, might crush Germany. Though Germany had pledged to assist Japan if another country attacked that nation, Japan was the aggressor. Hitler was certain that America would soon declare war on Germany, because the US Navy was already attacking German U-boats. FDR had repeatedly insulted the National Socialist ideology. Hitler misjudged Japan’s military strength and thought that Japan might defeat America and then assist Germany in fighting the Soviets. On December 11, late in the afternoon, the German charge d’affaires in Washington gave Secretary of State Cordell Hull a copy of the declaration of war.

On that same day, Hitler defended the declaration in the Reichstag, maintaining that Roosevelt’s failed New Deal was the real justification for the war, a means of covering up the disintegration of his economic programs. Hitler said, “First he incites war, then falsifies the causes, then odiously wraps himself in a cloak of Christian hypocrisy and slowly but surely leads mankind to war.” The members of the Reichstag responded with thunderous applause.

Federal agents, with unsubstantiated proof, immediately began knocking on doors in cities throughout the nation and even in Honolulu. They arrested men and women whom the government considered “enemy aliens,” frequently forcing them to abandon children who ended up in orphanages or with friends or relatives. In their search for “evidence,” the agents destroyed private property. US attorneys and FBI agents, certain of detainees’ guilt, subjected those they arrested, many less than fluent in English, to accusations, coercion, and hostility. Following each hearing, the Justice Department’s Alien Enemy Control Unit, created on May 19, 1942, would determine whether to release or to incarcerate the detainee for the remainder of the war. These actions regularly destroyed and impoverished families and jeopardized long-term relationships with family members and spouses left behind.545


544 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 12-13

545 Ibid. 12-17

On June 13, 1942, the coordinator of information’s propaganda department merged into the Office of Strategic Services under Donovan’s direction.546 The OSS developed worldwide clandestine capability and employed almost thirteen thousand men and women.547 It conducted psychological warfare, often used by governments to marshal troops for battle. This included repetition of fabricated atrocity stories to prove that the enemy was evil and merited elimination so the “good guys” could live in peace.”548

Roosevelt and Donovan had ties beyond partisan politics. They were both 33rd degree Freemasons, a status that routinely trumps all other considerations and allegiances—borders, constitutions, political parties, and philosophies. Allegedly, Donovan frequented Aleister Crowley’s Ordo Templi Orientis camp, an elite occult Masonic playground in Nyack, New York, similar to Bohemian Grove.549 Donovan was a Hoover Republican. Yet, because of their other connections, FDR, whose philosophies were allegedly opposed to Wall Street, chose him to manage espionage, black propaganda, guerrilla warfare, and other un-American subversive activities. James P. Warburg thought it was a great idea.550 Warburg, a Pilgrims Society member, declared to the Senate, “We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”551

From January 15 to 28, 1942, delegates from western-hemisphere countries met in a conference in Rio de Janeiro.552 By then, the Latin American republics, because of American pressure, had cut all connections to Axis nations and had entered the war on the side of the Allies. The United States insisted on creating the Emergency Advisory Committee for Political Defense to observe the activities of “alien enemies” in Latin America. The program entailed mandatory registration, escalating Soviet-style surveillance, decreased internal travel, a prohibition on gun ownership, and no access to radios or radio transmitters. Apparently, the Soviets and the Americans were using the same procedure manual since authorities imposed the same constraints in the United States. The government withdrew the naturalization process so that aliens could not enjoy citizenship. Officials suggested the termination of citizenship for anyone who supported the Axis powers in any way.553


546 Richard Harris Smith, OSS: The Secret History of America’s First Central Intelligence Agency, (Lyons Press, Guildford, Connecticut, 2005), 1-2

547 What was OSS? Many OSS records have recently been declassified: Report to the IWG on previously classified OSS Records, June 2000,
https://www.cia.gov/index.html; verified 07 Jan 2022 ,
http://www.archives.gov/iwg/reports/june-2000.html; verified 07 Jan 2022

548 Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, (Basic Books, 1972), 4

549 John Daniel, Two Faces of Freemasonry, (Longview, Texas: Day Publishing, 2007), 99-100

550 Richard Harris Smith, OSS: The Secret History of America’s First Central Intelligence Agency, (Lyons Press, Guildford, Connecticut, 2005), 1-2

551 Liberty Tree,
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quotes_about/debt; verified 06 Jan 2022

552 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 2299-2378

553 Ibid.

In the summer of 1942, Starr Gurcke, the mother of a German family in Costa Rica, faced imminent deportation. However, she had American citizenship and held a US passport. She went to the American consul for help, but officials told her they could do nothing and shifted the blame to the Costa Ricans. When she approached them, they said, “Oh, it’s the Americans.” Gurcke concluded that they were collaborating. The government had already detained her husband, Werner, a ten-year resident of Costa Rica, in a camp five months prior and was preparing to deport him. In early December 1942, two Costa Rican policemen arrested Gurcke, briefly taking her and her two daughters to the German Club, once a nice facility but now a holding facility for the families of incarcerated men. Its “indescribable sanitary conditions” included a pool that was now “a reeking, fermenting sewer.”554

On January 20, 1943, officials told the wives of the incarcerated Germans to prepare for deportation. Women and children traveled by bus all night to a railroad station where they joined husbands and fathers. They were then taken to Puntarenas, a Pacific port, to a ship anchored offshore, the US Army transport Puebla. The military police checked luggage, seized passports and visas, and issued receipts. They housed the men in the ship’s filthy hold. With open-bucket latrines and the stench of vomit and sweat, this certainly was not a place fit for human habitation. They crowded women and children into small, hot, humid, airless cabins, putrid with the stink of dirty diapers. The ship departed on January 26. Many passengers were already ill with infections, whooping cough, and conjunctivitis from staying at the filthy, overcrowded German Club.555

At 7:00 a.m. on February 6, the Puebla arrived at the immigration detention station on Terminal Island in San Pedro, California, with children who were even sicker than they were at the beginning of their hellish trip. By January 16, immigration officials from the Justice Department’s Alien Enemy Control Unit were prepared for Starr Gurcke, an American citizen, the wife of Werner Gurcke, whom they claimed was dangerous and had “engaged in subversive activities.” To justify Gurcke’s deportation and continued imprisonment in an American concentration camp, along with her family, the US government arrested her on the grounds that she had entered the country illegally, without a passport, an immigration visa, or an identification card as required by the Immigration Act of 1924. Authorities had seized her passport and other papers when she and her family boarded the ship in Puntarenas and had deliberately failed to return these documents upon arrival.556


554 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 1113, 1125-28

555 Ibid. Kindle Locations 1227-75

556 Ibid. Kindle Locations 1275-1321

Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 of February 19, 1942, called for the internment of Americans of Japanese descent classified as enemy aliens with no risk evaluation or evidence of incriminating behavior. The order, one of three programs targeting aliens, asked that these people voluntarily transfer from areas that the US Army considered militarily sensitive. That resulted in the compulsory incarceration of the majority of Japanese-Americans legally living in California, Washington, and Oregon. The order did not stipulate the mass detention in “relocation camps” of Germans or Italians. In the second program, the government selectively used the Alien Enemy Control Unit to classify the possible threat posed by individual Germans, Italians, and Japanese. The FBI used reports gathered from neighbors, business associates, and family members.557

In March 1942, the government confiscated the property and assets of the Japanese Americans it held. The administration created the War Relocation Authority to “assist” the Japanese-Americans as they were being driven from several states and relocated to military prison camps in California, Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado, and Arkansas. By the summer of 1942, the government had evacuated more than a hundred thousand Japanese Americans. FDR’s executive order also accommodated Caucasian farmers who had grievances against competing Japanese American farmers. The Japanese charged less for their produce. The media depiction of Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, anticipated by the US government, predictably outraged Americans—so much so that they accepted the government’s mistreatment of fellow citizens.

The State Department’s Special War Problems Division supervised the third very secret program under which authorities in Latin American countries apprehended 8,500 German nationals and others, legal citizens of these countries, and temporarily interned them in local detention centers. American authorities then deported a number of these people to Germany, Japan, or Italy and extradited 4,058 Germans, 2,264 Japanese, and 287 Italians to the United States. When they arrived in America, officials viewed these illegally detained Axis nationals as prisoners of war and interned them in detention camps. The US government wanted to exchange these people and their families for American prisoners that Axis nations might be holding.558


557 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 241-46, 249-52

558 Ibid. Kindle Locations 256-62

The government began arresting and deporting all German, Japanese, and Italian nationals considered dangerous in November 1942 through a memo distributed to all US diplomats in Latin America. Initially, the US deported only men and left women and children alone. Without their main source of income, families became destitute and justifiably angry, which might ignite anti-American sentiments. Therefore the government began to subsidize the incarceration and/or deportation of entire families for the eighteen participating countries in the Caribbean and South America. Meanwhile, Mexico, Venezuela, and Brazil implemented their own anti-German policies and programs. Chile, Mexico, Brazil, and Venezuela permitted deportation of Axis nationals to the United States. The US government argued that Germans could infiltrate and influence Latin American governments and engage in espionage against the United States. The OSS, the FBI, and the British Security Coordination reported a degree of suspicious Nazi activity in Latin America.559

To make matters worse, on March 23, 1943, the Treasury Department, using a 1941 law, froze all Axis assets, including those of internees, who had to fill out a two-page document describing their holdings, most of which were no longer under their control. Because of their incarceration, they lost their homes, businesses, and bank accounts, if not through bankruptcy, then through theft.560

After 1939, 64 percent of the people whom the FBI arrested and evicted from their homes were white and from European “enemy nationalities.” Due to massive propaganda, Americans feared German foreigners more than they did the Japanese. America arrested 4,058 Germans in Latin America. By 1938, the US government began evacuating Germans while it did not target the Japanese for another three years until Pearl Harbor. The government released most of the Japanese by 1945 but did not free most Germans until 1948. It allowed the Japanese to resume their lives in America and promoted them as exemplary Americans. Officials shifted the Germans and Italians to camps designated as prisoner of war facilities under the Geneva Convention. They did not view most German inmates as potential good citizens and deported them. Yet officials released most Italians into American society on Columbus Day in 1942. It is amazing, given the original composition of early America that the government would consider Asians more suitable Americans than white Europeans.561


559 Heidi Donald, We Were Not the Enemy: Remembering the United States’ Latin-American Civilian Internment Program of World War II (iUniverse, 2007), Kindle Locations 2299-2378

560 Russell Estlack, Shattered Lives, Shattered Dreams: The Untold Story of America’s Enemy Aliens in World War II, (Cedar Fort, Inc., 2011), 76-77

561 Institute for Research of Expelled Germans, “The US Internment of German-Americans alongside Japanese and Italians in Relocation Camps.”
http://expelledgermans.org/germaninternment.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

Chapter 15 ♦ Kristallnacht, a False Flag
Cui Bono, Who Benefits

05 Vladimir Jabotinsky
Vladimir Jabotinsky

To establish a Jewish state, Jews had to expel the indigenous Arab population to neighboring countries and import Jews from those same areas. Theodor Herzl imagined that they could accomplish that feat through social engineering. On June 12, 1885, he wrote in his diary that “Zionist settlers would have to ‘spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country.’”562 The Jewish Agency was the main organization in charge of the immigration, Aliyah, and absorption of Jews from the Diaspora. The Sixteenth Zionist Congress, July 28 to August 11, 1929, held in Zurich, Switzerland, created the Jewish Agency via the Zurich Agreement.

In mid-June 1931, at least 150 Jewish leaders in Germany convened a conference to discuss the desired cooperation between the two factions of the Jewish Agency, Zionist and non-Zionist. Felix M. Warburg sent his greetings via a telegram. The attendees included Oscar Wassermann, head of the Keren HaYesod, Eugen Landau, Dr. Bernhard Kahn, European Director of the JDC; Dr. Sobernheim, Kurt Blumenfeld, President of the German Zionist Federation, Bruno Asch, Rabbi Leo Baeck, President of the German B’nai B’rith, Dr. Georg Bernhard, and Dr. Schocken. Dr. Arthur Ruppin, of the Palestine colonization authority and the Jewish Agency Executive, spoke about the importance of middle-class colonization in Palestine.563

Vladimir Jabotinsky, the dedicated leader of the Zionist Revisionist Party, broke from the main Zionist Party on April 25, 1925 to alter the methods used to settle more Jews in Palestine. He regularly visited Germany to conduct conferences, lecture, and recruit agitators to his movement. He spoke German as well as seven other languages. He hated Germany, Hitler and the National Socialists. He began his Anti-Hitler campaign on April 28, 1933 by calling for a worldwide boycott over Radio Warsaw. He persuaded Jewish leaders to hold sixty-nine mass protests in cities throughout Eastern Europe. During a press conference on August 25, 1933, he declared that his Revisionist party was in charge of the worldwide boycott of Germany for Europe.564


562 Naeim Giladi, Ben-Gurion’s Scandals, How the Hagannah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews, (Dandelion Books, Tempe, Arizona, 2003), 15-17

563 Jewish Agency Conference in Berlin: Herr Oscar Wassermann Appeals for Continued Undisturbed Cooperation, (;JTA;, June 16, 1931),
http://www.jta.org/1931/06/16/archive/jewish-agency-conference-in-berlin-herr-oscar-wassermann-appeals-for-continued-undisturbed-co-opera; verified 05 Jan 2022

564 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 32-35

Jabotinsky offered Samuel Untermeyer his cooperation but wanted to lead the whole movement. Untermeyer led the movement in America while Jabotinsky, with headquarters in Paris, facilitated the operation in Europe. He maintained the names of shops and companies to determine if they conducted business with any German firms. He set up Boycott-Propaganda-Bureaus to apply pressure to those who failed to observe the boycott. He held meetings, posted newspaper articles, and did whatever he could, among Jews and non-Jews, to incite others against Germany and Hitler and focused on agitating Jews in Germany. He viewed Germans who embraced National Socialism as criminals. He understood that the Jews in Germany would suffer as a result of his worldwide war but saw them as only representative of “only a very small proportion of World Jewry.”565

Jabotinsky sent out circulars and directives to all of the Zionist organizations in Germany to awaken the Jews to the potential peril that they faced throughout the nation. Meanwhile, Untermeyer was working with the Jewish populations in New York and Amsterdam. In 1933, in Paris, Jabotinsky reconnected with and collaborated with Bernard Lecache, a Russian Jew who headed a propaganda office. He had worked with Lecache in 1925. Initially, Lecache concentrated on fighting anti-Semitism in Poland. Previously, Lecache depended on private contributions but suddenly he had huge sums of money at his disposal which he used it to convert his propaganda center into the Ligue International Centre l’Antisémitisme (LICA) which then worked exclusively on anti-German propaganda.566

LICA’s first operation followed the Reichstag Fire in Berlin (February 27-28, 1933). Vincent de Moro-Giafferi, the attorney also participated in the propaganda enterprise and promoted the idea that Göring arranged the fire. Moro-Giafferi, in his work for LICA, initially defended David Frankfurter, who murdered Wilhelm Gustloff.567 In 1932, Gustloff joined the NS movement and became the leader of its Switzerland Group. Frankfurter, an orthodox Jew, and son of a rabbi, purchased a revolver, then a few days later, travelled to Davos, which did not have the death penalty for murder. On February 4, 1936, Frankfurter went to Gustloff’s apartment and asked to see Gustloff on an important matter. Mrs. Gustloff led him to her husband’s study. Gustloff greeted him and in response, Frankfurter exclaimed that he was a Jew, and had come to avenge his people. He fired and hit Gustloff who died immediately. The Swiss gendarmerie arrested Frankfurter that same night.568

The Jewish press referred to him as a new David who had slain the German Goliath. A Zurich jurist replaced Moro-Giafferi. Frankfurter said that someone had incited him to kill Gustloff, and then he changed his mind and claimed that Gustloff wanted to take his own life and that it was an accident. The court sentenced Frankfurter to sixteen years but they released him after 1945. Then he relocated to the Israeli state and as late as 1979, was living there on reparations from the Germans. Dr. Friedrich Grimm, as counsel for Mrs. Gustloff, maintained years later that Frankfurter must have had hidden accomplices, possibly LICA.569


565 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 32-35

566 Ibid.

567 Ibid.

568 Ibid. 36-37

569 Ibid.

Jabotinsky reiterated that force was absolutely essential in the transfer of populations. On July 12, 1937, over a year before Kristallnacht in Germany, David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, told a Zionist Conference that in order to establish a Zionist state, they would have to “transfer Arab populations out of the area, if possible of their own free will, if not by coercion.” The Zionists uprooted 750,000 Palestinians and then confiscated their lands in 1948-1949. Ben-Gurion wanted the Jews in Islamic countries to relocate to Israel. To do that, he sent agents into those countries to persuade the Jews to immigrate, “either by trickery or fear.”570

On June 12, 1938, according to the minutes recorded during a meeting of the Jewish Agency Executive, Ben-Gurion said, “I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything immoral in it.” He devised the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. In his Diary, on July 12, he noted that the only course of action for Zionism to flourish was, “The Arabs will have to go.”571 In 1935, Ben-Gurion would succeed Ruppin as President of the Jewish Agency which played a huge role in founding and building the Israeli state.

In May 1938, Zionist leaders, Chaim Weizmann, president of the Jewish Agency, David Ben-Gurion, Moshe Shertok, head of the Jewish Agency’s political department, and Bernard Joseph, legal adviser to the Agency, met with the Partition Commission, which had just returned from a two-week tour of Palestine and were preparing to conduct open hearings.572

In June 1937, the Peel Commission, headed by Lord William Peel, had recommended boundary reductions for Israel, to just four hundred square miles of the coastal plain. Given the Zionist dissatisfaction with that proposal, “it was not difficult to predict Jewish reaction…”573 Weizmann and Ben Gurion reluctantly agreed but with huge reservations while the Arabs opposed the plan.574 Thus, the disgruntled British expected revolts and began planning for another world war because, for them, Palestine was an important crossroads and they wanted it to remain peaceful. In March 1938, the British installed a new High Commissioner, Sir Harold MacMichaels who immediately directed two British divisions to crush the revolts. He promised the Arabs that he would halt Jewish immigration and suggested that Britain abandon its plan to partition Palestine.575


570 Naeim Giladi, Ben-Gurion’s Scandals, How the Hagannah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews, (Dandelion Books, Tempe, Arizona, 2003), 15-17

571 Iqbal Jassat, “Ben-Gurion and Massacre of Deir Yassin,” The Palestine Chronicle, April 11, 2009,
http://palestinechronicle.com/ben-gurion-and-massacre-of-deir-yassin/#.UdgUgBlIE0M; verified 05 Jan 2022

572 Zionist Leaders Confer with Partition Commission, JTA, May 17, 1938,
http://www.jta.org/1938/05/17/archive/zionist-leaders-confer-with-partition-commission; verified 07 Jan 2022

573 Michael J. Cohen, Palestine, Retreat from the Mandate: The Making of British Policy, 1936-45, (Holmes & Meier, New York, 1978), 72

574 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 100-101

575 Ibid. 100-101

Ben-Gurion and his associates recognized that the British would not honor their commitment to the Balfour Declaration and the creation of a Jewish national home because of numerous events, including the German annexation of Austria in March 1938, which the British allowed. On June 5, 1938, Jabotinsky spoke at the Anglo-Palestine Club where he cited the distress of 6,000,000 European Jews who centered their hopes on Palestine. He maintained that 14,000,000 Jews were interested in Palestine’s future. On September 28-29, the major powers signed the Munich Pact which permitted Germany to annex Czechoslovakia.576,577

In 1938, Jewish Zionists were desperate to get Jews to emigrate from Germany and were using every means possible to augment the economic base of that country. Jabotinsky, in his writings, used the term, “propitious storm,” in describing the events that the Jews must employ in their host countries to make life “unbearable” in order to motivate them to opt for immigration to Palestine. He wrote, “This ‘storm,’ however terrifying it may be, blows the Jewish ship in the direction in which we ourselves want to guide it.” Later, he stated that the events in NS Germany would have the “effect of a hurricane,” a desirable consequence, “just as long as it drove the Jewish ship to Palestine.” He was relieved that other countries closed their doors to Jews coming from Germany. Certain Jews were willing to sacrifice anything, and maim or kill others, even fellow Jews.578

On October 15, 1938, Polish officials decreed that everyone holding a Polish passport must obtain a visa to validate that passport, effective after October 29. Without that visa, one would be unable to cross into Poland, which affected thousands of Polish Jews living abroad. Polish officials apparently wanted to prevent the 70,000 Polish Jews in Germany from returning to Poland. On October 9, Police Chief Heinrich Himmler asked Dr. Werner Best to discuss recent Polish policies with the German Embassy in Warsaw so that he could gain assurance from the Polish Government that the Polish Jews living in Germany could return to Poland without this visa. Those Polish policies necessitated the ejection of all Polish Jews from Reich territory as quickly as possible.579


576 Rafael Medoff, David Ben-Gurion’s Answer to Kristallnacht, (David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, 2008); viewed 7/6/2013

577 Hopes of 6,000,000 Jews Center on Palestine, Jabotinsky Declares, June 5, 1938,
http://www.jta.org/1938/06/05/archive/hopes-of-6000000-jews-center-on-palestine-jabotinsky-declares; verified 05 Jan 2022

578 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 99-101

579 Ibid. 11-12

On October 28, Reich officials, per the Polish passport-ordinance, took about 15,000 Jews, mostly adult males, into custody and accompanied them to the Polish border. They provided them with sufficient food and water and put them into special transports for their return to Poland. However, officials in Warsaw reneged and instructed the Polish border guards not to accept the thousands of documented deportees who had now converged in the border villages and were causing problems. Ultimately, 12,000 Jewish deportees went into Poland, some at the official crossings but many through the countryside and forests. Germany did not intend to permanently expel them. It was Poland’s policy! The Polish government then initiated the deportation of German Jews residing in Poland. By October 29, though relations between the two countries had deteriorated, they halted the expulsions. Germany released the Polish Jews still in custody so they could return to their homes. The deportees already in Poland returned to Germany with the necessary documentation.580

At age fifteen, Herschel Grynszpan left Germany and ultimately ended up in Paris where he lived with his uncle who soon kicked him out of the house. He then began associating with Paris’s criminal element and on April 15, 1938, the police arrested him and ordered him out of the country. Instead, he went underground, staying in France without a residence permit, and living in a small Paris hotel, one block from his uncle’s residence. On November 3, Grynszpan somehow received word from his father, allegedly via a postcard. Four days later, he purchased a revolver for 250 francs which is interesting in that he had no papers, no apparent means of support and what does a person of his age need or even know how to shoot a revolver? When the police expelled Grynszpan, it is very likely that LICA, a Jewish militant organization, located in an old Parisian apartment house very close to the small hotel where he lived, financed him. LICA probably supplied him with the money to buy the gun.581

Grynszpan, supposedly upset over his family’s deportation then visits the German Embassy in in Paris on November 7, and asks to see the German ambassador. The bureau chief took Grynszpan to the office of the Third Legation Secretary, Ernst vom Rath. Grynszpan announced “I am a Jew, and have come to avenge the Jewish people!” He then drew his revolver and shoots, perhaps as many as five times, and injures vom Rath who later undergoes surgery but dies from his wounds on November 9. The Paris police records do not indicate any other verbal exchange. According to the medical record, two bullets hit vom Rath. Grynszpan admitted that he murdered vom Rath because of what Germany had done to his family. Later, he said that it was an accident and that he meant to kill himself. Then even later, he said he did not remember or did not know what happened and perhaps he “had acted under hallucination.” No one ever determined exactly why he shot vom Rath. The Paris authorities, with the influence of LICA attorney, Vincent de Moro-Giafferi, ultimately relented and accepted his plea of “personal revenge.”582


580 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 11-12

581 Ibid. 12-19

582 Ibid.

In early October, 1938, MacMichaels had persuaded the British government to agree to his proposals. However, the Jews understood that this closed Palestine to them. The Jews then began trying to determine how to obstruct the British government. There were many Jews who thought that the British might reevaluate its decision if there were an anti-Jewish pogrom. The government was supposed to announce its findings on November 8. Then on November 7, just as if someone had planned an event that the Jews could exploit, Grynszpan shot vom Rath. Possibly, they sent provocateurs into Germany on the 8th, to bust shop windows, loot stores and set synagogues ablaze on the 9th. When the British heard about Kristallnacht, they decided to delay their announcement for a day, publishing it on November 10. While the terrorism failed to alter Britain’s plans, it accomplished other Zionist objectives.583 After a lengthy study, the Woodhead Commission announced that they would limit the Jewish State to the coastal region while placing northern Palestine, including the Jezreel Valley, and all the semi-arid part of southern Palestine, under a separate mandate. This reduced the Jewish State to 400 square miles of the coastal plain.

LICA hired Moro-Giafferi to defend Grynszpan although he never mentioned his LICA connection. LICAs office was a block away from Abraham Grynszpan. There were common elements between the murders of Ernst vom Rath and Wilhelm Gustloff. The Paris police concluded their investigation of the case in August 1939 when it should have then gone to the state’s attorney’s office. Then war broke out and the Paris authorities did not convene a trial. In 1940, after Germany invaded France, the Paris police turned Grynszpan over to the German officials who took him to Berlin. The Ministry of Justice decided to try him and invited all of the French witnesses to Berlin. The police interrogated him twice during which he withdrew all of his previous statements. He claimed that he killed vom Rath for personal rather than political reasons. The Germans never held a trial and the attorney for the vom Rath family, Dr. Friedrich Grimm, never discovered the reason for this.584 Court historians readily assumed that the evil Nazis had killed Grynszpan, without the benefit of a trial, allegedly along with the millions of other Jews that they slaughtered. The Grynszpan family found shelter in Poland via the assistance of the JDC which assisted them to ultimately immigrate to Palestine. Herschel Grynszpan probably spent the war years in a German prison but the Allies released him at the end of the war when he assumed a new name, created a new identity and returned to Paris where he probably still had an association with LICA.585


583 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 99-101

584 Ibid. 12-19, 32-35

585 Ibid. 12-19

The worldwide media exaggerated the events of the night of November 9-10, 1938, when a few NSDAP leaders and storm troopers, purportedly directing mobs of angry Germans, looted Jewish homes and businesses and burned synagogues throughout Germany. Obviously, these activities negatively impacted German-Jewish relations. An editorial in The New York Times, November 9, 1938, stated that one thousand Jews died during Kristallnacht. Actually, fewer than a hundred perished. Security Chief, Reinhard Heydrich told Hermann Göring that the instigators had killed thirty-six. Another account indicated that ninety-one died.

After Kristallnacht (Night of Broken Glass), Rudolf Hess issued an order, Ordinance No. 174/38, to all Gauleiters, the regional administers, saying, “On explicit orders from the highest level, no incendiary actions against Jewish businesses or similar are to be taken for any reason.” Hess further said, “Pillages and desecrations of places of cultural interest are unworthy of a German citizen.” In a speech in 1933, he said that it was unworthy of a National Socialist to harass those of a Jewish-Bolshevik persuasion.586

People have readily accepted distortions and fabrications without evaluating the evidence. Many maintain that Hitler ordered Goebbels to initiate the widespread violence against the Jewish population. However, Goebbels lacked the authority to expedite such a program. On the morning of November 10, Goebbels, angry about the violent outbreaks, ordered those involved to immediately stop all aggression against the Jews. Hitler also ordered an immediate cessation of the violence. To set the record straight, German author Ingrid Weckert examined all of the available documents in order to ascertain what actually occurred and who might have instigated it. She submits that Kristallnacht may have been a part of the continuing warfare that influential Jewish organizations in New York, Paris and London declared soon after Hitler came to power. One must ask—who benefited? It was not Germany and it certainly was not Hitler or the NSDAP.587


586 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 66-67

587 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 3-4

After that eventful night, the world’s media waged a lengthy anti-German campaign. The media would repeatedly refer to it as a night of violence and mass extermination. FDR broke off all diplomatic relations with Germany by recalling the ambassador. It destroyed Hitler’s opportunity to reach an agreement with France. Officials at Nuremberg introduced one document that they claim is evidence linking Goebbels to Kristallnacht. It is the statements of one of Himmler’s staff, Luitpold Schallermeier, who supposedly took dictation from Himmler. Yet, it was actually SS-Group Leader Wolff who dictated a memo in which he stated that Himmler surmised that Goebbels had initiated the actions against the Jews. Given the inconclusive origin of this document, one cannot with absolute certainty testify who was responsible for the Kristallnacht.588

Dr. Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda in Germany was personal friends with Friedrich Christian, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe, who in November 1938, was in Sweden attempting to acquire support for Germany. The events of November 9 undermined all of those efforts. Yet, some people claimed that Goebbels was behind the events of that night. When Christian returned to Germany, he spoke with officials within the propaganda ministry, as witnessed by the Norwegian Consul General in Berlin, Elef Ringnes, who wrote about these circumstances in a book in 1962. While there were pogroms in other European countries, none had occurred in the very civilized Germany since the middle ages. Revolutionaries in Russia used terrorism, organized pogroms, killing, plundering, and burning.589

Goebbels was personal friends with Friedrich Christian, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe, who was in Sweden attempting to acquire support for Germany. Kristallnacht undermined all of those efforts.590 They did not need a brutal pogrom to demonstrate their justifiable position. The Jews blamed Goebbels for the unexpected violence. Prince Schaumburg arrived at Goebbels office to determine whether or not he had ordered such activities, apparently orchestrated throughout Germany. The Prince waited in the ante-room as Goebbels and Count Helldorf, the President of the Berlin Police were deeply engrossed in conversation about the situation. The Prince, who knew Goebbels very well, could ascertain that he was extremely angry about the night’s events.591


588 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 4-6

589 Ibid. 6-7

590 Ibid. 30-31

591 Ibid. 7-8

Goebbels said, “The whole business is outrageous. That is not the way to solve the Jewish problem, not by any means… That only makes martyrs out of them… I am expected to hail us out of this idiocy, to iron everything out again with propaganda… We become unbelievable when we do things like that… They have cut the ground out from under me. They have made me a laughing stock.” Further, he said, “We could not possibly have done the opposing propaganda a greater service. Our people have killed a dozen Jews, but for this dozen we may have to pay some day with a million German soldiers.” Reportedly, crowds of angry people assaulted Jews in their homes, broke the windows of Jewish-owned shops, looted stores, destroyed property, severely beat some Jews while murdering others and burned synagogues. If the Germans were not the culprits behind the terrorist activities, then who perpetrated the events on Kristallnacht? What organization or agencies had that much influence and apparently the extensive network to pull off such a synchronized event? That night supposedly represented the beginning of the “final solution?”592 No one except Weckert has undertaken any investigation of the event.

Following Kristallnacht, David Ben-Gurion decided that the Jews should instigate their own war, an “Aliyah war.” He expected that the American Jews would be alarmed over what had happened in Germany and would be willing to cooperate with him. He told his associates, “Millions of Jews are confronted now with physical extinction.” He felt that it was time for mass immigration to Palestine and believed that American Jews and the U.S. government should participate in the creation of a Jewish state. He arrived in America on January 2, 1939, hoping to obtain support and persuade Jewish leaders to call a “world Jewish conference,” to shame London into supporting the Jews, and “help shape Israeli foreign policy.”593

Ben-Gurion was utterly disappointed in the lack of support from America’s Labor Zionists. Louis D. Brandeis conveyed his compassion for Aliyah but yet others, such as AJCm leader Cyrus Adler opposed Ben-Gurion’s plan. The AJC feared the possibility of anti-Semitism because it might appear that Jews were trying to engage America into foreign conflicts. B’nai B’rith and the Jewish Labor Committee also opposed the Aliyah war idea. Ben-Gurion persuaded the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) to endorse the idea of a world Jewish conference, but ZOA leader Rabbi Wise refused to engage in public criticism of British policies. Wise, who still supported Weizmann, did not attend Ben-Gurion’s speech in Washington nor did he meet with him while he was in America. Weizmann refused to confront British officials after Woodhead and Kristallnacht. Later, in London, Wise told Ben-Gurion that Americans should work with Britain even if it created a disadvantage for the movement. Ben-Gurion was furious and left the United States on January 21. While Kristallnacht failed to ignite American Jewish sympathy, the reports of the mass slaughter of European Jews in 1942-1943 would surely catch the attention of most of the American Jewish leaders.594


592 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 6-9

593 Rafael Medoff, David Ben-Gurion’s Answer to Kristallnacht, (David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, 2008); viewed 7/6/2013

594 Ibid.

Ben-Gurion exploited the deaths of hundreds of Jews for political objectives. On November 25, 1940, the Haganah sank the Patria, a French-built ocean liner, with 1,800 Jewish refugees from Europe aboard. The bombing killed 267 people and injured 172. The British would not allow the refugees to exit the ship and were deporting them to Mauritius. Moshe Sharett, in charge of the Jewish Agency in the temporary absence of Ben-Gurion authorized Haganah officer, Yitzhak Sadeh to plant a bomb to disable the ship so that it would not leave Haifa. Instead, the explosion sank the ship in less than sixteen minutes. On February 24, 1942, a Soviet submarine torpedoed and sank a Jewish refugee ship, with 786 passengers, including 101 children, from Romania, on its way to Palestine. All but one person perished in the coldest winter in generations.

At the Conference of Zionist Leaders and the World Jewish Congress in New York City, Rabbi Wise, ostensibly speaking for all of the Jewish people, declared war against Germany. Author Reb Moshe Shonfeld indicated that it was relatively easy for Wise, who was safe from the tribulations and collateral damage of warfare, to jeopardize European Jews on the “front lines.” The Zionists, anticipating further settlement in Palestine, were purportedly willing to sacrifice their potential future constituents.595

Even before the war, Yitzchak Greenbaum, chair of the “rescue committee,” located in Eretz Yisroel, actually declined any opportunities to send money from the United Jewish Appeal to assuage the hunger and distress of the ghetto Jews in Europe. He said, “One goat in Eretz Yisroel is more important than an entire community in the Diaspora.” The Zionist leaders not only would not assist their fellow Jews, they did everything they could to prevent other organizations from assisting those in such desperate need. In 1941 the Zeirei Agudas Israel with hundreds of yeshiva students, sent thousands of packages of food to needy Jewish families in Poland who responded with letters of deep gratitude. Then Rabbi Wise of the Committee to Boycott Germany, associated with the World Jewish Congress demanded that the group immediately stop sending assistance because it violated Britain’s boycott policies against Germany.596


595 Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse, Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, (Bnei Yeshivos, New York, 1977), 43-44

596 Ibid. 44-45

Jewish leaders organized a strike against the Zeirei Agudas Israel with demonstrators carrying signs which read, “Stop sending food to the lands of the Nazi enemy” or “Don’t break the boycott against Hitler.” The gentiles were amazed that the local Zionists appeared to be lending their support to Hitler in his warfare against the Jews. Zeirei Agudas Israel continued to send food but others, confused about the boycott, quit sending food. Wise had a more secular attitude and was willing to help the Allied war effort under any circumstances in order to acquire an independent state. Wise felt that the Zionists should not interfere even if it meant the lives of thousands of Jews. In 1943, the Jews had the chance to send food parcels via the International Red Cross working with the U.S. government. However, the Zionists even blocked this proposal despite that fact that it did not violate any allied regulations.597 Given the Jew’s declaration of war against Germany, German Jews would be the last people to receive any available food.

Dr. Chaim Weizmann, apparently worried about other issues, was unconcerned about the Jews allegedly starving in Europe. On the other hand, maybe he knew that those stories were mere rumors. His American associates, like Rabbi Wise, were merely facilitating the prediction he uttered at the Zionist Congress in London in August 1937, “The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They were moral and economic dust in a cruel world… Only a branch shall survive… They have to accept it…” The Zionists argued that they were not responsible for helping their starving fellow Jews. He said, “Every nation has had its dead in the fight for its homeland, the sufferers under Hitler are our dead in our fight.”598 Yet, one of the basic teachings of Jewish tradition is “All Israel is responsible for one another.”599 Was Rabbi Wise unaware of this basic Jewish tenet?

Two groups of young Jews organized to battle the hundred thousand British soldiers in Palestine—the Irgun and the Stern Gang, which together amounted to fewer than three thousand men and women. Ben-Gurion and Weizmann, because they criticized Irgun and the Stern Gang, encouraged others to view them with shame. The Marxist Jews and the Zionist Jews assured the British that they had nothing to do with the Irgun and actually told British Intelligence where members of Irgun were hiding. Officials arrested them and seized their weapons.600


597 Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse, Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, (Bnei Yeshivos, New York, 1977), 45-46

598 Ibid. 61

599 Union for Reform Judaism, Proposed Resolution On Solidarity And Support for The Argentine Jewish Community, 67th General Assembly,
http://urj.org//about/union/governance/reso//?syspage=article&item_id=1965; verified 07 Jan 2022

600 Ben Hecht, A Child of the Century, Save Israel,
http://www.saveisrael.com/others/hecht/hechtchild.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

Despite the Balfour Declaration, Britain limited Jewish immigration to Palestine, even when it appeared that the Jews were in mortal danger in Europe. In 1944, the Irgun and the Haganah joined forces to engage in anti-British attacks to change policy. The Haganah, between 1945 and 1948, began transporting Holocaust survivors to Palestine. However, British officials intercepted the majority of the sixty-four ships and interned the passengers in detention camps in Cyprus. The world’s Jewish-controlled media castigated the British which increased pressure on them to amend their immigration policies. In July 1947, British officials sent the ship the SS Exodus carrying 4,500 passengers back to France but the passengers refused to leave the ship.601

This struggle between Britain and the Jews impacted British and American relations because of the general sympathy of the population of the United States as a result of the Holocaust stories. The Truman administration was concerned about its Jewish supporters. Consequently, in April 1946, an American-British commission endorsed the admission of 100,000 DPs to Palestine but the British rejected the idea.602 Irgun, based on Jabotinsky’s philosophy, operated in Mandate Palestine from 1931 to 1948. It was an offshoot of the earlier and larger Jewish paramilitary organization Haganah. Irgun orchestrated the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on July 22, 1946, and the Deir Yassin massacre, with the Stern Gang’s help on April 9, 1948. In 1939, Jabotinsky wrote, “… the Arabs must make room for the Jews in Eretz Israel. If it was possible to transfer the Baltic peoples, it is also possible to move the Palestinian Arabs.”603

In 1948, according to John F. Kennedy, many of Truman’s supporters abandoned him because he supported the Morgenthau Plan and other questionable issues. On his whistle-stop campaign train during the presidential race, an avid Zionist delivered a suitcase containing $2 million in cash which gave him the financial boost he needed to win.604 Truman believed, as a result of the Holocaust, that the oppressed Jews deserved a homeland. The British relinquished the problem of a shared Arab-Jewish state to the UN on April 2, 1947 because of Jewish terrorism in Palestine. Truman instructed a reluctant State Department to endorse the UN’s partition plan of November 29, 1947. At midnight on May 14, 1948, Israel’s Provisional Government announced the new State of Israel. On that same day, like Roosevelt’s recognition of the Soviet government, Truman officially recognized the Zionist government in Palestine against the advice of many people. He did not tell leading State Department officials who became angry when they heard about it. On May 15, 1948, the Arab states responded by invading Israel which began the first Arab-Israeli war.605

Menachem Begin, former Irgun commander, spoke to a crowd of people during a special dinner at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel where he attacked British policies and the Bernadotte Plan regarding Palestine and praised the efforts of Ben-Gurion, Israel’s Premier. Ben Hecht, another speaker, praised Irgun and its underground force. Peter Bergson, Irgun’s agent in America, was with Hecht. Arthur Szyk also praised the efforts of Ben-Gurion for his efforts.606


601 Rafael Medoff, Ben Hecht’s A Flag is Born: A Play That Changed History, (Wyman Institute),

602 Ibid.

603 Iqbal Jassat, “Ben-Gurion and Massacre of Deir Yassin,” The Palestine Chronicle, April 11, 2009,
http://palestinechronicle.com/ben-gurion-and-massacre-of-deir-yassin/#.UdgUgBlIE0M; verified 05 Jan 2022

604 Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion, the Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London, England and Boulder, Colorado, 1994, vii

605 Harry S. Truman Library, the Recognition of Israel,
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/index.php; verified 05 Jan 2022

606 “Former Irgun Leader Sees Palestine Unity with Brotherhood among Jews and Arabs,” The New York Times, November 30, 1948

Chapter 16 ♦ Dangling the Czechoslovakian Carrot

After Hitler came to power, he looked to Britain as an ally. This was inconceivable as Germany’s new non-usury economic system and Britain’s debt-based, high interest economic structure were diametrically opposed to each other. While Germany was eliminating and lowering taxes, Britain, enslaved by the Jewish bankers, was imposing new taxes and raising old ones to fund their warfare, a method of enforcing her foreign policy. They had also enslaved other industrial countries but noncompliant Germany eliminated their high-interest credit. Germany, a model for other countries, immediately paid their obligations and did not purchase items it could not pay for with goods and services. They based their currency on the nation’s productivity. It was either Germany’s total destruction, along with Hitler, or other nations would adopt the sound economic ideas and release themselves and their citizens from the bondage of perpetual usury and debt.

Hitler, striving to befriend Britain, maintained that he would concentrate on Europe and not attempt to develop any competitive foreign colonies. Germany would limit its navy to one/third the size of Britain’s navy. Hitler felt that Britain could be an international beacon of stability. He wanted to reclaim the lost ethnic Germans that the Versailles Treaty relegated to newly-created, hostile countries. Other dastardly, divisive treaties, forced Germany, the most densely populated European nation, to relinquish resource-rich territory. Hitler was concerned about having sufficient living space to accommodate German citizens. They had to forfeit overseas colonies, which, before the war, solved part of their food production dilemma. Britain’s bankers disapproved of Germany’s development of foreign resources.607

The newly-created Czechoslovakia formed a large swath of land in the middle of Germany. Karel Kramář, an anti-Bolshevik, nationalist closely connected to the political elite in Prague and Vienna, was Czechoslovakia’s first Prime Minister under President Thomas Masaryk. Edvard Beneš, Czechoslovakia’s Foreign Minister (1920-1935), craftily created a network of alliances that would later determine the republic’s international stance. Beneš, who had represented his nation in the negotiations for the Versailles Treaty, was a member of the League of Nations Council. He viewed the League as a guarantor of the postwar status quo and as the biggest defender of the newly created states, Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia, resulting from the disbanding of Austria-Hungary. The League was the governing entity designed to impose treaty stipulations. Beneš negotiated the Little Entente, on August 14, 1920, the initial alliance to prevent the resurgence of Hungarian power and the restoration of the Habsburg Monarchy and to halt any encroachments on the member countries by other European powers.


607 Donald E. Schmidt, The Folly of War: American Foreign Policy, 1898-2005, (Algora Publishing, New York, 2005), 158

On April 23, 1921, in Bucharest, Beneš negotiated and signed an alliance with Yugoslavia and Romania to thwart Hungarian revanchism, the efforts of a country to reverse territorial losses incurred by a war or social movement, and Hapsburg restoration. He tried to negotiate treaties with Britain and France, in an effort to gain their support and assistance in the event of hostility against Czechoslovakia. Britain remained inflexibly isolationist. Beneš negotiated a separate agreement, the Treaty of Alliance and Friendship between his nation and France, signed on January 25, 1924. He was also an influential voice at the international conferences, such as Genoa (1922), Locarno (1925), The Hague (1930), and Lausanne (1932). Another pact, the Czechoslovak-Soviet Treaty of Alliance, signed on May 16, 1935, between the Soviets and Czechoslovakia, both allies of France. However, officials in Czechoslovakia insisted that the treaty was only valid if France agreed to give assistance to the victim of aggression. France was the strongest European country immediately after World War I. Beneš, a Member of the Czechoslovakian Parliament (1929-1935) belonged to the Czechoslovak NS Party. He did not regard the Slovaks and Czechs to be separate ethnicities. On December 18, 1935, he became president of Czechoslovakia, composed of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia, founded in October 1918.

Hitler viewed Czechoslovakia as a fraudulent state that violated international law and the law’s emphasis on nationalism and self-determination. The Germans, Slovaks, Hungarians, Ukrainians, and the Poles were not interested in a merger with the Czechs. Hitler accused Beneš, in his “regime of terror,” of attempting to gradually exterminate the Sudeten Germans. Since its creation, officials had forced over 600,000 Germans, out of three-and-a half million, out of their homes under the threat of starvation if they did not leave.608

Beneš, an experienced internationalist and politician, figured that Britain and France would side with him if Germany ever challenged his government. After all, it was officials from those countries that initially created Czechoslovakia. Beneš decided to manage the Sudeten issue internationally, with input from like-minded diplomats. He thought that if he conceded to the Germans, who were merely seeking equal treatment, then other minorities in the country would pressure the government for concessions. Czechoslovakia’s biggest political party was the Czech Agrarians and they disavowed any kind of connection with Communism, preferring Hitler to Stalin. The Czechoslovak army had thirty-four divisions as opposed to Germany who was wholly unprepared for war.609

Although the British had no treaty obligations to Czechoslovakia, the French did and would use that alliance to intimidate the British into joining with them to fight against Hitler. If the British failed to accept the bait, then others would accuse them of not standing up to what the media claimed was a tyrant. A crisis was bound to erupt, which would necessitate a response from the British who really were unaffected by the situation in Czechoslovakia but nonetheless had to weigh in on the problem as they wanted to avoid a European war. They assumed they could resolve the insoluble Sudeten German issue through negotiation and compromise. The British did not create the Czech crisis but some of them certainly exploited it.610


608 Max Domarus, The Essential Hitler: Speeches and Commentary, (Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, Inc., Illinois, 2007), 626-627

609 A. J. P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War, (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1961), 151- 154

610 Ibid. 151-154

Robert Vansittart, Anthony Eden, Orme Sargent, and Ralph Wigram advocated a military build-up to intimidate Germany. Vansittart stated that this would not prevent Germany’s aggression. In June 1936, Vansittart warned the Defence Policy and Requirements Committee (DPR) that Germany might invade Czechoslovakia in late 1936 or early 1937. In November 1936, Eden would tell the Cabinet this might occur in spring 1937 or thereafter. Vansittart characterized Hitler, Göring and Ribbentrop as lunatics and suggested using economic difficulties and mass propaganda to force Hitler’s hand.611

On July 22, 1936, in London, Winston Churchill, during a small private dinner with a group known as The Focus, had agreed to use his oratorical skills against Hitler and Germany. In exchange for his support in their crusade, the group, led by Sir Robert Cohen, managing Director of the Royal Dutch Oil Company would pay Churchill £50,000.612 Years before, Churchill accused the Jews of being the “the principal inspiration and driving power behind Bolshevism.” “He would have been ill-advised to repeat these obsessive claims in… , and it was little wonder that he now adopted the opposite line. Inspired by his robust line against Hitler, the wealthy and influential flocked to become his friends. The South African gold mining industrialist Sir Henry Strakosch started furnishing to him his own data on German raw material imports; Strakosch estimated that Hitler had spent £1,600 million on armaments since July …”613

David Irving, in Churchill’s War, said that Strakosch was a Czechoslovakian-born Jew.614 Arthur R. Butz wrote, “The question of Strakosch’s ethnicity is only important in relation to the question of what political forces were acting, during the thirties, to destroy Hitler. If he was a Jew, then political motivations that would explain his conduct would be obvious. If he was not a Jew, then the question of motivation arises. Why was he out to get Hitler?” In 1935, Strakosch had published a booklet arguing for the restoration of an international gold standard. Butz continues, “The Nazi economic policies were notoriously successful, and have been called The Nazi Miracle … The important point is that we see the motivations that Strakosch brought to the campaign against Germany. Hitler was on the way to proving him wrong.” Butz said, “If he had been a Jew, I still would not have described him as Irving did. I would have written ‘a Jewish South African gold miner campaigning for restoration of the international gold standard.’”615

While Churchill did not have a large following in the House of Commons in the 1930s, the government allowed him a lot of leverage and special privileges. Many, viewing him as an alternative leader and a real presence among elite politicians, consulted him on a number of important issues and regularly received confidential information. Beginning in 1932, Major Desmond Morton, per consent by Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald (1929-1935) gave him intelligence on German air power. In 1934, Lord Swinton, Secretary of State for Air, with Prime Minister Baldwin’s approval, gave Churchill access to official and secret materials. In June 1936, he organized a delegation of senior Conservatives who shared his views in order to visit Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin (1935-1937). Many shared his pro-war mentality and promoted rearmament and a more aggressive foreign policy.


611 Gaines Post Jr., Dilemmas of Appeasement: British Deterrence and Defense, 1934-1937, (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1993), 253-254

612 Robert Henriques, Sir Robert Waley-Cohen 1877-1952, A Biography, (Secker & Warburg, London, 1966), 362

613 David Irving, Churchill’s War, The Struggle for Power, Vol. 1, (Focal Point, London, 1952), 52

614 Ibid. 52

615 Arthur R. Butz, “Was Churchill’s Gold Bug Jewish?” (The Journal of Historical Review, January/February 2002 (Vol. 21, No. 1), 9,
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v21/v21n1p-9_butz.html; verified 10 Jan 2022

British officials were deeply troubled about Germany’s thriving economy as compared to their country’s economic situation. Hitler’s appointee as ambassador to Britain, Ribbentrop, arrived there in October 1936 in order to gain support, warn the British against the Communist menace and to negotiate some kind of an alliance against Bolshevism. Anthony Eden, in a speech on November 20, said that there would no such alliance outside of the British-sponsored “general settlement,” meaning the Versailles Treaty which Hitler was attempting to slightly and justifiably revise. Winston Churchill, of the “war party” was already spewing anti-German propaganda and referring to Germany’s “terrible war machine.” He claimed that Hitler wanted to take over much of Eastern and Southern Europe.616

Hitler began economically rejuvenating Germany on February 1, 1933 and within three years, the country experienced prosperity. In 1936, Churchill said, “We will force Hitler into the war, whether he wants it or not.” In November 1936, he told General Robert E. Wood, “Germany is getting too strong, and we must smash her.” In 1937, he told Carl J. Burckhardt, the High Commissioner for Danzig for the League of Nations, that “Germany was again getting too strong, the Germans were only impressed by power; in the event of an armed conflict, the excessive encroachments of National Socialism would help the British to a strong system of alliances.” In the summer of 1937, he told Joachim von Ribbentrop, “If Germany gets too strong, she will be crushed again (as in 1914).”617

Churchill, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, criticized Chamberlain’s appeasement policy regarding Hitler. Churchill said in a speech to the House of Commons, “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war.” On May 28, 1937, when Chamberlain became prime minister, he did not give Churchill a government position. He told Leslie Hore-Belisha that if he had made Churchill a part of the Cabinet “he will dominate it. He won’t give others the chance of even talking.” However, on September 3, 1939, Chamberlain would appoint Churchill as the First Lord of the Admiralty, just a couple of days after Germany invaded Poland. He would function in that capacity until May 11, 1940.

Germans residing elsewhere wanted to be part of their homeland. The Locarno Treaty, because of the post-war treaties, allowed Allied occupation until 1935. On May 21, 1935, Adolf Hitler stated “In particular, they (the Germans) will uphold and fulfill all obligations arising out of the Locarno Treaty, so long as the other parties are on their side ready to stand by that pact.” The Germans reoccupied the Rhineland in February 1936, and on March 7, the German Army marched in, remilitarizing the Rhineland, the first time since World War I that German troops had been in the Rhineland. Chamberlain praised Churchill’s speech of March 9, in which he opposed Britain and France’s intervention in the Rhineland. The issue divided the Warmongers who did not want Germany to know they were preparing for war, when in fact they were.


616 Richard Tedor, Hitler’s Revolution, Ideology, Social Programs, Foreign Affairs, (Chicago, Illinois, 2013), 138-139

617 Udo Walendy, Truth for Germany, the Guilt Question of the Second World War, (The Barnes Review Books, Washington, DC, 2003), 275-276

On July 11, 1936, Austrian and German officials informally discussed the idea of Austrian annexation by Germany. On November 5, 1937, Germany officially viewed Austria for annexation.618

Nevertheless, they would allow the citizens of each country to vote on the potential annexation. On March 9, 1938, Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg announced a plebiscite on Austrian independence in four days to take place in a month. Re-unification with Germany meant the termination of the offices of president and chancellor. On March 11, Schuschnigg left office and two days later President Wilhelm Miklas relinquished his position. On April 10, 4,460,778 Austrians voted 99.73% and 44,872,702 German citizens voted 99.02% for Anschluss or Austrian reunification with the Germany, as it was before the Versailles Treaty.619 On March 13, Germany annexed the German-speaking country of Austria, a nation in dire economic straits and anxious to be part of the more prosperous Third Reich.

On March 13, German Ambassador Hans-Heinrich Dieckhoff visited the U.S. State Department to discuss the annexation. Secretary of State Cordell Hull was not critical nor did he express disapproval of Anschluss. On March 12-13, the American press did not criticize Germany. However, on March 14, Dieckhoff recalls, a “sudden change took place.” The media sharply denounced the annexation and characterized it as “a breach of treaty, as militarism, as the rape of defenseless little Austria by her big neighbor bristling with arms.”620 On the same day, the Guardian reported, “On the day on which she was to have voted on her freedom and independence, Austria was last night officially proclaimed a ‘State of the German Reich.’ The Anschluss has been brought into being. A month hence the Austrian people will be asked to say what they think of it.”621

Dieckhoff got the impression that Roosevelt “intervened personally and gave instructions to both the State Department and the press.” He thought that both the State Department and the media “were probably, from the very outset, thinking less of Austria than of Czechoslovakia, with all the possible complications.” On March 14, 1938, Dieckhoff again spoke with Hull who was very courteous. However, Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles was quite the opposite. On March 15, Dieckhoff sent a dispatch to the Foreign Office complaining about Welles. Dieckhoff had given him a copy of the decrees incorporating Austria into the Reich and expressed approval over Anschluss. Dieckhoff mentioned the sudden turn of events in the media, which he said were “lies” and asked Welles why the State Department permitted the Jews “to dominate the press and public opinion.”622


618 Charles Callan Tansill, Back Door to War, the Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941, (Henry Regnery Company, Chicago, Illinois, 1952), 359

619 A. V. Schaerffenberg, Hitler: Bungling Amateur or Military Genius?, (Preuss Printing, Giddings, Texas, 2003), 35-36

620 Charles Callan Tansill, Back Door to War, the Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941, (Henry Regnery Company, Chicago, Illinois, 1952), 383-384

621 “Union declared: plebiscite to follow, Hitler sends his thanks to Mussolini,” The Guardian, Monday, March 14, 1938,
https://www.theguardian.com/century/1930-1939/Story/0,,127158,00.html,,127158,00.html; Verified 10 Jan 2022

622 Charles Callan Tansill, Back Door to War, the Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941, (Henry Regnery Company, Chicago, Illinois, 1952), 383-384

While Anschluss was occurring, the French ambassador called Lord Halifax to discuss it. Halifax asked him if France planned to respond to the emerging problem in Czechoslovakia. The British sent word to the French government reminding them that it was bound by the Locarno Treaty, signed in London on December 3, 1925, by Britain, France and Germany, which allowed Germany to join the League of Nations. According to Halifax, Britain would only offer economic sanctions or a blockade, if Germany were to occupy Czechoslovakia, in the event that France and the Soviet Union opposed Germany. Therefore, the Czechoslovakian government had to find a solution that was acceptable to the German minority. Halifax felt the timing was disadvantageous to Britain’s plans for warfare and told the French ambassador that the French would have to decide for themselves what to do.623

Obviously, after the Anschluss, Hitler would look at Czechoslovakia in his efforts to rescind the Versailles Treaty. Ethnic Germans sequestered elsewhere felt that if Austria could participate in Nationalist Germany, then why not them. However, they certainly were not ready to pull up stakes and relocate from where they had lived for generations. Czechoslovakia was isolated, and her immediate neighbors, Poland, Romania, and Hungary, were antagonistic. The lawyers and politicians at the postwar Peace Conference in Paris created Czechoslovakia, which was a conglomeration of minority nationalities: Slovaks, Hungarians, Ruthenes, and three million Sudeten Germans. The Czechs were the only authentic Czechoslovaks and expected to centralize their new country based on the Czech character.624

The Military Intelligence Service warned the British about Germany’s potential invasion of Czechoslovakia so it was no surprise. Chamberlain accepted the positive messages the British ambassador in Berlin gave him. However, the British population was apprehensive because of negative media reports about the validity of the Munich Pact. Meanwhile, the Labour Party tried to escalate a feeling of dissatisfaction regarding appeasement, which alarmed Chamberlain, especially among members of his side of the House. Some MPs thought Chamberlain should either leave office or repeal his policies.625


623 A. J. P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War, (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1961), 151- 154

624 Ibid. 151-154

625 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 102-103

Hitler advocated for the Germans living in Czechoslovakia, but had no intentions of forcing any kind of annexation. On March 24, 1938, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain said that Britain was unwilling or ready to defend Czechoslovakia against unprovoked aggression, even though no one even hinted at such an approach. In the February 1921, there were 3,123,000 Germans in Czechoslovakia—23.4% of the total population. In 1930, there were 3,231,688, representing 22.3% of the population. In 1939, the West German Statistisches Bundesamt would show that there were 3,477,000 Germans there. If Germany invaded Czechoslovakia, Britain would not respond. However, it was possible that political pressures might coerce the British to join a struggle against oppression.626

Chamberlain believed that the Versailles Treaty had created the Sudeten issue and did not object to allowing Germany to alleviate the current treaty-related problems. Lord Halifax had discussed the issue with Hitler in November 1937. Chamberlain wanted Germany to use diplomacy instead of force with Czechoslovakia. In exchanged, Britain vowed not to force to avert the adjustments that Germany wanted to enact. Further, Chamberlain did not oppose the annexation of Austria. Chamberlain went to Germany to discuss this situation with Hitler and then, at the Munich Conference obliged Hitler. In September 1938, Britain seemed unconcerned about the balance of power in Europe.627

As it had in Austria, a German national movement began in Czechoslovakia which created a crisis for Hitler who encouraged it as he wanted to liberate the Germans from this weaponized country, an ally of the Soviet Union, in 1935, when Beneš became president, and France, both of which would not welcome the any kind of a German hegemony. He would not risk French intervention by invading the country. He hoped that France would be preoccupied with Italy in their conflict in the Mediterranean, and then he would try to negotiate with Czechoslovakian politicians while continuing to encourage the national movement. He anticipated the possibilities of the upcoming Munich Conference in September 1938. On March 28, he met with the Sudeten representatives and appointed Konrad Henlein as their leader. Henlein would attempt to negotiate with Czechoslovakian officials, especially Beneš, who, like Stalin, viewed Hitler as an adversary. There was to be absolutely no violence on the part of the Germans.628

Henlein led the German minority (800,000 people) in Sudetenland, located in the western regions of Czechoslovakia inhabited mostly by ethnic Germans, especially the border areas of Bohemia, Moravia, and parts of Silesia. Those Germans, like most other peoples, suffered economically due to the worldwide depression. They voted, with a 90% majority, to reunite with Germany which was experiencing prosperity because of its new economic reforms. On May 21, 1938, despite their desires and a legal vote, Czech officials refused to allow the Sudetenland Germans to return to their homeland and actually mobilized military forces against them. Hitler threatened to deploy the Wehrmacht. It became obvious to Hitler that there were forces, within several neighboring countries, which were targeting him.629


626 Charles Callan Tansill, Back Door to War, the Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941, (Henry Regnery Company, Chicago, Illinois, 1952), 393

627 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 83-84

628 A. J. P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War, (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1961), 151- 154

629 A. V. Schaerffenberg, Hitler: Bungling Amateur or Military Genius?, (Preuss Printing, Giddings, Texas, 2003), 36-37

On September 12, 1938, Hitler spoke about the Sudeten crisis at a rally in Nuremberg during which he denounced the actions of the Czechoslovakian government.630 On September 15 and again on September 22, Chamberlain met with Hitler and agreed to cede the Sudetenland to Germany. French Prime Minister Édouard Daladier did the same. Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich, scheduled on September 29, with Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain. They signed the Munich Pact, on September 30, 1938, which reversed the consequences of the Versailles Treaty. It also granted Germany’s immediate annexation and military occupation of the Sudetenland, along the country’s borders inhabited by German speakers. The Czechoslovakian government, though not present at the conference, promised to abide by the agreement. Germany would take the Sudetenland between October 1 and 10. Hitler issued an ultimatum—release all of the Germans to return to their homeland by October 1, or Germany would invade. The Munich Pact meant peace for some but for others, the British and the French, it meant preparation for warfare.

King George VI and the royal family, Chamberlain and his cabinet, and most of the British population had absolutely no interest or desire in war. Chamberlain received a hero’s welcome when he returned from Munich and announced that he negotiated a mutually beneficial agreement with Hitler. Many members of the royal family, including Edward VIII and the Duke of Kent wanted to know how to create the same economic miracle that Hitler had in Germany. The royal family was so pleased with Chamberlain’s accomplishments that they invited him to join them on the balcony of Buckingham Palace to greet the people and accept, along with them, the appreciation of the crowds who had gathered. Chamberlain, besmirched by establishment historians, was the first Prime Minister that the royal family had honored in this manner. Unfortunately, due to a resurgence of World War I-type propaganda, even the pro-German Brits would turn against Germany when war erupted in 1939.631

After the Munich Conference, Lord Halifax assumed control of foreign policy from Chamberlain and he initiated a campaign to compel Germany to engage in a war. Franklin D. Roosevelt and his administration were intent on inciting a war with Germany. Assistant Secretary Francis B. Sayre, of the State Department had already negotiated with British Ambassador Sir Ronald Lindsay on September 9, 1938 in an attempt to establish an Anglo-American trade treaty. Sayre was the same person who headed an Interdepartmental Committee that met on April 19, 1937, to “help” Manuel Quezon, President of the Philippines, to decide the readiness of the Philippines for independence. He was insistent that Germany was threatening a war.632


630 Eleanor L. Turk, The History of Germany, (Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut, 1999), 123

631 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 76-77

632 David Hoggan, The Forced War, When Peaceful Revision Failed, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1961/1989), 60-61

On September 7, 1938, in The Times, Churchill conceded that surrendering the Sudetenland was not only beneficial but also acceptable. On October 3, Lord Halifax, referring to the Munich Pact, declared in the House of Lords, “Great Britain should never fight for a foreign state unless she was in a position to restore its old frontiers after a victorious war.”633 Yet, Churchill reinterpreted Lord Halifax’s statement by saying, “Hitler should not be allowed to ‘get away with it’ … (Hitler) had extracted British concessions at pistol point.” On October 4, the French National Assembly endorsed the Munich Pact.634

In that article in The Times, Churchill endorsed Hitler in his actions regarding the Sudetenland as “the best way out of the situation. However, Henry Strakosch evidently reminded Churchill of their agreement of 1936 and stepped forward to save Churchill from financial ruin because of decreasing value in the York stock markets. Churchill had gone into debt in the amount of £18,000 ($90,000). Churchill considered selling his house, Chartwell, but that would not cover his indebtedness. Strakosch paid this entire sum to Churchill in addition to bequeathing £20,000 to Churchill until the wealthy man ultimately died five years later.635 Strakosch also provided Churchill with other assets, including a car.636

Churchill, altering his views, on October 16, 1938, and apparently after Strakosch offered financial aid, said in a radio broadcast to America, “She (Czechoslovakia) was a democratic model in Central Europe, a land in which minorities were better treated than anywhere else. She has been forsaken, ruined, destroyed and swallowed up.” Further, he said, “Is this a call to war? Does anyone pretend that preparation for resistance to aggression is unleashing war? I declare it to be the sole guarantee of peace. We need the swift gathering of forces to confront not only military but moral aggression.”637 Within a month, Churchill denounced Hitler and introduced the idea of war.

Lord Halifax warned Chamberlain that a potential German invasion might ignite German imperialism. Chamberlain, though concerned about the faltering economy, then feeling pressure, changed his focus and increasingly began talking like a warhawk. Yet, he often referred to the Munich Pact and the promises that Hitler made there, especially about Hitler’s disinterest in ruling non-Germans. While Chamberlain had the Royal Family’s approval and most of the British population, the media did not report their views. Chamberlain, with warhawk advisors, began doubting his earlier views about Hitler and his actions in Czechoslovakia. With a media endorsement and to assuage some of his colleagues, he clarified Britain’s new stance—it would challenge further similar realignments.638


633 Winston Churchill, The Gathering Storm, (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York, 1948), 266, 290

634 Udo Walendy, Truth for Germany, the Guilt Question of the Second World War, (Verlag für Volkstum und Zeitgeschichtsforschung, Weser, 1981), 119-120

635 Arthur R. Butz, “Was Churchill’s Gold Bug Jewish?” (The Journal of Historical Review, January/February 2002 (Vol. 21, No. 1), 9,
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v21/v21n1p-9_butz.html; verified 10 Jan 2022

636 Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion, (Dolphin Press, Durban, South Africa, 1978), 178

637 Winston Churchill, His Complete Speeches 1897-1963, Vol. VI, (Chelsea House Publishers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1974), 6017

638 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 102-103

Beneš resigned on October 5, 1938 and on October 22, went into exile in Putney, London. Emil Hácha became President on November 30. In 1940, Beneš would organize the Czechoslovak Government-in-Exile in London with Jan Šrámek as Prime Minister and himself as President, a position he claimed until April 2, 1945. In 1941, Beneš and others planned Operation Anthropoid to assassinate Reinhard Heydrich, which they would implement in 1942. Beneš, friendly with Stalin, figured that Czechoslovakia could obtain more from an alliance with the USSR than with Poland. Therefore, in 1943, he would thwart the plans for the Polish-Czechoslovakian confederation and instead he would sign the entente with the Soviet Union. He would then preside over a coalition government until he appointed a Communist-dominated government. On February 25, 1948, he would sanction the Communist coup d’état, and allow the Communist-dominated National Assembly to draft the Ninth-of-May Constitution, similar to the Soviet Constitution. Beneš resigned on June 7, 1948.

Hitler realized that resident international bankers within their respective countries greatly influenced the British and French politicians. After all, British and French politicians and bankers, with advice from their American counterparts, configured the new borders of the countries that were now essentially holding the minority Germans hostage. However, England and France, and for that matter, Germany was not prepared to wage war. On December 6, 1938, French and German officials would sign an agreement in which both countries assured the stability of the current borders and agreed to peacefully settle all disputes.

In December 1938, Halifax had dispatched Anthony Eden to the United States to disseminate nasty rumors regarding evil German plans. On January 4, 1939, in response, Roosevelt delivered a warning to Germany in his message to Congress. Lord Halifax criticized Hitler’s foreign policy and his policies in Czechoslovakia. No matter what Hitler did, Halifax would have denounced him. On January 24, 1939, Halifax, in a cable, told Roosevelt that he received intelligence from trustworthy sources regarding Hitler’s international intentions and his alleged hatred of Britain. Yet, Hitler had always sought Anglo-German collaboration. Halifax claimed that Hitler wanted to create an independent Ukraine. British intelligence produced evidence to corroborate this “evidence.” Theo Kordt and Carl Goerdeler, Germans who opposed Hitler, collaborated with the British. However, Hitler had no intention of attacking Britain or France.639

Halifax, in ramping up support for a war against Germany, deluged the British population with propaganda, which was not as successful as he had hoped. On January 27, an American official informed Halifax that the U.S. Government, because of the failures of the New Deal, was planning on a European war to end the American depression.640 Halifax also told Ambassador Kennedy about Hitler’s purportedly intense hatred of Britain. He told people that Hitler had figured out that Britain was the “chief obstacle” to his ambitions. Hitler, despite Halifax and the fallacies he spread, never altered his desire for friendship with Britain. Halifax informed FDR that Hitler sought to persuade Italy into a war in the Mediterranean. Halifax used this strategy to push Poland into a war with Germany. He claimed that Hitler intended to attack Holland and that he was going to give Britain an ultimatum. Halifax, according to reliable proof, assured FDR that British officials expected Germany to engage in an imminent surprise air attack.641


639 David Hoggan, The Forced War, When Peaceful Revision Failed, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1961/1989), 137-138

640 Ibid.

641 Ibid.

Lord Halifax filled FDR with one falsehood after another, very much like the disinformation that would soon appear in the OSS-generated Hitler Source Book. Halifax, assuring Roosevelt that he did not want to sound like an alarmist, claimed that Germany was encountering an “economic and financial crisis” that would force the insolvent Germans into desperation. Halifax, to reiterate, spoke of Hitler’s mental condition, as if it was a well-known fact that Hitler was deranged. He cautioned Roosevelt to ignore the stories about a growing subversive German faction that would revolt and prevent a war. He claimed that hatred unified Germany against Britain, causing Britain to escalate its armament program. He claimed that Chamberlain was considering issuing a warning to German citizens before Hitler’s annual Reichstag speech on January 30, 1939. Halifax advised Roosevelt to do the same thing as soon as possible.642

On the evening of March 14, per his request, Hitler invited President Hácha to the Reich Chancellery in Berlin. On March 15, Hitler and Hácha signed an agreement to establish the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia on the former Czech territory. Hácha authorized the German occupation and actually asked that Czechoslovakia become a protectorate. Germany also accepted and advocated Slovakian independence which thereby dissolved the country of Czechoslovakia. German troops moved in immediately, placing all of Czechoslovakia’s defences under the jurisdiction of Germany according to the provisions of the Munich Pact.

Czechoslovakia allowed Germany to annex the Sudetenland. Other suppressed people appealed to Hitler for help. Humiliated Czech politicians then became furious and secretly began to build air bases for Soviet bombing operations thirty minutes away from Germany. In March 1939, Hitler invaded the Czech part of Czechoslovakia and restored the centuries-old borders of Bohemia and Moravia, separate countries before post-war treaties dismantled them. Now, the two countries had a different language and culture, which divided them. Before the Versailles Treaty, they managed their own government and could do so again.643

Virgil Tilea, in exile in London, was the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Envoy of Romania to London (1938-1940). In mid-March 1939, Tilea convinced Lord Halifax that German officials had issued an ultimatum to his government, which in fact, turned out to be false. Tilea said that it would reduce Romania to a mere Third Reich colony, which would receive a majority of all Romanian exports and stall its industrial development. Berlin, in return, would guarantee the nation’s frontiers. Tilea queried Britain about her reactions to this aggression.644 This claim altered Chamberlain’s European Policy of appeasement and containment towards Germany while increasing the strength of Britain’s armed forces.


642 David Hoggan, The Forced War, When Peaceful Revision Failed, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1961/1989), 137-138

643 A. V. Schaerffenberg, Hitler: Bungling Amateur or Military Genius?, (Preuss Printing, Giddings, Texas, 2003), 36-37

644 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 102-103

On March 14, Slovakian officials declared their country as an independent republic, which dissolved Czechoslovakia. On that same day, Hácha formally agreed to establish Bohemia and Moravia as protectorates under Germany. The British were amiable to this new plan. However, Roosevelt, after hearing from William C. Bullitt, the U.S. Ambassador to France (1936-1940) opposed it. Bullitt recommended that Roosevelt speak with Congress about repealing the Neutrality Act. He was livid over the Bohemia and Moravia situation. Per Bullitt’s urging, on March 16, Roosevelt, in talking with Chamberlain, demanded that Britain oppose Germany. Otherwise, Britain would get no more material or moral support from the United States. On March 17, Chamberlain gave a speech at Birmingham in which he angrily criticized Hitler. Within two weeks, British officials vowed to side with Poland if war should erupt between Germany and Poland.645

When he went to Birmingham, he planned to speak about economic recovery and social services but instead talked about the recent fall of Czechoslovakia which distressed officials in the British Foreign Office as well as the public, probably a result of the press’ negative reporting. Chamberlain, after he returned to London, continued his hardline rhetoric because of a potential new crisis, or so it seemed. Vansittart, the Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office, a member of the Order of the Bath, exhibited a cynical view of German foreign policy, similar to Churchill’s negative, pro-war perceptions.646

The British media accused the Germans of assaulting the Czechs and claimed that Hitler thereafter threatened Romania. On March 20, Lord Halifax offered an alliance with Poland but the Polish media misrepresented the proposal. No one mentioned the Tilea hoax as the Polish leaders immediately revealed that Germany had not issued an ultimatum to Romania. The British and the American press castigated the Germans over the events occurring in Czechoslovakia. The Marxist newspapers in Poland sympathized with the Czechs due to their connection to the Czech Marxists in Moscow, while the Poles sided with Slovakia as indicated by a speech that Jozef Beck delivered on March 12. Beck counseled foreign countries to assist Poland and accept some of her Jewish population. He did not express any concern regarding Germany’s actions or goals in Slovakia. On March 14, Germany had concurred with the Slovakian independence.647


645 Mark Weber, “President Roosevelt’s Campaign to Incite War in Europe: the Secret Polish Documents,” (The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1983, Vol. 4, No. 2), 135-172

646 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 102-103

647 David Hoggan, The Forced War, When Peaceful Revision Failed, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1961/1989), 171-173

On March 31, 1939, in response to Hitler’s alleged defiance of the Munich Pact and their occupation of Czechoslovakia, Chamberlain, after negotiating with the French, announced their guarantee to Poland. It stated, “in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence, and which the Polish government accordingly considered it vital to resist with their national forces.” On July 10, Chamberlain said that the guarantee would also apply to Danzig. Sir Howard Kennard, the British Ambassador in Warsaw, was displeased with the guarantee as he thought that Poland would exploit it regarding the Danzig situation and make false claims against Germany. Chamberlain’s announcements functioned as a green light for Poland. It also eliminated the potential for Germany and Poland to negotiate their differences. Moreover, the Anglo-Polish Treaty, of August 25, promised direct or indirect military assistance between the nations in case another European nation attacked Poland. It also promised Polish independence.648

On April 9, 1939, Bullitt sent a telegram to Roosevelt regarding his discussion with the Ambassador Juliusz Łukasiewicz wherein he explained that American law, specifically the Johnson Act, prevented Roosevelt from furnishing direct financial assistance. However, the United States might be able to furnish warplanes through Britain. In addition to planes, the ambassador was seeking financial assistance from the United States. Bullitt proposed that it might be feasible for Britain to buy planes from the Americans and then relinquish them to Poland.649

On April 15, Roosevelt sent a telegram to Adolf Hitler accusing Germany of being aggressive and demanding assurances of nonaggression. As a result of this telegram, Hitler decided to call a special session of the Reichstag, scheduled on April 28, which they would broadcast not only in Germany but also with relayed broadcasts throughout the world, in an effort to avoid an eruption of warfare in Europe. German consulates in the United States and elsewhere translated and distributed the speech so that everyone could access and read it.650 At least, German officials thought that most people would have access, possibly just as they thought their purchased ad in The New York Times and their warning to their diplomats at the U.S. Embassy would prevent Americans from traveling on the Lusitania. The Times published the warning too late, probably in small print, hidden away on a seldom-read page.


648 Robert Smyth, The Gleiwitz Incident, Nazi Plot or Allied Cover-Up?, (Steven Books, London, 2011), 31-32

649 Mark Weber, “President Roosevelt’s Campaign to Incite War in Europe: the Secret Polish Documents,” (The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1983, Vol. 4, No. 2), 135-172

650 Harrell Rhome, ed., A Few Minutes Before Midnight Ein Paar Minuten vor Mitternacht, Communications Between Germany and the USA Directly Preceding WW II, 2008, 3-9;
A_Few_Minutes_Before_Midnight.pdf; verified 10 Jan 2022

Hitler, in that historic address said, regarding the Versailles Treaty, “That politics should be controlled by men who had not fought in the war was recognized for the first time as a misfortune. Hatred was unknown to the soldiers, but not to those elderly politicians who had carefully preserved their own precious lives from the horrors of war, and who now descended upon humanity as in the guise of insane spirits of revenge.” Hitler continued, “No one knows this (the burdens of Versailles) better than the German people. For the Peace Treaty imposed burdens on the German people, which could not have been paid off in a hundred years, although American teachers of constitutional law, historians and history professors that Germany have proved conclusively that Germany was no more to blame for the outbreak of the war than any other nation.”651

Hitler said the following about the Munich Conference, “If the cry of ‘Never another Munich’ is raised in the world today, this simply confirms the fact that the peaceful solution of the problem appeared to be the most awkward thing that ever happened in the eyes of those warmongers. They are sorry no blood was shed—not their blood, to be sure—for those agitators are, of course, never to be found where shots are being fired, but only where money is being made. No, it is the blood of many nameless soldiers!”652

Hitler continued, “They hate us Germans and would prefer to eradicate us completely. What do the Czechs mean to them? They are nothing but a means to an end. And what do they care for the fate of a small and valiant nation? Why should they worry about the lives of hundreds of thousands of brave soldiers who would have been sacrificed for their policy? These Western Peacemongers were not concerned to work for peace but to cause bloodshed, so in this way to set the nations against one another and to thus cause still more blood to flow. For this reason, they invented the story of German mobilization …”653

“Moreover, Hitler said, “there would have been no necessity for the Munich Conference, for that conference was only made possibly by the fact that the countries which had at first incited those concerned to resist at all costs, were compelled later on, when the situation pressed for a solution on one way of another, to try to secure for themselves a more or less respectable retreat; for without Munich—that is to say, without the interference of the countries of Western Europe—a solution of the entire problem—if it had grown so acute at all—would likely have been the easiest thing in the world.”654

Ward Price interviewed Hitler who said, “On August 4, 1914, I was very distressed that the two great Germanic peoples, who had lived at peace with one another throughout all the disputes and fluctuations in human history for so many centuries were drawn into war. I would be pleased if this unfortunate atmosphere would finally come to an end and the two related nations could rediscover their old friendship. The assertion that the German people are enthusiastically preparing for war is a misunderstanding of the German revolution. We find it simply incomprehensible. We leaders of the German nation had almost without exception been front-line soldiers. I would like to see the front-line soldier who wants to prepare for another war.”655


651 Harrell Rhome, ed., A Few Minutes Before Midnight Ein Paar Minuten vor Mitternacht, Communications Between Germany and the USA Directly Preceding WW II, 2008, 3-9;
A_Few_Minutes_Before_Midnight.pdf; verified 10 Jan 2022

652 Ibid. 3-9

653 Ibid.

654 Ibid.

655 Richard Tedor, Hitler’s Revolution, Ideology, Social Programs, Foreign Affairs, (Chicago, Illinois, 2013), 138-139

Chapter 17 ♦ Winston Churchill, the Warmonger

Harry Levine, a propagandist and writer claimed, “After WW I Jews bought into Germany in a big way, houses, land, artwork, and jewelry all for knock down prices. Along came Mr. Hitler who took it all back for the German people, and he also took the economy out of Jewish control, so in 1933 the Jews began to emigrate to New York and London, where the underground was instructed to change their names, assimilate, infiltrate and influence.” This property seizure is typical behavior in any catastrophe—warfare or economic depressions, always engineered events. Levine claims that Robert Maxwell, the publisher, successfully infiltrated the Jewish Underground. Maxwell, via his publishing efforts, helped to persuade the British population to support a war against Germany. Allegedly, he employed blackmail and bribery on Churchill to achieve that objective.656

William de Ropp initially arrived in Berlin in the 1920s, representing the Bristol Aeroplane Company (BAC), a British aviation company. The NSDAP regarded de Ropp as its asset in Britain. He befriended Alfred Rosenberg whose objective was to develop a connection with influential people in Britain. De Ropp had ties with a powerful faction of the British elite, the Cliveden Set, who wanted conciliation with Germany. Various members of the Royal Family, specifically the Duke of Kent, also wanted a peaceful resolution. Rosenberg introduced de Ropp to Adolf Hitler and Rudolf Hess. The Führer, very trusting, confided his intentions regarding Britain to de Ropp. Incredibly, some Luftwaffe officers unwisely revealed some of its accomplishments to de Ropp. Frederick Winterbotham, the head of Air Intelligence, part of MI6, cultivated de Ropp for over three years. De Ropp encouraged Winterbotham to visit Germany in 1934 where he met Hermann Göring and Rosenberg who also shared too much data.

Churchill, a backbencher in 1933, soon began advocating several actions including a British and USSR alliance, intelligence gathering and increased arms production, actions that alarmed people in the peace movement. He had worked in the intelligence services when he headed the Admiralty before and during World War I. In the 1930s, he created his own intelligence apparatus, even more proficient than the government’s agency. He placed minions within the government departments and the military services. One such figure was Major Desmond Morton, then head of the newly-created MI6, of the Industrial Intelligence Centre. During the war, he would serve as Churchill’s intelligence adviser.657


656 Anonymous, The Ugly Face of Zionism, What is the Jewish Underground? December 18, 2008,
http://www.illuminati-news.com/00352.html; verified 05 Jan 2022

657 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 114-115

During the 1930s, people formed numerous groups, not necessarily pro-NSDAP or pro-Hitler, but to nurture a closer connection between Germany and Britain in order to avoid another disastrous war as many people had been in WWI or had lost family members in that war.658 Hitler sent Alfred Rosenberg, Rudolf Hess, Joachim von Ribbentrop and others to Britain and invited many British diplomats to Germany, including David Lloyd George. Several groups in Britain, people in the Establishment, politicians, aristocrats, and businessmen, who completely opposed the intensifying discord and once war had erupted, wanted an early resolution to the conflict and worked towards that end.

Ribbentrop arrived in London in October 1936 as Ambassador to Britain with the hope of cementing the Anglo-German alliance. Because of his lack of knowledge of British culture, he made numerous social blunders and failed to develop a good relationship with many in the British Foreign Office. He also did not comprehend the king’s restrained role in government affairs as he incorrectly assumed that the King regulated foreign policy. Ribbentrop assured Hitler that Edward VIII supported the Führer. In December, during the abdication crisis, Ribbentrop reported that the Jews and their minions were forcing the king out because of his pro-German sympathies.

On September 16, 1938, King George VI sent a letter to Chamberlain saying, “I am sending this letter to meet you on your return, as I had no opportunity of telling you before you left how much I admired your courage and wisdom in going to see Hitler in person. You must have been pleased by the universal approval with which your action was received. I am naturally very anxious to hear the result of your talk, and to be assured that there is a prospect of a peaceful solution on terms which admit of general acceptance. I realize how fatigued you must be after these two very strenuous days, but if it is possible for you to come and see me either this evening or tomorrow morning, at any time convenient to yourself, I need hardly say that I shall greatly welcome the opportunity of hearing your news.” He followed up this letter with another one dated September 27, conveying his “heartfelt congratulations” for the success at Munich and inviting Chamberlain to immediately visit Buckingham Palace as soon as he returned.659


658 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 82-83

659 John Simkin, Prince George, Duke of Kent, Spartacus Educational,
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWkentD.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

In 1939, Harry Elmer Barnes justifiably accused Vansittart of plotting aggression against Germany. Vansittart wrote, “In the opinion of the author, it is an illusion to differentiate between the German right, center, or left, or the German Catholics or Protestants, or the German workers or capitalists. They are all alike, and the only hope for a peaceful Europe is a crushing and violent military defeat followed by a couple of generations of re-education controlled by the United Nations.”660 In 1943, Vansittart would write Lessons of My Life, a venomous, hate-filled diatribe against Germans. His mistrust of Germans began when he was a student in Germany in the 1890s. He regarded national socialism as evidence that the Germans did not want or care about democracy. He appealed for complete disarmament and a re-educational program for the entire generation.661

Vansittart was the self-appointed chieftain of the “hate Germany” movement in Britain, insisting, in an article, Bones of Contention that at least seventy-five percent of the German people were “incurably bellicose.”662 In his book, he wrote “that all Germans are bad; I have taken the percentage of good Germans at twenty-five. I am, however, prepared to abide by the generosity… Seventy-five per cent of Germans have… been eager for any assault on their neighbors. Much of their own tastes and nature they can and must change for themselves.” He said that others would have to change the Germans, “not by brutality. You cannot educate by brutality. Only Germans have thought so; and in this, too, I am anti-German.”663

By 1940, all of the surviving monarchies throughout Europe, from Holland, Belgium and elsewhere seemed to be in exile in Britain. The younger generation of royals, Edward, Prince of Wales, his brother Prince George, the Duke of Kent, recognizing the devastation and death of World War I, certainly did not want any part of the erupting war. Hitler did not want war with Britain but a few people in Britain, worried about the balance of power in Europe, were now plotting and promoting war against Germany.664


660 Robert Vansittart, Lessons of My Life, (Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., London, 1943), front dust cover

661 Victoria Stewart (Assoc. Ed.), The Second World War in Contemporary British Fiction: Secret Histories, (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2011), 90-91

662 John L. Snell, Charles F. Delzell, and George A. Lensen, Forrest C. Pogue (ed.), The Meaning of Yalta: Big Three Diplomacy and the New Balance of Power, (Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, 1956), 38

663 Robert Vansittart, Lessons of My Life, (Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., London, 1943), 32-33

664 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 76-77

To save face, Chamberlain’s government decided to fight a “short and strictly limited” war followed by a “negotiated peace” as quickly as possible. They called this period, from September 3, 1939 to April 1940, the Phony War. After war really erupted, several groups attempted to set up meetings during which they could, with neutral mediators, end the war. On January 12, 1940, Francis D’Arcy Osborn, the British Ambassador to the Vatican, met with Pope Pius XII, and thereafter met with Lord Halifax. The Pope, acting as an intermediary, said that there were several German generals who, if they could obtain British support, were planning on overthrowing Hitler and establishing an interim military government which would restore Poland and Czechoslovakia but would retain Austria. During the next few months, the Foreign Office considered the Vatican’s proposal. 665

Following the eruption of war, Lord Halifax and R. A. Butler, Halifax’s under-secretary, thought it prudent to discontinue the destruction if there was any chance to do so without defaming the country’s dignity. Suddenly, Halifax and Butler were at the center of the peace movement which had ties to the main factions of the Conservative Party. People who desired an early peace included Queen Mary, the Dukes of Westminster and Buccleuch, Lords Aberconway, Bearsted, Brockett, Buckmaster, Harmsworth, Londonderry, Mansfield, and Rushcliffe, and at least thirty MPs. The court, and even the City of London, big business, and aristocratic landowners joined the movement because of fear for the future of the Empire and the potential termination of the international system of imperialist Britain. Total war entailed the socialization of Britain and a disastrous struggle within Europe that would only benefit the Soviet Union. U.S. Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy reported to FDR that Montagu Norman thought that Britain was finished. Lord Halifax surmised that Bolshevism, after the war, would oppress all of Europe.666,667 Prince George, the Duke of Kent led the Anglo-German peace group, mostly composed of senior RAF officers, called the RAF Club.668 When World War II erupted, he returned to active military duty as a Rear Admiral, serving on the Intelligence Division of the Admiralty. In April 1940, he had transferred to the RAF where he assumed the position of a Staff Officer, a Group Captain, at the RAF Training Command.

British intelligence wanted Britain to stay out of WWII so Churchill, a perpetual warmonger, exploited people and circumstances and allegedly replaced all the key political figures in order to get the country into war. He became Prime Minister on May 10, 1940 but recognized that his hawkish political position was unsustainable absent sufficient support and without enacting legislation to silence his opposition. Yet, many of the Conservative MPs, who retained their desire for appeasement, remained in the House of Commons. Though Churchill was now Prime Minister, Chamberlain retained the greatest respect, applause and appreciation of their colleagues when they entered the Chamber together. Only after court historians and the press characterized him negatively did he lose all of that admiration. Churchill cautioned numerous journalists seeking to identify and perhaps expunge the guilty parties that if they disparaged certain people, not only would they have him to deal with but it would only benefit Germany.669


665 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 107-108

666 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 168-170

667 The Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators 1929-2004, (London), 6, 16,
www.gapan.org verified 10 Jan 2022

668 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 92-94

669 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 168-170

Churchill soon dismissed the popular Vernon Kell, first Director General (DG) of MI5, claiming that he had been too permissive with the Fascist underground. Churchill then appointed his own intelligence adviser, Sir Desmond Morton, from his Focus group. He had an SIS background and was more dedicated to the anti-Fascist cause than Kell. Reportedly, Churchill ordered Kell’s assassination. Anthony Trevor-Stokes claimed that Churchill used black magicians in WWII, many of whom Trevor-Stokes personally knew. Trevor-Stokes was one of the three men who exposed Churchill’s alleged murder of Chamberlain, Britain’s most popular Prime Minister who died on November 9, 1940.670

Churchill appointed himself as the Minister of Defense when he became the PM and then immediately purged his War Cabinet of anyone who advocated peace. He dispatched Sir Samuel Hoare as an ambassador to Spain, where the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were then residing. He instructed Hoare to make certain that Franco’s country remain neutral. On September 1, 1939, Churchill had also begun rounding up enemies of the state. Some of those who the government detained included Oswald Mosley, the youngest elected Conservative MP, and his wife Diana, Captain Archibald M. Ramsay, Sir Barry Domvile, the former director of naval intelligence (1927-1930).671 Mosley had created the BUF in 1932. The government would order the termination of the group in 1940.

Domvile, after leaving Naval Intelligence in 1930, commanded the Third Cruiser Squadron (1931-1932), and was the President of the Royal Naval College, Greenwich (1932-1934). In 1935, he visited Germany and was impressed with the effectiveness of the NS government. He attended the Nuremberg Rally in September 1936 as a guest of Ambassador Joachim von Ribbentrop. Between March 1938 and June 1939, Domvile, believing that a Jewish-Masonic conspiracy existed, along with other like-minded individuals founded The Link, which had doubled its membership to approximately 4,300 people. Domvile was also a council member of the Anglo-German Fellowship.672


670 Chris Cooper, Death of T Stokes,
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=71557; verified 05 Jan 2022

671 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 114-115

672 Ibid. 82-83

On May 8, 1939, Admiral Domvile wrote the foreword to Arthur P. Laurie’s The Case for Germany. Dr. Laurie, a brilliant scientist and author of many scientific-related books, also wrote Great Britain’s policy after Munich (1940). Domvile included the following in his foreword, “Dr. Laurie knows full well that this friendship (between Britain and Germany) is the keystone to peace in Europe—nay, in the whole world. He is one of the small groups who founded the Association known as The Link, whose sole aim is to get Britons and Germans to know and understand one another better… He writes of the National Socialist movement with knowledge and great sympathy… value of this book lies in the fact that it is written by a foreigner, who cannot be accused of patriotic excess in his interpretation of the great work done by Herr Hitler and his associates.”673

The Link, as well as other similar groups, appealed to many people in the British establishment such as the Duke of Westminster, Britain’s biggest landowner, who joined the group. The Duke of Hamilton belonged to the Anglo-German Fellowship. Many Brits, who did not want war, felt that way because they agreed with Hitler and the NS philosophy. In addition to the BUF, individuals who endorsed National Socialism included Lord Harry McGowan, chair of the Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), General Sir Ian Hamilton, head of the British Legion, and Montagu Norman, governor of the Bank of England. Many people were generally horrified when Britain allied with the Soviet Union, which they viewed as the wrong side. In addition to being pro-German, some of the industrialists and bankers had invested heavily into German industry, urged by Norman.674

Churchill took measures against his opponents. By May 1940, the BUF, which claimed 50,000 members at one time, was associated with a network, the other pro-German groups which included the NS Party in Berlin, the Right Club and the Nordic League. Purportedly, the Right Club and the Nordic League had access to sensitive military secrets which they were able to convey to Germany. On September 11, 1939, the leaders of the Nordic League had decided to attach their group to the BUF, led by Sir Mosley. British intelligence had monitored the activities of the BUF, the Right Club, and the Nordic League for months. In May 1940, MI5 put the Right Club secretary, Anna Wolkoff, under surveillance. She was a White Russian émigré, the eldest child of the last Imperial Russian naval attaché in London. A clerk at the U.S. Embassy, Tyler Kent showed Wolkoff copies of the private memos between Churchill and Roosevelt very early in the war. Kent evidently decided to release selective bits of this information to the press revealing FDR’s collaboration with Britain in ending American neutrality. He planned to leak the data at the beginning of the presidential campaign in an effort to destroy FDR’s chances for reelection.675 Anna Wolkoff sympathized with NS Germany, where she had visited several times during the 1930s. Because of those visits, beginning in 1935, MI5 regarded her as a possible German spy. Allegedly, she was associated with Wallis Simpson, who was actually a client of her couture business. British counter-intelligence was also trying to frame Simpson.


673 A. P. Laurie, The Case for Germany, A Study of Modern Germany, (Internationaler Verlag, 1939), Foreword

674 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 82-83

675 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 168-170

The pro-German sentiments and activity alarmed Churchill so he persuaded the Cabinet to quickly approve Defence Regulation 18b, allowing the government to arrest and detain people who it claimed presented a potential national security risk. He followed this with legislation that provided for an onslaught on the far Right. In the next three months, officials arrested 1,769 people, including Sir Archibald M. Ramsay, an MP, Sir Barry Domville, Sir Oswald Mosley, and other leading BUF members. The government dismissed the Duke of Buccleuch from his position as lord steward of the Royal Household and put him under surveillance. These actions were a clear omen to any antagonists of the war effort and a warning against those who favored peace with Germany. In order to remain safe and free, individuals would have to tread very carefully. Other MPs, also part of the peace group, looked to David Lloyd George as the leader of an alternative administration.676

Using the Defence Regulation 18B, similar to the U.S. Military Commissions Act of 2006, British Intelligence interned Sir Domvile from July 7, 1940 to July 29, 1943. In June 1940, they had arrested and incarcerated his mistress, Olive Baker, for five years for distributing leaflets promoting German radio broadcasts to Britain.677 Domvile’s belief in a Judaea-Masonic combination responsible for much of the world’s problems increased as a result of his internment. Before they incarcerated him, he concealed his latest volume, a personal diary, in his garden where he hoped that the authorities would not find it.678

On June 18, 1940, the Italian Foreign Minister wrote about Hitler’s attitude towards Britain, in his diary, “If London wants war it will be total war, complete, pitiless. But Hitler makes many reservations on the desirability of demolishing the British Empire, which, he considers, even today, to be an important factor in world equilibrium. I ask von Ribbentrop a clear-cut question, ‘Do you prefer the continuation of the war, or peace?’ He does not hesitate for a moment. ‘Peace.’ He also alludes to vague contacts between London and Berlin by means of Sweden.” On July 19, 1940, Hitler delivered a speech in the Reichstag, remarks to the British public, during which he requested that England join Germany at the peace table. The Germans thought that Churchill, the warmonger, was totally unaware of the desires of the British population, most of who wanted peace. Hitler said, “I see no reason why this war must go on.” The Luftwaffe dropped copies of this speech throughout Britain. The British government rejected Hitler’s peace proposal three days later. Meanwhile, British civilians prepared for a probable invasion.679


676 Scott Newton, Profits of Peace, The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), 168-170

677 Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Stephen Prior, with additional research by Robert Brydon, Double Standards, the Rudolf Hess Cover-up, (Time Warner Book Group, London, 2002), 82-83

678 Ibid. 115, 260

679 Ibid. 114-115

Captain Archibald M. Ramsay, founder of the Right Club, in the House of Commons, later stressed the fact that there was a difference between anti-Semitism and pro-Nazism. Other Right Club members included William Joyce, who defected to Germany as a broadcaster, A. K. Chesterton, Francis Yeats-Brown, Admiral Wilmot Nicholson, and the Duke of Wellington. Members frequently convened their meetings in the Russian Tea Room. On January 3, 1946, the government would execute Joyce. Prior to his death, he said, “In death as in this life, I defy the Jews who caused this last war and I defy the power of Darkness which they represent. I warn the British people against the aggressive Imperialism of the Soviet Union. May Britain be great once again; and, in the hour of the greatest danger to the West, may the standard of the Hakenkreuz (Swastika) be raised from the dust… I am proud to die for my ideals; and I am sorry for the sons of Britain who have died without knowing why.”680

On June 24, 1940, the State Secretary filed charges against Ramsay, for engaging in “acts prejudicial to the public safety or the defense of the Realm, or in the preparation or instigation of such acts, and that by reason thereof it was necessary to exercise control over him.” Officials stated that he, in May 1939, formed the Right Club, which “ostensibly directed its activities against Jews, Freemasons and Communists.” The government suggested that he designed the club “to spread subversive and defeatist views among the civil population” of Britain, to obstruct its war effort and “endanger public safety and the defense of the Realm.”681

Ramsay, in answering the charges, said, “The formation of the Right Club… was the logical outcome of many years of work against Bolshevism, carried on both inside and outside the House of Commons, and well-known to all my political colleagues since 1931. The main object of the Right Club was to oppose and expose the activities of Organized Jewry, in the light of the evidence which came into my possession in 1938… Our first objective was to clear the Conservative Party of Jewish influence and the character of our membership and meetings were strictly in keeping with this objective. There were no other and secret purposes. Our hope was to avert war, which we considered to be mainly the work of Jewish intrigue centered in New York. Later, I and many others hoped to turn the phony war into, not total war, but an honorable negotiated peace.”682 The government sent Ramsay to Brixton Prison for accusing the Jews of provoking the war. They would ultimately release him on September 26, 1944.

The victors create the histories. If historians actually produced a correct account of World War II, people would no longer view Churchill in the same way. He said, “History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.” Further, he said, “For my part, I consider that it will be found much better by all parties to leave the past to history, especially as I propose to write that history myself.” He was influential enough to destroy the evidence that challenged the Churchill illusion, including ordering the death of Prince George of Kent.683 684 John Simkin said, “One of the reasons that the creation of the Churchill myth has been so successful is that it appeals to the vanity of the British people. Churchill’s message was not only about his own courage but that of those willing to fight by his side against tyranny and injustice. As a result, British historians have been reluctant to question the reality of Churchill’s actions between 1930 and 1945.”685


680 Andrew Carrington Hitchcock, The Synagogue Of Satan - Updated, Expanded, And Uncensored, (2012), Kindle Locations 5201-5207

681 Archibald M. Ramsay, The Nameless War, (Britons Publishing Company, London, 1952), 94-95

682 Ibid. 95-96

683 T. Stokes, Alfred Hitchcock’s Part in WWII,
http://thetruthnews.info/hitchcock.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

684 John Simkin, Winston Churchill and the death of Prince George, Duke of Kent, May 19, 2007,
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10003; verified 05 Jan 2022

685 Ibid.

Chapter 18 ♦ Immigration, Not Extermination

In 1936, in New York and London, Victor Gollancz published The Yellow Spot, the Outlawing of Half a Million Human Beings devised by a “group of investigators” to arouse moral indignation.686 This “outlawing of half a million human beings” may refer to specific stipulations contained in the NSDAP program, written on February 24, 1920, the state is first responsible to provide job opportunities and a suitable lifestyle for the citizens. If it is impossible to sustain the total population of the State, then the Reich should expel the people of foreign nations (Jews or non citizens); prevention of further immigration of non citizens; the deportation of all non Germans, who immigrated to Germany since August 2, 1914.687

Gollancz’s sensationalist book purported to document the anti-Jewish measures in Germany between 1933 and 1935. The deceptive title of the German edition was The Extermination of 500,000 German Jews. Clearly, there is a major difference between outlawing and exterminating an ideological group. According to the book, there were only 2,000 prisoners at Dachau in the 1930s, hardly an indictment demonstrating Germany’s inhumanity given that the Soviets imprisoned and starved millions during the same period.688 Lion Feuchtwanger, editor of the Moscow-based German language Communist literary magazine, Das Wort, assisted and promoted the German edition of Gollancz’s book, which was shameful propaganda. He was a henchman for Stalin’s Comintern which had an operation in Paris in 1936-1938.689

A propaganda campaign continued in America where the Zionists claimed there was a pogrom in Berlin based on Roosevelt’s “quarantine” speech of October 5, 1937, asking for an international “quarantine of the aggressor nations,” implying Japan, Italy, and Germany. He suggested using economic pressure (sanctions) instead of open aggression as an option in view of America’s policy of neutrality. The Zionists and Communists, abundant in the State Department, were not so concerned about their fellow Jews, but rather they refused to alleviate whatever suffering the Jews in Germany might be experiencing. Rabbi Wise admitted that he and fellow Zionists did not respond to the urgent appeals from them to halt the economic boycott. He did not want them to resolve their issues with Hitler. He told his associates, “… that our Jewish brothers in Germany might feel moved or compelled to accept a peace agreement or pact that might mean some slight amelioration or mitigation of their wrongs … that the Nazi regime might decide to prevent some of the evil consequences of its regime by such palliative treatment of the Jews as would disarm worldwide Jewish protest.” 690


686 James J. Martin, The Man Who Invented Genocide, the Public Career and Consequences of Raphael Lemkin, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 198), 102-103

687 Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P., (Trans. by E. T. S. Dugdale, Frz. Eher Nachf, Munich, Germany, 1932), 18-20

688 James J. Martin, The Man Who Invented Genocide, the Public Career and Consequences of Raphael Lemkin, (Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1984), 102-103

689 Ibid. 102-103

690 Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion, (Dolphin Press, Durban, South Africa, 1978), 222-223

Reb Moshe Shonfeld, in the first chapter of his book, The Holocaust Victims Accuse (1977), says, “After the fall of Poland, where the majority of European Jewry resided, Hitler immediately began to implement the ‘Final Solution’ to slaughter and exterminate every Jewish soul. The murder of the Jews was no small affair to Hitler. It was his main goal and the very first item on his agenda.”691 The three Zionist emigration groups, intent on settling in Palestine, wanted the younger Jews, capable of hard work, to immigrate. They acknowledged that the only way to facilitate such an operation was to work with the National Socialists. The Main Office for Jewish Migration Welfare assisted the resettlement of non-German Jews.692 The NS government tried to persuade all of its Jewish citizens to emigrate and arranged two official symbiotic contracts, the Ha’avara (1933-1941) exclusively for relocation to Palestine and the Rublee-Wohlthat Agreement.

In 1960, Malcolm H. Stern, a scholarly New Yorker, published 550 numbered copies of a ten-pound, $40 book entitled Americans of Jewish Descent which documented the Jews who had arrived in America before 1840, not including the large migration of Jews from Germany during the 1840s. He traced the ancestry of the elite Jews who had arrived as early as the sixteenth century, mostly the Sephardim, who considered themselves “emphatically superior.” Stern included the Roosevelt family.693 Isaac Roosevelt (1726-1794), one of the co-founders and the president of Alexander Brown and Sons (later called Brown Brothers Harriman), was a federalist and was FDR’s great-great grandfather.694 Isaac Roosevelt, baptized a Christian, owner of a sugar refinery, engaged in the infamous triangle trade—rum, sugar, and slaves. FDR, a Crypto Jew on both his father and mother’s side, consistently worked in behalf of the Jews.

Franklin D. Roosevelt convened a conference in the Hotel Royale at Évian-les-Bains, on Lake Geneva, for July 6-15, 1938, in order to discuss the Jewish refugee problem. The U.S Government proposed the agenda on June 14 as follows,

  1. To consider steps to facilitate the settlement in other countries of political refugees from Germany and Austria;
  2. To devise immediate solutions, within the existing immigration laws… to assist the most urgent cases;
  3. To consider a system of documentation… for those refugees who are unable to obtain requisite documents from other sources;
  4. To consider the establishment of a continuing body of representatives… a long-range program;
  5. Recommendations to the participating governments regarding the subjects enumerated above.695

691 Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse, Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, (Bnei Yeshivos, New York, 1977), 4

692 Ingrid Weckert, Jewish Emigration from the Third Reich, (Theses & Dissertations Press, Chicago, Illinois, 2004), 19-22

693 Stephen Birmingham, The Grandees, the Story of America’s Sephardic Elite, (Dell Publishing, New York, 1971), 3, 218

694 Antony C. Sutton, The Federal Reserve Conspiracy, (Emissary Publications, Clackamas, Oregon, 1995), 6

695 Annette Shaw, The Evian Conference - Hitler’s Green Light for Genocide, Chap. 2, The Evian Conference And Its Proceedings,
http://christianactionforisrael.org/antiholo/evian/chapter2.html#_ftnref1; verified 05 Jan 2022

Golda Meir (Meirson) led the Jewish Agency delegation, which disregarded Germany’s offer to facilitate and fund the immigration of Jews to other countries for $250 a head. The Zionists in attendance seemed disinterested in discussing more lenient immigration policies for Jews in Germany and Austria with the representatives of the thirty-two countries who attended the conference. All of the “compassionate” representatives, while thoroughly denouncing Germany for its cruel and evil anti-Semitism, regrettably emphasized that his country was not in the position to admit any of these Jews.696 Hitler said, “It is a shameful spectacle to see how the whole democratic world is oozing sympathy for the poor tormented Jewish people, but remains hard hearted and obdurate when it comes to helping them…”697 These countries included Australia, the Argentine Republic, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, England, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Sweden, Switzerland, the United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.698

At the conclusion of the Evian Conference, some delegates opted to establish a committee to determine the fate of the Jews from Germany with American attorney, George Rublee as Director of the Intergovernmental Committee of the Evian Conference. They held their first meeting on August 3, 1938. Rublee was the originator of the rarely-discussed Rublee-Wohlthat eight-month long agreement as war erupted which was applicable to the majority of Jews, those uninterested in relocating to Palestine. About two-thirds of all immigrants sought residence in another European country or in an overseas country. Germany sought emigration, not extermination.699

Rublee reported that British officials and diplomats were uninterested in the work of the Committee. Joseph P. Kennedy, the U.S. Ambassador, though slightly interested never carried it any further.700 Roosevelt may have presumed that he should offer “some sort of gesture” because of “the outrage caused by the Jewish persecution.”701 While Kennedy was in London, he interacted with many German officials with whom he expressed his views about the Jews and their control and management of FDR. Having made a lot of money in the movie industry, Kennedy was also aware of their movie monopoly as well as their control of the press. He was close to Father Charles Coughlin and felt that, in as much as Hitler opposed Communism, then perhaps the United States should collaborate with Hitler.702


696 The Role of Zionism in the Holocaust, Spiritually and Physically Responsible,

697 Annette Shaw, The Evian Conference - Hitler’s Green Light for Genocide, Conclusions, The Evian Conference And Its Proceedings,
http://christianactionforisrael.org/antiholo/evian/conclusion.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

698 Ibid.

699 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 123-125

700 Ibid. 118-122

701 Ibid.

702 Hasia R. Diner, The Jews of the United States, 1654 to 2000, (University of California Press, Berkeley, California, 2004), 213

On November 17, 1938, Sir Ronald Lindsay, the British Ambassador in Washington called Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles and told him, per instructions from London, that Britain had decreased its immigration quota by fifty percent, applicable only to Jews emigrating from Germany. Lindsay anticipated an equivalent proposition from the United States. Welles, who was not in charge of immigration policies, told Lindsay “to forget that idea.” On November 15, FDR had already stated that he had “no intention of raising immigration quotas for immigration from Germany.” Welles assumed that “influential American Jewish leaders, who rigidly opposed increased Jewish immigration from Germany, were behind this decision.”703

After Kristallnacht, Hitler directed Hjalmar Schacht to design an immigration and resettlement program of Germany’s Jews that he would then present to leading Jews in London, perhaps the same group that had helped organize the 1933 boycott. If that was the situation, then it would be no surprise if they rejected it so that, according to Chaim Weizmann, the Zionists might found their state “following great sacrifice.”704 Given the massive assets of the Jews in Germany, about six billion Reichmarks, Schacht thought that a committee composed of Germans, Jews, and foreign financiers should determine the best solution for the relocation of the Jews and their assets, using a foreign exchange loan of the counter value of one and a half billion Reichmarks, enough to finance the emigration.705

Schacht was in London on December 14-17, 1938, seeking the advocacy of wealthy Jews and others, Montagu Norman, William Roberts (Lord Winterton), the Chairman of the Evian Conference, Sir Frederick Leith-Ross, Walter Samuel (Lord Bearsted), and George Rublee, then living in London. Lord Bearsted, from a wealthy Jewish family, said that the Jews themselves would have to decide. He proposed that Schacht speak with Dr. Chaim Weizmann, President of the Jewish Agency. Lord Bearsted reported that Weizmann inexplicably opposed the plan as he believed that he could only found the Zionist state following great sacrifice. Schacht left London under the impression that the Jews rejected his plan. In 1970, in an interview regarding the events of 1938, Schacht said that one should not exclude the notion that Weizmann may have said to himself, “I will achieve my goal to rebuild Zion, and found a Jewish State, only if I am willing to allow great sacrifices to give an impetus to the course.” He said he believed that Weizmann “nurtured the idea of creating victims.”706


703 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 123-125

704 Ibid. 118-122

705 Ibid. 120-122

706 Ibid. 99-101, 120-122

German Ambassador, Herbert von Dirksen, in London told the Foreign Office in Berlin that Lord Winterton, and Leith-Ross had accepted Schacht’s plan to move 150,000 Jews from Germany to other countries. A foreign consortium was willing to fund it in the amount of 1.5 billion Reichmarks, with Germany making additional exports to handle the interest and amortization of the total amount. On December 18, 1938, Rublee approached officials in Washington about more financing. Evidently, Jewish leaders in London and in Paris rejected Schacht’s plan and turned it over to others to create international Jewish consortium. They also wanted the support of several governments represented on this Intergovernmental Refugee Committee (IRC). Sumner Welles totally rejected Schacht’s loan plan.707

Rublee convened a meeting for December 20, 1938 in Paris with financial experts who decided that only an international Jewish consortium could raise the necessary 1.5 billion Reichmarks in foreign exchange. They agreed that they should ask Germany to pay the interest directly in foreign exchange. It was the Jews in London who proclaimed a boycott in March, and then Samuel Untermeyer announced it in August, 1933, in New York. Yet, in December 1938, Jews claimed that “World Jewry” was non-existent. In 1933, the Jews used a boycott. They had used Kristallnacht and the influence of the Evian Committee to exert pressure on Germany. German officials wanted Rublee to conclude the negotiations with the Jews as they wanted these troublemakers out of Germany.708

In early January, Hermann Göring arranged for Rublee to come to Berlin to discuss the Jewish situation with Dr. Helmuth Wohlthat, of the Reich Economics Ministry. They negotiated an agreement regarding 150,000 of the 600,000 Jews living in Germany. German officials, each year, over the next five years, would make accommodations with other countries for 30,000 young Jews to leave Germany. Presumably, the families of these Jews would thereafter follow meaning that another 250,000 Jews would relocate; leaving 200,000 older Jews, over the age of forty-five, or those who were ill or for some other legitimate could not emigrate.709


707 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 120-122

708 Ibid.

709 Ibid. 123-125

The Jews viewed the results of the Evian Conference and the IRC ineffectual as they demonstrated the “world’s indifference to Jewish persecution.” However, in February 1939, the German government signed an agreement with Rublee, wholly against the resolve of Weizmann, head of the Jewish Agency. The British, the French and the American Jews opposed any program that assisted Jewish emigration from Germany even though Rublee had arranged a financial program for the resettlement of over 400,000 Jews without their loss of assets. The German government was also prepared to fund their occupational retraining and relocation of legitimate workers to the countries of their choice. Germany would also grant consent to immigrate to inmates in the camps, except to those guilty of crimes.710

Himmler, Göring and all the top officials agreed, without the least objections, with the Rublee memorandum, which defined the disposition of those who chose to immigrate and those who remained in Germany. They readily signed it and were committed to keeping all of their commitments. They remarked that Germany now had a “final solution” to the Jewish question. Göring discussed the agreement with Hitler who gave it his absolute approval. Jewish bankers in America were prepared to raise the funds necessary to “guarantee the accomplishment of all resettlement projects.” Dr. Wohlthat, in a document dated April 29, 1939, stated that Myron C. Taylor, Sir Herbert Emerson, and Lord William Peel assured that financing was available. The German government guaranteed the safety and freedom of the Jews over forty-five who decided to remain in Germany. Older people would have access to a social program to accommodate their needs in their retirement years. The Rublee Agreement removed all travel restrictions and all injunctions against selected professional activities.711

On June 11, 1939, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reported that the IRC was assisting the Jews in the “plight of refugees aboard ships barred from their intended destinations.” Cuba would not let the ship dock so German authorities were welcoming the ship back to Hamburg. The Jews would return to their homes rather than be interned in concentration camps. The JTA said, “Sir Herbert has conferred with Colonial Secretary Malcolm MacDonald and others regarding the plight of refugees aboard ships in the Mediterranean without permits to enter Palestine who are not permitted to disembark anywhere.” The JTA reported, “Representatives of an American group, which had been discussing the project in New York with Myron C. Taylor, American vice chairman of the IRC, are now holding discussions with the committee’s London bureau and are also in contact with financial interests in other countries.”712


710 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 118-122

711 Ibid. 118-122, 123-125

712 “World Body Acts to Ease Lot of Ship Bound Refugees; Talks on Financing Projects Advance,” (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, June 11, 1939),
http://www.jta.org/1939/06/11/archive/world-body-acts-to-ease-lot-of-ship-bound-refugees-talks-on-financing-projects-advance; verified 05 Jan 2022

On June 18, 1939, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reported that officials with the international foundation were conducting intensive discussions about the emigration of Jews from Germany. “Dr. Helmuth Wohlthat, of the Reich Economics Ministry, was in London last week and discussed the question of Jewish emigration with officials of the Intergovernmental Refugee Committee, continuing talks initiated in Berlin with Robert Pell, vice-director of the committee. The German official met Lord Winterton, chairman of the committee, Sir Herbert Emerson, committee director and League High Commissioner for Refugees, as well as representatives of an American group now here to negotiate in connection with the foundation.” The JTA stated that the discussions appeared to be leading to “immediate, definite results.”713

George Rublee remarked that both the Germans and the Jews, up until August 1939, did what they agreed to do. War erupted and the immigration project stopped. From the time that Rublee left Germany until the war began, there was very little, if any, persecution of Jews in Germany. Rublee wrote, “Perhaps, if the war had not come, the Jewish question in Germany might have come to an end.” However, there were certain Jews who really did not want the Jewish persecution, legitimate or otherwise, to end. It would deprive some American Jews of “their most flammable tinder for feeding the flames of war against the German Reich.” They had to concoct some moral outrage to justify their violence.714

Congressman Sol Bloom, a Jew, defended FDR’s policy regarding European Jewry and their plight, as portrayed in the press. Bloom was the chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He was the American delegate to the Evian Conference and to the conference in Bermuda (1943). A Jewish periodical castigated him for his lack of support for the Jewish cause. He collaborated with the administration to obstruct congressional efforts in the establishment of the Israeli state. He supported the State Department’s idea to eliminate “all public discussion of the Palestine issue” for the remainder of the war. Jewish leaders were outraged over this.715 Was Bloom functioning as orchestrated opposition to draw even more attention to Jewish victimhood?


713 Reich Official Confers on Refugee Project in London, (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, June 18, 1939),
http://www.jta.org/1939/06/18/archive/reich-official-confers-on-refugee-project-in-london; verified 05 Jan 2022

714 Ingrid Weckert, Flashpoint: Kristallnacht, 1938, Instigators, Victims and Beneficiaries, (Institute for Historical Review, Costa Mesa, California, 1991), 123-125

715 Rafael Medoff, FDR Had His Kissinger Too, (The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, December 2010),

Rabbi Wise, the president of the AJC, appeared to be sabotaging efforts to save the European Jews which was even confusing to the many well-meaning gentiles who wanted to counter anti-Semitism. Some people even claimed that he had the opportunity to destroy Hitler but rather protected him and abandoned the European Jews. Wise, who favored Weizmann’s ideology, accused Vladimir Jabotinsky of being a traitor for advocating the evacuation of over a million eastern Jews. Wise said that Jabotinsky wanted to send “unsuitable” Jews to Palestine. Henry Montor, the United Palestine Appeal’s publicity director by 1931,716 and the Vice-Chairman of the United Jewish Appeal in the United States supported Wise. Montor said, “No responsible person has ever said that Palestine could hold all the millions of Jews who need shelter.”717

On February 1, 1940, Montor wrote in a letter to Rabbi Rabinowitz of Hagerstown, Maryland, “Selectivity is an inescapable factor in dealing with the problem of immigration to Palestine.”718 On that same day, Montor refused to intervene for a shipload of Jews stranded on the Danube River. He said that Palestine cannot be flooded with… old people or with undesirables.”719 He denounced people who discounted the “need” for choosing creditable Jews to settle in Palestine. He accused the Revisionists of settling Palestine with prostitutes and criminals.720 Later he became the vice-president and chief executive of the Development Corporation for Israel (DCI). On May 15, 1948, the end of the British Mandate and the establishment of Israel removed all impediments to immigration.

Montor was “a genius in persuading American Jewish communities to provide unprecedented sums for Palestine by the use for the first time of all the tools and techniques of modern public relations.”721 In 1939, the Joint Distribution Committee (JDC) and the United Palestine Appeal (UPA) had joined forces to become the United Jewish Appeal. Montor, the organization’s new national campaign director, and his associate, Meyer Steinglass, began placing expensive ads in the newspapers and utilizing radio to promote candidates. Montor left UJA to take a leading position with the Bonds for Israel operation. Steinglass joined him as the director of public relations. Raphael Levy and Ben Hanft took over at UJA and continued to use the same propaganda methods.722

American Jews used the UJA to transfer funds to Jews living elsewhere. They changed the name of the agency to the United Israel Appeal which operates through the Jewish Agency in Israel. The organizers give funds, through hundreds of federations and humanitarian funds, to support Jewish communities throughout the world. From 1939 to 1967, the UJA collected $1.925 billion. In 1999, the UJA raised $524 million and was the seventh-largest charity in the United States. The UJA Federation of New York raised $157 million alone.723


716 Public Relations, Jewish Virtual Library,
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0016_0_16178.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

717 Eretz Israel Forever, Timeline,
http://www.eretzisraelforever.net/Timeline/index.asp?sAction=ByYear_and_sYear=1940; verified 05 Jan 2022

718 Ibid.

719 The Role of Zionism in the Holocaust, Spiritually and Physically Responsible,

720 Louis Rapoport, Shake heaven and earth: Peter Bergson and the struggle to rescue the Jews of Europe, (Gefen, Jerusalem and New York, 1999), 32

721 Public Relations, Jewish Virtual Library,
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0016_0_16178.html; verified 06 Jan 2022

722 Ibid.

723 United Jewish Appeal (UJA),
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3424602784.html; verified 07 Jan 2022

Chapter 19 ♦ Stage-Managing Perceptions to Create Victimization
06 Ben Hecht
Ben Hecht

Hillel Kook of Jerusalem, using the pseudonym Peter Bergson, was the nephew of Abraham Kook, the first chief rabbi of British Mandatory Palestine. Bergson came to the United States in 1940 to appeal for support for an Israeli state in Palestine. After the reports of genocide in Germany, he formed the Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People of Europe. 724 Ben Hecht, a member of Irgun, wrote an article for the incredibly popular Reader’s Digest, of February 1943, in which he used Dr. Greenberg’s statistics regarding Jewish population figures for various countries in Europe: Poland, 3,000,000; Romania, 900,000; Germany, 900,000, Hungary, 750,000; Czechoslovakia, 150,000; and France, Holland, and Belgium, 400,000. Hecht claimed that, of the six million Jews, that the Germans had already killed two million.725,726

In 1943, Hecht managed to get his friends, George and Beatrice Kaufman to gather thirty influential Jewish writers for a dinner party. Hecht hoped to persuade them to use their skills, to “save the surviving four million Jews in Europe” because these passionate writers “could dramatize the German crime,” in a play or pageant, and “could command the press of the world.” He told the guests everything he knew about the Jewish killings. He said that the civilized world, and politicians, such as Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt, was indifferent about a potential Jewish extermination and argued that some kind of an outcry would have an important impact on the British who would certainly respond.727


724 Rafael Medoff, The Day the Rabbis Marched, (David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, October 6, 2005); viewed 4/22/2013

725 Ben Hecht, Remember Us, The Reader’s Digest, February 1943, 107- 110

726 1943 Holocaust Ghost Writer in The Reader’s Digest - 6 Million Jews,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jj1Ca9rN4iQ; viewed 7/4/2013
[ed. note: although the video is not available, perhaps it focused on THIS page?]

727 Ben Hecht, A Child of the Century, Save Israel,
http://www.saveisrael.com/others/hecht/hechtchild.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

The Jewish writers were apathetic which shocked Hecht, especially as some of them made cutting remarks. Just when he thought that no one was interested, Moss Hart said, “I thought I’d tell you that if I can do anything definite in the way of Jewish propaganda call on me.” Kurt Weill, the only composer present said, “Please count on me for everything.” Billy Rose also joined Hecht, Moss, and Weill in their efforts to create the pageant. Yet, most of the Reform Jews wanted nothing to do with Hecht and his project. Even the Jewish press and magazines, including the American Jewish Congress monthly, opposed his intentions.728

Rabbi Stephen S. Wise called Hecht and said, “I have read your pageant script and I disapprove of it. I must ask you to cancel this pageant and discontinue all your further activities in behalf of the Jews. If you wish hereafter to work for the Jewish Cause, you will please consult me and let me advise you.” Peter Bergson assumed that there were spies in their organization. He also did not count on support from B’nai B’rith who refused to place Hecht’s “propaganda advertisement” in the Times as it attacked the American State Department, which would then “raise hell” with the Jews of America. Judge Joseph Proskauer, the president of the AJCm, feared that such an attitude would ignite Jewish pogroms in America. The British officially closed the ports of Palestine to all Jewish immigration and refused to listen. Influential Jews America appealed to Roosevelt who rejected their pleas.729

Bergson and his group, employing Spielberg-like drama and exploiting theatrical license, subsidized a theatrical presentation entitled, We Will Never Die. On March 9, 1943, over 40,000 people at Madison Square Garden viewed the play which they then showed in cities throughout the nation. The Bergson group also sponsored over 200 newspaper advertisements admonishing the government to rescue the refugees.730 Hecht took the pageant to Washington, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, St. Louis and Los Angeles where it played to “weeping and cheering audiences.” He wrote, “The news and pictures of our pageant in the press were the first American newspaper reports on the Jewish massacre in Europe.”731


728 Ben Hecht, A Child of the Century, Save Israel,
http://www.saveisrael.com/others/hecht/hechtchild.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

729 Ibid.

730 Rafael Medoff, The Day the Rabbis Marched, (David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, October 6, 2005); viewed 4/22/2013

731 Ben Hecht, A Child of the Century, Save Israel,
http://www.saveisrael.com/others/hecht/hechtchild.htm; verified 05 Jan 2022

Judge Samuel Rosenman, a leading member of the AJCm, claimed that he was “uncomfortable calling attention to Jewish concerns” because it might increase anti-Semitism. After Kristallnacht, he persuaded FDR to prohibit the immigration of Jewish refugees to America as it could “create a Jewish problem” in the United States. Rafael Medoff, of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, described the events of October 6, 1943, three days before Yom Kippur, when over 400 rabbis marched to the Capitol in an effort to get the government to take action to rescue the Jews from Hitler. They included Eliezer Silver, Israel Rosenberg, Solomon Friedman, Bernard Dov Leventhal, and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein.732 733 Rosenman convinced FDR to ignore them. Rosenman also opposed the Treasury Department officials and their desire to create the War Refugee Board (WRB), which happened despite his antagonism.734

In 1944, WRB officials requested that Roosevelt “issue a statement threatening to prosecute anyone involved in persecuting Jews” and they also wanted the United States to allow Jewish refugees. Rosenman removed six references to Jew, the offer of shelter in America and added three paragraphs about the Nazis and their persecution of “Poles, Czechs, Norwegians, Dutch, Danes, French, Greeks, Russians, Chinese Filipinos—and many others.”735


732 Rafael Medoff, The Day the Rabbis Marched, (David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, October 6, 2005); viewed 4/22/2013

733 List of rabbis who marched to the Capitol; viewed 4/25/2013

734 Rafael Medoff, FDR Had His Kissinger Too, (The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, December 2010),

735 Ibid.

The Auschwitz Protocols

On November 26, 1944, via the WRB, Roosevelt released a forty-page report, the Auschwitz Protocols, typed by Oscar Krasniansky of the Slovak Jewish Council, reporting the stories of two alleged eye-witnesses. Slovakian Jews, Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler claimed to have escaped the impenetrable Auschwitz on April 10, 1944, where they purportedly saw “horrible and barbarous events,” which occurred in the “two notorious extermination camps”—Auschwitz and Birkenau in Upper Silesia. The Protocols also included the seven-page report from Arnost Rosin and Czesław Mordowicz, escapees from Auschwitz on May 27, 1944, and an earlier report, the Polish Major’s report, written by Jerzy Tabeau, who escaped on November 19, 1943.736

FDR prefaced the statement that it was now “beyond denial that the Germans have deliberately and systematically murdered millions of innocent civilians, Jews and Christians alike, all over Europe, part of the German plan to subjugate the free peoples of the world.” Another witness, a non-Jewish Polish army major, provided the number of Jews that the Germans had gassed at Birkenau between April 1942 and April 1944. He claimed it was 1,765,000, of whom 900,000 came from Poland; 300,000 from Polish camps for foreign Jews; 150,000 from France; 100,000 from Holland; 60,000 from Germany; 50,000 each from Belgium and Lithuania; 45,000 from Greece; 30,000 from Slovakia; 50,000 from Yugoslavia, Italy and Norway together; and 30,000 from Bohemia, Moravia and Austria together.737 How could a prisoner acquire these figures?

Allegedly, high-tension electric wires surrounded Auschwitz, designed to quickly electrocute escapees. They publicly hung those who attempted to escape. Despite these obstacles, two Jews claim to have been the only deportees from Slovakia who managed to escape from Auschwitz or Birkenau. The escapees claim that thirty internees out of a working party of 200 men died each day due to the brutal working conditions. The eye-witnesses claimed that guards beat the prisoners to death if they slowed down the brisk pace at which they were expected to work.738


736 “War Refugee Board Releases Report on Extermination of Millions of Jews in Nazi Camps,” (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, November 26, 1944),
http://www.jta.org/1944/11/26/archive/war-refugee-board-releases-report-on-extermination-of-millions-of-jews-in-nazi-camps; verified 05 Jan 2022; Read more:
http://www.jta.org/1944/11/26/archive/war-refugee-board-releases-report-on-extermination-of-millions-of-jews-in-nazi-camps#ixzz2awCesyGj; verified 05 Jan 2022

737 Ibid.

738 Ibid.

The “witnesses” stated that German doctors performed experiments in a biological laboratory on Jewish girls and women at Birkenau and Auschwitz. Allegedly, the guards brutalized the females, causing a higher mortality rate than among the men. They provided the prisoners with filthy, patched and virtually worn-out clothing. In 1943, according to the “witnesses,” the Germans instituted the first Birkenau crematorium by gassing and then cremating 8,000 Jews from Krakow. Prominent guests from Berlin witnessed the grisly gassing of the Jews through a special peephole. They praised the event and the equipment used.739 The guards at Birkenau allegedly dispensed soap and a towel and told each victim that he/she was going to bathe. They crowded the victims into the shower, where they huddled together. They closed the doors and increased the temperature. SS men wearing gas masks went to the roof and dropped a poisonous cyanide mixture. After three minutes, everyone in the chamber was dead.740

The “witnesses” told of the atrocities performed in Auschwitz’s infirmary such as the doctors injecting phenol in the heart region of eighty to ninety percent of the hospitalized Jews. They claimed that many Jews seeking death went to the infirmary instead of throwing themselves on the high-tension wires. They claimed that, at the Majdanek camp in Lublin, that officials conducted concert parties in order to torture Jewish inmates. Either the music was pretty bad or, according one of the Slovakian Jews, the inmates had to stand and sing for hours after a hard day’s work while the SS men laughed. Reportedly, Rabbi Eckstein suffered from dysentery and was late arriving at the concert. The SS leader grabbed him, immersed him head first into a latrine, and then shot him with his revolver.741

Since 1945, the Jews, in an attitude of recrimination, refer to the world’s silence, the world’s indifference, and the “abandonment of the Jews.” Look magazine published, in serial format, Arthur D. Morse’s accusatory While Six Million Died: A Chronicle of American Apathy, the breathtaking story of how America ducked chance after chance to save the Jews.742 Companies published Morse’s work in book form in 1968 and again in 1998 just before America’s second invasion of Iraq on behalf of Israel.


739 “War Refugee Board Releases Report on Extermination of Millions of Jews in Nazi Camps,” (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, November 26, 1944),
http://www.jta.org/1944/11/26/archive/war-refugee-board-releases-report-on-extermination-of-millions-of-jews-in-nazi-camps; verified 05 Jan 2022; Read more:
http://www.jta.org/1944/11/26/archive/war-refugee-board-releases-report-on-extermination-of-millions-of-jews-in-nazi-camps#ixzz2awCesyGj; verified 05 Jan 2022

740 Ibid.

741 Ibid.

742 Peter Novick, The Holocaust in American Life, (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, Massachusetts, Kindle, 2000), 157-158

In his autobiography, Ben Hecht wrote, “President Roosevelt’s failure to raise one of his humanitarian fingers to prevent the extermination of the Jews, his many sullen statements about the Jewish situation, and his spiritual anesthesia to the greatest genocide in history” was beyond comprehension. Hecht related that David Niles, a Jew and FDR’s chief secretary, told him that “Roosevelt would not make a speech or issue a statement denouncing the German extermination of the Jews.” Hecht created a one-act play entitled Call the Next Case in which the fictional bar of history summons FDR to account for his moral failure to save the Jews in Europe. Twelve dead Jews from the German crematoriums functioned as the jury. He had just finished writing his script when he heard the announcement of Roosevelt’s death on April 12, 1945.743

Hecht, a member of the American League for a Free Palestine (ALFP), utilizing psychological warfare, created another one-act incredibly popular Broadway play, A Flag is Born which opened on Broadway on September 4, 1946. It increased American antagonism against Britain and heightened compassion for the Jews. After Broadway, the play went to Detroit, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, and Boston. The ALFP publicized the play and openly admitted that Hecht wrote it to finance ships to transport Jews to Palestine, to provoke support for the resistance, and to raise awareness of the purported German genocide against the Jews. Several Hollywood personalities endorsed Bergson’s campaign including Bob Hope, Milton Berle, Carl Reiner, Groucho and Harpo Marx, Paul Robeson, Frank Sinatra, Perry Como, and many others.744

Hecht selected a 22 year-old Marlon Brando to play the lead in Flag who was anxious to work with Paul Muni, who he greatly admired, and was empathetic because of his belief that the Germans had killed all of these Jews and the idea that his Jewish friends were attempting to establish a Jewish State. The ALFP featured a Brando speech for its film, Last Night We Attacked, which played throughout the country. Brando, during the rehearsals for the play, stayed at Hecht’s home in Nyack, New York, an area where several Zionists and members of the Palestinian underground lived. In the play, Brando’s character David gives and emotional speech in which he condemned the American Jewish community because it failed to persuade the government to rescue Jewish refugees from Hitler. Brando demanded, “Where were you, Jews? Where were you when six million Jews were being burned to death in the ovens of Auschwitz? Where were you?” This speech “touched a sensitive nerve” and certainly helped to open the wallets of the American Jews.745


743 Hamilton Fish, FDR, the Other Side of the Coin; How We Were Tricked Into World War II, (Life and Liberty Publishing, Murrieta, Georgia, 2005), 211

744 Rafael Medoff, Ben Hecht’s A Flag is Born: A Play That Changed History, (Wyman Institute),

745 Ibid.

In 1925, Leon Shapiro, who had studied law at Kiev University, relocated to Palestine and was in Paris by 1935. In 1941, he immigrated to America, where he became a Research Associate (1941-1949), and an editor for the quarterly journal of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC), founded November 27, 1914. For thirty-five years, he regularly contributed articles and population estimates on Jews in the Soviet Union to the American Jewish Year Book.746 He assisted many Jews to leave Europe during World War II and helped facilitate the emigration of Soviet and Eastern European Jews to Palestine. He was the Assistant Director (1952-1956), in the Cultural Department, of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims against Germany, or the Claims Conference (CC), founded in 1951 by Nahum Goldmann, then president of the World Jewish Congress (WJC).747

Since 1952, via the CC, the German government has paid over $60 billion in indemnification for suffering and losses resulting from persecution. It also created a way to extract funds from German and Austrian industry, and from the Austrian government.748 As of January 1, 2012, a Jew (or fetus at the time) may collect reparations if he/she was in Leningrad any time between September 1941 and January 1944 or if he/she fled from there. A Jew may also collect reparations if he/she fled from any area that Germany later occupied by filing a CC claim. Presumably, this includes those that the Soviets evacuated.749 Until 2007, any Jew who was compelled to work in a camp could also collect reparations.750 In the mid-1960s, Leon Shapiro became a professor of Russian-Jewish history at Rutgers University until he retired in 1978.751

Decades later, CC Officials admitted that they knew that their own employees were perpetrating a fraud, for as long as fifteen years, to collect restitution money, at least $57 million from Germany. CC officials ignored a letter detailing the fraud about the unqualified recipients. Authorities convicted as many as thirty-one people, including the ringleader, Semen Domnitser, in 2001, for their scheme to get compensation as Holocaust survivors.752 753 This victimization tactic may also be their means of acquiring a lion’s share of federal grants. Janet Napolitano, perhaps a crypto Jew, claims that Jews face “special risks” that require vigilance, though there is no “specific, credible threat” against Jewish targets.”754

On March 30, 2011, Obama introduced Policy Directive / PPD-8: National Preparedness, under the direction of the DHS/FEMA, for “strengthening the security and resilience of the United States through systematic preparation for the threats that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation, including acts of terrorism, cyber-attacks, pandemics, and catastrophic natural disasters.” It functions as an apparatus for certain groups of accomplices, the politicians and those who add to their campaign coffers, to subtly siphon huge amounts of money from the taxpayers.755 In 2012, the Department of Homeland Security, headed by Napolitano awarded Jewish institutions in the United States $9.7 million in federal anti-terrorism grants out of a total of $10 million distributed to not-for-profit institutions under the Urban Areas Security Initiative Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP).756 757 ALEC probably developed this legislation.758


746 Leon Shapiro, The New York Times, December 26, 1984

747 Leon Shapiro Papers (MS 127), Special Collections and University Archives, W.E.B. Du Bois Library, University of Massachusetts Amherst,
http://www.library.umass.edu/spcoll/umarmot/?p=147; verified 06 Jan 2022

748 Claims Conference,
www.claimscon.org/index.asp?url=mission; verified 10 Jan 2022

749 Conference on Jewish Material Claims against Germany, Inc., Holocaust Victim Compensation Fund (HVCF)
http://forms.claimscon.org/HVCF/HVCF-Guidelines-English.pdf; verified 05 Jan 2022

750 The German Foundation established the following criteria for payments for labor,
https://www.claimscon.org/index.asp?url=slave_labor/eligibility; verified 10 Jan 2022

751 Leon Shapiro, The New York Times, December 26, 1984

752 Paul Berger, “Claims Conference Officials Were Told of Massive $57M Fraud—But Didn’t Act Detailed Letter Pointed to Scheme Years Earlier,” The Jewish Daily Forward, May 14, 2013,
http://forward.com/articles/176583/claims-conference-officials-were-told-of-massive/?p=all#ixzz2THFLHCKV; verified 06 Jan 2022

753 Jacob Edelist, “Another Holocaust Claims Conference Schemer Convicted,” ( The Jewish Express, October 11, 2012),
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/another-holocaust-claims-conference-schemer-convicted/2012/10/11/; verified 05 Jan 2022

754 Nathan Guttman, Jews Face Special Risks, Napolitano Says Homeland Security Sec’y Defends Controversial Grant Program,
http://forward.com/articles/157280/jews-face-special-risks-napolitano-says; verified 06 Jan 2022

755 Presidential Policy Directive / PPD-8: National Preparedness, March 30, 2011,
http://www.dhs.gov/presidential-policy-directive-8-national-preparedness; verified 06 Jan 2022

756 Josh Nathan-Kazis, Jewish Groups Grab Huge Share of Grants, Almost All Homeland Security Grants Go to Jewish Non-Profits, Forward.com,
http://forward.com/articles/158866/jewish-groups-grab-huge-share-of-grants; verified 06 Jan 2022

757 Urban Areas Security Initiative Nonprofit Security Grant Program, 2010:
http://www.fema.gov/2010-nonprofit-security-grant-program; verified 05 Jan 2022

758 ALEC Exposed:
http://www.alecexposed.org; verified 05 Jan 2022

Chapter 20 ♦ The Deceptions behind the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact
Making a Deal with the Devil

Poland stood in the way of the Soviet Union’s initial target, Germany. There was no common border between the Soviet Union and Germany, the best way to trigger a revolution was to obliterate the barrier separating the two countries.759

On March 3, 1918, Lenin had betrayed his war allies by signing the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty with the Central Powers. In signing it, he relinquished Poland, Latvia, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Belarus, and Ukraine that economically jeopardized Russian citizens but also affected Germany. Lenin, intent on a world revolution, relinquished national interests. His goal, the Sovietization of other countries, was “above all national sacrifices.” The Brest-Litovsk Treaty was a prototype of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Lenin and Stalin used the same ploy, get Germany to fight and exhaust herself in the West and then the Soviets would act.760 The Zionist newspaper Peiewische Vordle, dated January 13, 1919, stated, “The international Jewry… believed it necessary to force Europe into the war so that a new Jewish era could begin throughout the world.”761 Lenin said, “The first World War gave us Russia, while the Second World War will hand Europe to us.”762

On February 4, 1920, after Germany’s defeat, Churchill warned of the spread of communism in a newspaper article. He said that Bolshevism was a Jewish conspiracy, evidenced by historical data. He wrote, “This movement among Jews is not new… but a ‘world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality.” In July 1925, Stalin addressed the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party and anticipated a future war. Stalin explained his doctrine, “Should war begin, we will not stand by inactively; we will enter the war, but we will enter as the last belligerent. We shall throw a weight on the scale that should be decisive.”763 He obviously changed sides and worked for the very people he claimed to fear.

In 1930, Churchill, allegedly wary of Adolf Hitler and his objectives, warned others at a dinner at the German Embassy that Hitler and his followers wanted to initiate a war. Beginning in 1932, Churchill, in his writings, opposed the British politicians who favored giving Germany military parity with France. Churchill, portraying himself as a lone courageous voice, frequently referred to Germany’s potential rearmament. He accused the Spanish Republican government of being a communist front and that Spain was attempting to influence the politics in Portugal and France.


759 Viktor Suvorov, Icebreaker, Who Started the Second World War?, (Hamish Hamilton Ltd., London, England, 1990), 19

760 Ibid. 17-18

761 Jüri Lina, Under the Sign of the Scorpion: The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire, (Referent Publishing, Stockholm, Sweden, 2002), 181

762 June Grem, The Money Manipulators, (Enterprise Publications, Inc., Oak Park, Illinois, 1971), 109-110

763 Joachim Hoffmann, Stalin’s War of Extermination, 1941-1945, Planning, Realization and Documentation, (Theses & Dissertations Press, Capshaw, Alabama, 2001), 26-27

Meanwhile, Hitler was concerned with minimizing the influence of the “Jewish Bolshevists.” On March 23, 1933, Hitler, in a speech, had said “the struggle with communism in Germany is our internal affair.” He did not intend to allow Germany’s relationship with other countries interfere with that struggle.764

On February 7, 1934, Churchill, in a speech, urged the rebuilding of the Royal Air Force (RAF) and the creation of a Ministry of Defence. On July 13, he endorsed a stronger League of Nations. In 1935, he helped found The Focus, a bipartisan group seeking and promoting peace. He supported the Hoare-Laval Pact (December 1935) and until 1937, supported Benito Mussolini. In Great Contemporaries (1937), contradicting his earlier statements, he said that he hoped that Hitler would rebuild Germany. Churchill apparently targeted Germany according to his writings of 1934. One must also consider his actions in the execution of World War I, meaning the orchestrated attack on the Lusitania. He and FDR, also a factor in the Lusitania incident, considered Germany even more dangerous to Britain and France, than Stalin was, mostly because of Germany’s economic threat and her successes.765

According to Leon Gelfand, “Stalin had been obsessed with the idea of an agreement with Germany since 1933.” On December 21, 1935, and again in July 1936, Sergei Bessonov, apparently on assignment from the Kremlin, visited with German authorities in Berlin to promote the idea that Germany and Soviet Russia should devise an additional neutrality pact similar to the one that Germany and the Soviet Russia signed in 1926.766 In 1933, Roosevelt appointed Laurence Steinhardt, a member of the Federation of American Zionists and the American Zion Commonwealth as Minister to Sweden. Previously, he practiced law at Guggenheimer, Untermeyer and Marshall. Samuel Untermeyer was his uncle. Steinhardt confided to FDR that the German and Soviet governments maintained communications.


764 Albert L. Weeks, Stalin’s Other War: Soviet Grand Strategy, 1939-1941, (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, New York, 2003), Kindle, 61-62

765 Erkki Hautamäki, Finland in the Eye of the Storm, September 20, 2005
http://www.prokarelia.net/en/?x=artikkeli&article_id=667&author=10; verified 05 Jan 2022

766 Albert L. Weeks, Stalin’s Other War: Soviet Grand Strategy, 1939-1941, (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, New York, 2003), Kindle, 61-62

Stalin, resolute to reach an agreement with Germany, replaced Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov with Vyacheslav Molotov on May 3, 1939. The German media had derided Litvinov’s Jewish ancestry and Stalin wanted to remove any obstacles to the negotiation process. Georgy Malenkov, Lavrenty Beria and Molotov informed Litvinov of his dismissal.767 Stalin quickly directed Molotov to “purge the ministry of Jews.” Molotov commented, “Thank God for these words! Jews formed an absolute majority in the leadership and among the ambassadors. It wasn’t good.”768 Of course, it was only a token purging.

Hitler, in an attempt to improve relations between the two countries, encouraged British officials to sign the Anglo-German Naval Agreement (AGNA) which they did on June 18, 1935. This pact would isolate the Soviet Union, which both the Soviet Union and Britain had previously attempted to do to Germany. This bilateral agreement between the United Kingdom and the German Reich regulated the size of the Kriegsmarine, from 1935 to 1945, in relation to the Royal Navy. The AGNA set the permane