Archive for the ‘Danzig’ Category



[Part 17]


[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormentor, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.


In Part 17, the lead-up to the German invasion of Poland is described and how Germany was provoked into that act by the Polish, who adopted a murderously belligerent and uncooperative policy towards Germany’s offers of a sensible solution to the Danzig and Polish Corridor issues.

Poland was encouraged in adopting that attitude because of the guarantees and promises made by the British and American war-mongers, such as Churchill, Halifax, Vansittart, Roosevelt and Bullitt who were acting as tools of International jewry to create another World War. This was engineered to finish what their World War I had not accomplished, that is, the complete crushing of Germany and its sovereignty.

Hitler, who knew first hand the horrors of armed conflict, never wanted a war, let alone a World War, yet was forced into one on the day that Britain and France, on the orders of international jewry, officially declared war on Germany on Sep 3, 1939 — KATANA.]





NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

 The book can be bought at Amazon here: The Myth of German Villainy




The Myth of


German Villainy




Benton L. Bradberry








Chapter 1   –   The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight 

Chapter 2   –   Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

Chapter 3   –   The Jewish Factor in the War

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

Chapter 4   –   The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

Chapter 5   –   The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

Chapter 6   –   The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Sparticist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil


Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

Chapter 7   –   The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

Chapter 8   –   Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

Chapter 9   –   Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

Chapter 10  –  National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

Chapter 11  –  Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

Chapter 12  –  The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for

Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

Chapter 13  –  Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

Chapter 14  –  Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15  –  The 1936 Olympics

Chapter 16  –  Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

Chapter 17  –  Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Chapter 18  –  War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland


German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

Chapter 19  –  The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

Chapter 20  –  Germany invades France Through the Low Countries.

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

Chapter 21  –  The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Chapter 22  –  Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

Chapter 23  –  Winners and Losers





Chapter 18


War with Poland 





The international jubilation over the peace pact between Prime Minister Chamberlain and Chancellor Hitler resulting from the Munich Agreement, did not last for long. Public opinion outside Germany soon began to cool again and turn against Hitler and the Nazis; the result of the relentless anti-Hitler, anti-Nazi propaganda. Propaganda is a powerful weapon and it was used to its fullest potential to turn public opinion against Nazi Germany, and to create pretexts for war, both in Britain and the United States. This hate campaign was controlled and managed mainly by the Jews who spared no effort to undermine the Nazi regime.


British historian Nesta Webster wrote in her book, Germany and England, published in 1938, shortly before World War II began:

Britons in the past have not been easily worked up to hate, but this insane hatred of two men, Mussolini and Hitler, is being instilled in them by the Jews and those who benefit by them, and acting like a poison in the life blood of our people.

Germany is under a visible anti-Jewish dictatorship. We are under an invisible Jewish dictatorship, but a dictatorship that can be felt in every sphere of life, for no one can escape from it.

Already the Jews can make or break the career of any man as they please. Once war breaks out we cannot doubt that they will be found in every key position and will hold us at their mercy. Then the real purpose of the world war will become apparent. As long as the Jews do not hold Germany they can never realize their final aim – world domination. Therefore Hitler must be overthrown and Jewish power restored.” (emphasis added)


[Add. image] Nesta Webster’s booklet (33 pp), “Germany and England” (1938).


In this atmosphere of hate, distrust and bellicosity created by the anti-Hitler propaganda, the Western leaders were preconditioned to take the worst possible interpretation of any foreign policy initiative by Hitler. He had been made out to be an aggressive psychopath by the Jewish press and was therefore given no credit for having legitimate claims for Germany.


After the Munich conference, personal control of British foreign policy passed from Prime Minister Chamberlain to his Foreign Minister, Lord Halifax, who thereafter waged a relentless campaign to provoke a war with Germany. Halifax and certain British leaders on both the left and the right joined together to castigate Hitler and the Nazis and push for war. Principle among these was Sir Robert Vansittart, Chief Diplomatic Advisor to the British Government, who made anti-Nazi radio broadcasts.


[Add. image] Robert Gilbert Vansittart, (25 June 1881 – 14 February 1957), known as Sir Robert Vansittart between 1929 and 1941, was a senior British diplomat in the period before and during the Second World War. He was Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister from 1928 to 1930 and Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office from 1930 to 1938 and later served as Chief Diplomatic Adviser to the British Government. He is best remembered for his opposition to appeasement and his strong stance against Germany during and after the Second World War.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Vansittart,_1st_Baron_Vansittart


Vansittart’s radio broadcasts were intended to awake the British public to “The Nature of the Beast” ― to the habits of militarism, aggression and blind obedience which, according to Vansittart, had been inculcated into the Germans since the time of Tacitus, and which made them uniquely dangerous to their neighbors. Vansittart used the metaphor of the butcherbird he had observed years before on the Black Sea, ruthlessly eliminating its unsuspecting prey one by one. In Vansittart’s view, Nazism was no aberration but the logical outcome of German history. Vansittart and the others characterized each foreign policy move by Hitler as a new “surprise” and declared that he could not be trusted and had to be “stopped.” Vansittart’s broadcasts were very effective in inflaming British public opinion against Germany.


In reality, Hitler had made it clear from the beginning of his chancellorship that he intended to reclaim those territories taken away from Germany by the Versailles Treaty. His plan for a single German state that would include all Germans was also made clear from the beginning. “Ein Reich, ein volk, ein fuhrer,” (one country, one people, one leader) he repeated again and again. So far, he had remilitarized the Rhineland, annexed Austria, and annexed the Sudetenland ― all peacefully. The majority German city of Memel had also been returned to East Prussia from Lithuania. The only remaining pieces of the puzzle were Danzig and the Polish Corridor. It was obvious that they were next on the agenda. Hitler had already made that clear. But he also renounced any claim to the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine which had been returned to France at the end of World War I. Hitler stated his plan clearly and then followed that plan, step-by-step, precisely as he said he would do.


Moreover, numerous world statesmen, journalists and academics concurred with Hitler’s demand for reclamation of these German territories, and declared that his demands were both reasonable and just. The Versailles Treaty was based on the “War Guilt” clause which assigned blame for starting WWI to Germany. Revisionist historians had already disproved the war guilt allegation against Germany, so there was no longer any basis for the onerous terms of the Versailles Treaty and it should have been scrapped long before Hitler was elected to office. It was simply disingenuous for Churchill, Halifax, Vansittart, and the other members of the British “war party” to characterize Hitler’s moves as “aggression” or “surprises.” To say that his word could not be trusted was not true.



The Polish Problem


The Versailles Treaty had taken a large swath of German territory, along with its German inhabitants, to create the new sovereign state of Poland. This included a strip of land across Germany to give Poland access to the Baltic Sea, called the Polish Corridor. The main problem of the Corridor was that it split Germany in two, separating East Prussia from the rest of Germany. For Germans to travel back and forth between East Prussia and the rest of Germany, they were required to go around the Corridor by ship. They were not allowed to cross the Corridor. The German City of Danzig had also been taken from Germany and placed under the supervision of the League of Nations as a “free city” for the purpose of providing Poland with her port facilities. Around one and a half million ethnic Germans now lived as second class citizens in this Polish controlled territory.


This territory, along with its residents, had been German for centuries and its people made it clear from the start through countless mass demonstrations that they did not want to be separated from Germany. Danzig had been a member of the old Hanseatic League, and was one of the most German of German cities. It’s population was 96 percent German, and in a plebiscite they voted overwhelmingly to be returned to Germany. The ethnic Germans living in this region were now a minority in a hostile Polish state, under Polish rule, and suffered the same kind of discrimination and repression that the Germans had suffered in the Sudetenland. Germany had a just claim for the return of all of the territory taken from it by force by the Versailles Treaty, and many world leaders openly acknowledged that. A prominent British authority on Germany and German affairs, William Harbutt Dawson, wrote in “Germany Under the Treaty,” 1933:

… no factor in the life of Europe today offers so grave and certain a menace to peace than the Corridor, which cuts Germany into two parts, and severs Danzig, one of the most German of cities, from the fatherland. Can Europe afford to ignore this menace and allow matters to drift? To do so would be tantamount to inviting and hastening catastrophe, for instead of improving, the conditions in the Corridor after and because of 12 years of Polish occupation, are steadily growing worse.

Because it is now abundantly clear that all the needs of Polish trade, present and future, can be satisfied without the corridor, and because good relations between Germany and Poland, which are so essential to the settlement of peace in Europe, will be impossible so long as that political monstrosity continues. The greater part of the territory should go back to the country to which it owes its civilization.”


Halifax and the “war party,” however, refused to acknowledge the justification of Germany’s claims, and characterized each of Hitler’s revanchist actions as naked aggression and proof of his intent to take over the world. They claimed that he even had designs on Britain itself. There was no basis in fact for either of these claims. President Roosevelt was at the same time, preposterously warning the American people of a possible German invasion of the United States through South America.



Hitler’s Proposal to Poland


Poland had traditionally harbored hostile feelings towards Germany and for all German people, so Hitler proceeded with caution in attempting to settle this last territorial dispute. He was moderate in his approach and displayed considerable generosity in recognizing Polish interests. British Ambassador to Berlin, Sir Neville Henderson, acknowledged Hitler’s reasonable approach.

Of all the Germans,” Henderson said, “believe it or not, Hitler is the most moderate as far as Danzig and the Corridor are concerned.


On October 24, 1938, Hitler had his foreign minister, von Ribbentrop, propose the following four step plan to Polish Ambassador Lipski that would have rectified the injustices of the Versailles Treaty and which should also have eliminated all sources of friction between Poland and Germany.


1.) The return of the Free City of Danzig to the Reich, but without severance of its economic ties to the Polish State. This offer would guarantee to Poland free port privileges in the city of Danzig, as well as extra-territorial access to the harbor.

2.) Germany would make no demand for the return of its former territory, now called the Polish Corridor, but Germany should be allowed to build a highway and a railroad across the Polish Corridor in order to reunite Germany with East Prussia.

3.) Mutual recognition of the location of the borders between Germany and Poland would be permanently settled. In other words, Germany would not demand return of any remaining territory ceded to Poland by the Versailles Treaty.

4.) The German-Polish Pact of 1934 would be extended from ten to twenty-five years. (In the German-Polish Pact of 1934, both countries pledged to resolve their problems through bilateral negotiations and to forgo armed conflict for a period of 10 years. The pact effectively normalized relations between Poland and Germany, which were previously strained by border disputes arising from the Treaty of Versailles.)


In his negotiations with Poland, Hitler could not have been more reasonable.






[Add. image] Jewish shops damaged during “Kristaslnacht”.


While these negotiations were going on an unfortunate event known as “Kristasllnacht” (night of broken glass) occurred in Germany which had the effect of further turning international public opinion against Germany. It could not have occurred at a worse time. The trigger for Kristalnacht was the murder of the German diplomat, Ernst vom Rath, in Paris by a young Jewish man named Herschel Grynszpan, on November 9, 1938. Grynszpan’s family, along with approximately 15,000 other Jews who had entered Germany from Poland after 1914, and who were not German citizens, had been expelled out of Germany back to Poland on October 27, 1938. Seventeen year old Herschel Grynszpan, who was living in Paris with an uncle at the time, shot and killed vom Rath inside the German Embassy in revenge for the deportations, though vom Rath personally had nothing to do with it. News of the murder was in all the German papers.


Anti-Jewish feeling was already running high as a result of the Jewish “holy war” against Germany, and the German people reacted angrily over vom Rath’s murder. On the nights of November 9 and 10, gangs of youths roamed through the Jewish neighborhoods breaking windows of Jewish businesses and homes and setting fire to synagogues. Uniformed SA men also participated. The official German position on these events was that these were spontaneous outbursts of angry German citizens over the murder of a German diplomat by a Jew, but the international Jewish press accused Nazi officials, specifically Goebbels, of orchestrating the event.


That seems doubtful, however, because early in the morning following the Kristallnacht events, Dr. Goebbels announced in a radio broadcast that any action against Jews was strictly prohibited and warned of severe penalties for disobeying this order. Numerous people were also arrested for violence against Jews. Government and Nazi Party officials were furious over what had happened because of the negative propaganda against Germany which would obviously follow. Hitler was also furious when he first heard about it and ordered a telex message to be sent to all Gauleiter offices, which read:

By express order from the very highest authority, arson against Jewish businesses or other property must in no case and under no circumstances take place.”


Unfavorable international reaction was impossible to avoid, and popular opinion of Nazi Germany declined dramatically as a result of Kristallnacht. The British historian, Martin Gilbert, himself a Jew, writes that;

no event in the history of German Jews between 1933 and 1945 was so widely reported as it was happening, and the accounts from the foreign journalists working in Germany sent shock waves around the world.”


The Times of London wrote at the time:

No foreign propagandist bent upon blackening Germany before the world could outdo the tale of burnings and beatings, of blackguardly assaults on defenseless and innocent people, which disgraced that country yesterday.”


There was no need to exaggerate what had happened. The violent rampage against Germany’s Jews was truly a disgrace. But in typical fashion, the international Jewish press did exaggerate the event out of all proportion to what actually happened, providing their usual “eye witness” accounts. An orgy of brutal beatings, rapes, and murder of large numbers of innocent Jews all across Germany, as well as extensive damage to Jewish property was alleged. These exaggerated reports had the effect of poisoning international public opinion against Germany, as they were intended to do. Yet, it makes no sense that the German government or the Nazi Party could have orchestrated this pogrom, as the negative publicity resulting from it hurt Germany and the Nazis far more than it did the Jews. Already sensitive to the hysterical anti-Nazi propaganda campaign being waged against them, German officials were being very careful not to create incidents, such as Kristallnacht, for which they could be criticized further. It is more likely that Kristallnacht was a spontaneous pogrom against the Jews, caused by the buildup of hostility over the International Jewish “holy” war against Germany, and triggered by the vom Rath murder.


[Add. image] A New York Times headline.


In the aftermath of Kristallnacht, the world press became overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Jews, and bitterly hostile towards Germany. In France, Britain and the United States, calls for war against Germany became increasingly bellicose as a result of Kristallnacht.*


[*] [For an alternative view on who was behind Kristallnacht please see:  ]



German-Polish Talks Continue


On January 5, 1939, Poland’s Foreign Minister, Josef Beck, met with Hitler at Berchtesgaden. Hitler reiterated to Beck a clear and definite guarantee that Germany would make no claims on the Polish Corridor, and reaffirmed that he only wanted to build a railroad and a highway across it. The following day, January 6th, in a meeting with Polish officials in Munich, von Ribbentrop confirmed Germany’s willingness to guarantee, not only the Corridor, but all Polish territory. This friendly, generous offer was repeated again by von Ribbentrop during a state visit to Warsaw on January 23, 1939. During this state visit von Ribbentrop appealed for a final all-inclusive settlement of German-Polish territorial points of contention.


A settlement in accord with the “four points” outlined above would have taken nothing away from Poland. Danzig was not a Polish city, but a “free city,” supervised by the League of Nations. Germany’s four point offer would have permitted Poland to continue to use Danzig’s port facilities, as before. Germany did not demand a return of its lost territory, now known as the Polish Corridor, only the right to build a highway and a railroad across it in order to reconnect with East Prussia. There was nothing unreasonable in Germany’s demands.


Yet, on March 21, 1939 French President LeBrun and British Prime Minister Chamberlain met in London and proposed a French-British-Polish alliance to contain Germany. This proposal was then sent on to Polish officials, which had the effect of further steeling their resistance to Hitler’s demands. Despite Germany’s best diplomatic efforts, the Poles were now refusing to concede anything.


The popular view today is that an overwhelmingly powerful Germany was threatening and intimidating a weak and impotent Poland, but in reality, that was hardly the case. Poland had a long military tradition and maintained a powerful, well trained army. The Polish army had only recently (1920) defeated the Russian “Red” army. Polish military leaders were not in the least intimidated by the power of Germany. It should be remembered that German armed forces had been reduced to only 100,000 men by the Versailles Treaty, and that Germany at the time of the crisis with Poland was still in the process of rebuilding her military forces. Not only was Poland not intimidated by Germany, she was even belligerent.


These Polish tanks were the equal of anything in the German army.


[Add. image] The Polish tank TP-7, 9 ton.


In October 1930, the influential Polish newspaper, Die Liga der Grossmacht, carried the following declaration:

A struggle between Poland and Germany is inevitable. We must prepare ourselves for it systematically. Our goal is a new Grunewald (The Battle of Tannenberg on July 15th, 1410 when the Teutonic Knights were defeated). However, this time a Grunewald in the suburbs of Berlin.”

“That is to say, the defeat of Germany must be produced by Polish troops in the centre of the territory in order to strike Germany to the heart. Our ideal is a Poland with the Oder and the Neisse as a border in the West. Prussia must be re-conquered for Poland, and indeed, Prussia as far as the Spree.

In a war with Germany there will be no prisoners and there will be room neither for human feelings nor cultural sentiments. The world will tremble before the German-Polish War. We must evoke in our soldiers a superhuman mood of sacrifice and a spirit of merciless revenge and cruelty.


At around the same time, Poland’s Marshall Rydz-Smigly said:

Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to.


Edvard Rydz-Smigly, Marshall of Poland



Jews Influence Both Roosevelt and Churchill


As the result of restrictions placed on them in Nazi Germany, Jews involved in theater and the movie business left Germany en masse for Hollywood where they were quickly made welcome by the Jews who ran the motion picture industry. These German émigré Jews then joined the Hollywood Jews in making anti-Nazi movies (usually with pro-Communist undertones) for American audiences. The stereotype Nazi officer, complete with monocle, cigarette holder, arch aristocratic manner, impeccable uniform, erect, arrogant bearing, and an evil sneer or a sinister smile on his haughty face, became a stock character in these movies.


[Add. image] The stereotypical Nazi officer as portrayed by Hollywood Jews.


The mass information and entertainment media in Britain and the United states was almost entirely under Jewish control, so a very one-sided picture of events in Germany was presented to the British and American people. Hitler and the members of his Nazi government were relentlessly smeared as guttersnipes, murderers and psychopaths, in total contradiction of the actual facts, thus public opinion in both countries was turned against Nazi Germany.


In 1940 and 1941 appeared Jewish made, pro-war films such as Charlie Chaplin’s burlesque of Hitler and Mussolini, The Great Dictator, as well as Man Hunt, directed by German Jewish émigré Fritz Lang, The Mortal Storm, A Yank in the R.A.F., Sergeant York, I Married a Nazi and numerous other such movies. These movies were an integral part of the vigorous campaign by various elements to get the United States into a war with Germany.


Once the United States was at war with Germany, the studios churned out one anti-Nazi potboiler after another. An audience today is likely to snicker at such “classics” as Hillbilly Blitzkrieg, Women in Bondage, The Devil with Hitler, I Escaped from the Gestapo, Hitler’s Children, That Nazi Nuisance, Strange Death of Adolf Hitler, Enemy of Women, Hitler’s Madman, The Master Race, The Hitler Gang, Hotel Berlin and Tarzan Triumphs.


[Add. image] Posters for Tarzan Triohphie Des Nazis and Tarzan Triumps starring Johnny Weissmuller. Storyline: “Zandra, white princess of a lost civilization, comes to Tarzan for help when Nazis invade the jungle with plans to conquer her people and take their wealth. Tarzan, the isolationist, becomes involved after the Nazis shoot at him and capture Boy: “Now Tarzan make war!””


A summary of the plot of Tarzan Triumphs will illustrate the flavor of these potboilers. Nazi agents parachute into Tarzan’s peaceful kingdom and occupy a fortress, hoping to exploit oil and tin. Johnny Weissmuller, a slightly flabby but still commanding noble savage, rallies his natives (all of whom are white) against the Axis. “Kill Nadzies!” Tarzan commands the natives. They nod eagerly. The Germans are so despicable even the animals turn against them. Tarzan chases the head of the Nazi troops into the jungle, and, just as the fear-crazed German officer frantically signals Berlin on his shortwave radio, Tarzan kills him. In Berlin the radio operator recognizes the distress signal and rushes out to summon the general in charge of the African operation. While Tarzan, Boy, and Jungle Priestess laughingly look on, Cheetah the chimp chatters into the microphone of the transmitter. Ignorant of the fatal struggle in the jungle depths, the general hears the chimp on the radio, jumps to his feet, salutes, and yells to his subordinates that they are listening not to Africa but to Der Führer.


The roles of the sadistic, sex-crazed, bullet-headed, Nazi “Krauts” in these Jewish made anti-German movies were played by such Hollywood “heavies” as George Siegman, Erich von Stroheim, Walter Long and Hobart Bosworth. Actor Bobby Watson was kept busy throughout the war playing the part of Adolf Hitler.


The American public, inundated with this kind of anti-German propaganda, was brainwashed to hate Germany and the German people. Anything our brave and noble armed forces could do to them was less than they deserved. Bomb their cities, kill their women and children. But destroy evil Germany by all means possible!



British and American Political Leaders

Under Jewish Influence


The political leaders in both Britain and America were also under the controlling influence of the Jews. Both Roosevelt and Churchill had surrounded themselves with Jewish advisors, to the exclusion of almost anyone else, and relied on Jewish money to support their campaigns for office. Jews were 2% of the American population, but of the 15 members of Roosevelt’s “Brain Trust,” 8 of them were Jews. The Jews therefore had control of the political leaders of both Britain and America, as well as control of public opinion in both countries.


A partial list of Jews surrounding FDR included: Bernard Baruch, Felix Frankfurter, David E. Lilienthal, David Niles, Louis Brandeis, Samuel I. Rosenman, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Benjamin V. Cohen, Rabbi Stephen Wise, Francis Perkins, Sidney Hillman, Herbert H. Lehman, Jesse I. Straus, Harold J. Laski, Charles E. Wyzanski, Samuel Untermyer, Edward Filene, David Dubinsky, Mordecai Ezekiel, Abe Fortus, Isador Lubin, Harry Dexter White (Weiss), David Weintraub, Nathan G. Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Benjamin Cardozo, Anna Rosenberg, …and numerous, numerous others, almost to the exclusion of Gentile advisors.


As a consequence, Roosevelt was enveloped in a milieu of Jewish hate and hostility for Germany, to the extent that he eventually became a part of it himself, habitually making malicious anti-Hitler and anti-Nazi remarks in public. These indiscreet public remarks by Roosevelt foreclosed any possibility of amicable diplomatic relations between Nazi Germany and the United States.


Moreover, these Jews were, to a man, sympathetic to Stalin and the Communists and acted essentially as the Soviet Union’s agents within the American government. These Communist leaning Jews proliferated in every branch of Roosevelt’s government and spied routinely for the benefit of the Soviets. Roosevelt warmly regarded Joseph Stalin and referred to him as “Uncle Joe.


Churchill likewise surrounded himself with Jewish advisors. Churchill enjoyed living high on the hog though he had very little money. He was accused more than once during his long career of taking Jewish money in exchange for advocacy of policies which favored them. Churchill supplemented his salary as a public servant by writing as a journalist and by writing books, though these combined amounts were inadequate to finance his lavish life style. During his “wilderness years,” as he called them, between 1930 and 1939 when he was out of government, though still a Member of Parliament, Churchill was supported by a slush fund set up by a secret anti-German pressure group known as “The Focus.” Focus membership was composed of wealthy British Jews, like Sir Robert Mond, a directory of several chemical firms, and Sir Robert Waley-Cohen, the managing director of Shell Oil, who employed Churchill as their Gentile front man. The American Jew Bernard Baruch also made significant contributions to Churchill’s well being. Churchill’s assigned task was to fight Germany; to start warning the world about Nazi Germany. Churchill was a brilliant orator and a superb writer, and he did his job splendidly.


Jewish money, primarily through “The Focus,” paid for Churchill’s lavish life style, got him into the British cabinet, and eventually made him Prime Minister. From his position as a Member of Parliament, and subsequently as a member of the cabinet, Churchill, doing the bidding of The Focus, began loudly and belligerently berating Nazi Germany and sternly criticized first Stanley Baldwin’s and then Neville Chamberlain’s alleged blindness to the threat to Britain posed by Nazi Germany. He began to clamor for war. Both Roosevelt and Churchill became Gentile front men in international Jewry’s war on Germany.


A German Cartoon of Winston Churchill, depicting him as the paid front man of the Jews. In fact, he was paid lavishly by the Jewish group called “The Focus.


[Add. image] The two faces of the jewish controlled Churchill.


Churchill, in a speech before the House of Commons on October 5, 1938, said:

…but there can never be friendship between the British democracy and the Nazi power, that Power which spurns Christian ethics, which cheers its onwards course by a barbarous paganism, which vaunts the spirit of aggression and conquest, which derives strength and perverted pleasure from persecution, and uses, as we have seen with pitiless brutality the threat of murderous force.”


He was, of course, only repeating the super-heated, hysterical exaggerations and outright lies of international Jewish propaganda against Nazi Germany.


Contrary to Churchill’s warnings, Germany had no designs on Britain, whatever. Hitler actively sought an alliance with Britain, which the British rejected. Hitler even offered to provide German military assistance if it were ever needed to protect Britain. Hitler believed, and often stated, that the British Empire, and the Catholic Church, were international institutions which were absolutely essential to world peace and to world stability. Hitler was an open Anglophile who yearned to be accepted by the British and did everything he could to forge an alliance between Britain and Germany. He often said, as many British did also, that the British and German peoples were the same race; the same people actually, divided only by language. Hitler wanted only peace and friendship with Britain.


Hitler was dismayed by the steady stream of invective and hate propaganda directed at Germany by these British war mongers. In a speech given in Saarbrucken on October 9, 1938 he said:

…All it would take would be for Mr. Duff Cooper or Mr. Eden or Mr. Churchill to come to power in England instead of Chamberlain, and we know very well that it would be the goal of these men to immediately start a new world war. They do not even try to disguise their intents, they state them openly…


In the post-World War II world, Churchill has become almost God-like in the common mythology about the war, but the common mythology is so far from the truth that even an ardent Churchill sympathizer, Gordon Craig, felt obligated to write:

It is reasonably well-known today that Churchill was often ill-informed, that his claims about German strength were exaggerated and his prescriptions impractical, that his emphasis on air power was misplaced.


In “Rethinking Churchill,” 1998, Dr. Ralph Raico wrote:

For all the claptrap about Churchill’s “far-sightedness” during the 30s in opposing the “appeasers,” in the end the policy of Chamberlain’s government to rearm as quickly as possible, while testing the chances for peace with Germany was more realistic than Churchill’s.”



Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities


The attitude of President Roosevelt and his entourage toward Germany was even more extreme than that of the British leaders. Roosevelt was predisposed from the beginning of his career in public office to a deep antipathy for the German people in general, probably stemming from the anti-German propaganda of WWI, and there is no doubt that he personally despised Adolf Hitler. According to Professor David L. Hoggan (“The Forced War” – 1961):

Roosevelt’s hatred for Hitler was deep, vehement, passionate ― almost personal. This was due in no small part to an abiding envy and jealousy rooted in the great contrast between the two men, not only in their personal characters but also in their records as national leaders.”


The public lives of Roosevelt and Hitler had many similarities. Both assumed the leadership of their respective countries at the beginning of 1933 and then proceeded down parallel tracks. They both faced the enormous challenge of mass unemployment during a catastrophic worldwide economic depression. Each became a powerful leader in a vast military alliance during the most destructive war in history, albeit on opposite sides. Both men died while still in office within a few weeks of each other in April 1945. Though there were many similarities, the contrasts in their lives were enormous.


Roosevelt was born into one of the wealthiest families in America, and his life was completely free of economic worry. He, like Hitler, served in the First World War, but in an entirely different way. Roosevelt spent the war in an office in Washington as Under Secretary of the Navy. Hitler was born into a provincial family and grew up in semi-poverty. As a young man he worked as a manual laborer and lived hand-to-mouth. He served in the First World War as a front line soldier in the hell of the Western Front, never higher in rank than corporal. He was wounded several times and was decorated for bravery.


Despite his Ivy League education, his confident, aristocratic manner and persuasive rhetoric, Roosevelt was unable to solve the enormous economic problems existing in the United State which he inherited when he became president. Throughout his presidency, he was never able to reduce unemployment or to get the economy moving again. At the end of his first four years as president, millions of people remained unemployed, undernourished and poorly housed in a country rich in all the resources required for incomparable prosperity. Roosevelt’s New Deal was plagued from beginning to end with bitter strikes and bloody clashes between labor and industry.


The story unfolded very differently in Germany under Hitler. When Hitler became Chancellor, he was faced with all the problems facing Roosevelt, multiplied many times over. Yet, Hitler rallied his people behind a radical program that transformed Germany within a few years from an economically ruined land on the verge of civil war, into Europe’s powerhouse. Germany underwent a social, cultural and economic rebirth without parallel in history.


The contrast between the personalities of the two men was also stark. Hitler tended to be straightforward in his relationship with others and unambiguous in communicating his intentions. He had a conservative sense of Christian morality and was not a liar. Roosevelt put on a front of bon homme, but behind the big smile he was devious and calculating, and he manipulated others by misleading them. He was very probably a sociopath, devoid of a conscience, as many successful politicians are.


Hitler, on the other hand, was truly a man of the people who genuinely wished to elevate the German people out of their “slough of despond” to the realization of their full potential as a people and as a nation.


In contrast to Hitler, there was much of the cynical politician in Roosevelt who may have cared about the people in an abstract way, but he believed that only he knew what was best for them and that they were incapable of understanding such matters themselves. He manipulated the American people through devious and deceitful means, such as lying about his true intentions about taking America to war. He even admitted his devious and contradictory nature. He once said:

I never let my left hand know what my right hand is doing.


Roosevelt had worked in the Wilson administration during the First World War and was impressed by Wilson’s boundless idealism, and also by the way he was idolized by people around the world for his high-minded approach to the peace settlement after the war. Like Wilson before him, Roosevelt had an exaggerated, messianic view of himself as uniquely qualified for national leadership, and believed that he had been called upon by providence to reshape the world. He was convinced, as so many American leaders have been, that the world could be saved only by remodeling itself after the United States. Presidents like Wilson and Roosevelt, and George W. Bush most recently, view the world not as a multiplicity of different nations, races, and cultures who must mutually respect each others’ separate collective identities in order to live together in peace. They look at the world from a self righteous missionary perspective which divides the nations of the world into two groups ― those representing “good” on one side (our side), and those representing “evil” on the other (This is known as a “Manichean” world perspective.). They also see America as providentially ordained as the permanent leader of the forces of “good” in the world, with the mission of either destroying or converting the forces of “evil.” (Luckily, this view just happens to correspond to the economic and political interests of those who wield power in the United States.) Nazi Germany, in Roosevelt’s view, represented the forces of “evil,” with whom normal relations were impossible, and with whom one could not even reason; and so, he refused to try. He regarded Nazi Germany with total hostility.


Roosevelt most certainly did not see himself as an evil man, though his actions certainly made him one. He sincerely believed that he was doing the right and noble thing in pressuring Britain and France into a war against “evil” Germany. He was St. Michael the archangel leading the world in an existential struggle against the forces of Satan. The result of his vision of himself as the leader of the forces of righteousness, and his view of Germany under the Nazis as the force of evil in the world constantly threatening the forces of righteousness, produced an atmosphere of war hysteria and war psychosis among those who surrounded him and who ran his administration, to the extent that any utterance or action of this “force of evil,” that is, Nazi Germany, was given the worst possible interpretation, and evil designs were imputed to them however benign their actual intentions. The Jews who surrounded him and advised him, and who hated Hitler’s Germany for their own reasons, fed Roosevelt’s delusions about himself and his role in the world, and validated his Manichean view of the world.


To illustrate the war psychosis which had seized American political leaders during this time, Assistant Secretary of State F.B. Sayre exclaimed to British Ambassador Sir Ronald Lindsay on September 9, 1938;

…at such a time, when war is threatening and Germany is pounding at our gates, it seems to me tragic that we have not been able to reach and sign an agreement [against Germany].”


To imagine Germany “pounding at the gates” of America in 1938 was totally absurd. Germany lacked the means to pound at the gates of Britain, just across the English Channel. Moreover, Hitler and the Nazis had no motive or reason in 1938 to view America with hostility; only with dismay at America’s baseless bellicosity towards Germany. If anything, it was the United States “pounding at the gates” of Germany.


In this atmosphere of false urgency, America’s Jewish secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., telephoned the Jewish French President, Leon Blum, and suggested freezing German bank accounts in France, in hopes of pushing France into war with Germany. Roosevelt, himself, became increasingly belligerent towards Hitler, and repeatedly made personally insulting remarks about him in public. (Rather like the current war hysteria over Iran, but more extreme.)


William C. Bullitt was the American Ambassador to France at the time, as well as Ambassador at Large to all other European countries. Like Roosevelt, Bullitt “rose from the rich.” He was born into a wealthy Philadelphia banking family and was descended from Jonathan Horwitz, a German Jew who had immigrated to America. Bullitt was especially close to Roosevelt and shared Roosevelt’s enthusiasm for “Uncle Joe” (Stalin) and the Soviet Union, as well as his enthusiasm for war with Germany. Bullitt was used by Roosevelt to transmit messages to other American Ambassadors, including Joseph P. Kennedy, Ambassador to London (father of President John Kennedy), and Anthony Biddle, Ambassador to Warsaw, and those messages consistently expressed Roosevelt’s belligerence towards Germany.


In 1919 Bullitt was an assistant to President Wilson at the Versailles Peace Conference. That same year, Bullitt was sent to Russia to meet with Lenin to determine if the new Bolshevik government deserved recognition by the Allies. Bullitt was impressed with what he saw in Bolshevik Russia, and upon his return to Washington, urged recognition of the new regime. He was very sympathetic to Communist aims. In 1923 Bullitt married Louise Bryant Reed, the widow of American Communist leader John Reed (The movie, “Reds,” starring Warren Beatty, 1981, was about John Reed). When Roosevelt became president in 1933, he brought Bullitt back into diplomatic service. Throughout his career, Roosevelt had consistently maintained close relations with people who were either Communists or Communist sympathizers. In 1938, all U.S. envoys in Europe were subordinated to Bullitt who was based in Paris. Roosevelt bypassed the State Department and frequently spoke with Bullitt directly by telephone, often daily, giving him precisely detailed and ultra-confidential instructions on how to conduct America’s foreign policy.


Bullitt had access to Roosevelt by telephone at any hour of the day or night. Roosevelt and Bullitt were close friends and saw eye to eye on all foreign policy issues, and were especially in consonance in their hostility to Germany. Both were aristocrats and thorough internationalists with a shared view on how to remake the world, and both saw themselves as destined to bring about that grand reorganization. In Europe, Bullitt spoke with the voice and the authority of President Roosevelt himself.


President Roosevelt riding in a car with his “agent provocateur” Ambassador William C. Bullitt


The Polish Ambassador to Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki, reported back to Warsaw that William C. Bullitt had informed him that President Roosevelt was determined to bring America into the next European war. Bullitt predicted that a long war would soon break out in Europe.

Of Germany and her Chancellor, Adolf Hitler, he [Bullitt] spoke with extreme vehemence and with bitter hatred,”


Potocki reported:

He [Bullitt] suggested that the war might last six years, and he advocated that it should be fought to a point where Germany could never recover.”


[Add. image] William Christian Bullitt, Jr. (January 25, 1891 – February 15, 1967) United States Ambassador to the Soviet Union, 21 November 1933 – 16 May 1936. United States Ambassador to France, 1936–1940. Bullitt was born to a prominent, well-to-do Philadelphia family, the son of Louisa Gross (Horwitz) and William Christian Bullitt, Sr. 


Potocki asked Bullitt how such a war might begin, since it was very unlikely that Germany would attack either France or Britain. Bullitt said that it would likely begin with a war between Germany and some other country, and that the Western Powers would then intervene against Germany. Bullitt predicted an eventual war between Germany and the Soviet Union, which Germany would probably win, but would then be so worn out that it would have to capitulate to the Western Powers. Bullitt assured Potocki that the United States would participate in any such war if Britain and France made the first move. When Bullitt asked about the German-Polish problem, Potocki said that Poland would fight rather than give in to German demands, and Bullitt and Roosevelt were both encouraging Poland in this stance. Potocki attributed the belligerent American attitude toward Germany solely to Jewish influence. He reported to Warsaw again and again that American public opinion was merely the product of Jewish manipulation.


In a report from Washington back to the Foreign Ministry in Warsaw, dated February 9, 1939, he wrote:

The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful …

… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent.

In their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.

This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean of blood.

In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be subdued by the ‘democratic world.’ ”



Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums


Britain’s Foreign Minister, Lord Halifax, continued to maintain a hostile attitude toward Hitler and Germany, and was determined to provoke a war with Germany. He circulated rumors both at home and abroad which presented the foreign policy of Hitler in the worst possible light. He would have found fault with Hitler no matter which direction he turned or what he did. Halifax dispatched a message to President Roosevelt on January 24, 1939 in which he claimed to have received;

a large number of reports from various reliable sources which throw a most disquieting light on Hitler’s mood and intentions.”


He falsely claimed that Hitler harbored a fierce hatred for Great Britain. Hitler had, in fact, consistently expressed only admiration for Great Britain and had pursued a goal of Anglo-German cooperation. Regardless, Halifax continued to claim the opposite. Halifax claimed that Hitler wanted to establish an independent Ukraine, and that he intended to destroy the Western Powers in a surprise attack before moving Eastward. He claimed that not only British intelligence but “highly placed Germans who are anxious to prevent this crime” had furnished him evidence of this evil conspiracy. No German had furnished any such thing to him. He made it up. Hitler had not the remotest intention of attacking either Great Britain or France.


Churchill and Halifax were determined to have a war with Germany.


How to explain the desire of these men to have a war with Germany? These men, Churchill, Halifax, Cooper, Eden, Vansittart, et al, were conservative men devoted to the British Empire and to its dominant position in the world. But they were also nervously aware that British power was waning. Churchill had been one of the most vocal advocates for war against Germany before World War I. He, and the others, were now advocating war with Germany for the same reason as before ― Germany was becoming too powerful, both commercially and militarily, and therefore threatened to eclipse the dominance of the British Empire.


These conservative British leaders were devoted to the old balance of power principle worked out after the Napoleonic Wars. Preventing any one power from becoming dominant on the European continent had always been an overriding foreign policy principle of Great Britain.


Germany’s defeat in a war would serve the interests of both Britain and International Jewry. Vilifying Hitler and deliberately misinterpreting his actions and intentions served only as pretexts for a war they were determined to bring about for their own reasons. These advocates of war with Germany were well aware that Britain could not defeat Germany without bringing the United States in on her side, as in World War I. At the same time that they were developing pretexts for war against Germany, they were propagandizing President Roosevelt to make sure he was behind them, though little propaganda was needed, as Roosevelt was already in their corner. To fan the flames, Halifax made the most dire, though unfounded warnings to Roosevelt concerning Germany’s intentions. He told Roosevelt in a telegram that Hitler planned to invade Holland and give the Dutch East Indies to Japan. (Japan needed its oil.) Germany had no such plan. He told Roosevelt that he was certain that Germany would soon give Britain an ultimatum. Halifax added that the British leaders expected a surprise air attack from Germany before the ultimatum actually arrived. He claimed to have knowledge that Germany was mobilizing for such an attack as he was composing the telegram and that the attack could occur at any moment. These were preposterous inventions.


Hitler was preoccupied at the time with the Polish matter and had not given a thought to attacking Britain. But Halifax was determined. He went on to emphasize “Hitler’s mental condition, his insensate rage against Great Britain and his megalomania.” He confided that Britain was greatly increasing her armament program, and he believed that it was his duty to enlighten Roosevelt about Hitler’s intentions and attitudes;

in view of the relations of confidence which exist between our two governments and the degree to which we have exchanged information hitherto.


Halifax claimed that Chamberlain was contemplating a public warning to Germany prior to Hitler’s annual Reichstag speech on January 30, 1939, and suggested that Roosevelt should do the same without delay. Chamberlain gave no such warning, but Halifax hoped to goad Roosevelt into making another alarmist and bellicose speech.


Halifax had sent Anthony Eden to the U.S. in December 1938 to spread rumors about sinister German plans, and Roosevelt responded with a provocative and insulting warning to Germany in his message to Congress on January 4, 1939. Halifax hoped for a repeat performance from Roosevelt as a result of his most recent telegram. Halifax was preparing a war propaganda campaign for the British public and such a warning from Roosevelt would feed into his purposes. All of these machinations of Lord Halifax amounted to sheer fantasy, but Roosevelt, already predisposed toward war with Germany, swallowed it whole. Halifax only told him what he already wanted to hear.


Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, another strident advocate for war, sent a message to Halifax stating that;

the United States Government had for some time been basing their policy upon the possibility of just such a situation arising as was foreshadowed in your telegram.


This was the Roosevelt administration’s way of informing Britain that it supported the idea of war with Germany despite American public opinion, which was totally against it.


Roosevelt wanted a war to distract attention from his failed economic policies. He also wanted war because he cherished the idea of himself as a heroic wartime president. The Jews who surrounded Roosevelt, such as Henry Morgenthau, Jr., as well as all the other officials in the Roosevelt administration, worked themselves into a fever fantasizing about Nazi Germany’s malevolent intentions.


Henry Morgenthau, Jr.


According to David L. Hoggan, in his paper, “President Roosevelt and the Origins of the 1939 War”:

…anyone within Roosevelt’s and Hull’s circle who did not declare that Hitler was hopelessly insane was virtually ostracized.


On January 4, 1939, Roosevelt told Congress that U.S. neutrality policy must be re-examined. He wanted a freer hand to act against Germany. At this same time (the next day, in fact) Poland’s foreign minister, Beck, joined Hitler at Berchtesgaden in an amicable meeting during which Hitler stressed German-Polish cooperation in settling the matter of Danzig and the Polish Corridor. Though cordial, the conversations were unproductive and nothing concrete was settled. Hitler made clear, however, that as Danzig was a German city, sooner or later it would have to be returned to Germany.


The contrast between Hitler’s calm, diplomatic approach in his talks with Polish officials, and the deranged, hysterical, confrontational manner imagined of him by officials surrounding Roosevelt, could not have been greater.


American Charge d’Affaires in Berlin, Prentiss Gilbert, reported back that the situation between Poland and Germany was not as incendiary as Washington officials imagined. He reported to the State Department on February 3, 1939 that Hitler’s basic policy in the East was friendship with Poland. It seemed certain according to Gilbert that Beck would be willing to allow the return of Danzig to Germany in exchange for a 25 year Pact, and for a German guarantee of the Polish Corridor. That is not, however, what Roosevelt and his officials wanted to hear. But had Britain and America stayed out of it, that is most likely what would have happened.



Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia


Meanwhile, what remained of Czechoslovakia after the German annexation of the Sudetenland, soon fell apart, as described in the previous chapter. All that remained of the former Czechoslovakia was parts of Bohemia and Moravia, and on March 15, 1939, with the consent of the Czecho-Slovak president, Emil Hacha, Germany occupied Bohemia and Moravia and proclaimed it a German protectorate in order to prevent its being taken over by the Communists. In any case, Bohemia and Moravia had existed under German rule for most of its thousand year history, so this was nothing new. Czechoslovakia was a new, artificial creation of the Peace Conference after WWI, which now had already fallen apart. The entire region had a German character. Mozart premiered his opera “Don Giovanni” in Prague. Pilsen, Bohemia’s fourth largest city, is known worldwide for Pilsner beer, a German beer. Another Bohemian city with a German name, Budweis, is best known for the original Budweiser beer (the European brand).


Britain initially accepted the German occupation, reasoning that her guarantee of Czechoslovakia was rendered invalid by the collapse of the Czech state. But Prime Minister Chamberlain had been under attack by Churchill, Halifax, Duff Cooper, and Vansittart, among others, for his “appeasement” of Hitler through the Munich Agreement. After Germany occupied Bohemia and Moravia, the attacks on him intensified, and were egged on even further by Roosevelt. Chamberlain became flustered and defensive. In a speech on March 17, he declared that he wished to correct a misapprehension of weakness on his part. He said that Munich had been the right policy, but now Hitler had broken that agreement by occupying Czechoslovakia (Bohemia and Moravia). From that point on, Chamberlain stated, Britain would strenuously oppose, even to the point of war, any further territorial moves by Hitler, no matter how justified.


The occupation of Bohemia and Moravia caused a greater outburst of hostility towards Germany in Washington, D.C., than it did in Britain, or for that matter, in any other capital in the world, though the reason for it is not clear. The occupation in no way affected American interests.


Nevertheless, the head of the German Embassy in Washington reported back to Berlin that a violent press campaign against Germany had been launched throughout the United States. President Roosevelt also pressured Lord Halifax to adopt an “outspoken anti-German policy,” in Britain, as well. Halifax replied by promising Roosevelt that the British leaders were “going to start educating public opinion as best they can to the need for action.” In other words, they would launch an anti-German/pro-war propaganda campaign.



Roosevelt Pushes for War


Ambassador Bullitt informed the Poles that both he and President Roosevelt were counting on Polish willingness to go to war over Danzig if necessary. On March 19, 1939, Bullitt informed the Poles that Roosevelt was prepared to do everything possible to promote a war between the British and the French against Germany. Halifax, meanwhile, was attempting to create a broad anti-German front and an encirclement of Germany by proposing an alliance to include Britain, France, Poland and the Soviet Union. The Poles distrusted the Soviets as much as they did the Germans, and backed away from any such agreement that would bind Poland to the Soviet Union.


Both Lord Halifax and President Roosevelt began to vigorously encourage the Poles in their refusal to accept the German demands regarding Danzig. Bullitt finally told the Poles that he regarded an alliance between Britain, France and Poland, without the Soviet Union, to be the best possible arrangement. He said that British leaders hoped that there would be a war between Germany and the Soviet Union, and that they were not eager to make commitments to the Soviet Union for that reason. The Soviet Union was also becoming ever more distrustful of Britain and France.


On March 26, Bullitt contacted Ambassador to London Joseph P. Kennedy and instructed him to tell Prime Minister Chamberlain that the United States hoped that Great Britain would go to war against Germany in event of hostilities over Danzig. Britain then announced a doubling in size of its army. On March 31, 1939 Prime Minister Chamberlain announced in Parliament a “blank check” guarantee to Poland in event of war between Poland and Germany, that is, that Britain would declare war on Germany if Germany were to invade Poland. France joined Britain and made the same guarantee.


Ambassador Kennedy was appalled at the idea of a war with Germany, and only reluctantly carried out his duties as Ambassador when that possibility was involved. To this extent, he was out of step with the Roosevelt administration, as well as with the British government. Both Roosevelt and Bullitt disliked and distrusted Kennedy and Kennedy disliked and distrusted both of them. In a letter to his wife, he wrote:

I talk to Bullitt occasionally. He is more rattlebrained than ever. His judgment is pathetic and I am afraid of his influence on FDR because they think alike on many things.”



Anti-war Movement Becomes Active


Meanwhile, back in the United States, the anti-war movement was growing in strength. One of the leading voices in that movement was that of Hamilton Fish, a leading Republican congressman from New York. Fish made a series of radio speeches to expose Roosevelt’s march to war while claiming that he only wanted peace. On January 6, 1939, Fish told a nationwide radio audience:

The inflammatory and provocative message of the President to Congress and the world [given two days before] has unnecessarily alarmed the American people and created, together with a barrage of propaganda emanating from high New Deal officials, a war hysteria, dangerous to the peace of America and the world. The only logical conclusion to such speeches is another war fought overseas by American soldiers.

All the totalitarian nations referred to by President Roosevelt … haven’t the faintest thought of making war on us or invading Latin America.

I do not propose to mince words on such an issue, affecting the life, liberty and happiness of our people. The time has come to call a halt to the warmongers of the New Deal, backed by war profiteers, Communists, and hysterical internationalists [meaning Jews], who want us to quarantine the world with American blood and money.

He [Roosevelt] evidently desires to whip up a frenzy of hate and war psychosis as a red herring to take the minds of our people off their own unsolved domestic problems. He visualizes hobgoblins and creates in the public mind a fear of foreign invasions that exists only in his own imagination.”


In another radio address of April 5, 1939, Congressman Fish said:

The youth of America are again being prepared for another blood bath in Europe in order to make the world safe for democracy.

If Hitler and the Nazi government regain Memel or Danzig, taken away from Germany by the Versailles Treaty, and where the population is 90 percent German, why is it necessary to issue threats and denunciations and incite our people to war? I would not sacrifice the life of one American soldier for a half dozen Memels or Danzigs. We repudiated the Versailles Treaty because it was based on greed and hatred, and as long as its inequalities and injustices exist there are bound to be wars of liberation.

The sooner certain provisions of the Versailles Treaty are scrapped the better for the peace of the world.

I believe that if the areas that are distinctly German in population are restored to Germany, except Alsace-Lorraine and the Tyrol, there will be no war in western Europe. There may be a war between the Nazis and the Communists, but if there is that is not our war or that of Great Britain or France or any of the democracies.

New Deal spokesmen have stirred up war hysteria into a veritable frenzy. The New Deal propaganda machine is working overtime to prepare the minds of our people for war, who are already suffering from a bad case of war jitters.

President Roosevelt is the number one warmonger in America, and is largely responsible for the fear that pervades the Nation which has given the stock market and the American people a bad case of the jitters.

I accuse the administration of instigating war propaganda and hysteria to cover up the failure and collapse of the New Deal policies, with 12 million unemployed and business confidence destroyed.

I believe we have far more to fear from our enemies from within than we have from without. All the Communists are united in urging us to go to war against Germany and Japan for the benefit of Soviet Russia.

Great Britain still expects every American to do her duty, by preserving the British Empire and her colonies. The war profiteers, munitions makers and international bankers [meaning Jews] are all set up for our participation in a new world war.


The hero aviator, Charles A. Lindbergh, was also a leading opponent of Roosevelt’s war aims, and went around the country speaking out against going to war with Germany. In his diary entry of May 1, 1941, Lindbergh wrote:

The pressure for war is high and mounting. The people are opposed to it, but the Administration seems to have ‘the bit in its teeth’ and [is] hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in the country are behind war, and they control a huge part of our press and radio and most of our motion pictures. There are also the ‘intellectuals,’ and the ‘Anglophiles,’ and the British agents who are allowed free rein, the international financial interests, and many others.


Roosevelt’s motives for wanting a war with Germany have long been the subject of debate. As America’s interests were not threatened in any way by Germany, nor would they be served by a war, Roosevelt’s determination to have a war made little sense…, that is, unless one takes into account Roosevelt’s intimate ties to organized Jewry. As Jewish historian Lucy Dawidowicz noted:

Roosevelt himself brought into his immediate circle more Jews than any other President before or after him. Felix Frankfurter, Bernard M. Baruch and Henry Morgenthau were his close advisers. Benjamin V. Cohen, Samuel Rosenman and David K. Niles were his friends and trusted aides.”


Roosevelt was totally in thrall to the Jews, owed his political career to the Jews, and had so surrounded himself with Jews, almost to the exclusion of all others, that he essentially became one of them. Their attitudes, motives and goals became his. They hated Germany, so he hated Germany. They were determined to destroy Germany, so he was determined to destroy Germany.


In the summer of 1939 Polish ambassador to Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki returned to Warsaw on leave and was astonished at the calm mood in Poland, compared to the war psychosis that had gripped the West. In a conversation with Polish Foreign Ministry Under-Secretary, Count Jan Szembek, about the growing war psychosis that had gripped the West. Potocki said to Szembek:

In the West there are all kinds of elements openly pushing for war: the Jews, the super-capitalists, the arms dealers. Today they are all ready for a great business, because they have found a place which can be set on fire: Danzig; and a nation that is ready to fight: Poland. They want to do business on our backs. They are indifferent to the destruction of our country. Indeed, since everything will have to be rebuilt later on, they can profit from that as well.” From the diary of Count Szembek.



Poles Murder German Nationals

Within the Corridor


Reports of increased hostilities breaking out between Poles and ethnic Germans in Polish controlled territories created a feeling of urgency in Germany. For several months before Germany’s invasion of Poland, ethnic Poles, protected by the Polish Army, launched a reign of terror against German nationals living within the Polish Corridor. (Formerly part of Germany where Germans had lived for several hundred years.) It is estimated that some 58,000 German nationals were killed during this period by marauding mobs, encouraged by the Polish government. The German government lodged dozens of formal complaint with the League of Nations, but with no results. Hitler became increasingly distressed about it and said to the British Ambassador Sir Neville Henderson on August 25, 1939:

Poland’s provocations have become intolerable.”


Typical of these massacres was that which occurred in the German town of Bromberg, in the Polish Corridor. In this massacre, called “Bloody Sunday,” 5,500 ethnic Germans were slaughtered like pigs. Children were nailed to barns, women were raped and hacked to death with axes, men were beaten and hacked to death. 328 Germans were herded into Bromberg’s Protestant church, after which the church was set on fire. All 328 burned to death.


[Add. image] William Joyce, aka, “Lord Haw Haw” and a book on his radio work for the German war effort.


William Joyce, nicknamed Lord Haw Haw by British propaganda, became a German citizen and took up Germany’s cause against Poland. He described the horrible conditions of the Germans who lived in the former German territory which was now a part of Poland, in his book, “Twilight Over England.” The following is his description of what happened in Bromberg:

German men and women were hunted like wild beasts through the streets of Bromberg. When they were caught, they were mutilated and torn to pieces by the Polish mob… . Every day the butchery increased… . Thousands of Germans fled from their homes in Poland with nothing more than the clothes that they wore.. On the nights of August 25 to August 31 inclusive, there occurred, besides innumerable attacks on civilians of German blood, 44 perfectly authenticated acts of armed violence against German official persons and property.


According to historian John Toland in his book “Adolf Hitler,” when Hitler first learned of the Bromberg slaughter, at first he refused to believe that such a number had been killed, but, when Berndt (the German public official who had brought the matter to his attention) replied that it may have been somewhat exaggerated but something monstrous must have happened to give rise to such stories, Hitler shouted:

They’ll pay for this! Now no one will stop me from teaching these fellows a lesson they’ll never forget! I will not have my Germans butchered like cattle!


At this point, according to Toland, the Fuhrer went to the phone and, in Berndt’s presence, ordered Keitel to issue “Directive No. 1 for the Conduct of the War.” That may well have been the actual trigger for the war, though the causes of the war were multiple.


Murdered Germans before their burial in the Protestant cemetery of Bromberg.


German woman weeping over the murder of her husband in Bromberg by marauding Poles.


[Add. image] The German Catholic Priest of the Church of the Sacred Heart, Bromberg, in silent prayer before the bodies of murdered Bromberg Germans.


On August 24, 1939, a week before the outbreak of hostilities, Sir Horace Wilson, advisor to Chamberlain, went to Ambassador Kennedy with an urgent appeal from Prime minister Chamberlain to President Roosevelt. He wanted Roosevelt to “put pressure on the Poles” to open negotiations with Germany in order to avert a war. Chamberlain was already regretting Britain’s “guarantee” to Poland. Kennedy telephoned the State Department and said that the British;

felt that they could not, given their obligations, do anything of this sort but that we could.”


Roosevelt rejected Chamberlain’s plea out of hand. When Kennedy reported this back to Chamberlain, Chamberlain, according to Kennedy, said:

The futility of it all, is the thing that is frightful. After all, we cannot save the Poles. We can merely carry on a war of revenge that will mean the destruction of all Europe.”


Kennedy sent a telegram to Roosevelt urging him to intervene on behalf of peace. “It seems to me,” Kennedy wrote;

that this situation may crystallize to a point where the President can be the savior of the world. The British government as such certainly cannot accept any agreement with Hitler, but there may be a point when the President himself may work out plans for world peace. Now this opportunity may never arise, but as a fairly practical fellow all my life, I believe that it is entirely conceivable that the President can get himself in a spot where he can save the world.


Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr., U.S. Ambassador to Britain under Roosevelt.


Roosevelt rejected Kennedy’s efforts and called Kennedy’s plea;

…the silliest message to me that I have ever received.”


Roosevelt told Henry Morgenthau that Kennedy was a;

pain in the neck.” “Joe has been an appeaser and will always be an appeaser,”


Roosevelt said:

If Germany and Italy made a good peace offer tomorrow, Joe would start working on the King and his friend the Queen and from there on down to get everybody to accept it.”


Angered by Kennedy’s stubborn attempts to prevent a war in Europe, Roosevelt essentially instructed him to cease and desist, and told him that any American peace effort was completely out of the question. Kennedy resigned shortly thereafter under pressure.


Deep distrust was developing between the British government and the Soviets. The British had made strong efforts to create a mutual pact against Germany that would include Britain, France, Poland and the Soviet Union, and had finally obtained the Soviets’ agreement to a joint declaration. But when Chamberlain gave his blank check guarantee to the Polish government, he did it without consulting the Soviets. The Soviets were bewildered that the British would go ahead with a new plan without consulting them, and took it as an insult. The Soviets were already convinced that France and Britain were scheming against them. The Poles, for their part, were deeply distrustful of the Russians, and the British/French guarantee of Poland strengthened Polish resistance to Soviet participation in any kind of alliance in which they themselves took part. The British/French guarantee antagonized the Russians but at the same time did not have the effect of restraining Hitler.


Unable to reach a collective agreement with Britain and France against Germany, the Soviets began to fear that they might face a war with Germany alone, so they began searching around for a change of policy. On May 3, 1939, Stalin fired Foreign Minister Maksim Litvinov, who was Jewish and an advocate of collective security with Britain and France, and replaced him with Vyacheslav Molotov, who soon began negotiations with the Nazi foreign minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop. The Soviets, at the same time, continued negotiations with Britain and France, but in the end Stalin decided to reach an agreement with Germany. In so doing, he hoped to avoid a war with Germany until such time that he could re-build the Soviet Military which had been severely weakened by the purge of the Red Army officer corps in 1937. For his part, Hitler wanted a nonaggression pact with the Soviet Union so that his armies could invade Poland without winding up in a two front war. After the Polish matter was settled, Hitler believed that he would then be able to deal with Britain and France from the stand point of a fait accompli regarding Poland. Hitler did not believe that Britain and France would follow through on their guarantee to Poland and actually declare war on Germany. It made no sense to him that they would take such a step when they were manifestly in no position to act upon it.


The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed in Moscow on August 23, 1939. Formally a nonaggression pact, the agreement also included a secret provision to divide Northern and Eastern Europe into German and Soviet spheres of influence. Poland was to be divided between Germany and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was to take back the region of Poland that it had controlled since 1772. The Baltic states, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and the Hertza region (on the Romanian border in Southern Ukraine), were ceded to Soviet control.


Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov signs the Nazi-Soviet Non-aggression Pact while German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop and Stalin look on.


The news of the Pact was met with utter shock and surprise by government leaders and media worldwide, most of whom were unaware of the negotiations which had been going on between the Soviet Union and Germany. They were aware only of the ongoing negotiations between the Soviets and Britain and France. Jews around the world, who looked upon the Soviet Union as the base of International Jewry, were particularly shocked by the agreement. They saw it as a sell out by the Soviets. In reality it was only a ploy to buy time by both Stalin and Hitler, and neither side saw it as permanent.


During the months leading up to the outbreak of war, Polish armed forces repeatedly violated German borders. Numerous altercations occurred between Polish irregulars and regular or auxiliary Germans all along the Polish/German border; in each case, on German territory. Poland in 1939 was highly militarized with an army larger than the German army. Moreover, Poland’s new leaders were military men with an aggressive attitude towards Germany. Poland even underwent a partial mobilization in March, 1939, and on August 30, 1939, ordered a total mobilization. (According to the Geneva Convention, mobilization is equivalent to a declaration of war.) On August 31, 1939, Polish irregular armed forces launched a full scale attack on the German border town of Gleiwitz.


The next day, September 1, 1939, German forces invaded Poland. On that same day, Hitler addresses the Reichstag.

For months we have been suffering under the torture of a problem which the Versailles Diktat created ― a problem which has deteriorated until it becomes intolerable for us. Danzig was and is a Germany city. The Corridor was and is German. Both these territories owe their cultural development exclusively to the German people. Danzig was separated from us, the Corridor was annexed by Poland. As in other German territories of the East, all German minorities living there have been ill-treated in the most distressing manner.

… proposals for mediation have failed because in the meanwhile there, first of all, came as an answer the sudden Polish general mobilization, followed by more Polish atrocities. These were again repeated last night. Recently in one night there were as many as twenty-one frontier incidents; last night there were fourteen, of which three were serious. I have, therefore, resolved to speak to Poland in the same language that Poland for months past has used towards us. This night for the first time Polish regular soldiers fired on our territory. Since 5:45 a.m. we have been returning fire, and from now on bombs will be met by bombs. Whoever fights with poison gas will be fought with poison gas.


The invasion of Poland occurred one week after the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed. On September 3, 1939, to Hitler’s great surprise, Britain and France declared war on Germany, though they totally lacked the means of intervening in Poland.


On September 3, also, Winston Churchill was returned to the cabinet by Prime Minister Chamberlain as First Lord of the Admiralty, the job he had had in WWI. Churchill’s bellicose warnings against Hitler leading up to the war now made him seem prescient and far sighted to many. On September 17, the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the other side. The Soviet invasion of Poland produced no reaction from Britain and France, though the Soviets had done precisely the same thing the Germans had done, albeit, without Germany’s justification of reclaiming lost territory. This gave the lie to Britain’s reason for declaring war on Germany.


Germany’s invasion of Poland provided only Britain’s needed pretext for war. It was not a casus belli. The war with Poland ended on October 6, 1939, after which Germany and the Soviet Union divided and annexed Poland.


As in interjection, we shall mention here the reaction of Poland’s Jews to the Russian invasion of Poland. Jews throughout Europe saw the Soviet Union as “good for the Jews,” and were very favorably disposed towards the Soviet Union. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, in his book “Two Hundred Years Together,” wrote that when the Soviets invaded Poland:

Polish Jews, and the Jewish youth in particular, met the advancing Red Army with exulting enthusiasm” (as they had also done during the Soviet invasion of 1919).


The enthusiastic welcome of the Soviet invaders by Poland’s Jews angered Polish patriots and became a major aspect of Polish anti-Jewish attitudes in later years. Jews welcomed the Soviet troops in the very same way when they later invade Lithuania, the other Baltic States, and other central and east European countries. After the war when the Soviet Union took control of all of Eastern and Central Europe, all-Jewish regimes were installed in each of these countries.


Hitler’s invasion of Poland is known as the beginning of World War II, though that is not what Hitler intended. Hitler did not even want a war with Poland, much less a world war. Hitler had made every attempt to settle diplomatically the dispute with Poland over the return of Danzig and a highway across the Polish Corridor. In fact, Hitler wanted more than to simply settle the dispute with Poland; he wanted an alliance with Poland in his anti-Comintern pact against the Soviet Union, which he had already concluded with Japan. Poland saw the Soviet Union as her enemy and the anti-Comintern pact would actually have served Poland’s interests. They were foolish, indeed, to have rejected it.


The Poles had stubbornly refused to negotiate with Germany for a number of reasons. First, the Poles and the Germans had shared a mutual hostility for centuries. The military officers who ruled Poland were a proud lot with an exaggerated confidence in their military power. Britain, France and the United States all pressured Poland to resist Hitler’s demands; and finally, British Prime Minister Chamberlain had insanely given the Poles an unsolicited war guarantee, promising to declare war on Germany if Hitler invaded, and he talked France into doing the same. From March to August, 1939, Hitler did his best to negotiate a settlement with Poland over Danzig, and his demands were far from unreasonable. But the Poles, confident in their British and French war guarantee defiantly refused. Finally, at wits end, Hitler made a deal with Stalin and the two invaded and divided Poland.


What would it have cost Poland to have concluded a peaceful settlement with Hitler? The German city of Danzig, which was under the supervision of the League of Nations, and did not belong to Poland, would have been returned to Germany. Germany would also have been allowed to build a highway and a railroad across the former German territory, the Polish Corridor, to reconnect with East Prussia. That’s it! A peaceful settlement of the dispute would have taken nothing away from Poland. But the cost of refusing to settle the dispute peacefully was a world war in which millions of Poles were killed, much of their country destroyed, followed by 50 years of Nazi and Soviet occupation. If Poland had yielded, there would have been no World War II, no Cold War, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War, and Eastern Europe would have escaped the horrific occupation and domination by the Soviet Union.




[END of Part 17]





PDF Notes


Total words = 14,484

* Total pages = 70

*Total images = 22

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.





Click to download a PDF of this post (3.0 MB).


The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 17







Click on a link to go to another part:


Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland


See also:


The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT






Version History


 Version 2Mar 16, 2017 — Improved formatting. Added PDF of post for download.


Version 1: Mar 15, 2017 — Created post.

Read Full Post »

[[Dies ist eine Übersetzung von The Blackguard – Winston Churchill. Wenn Leser erkennen keine wesentlichen Fehler in der Übersetzung informieren Sie mich in den Kommentaren wissen.]

This is a German translation of The Blackguard — Winston Churchill. If readers spot any significant errors in the translation please let me know in the comment section.]

 Winston Churchill - Das Blackguard - Cover

[Click to enlarge]


Das Blackguard


Winston Churchill



The Barnes Review — 2012 Januar – Februar


Winston Churchill - Das Blackguard - Cartoon 2






Der Artikel wird von BROSCHÜRE exzerpiert kühn berechtigt, That Bastard Churchill, von patriotischen Schriftsteller Maj. ME Thurgood. Es wird eine Blasenbildung ausgesetzt werden von Winston Churchill Mangel an Menschlichkeit und Ritterlichkeit im Krieg, seine schlechte Laune und bizarren Gewohnheiten und seine unersättliche Gier nach Alkohol – unten gewaschen mit einer guten Dosis von Christian Blut. Die jahrzehntelange Propaganda haben Millionen von Menschen glauben, Churchill war eine Art eines englischen Retter, wenn in der Tat, der Architekt der Zerstörung des britischen Empire war er.




Read Full Post »

 Winston Churchill - That Blackgaurd Cover

[Click to enlarge]


That Blackguard


Winston Churchill



The Barnes Review — 2012 January – February


Winston Churchill - Cartoon lighting cigar with swastika, Europe, Star of David, Pound sign






THE ARTICLE IS EXCERPTED FROM A BOOKLET boldly entitled That Bastard Churchill, by patriotic writer Maj. M.E Thurgood. It is a blistering expose of Winston Churchill’s lack of humanity and chivalry in war, his bad temper and bizarre habits, and his insatiable lust for alcohol — washed down with a good dose of Christian blood. Decades of propaganda have millions of people believing Churchill was some kind of an English savior when, in fact, he was the architect of the destruction of the British empire.



Read Full Post »



Onward Christian Soldiers 

[Part 12]



Onward Christian Soldiers - Cover - New Edition



This new version of Onward Christian Soldiers that I’ve compiled consists of the original contents published by Noontide Press in 1982 plus the “missing” text that, for reasons explained below, was in the Swedish version published in 1942.

I’ve also included some supplementary texts here giving the history of the missing parts of Day’s book. Also book reviews by Revilo Oliver and Amazon readers (see Part 1).







Maps of Northern Europe & the Baltic States

THE REST OF DONALD DAY by Paul Knutson — 1984

EDITORIAL NOTE by Liberty Bell

The Resurrection of Donald Day — A review by Revilo P. Oliver. The Liberty Bell — January 1983

TWO KINDS OF COURAGE by Revilo P. Oliver. The Liberty Bell — October 1986






Permit Me To Introduce Myself * (all new)

1 Why I did not go Home *………………………………. 1

2 The United States  *………………………………………. 7

3 Latvia  ………………………………………………………… 21

4 Meet the Bolsheviks  *………………………………….. 41

5 Alliance with the Bear  *……………………………….. 53

6 Poland  ……………………………………………………….. 63

7 Trips  ………………………………………………………….. 85

8 The Downfall of Democracy * ………………………. 93

9 Jews  …………………………………………………………… 101

10 Russia  *………………………………………………………. 115

11 Lithuania * ………………………………………………….. 131

12 Danzig  ……………………………………………………….. 145

13 Estonia  ……………………………………………………….. 151

14 Sweden  ………………………………………………………. 159

15 Norway  ………………………………………………………. 169

16 Finland  ………………………………………………………. 183

17 England  *……………………………………………………. 197

18 Europe  *…………………………………………………….. 201

19 Epilogue  *…………………………………………………… 204

Index of Names  ………………………………………………….. 205

* Contains new material (dark blue text) missing from original Noontide edition.


of Northern Europe 1920s (click to enlarge in new window)

Onward Christian Soldiers - Map Baltic




of Baltic States 1920s (click to enlarge in new window)

Onward Christian Soldiers - Map NE





June 1984




Paul Knutson

Donald Day, who had been for many years the foreign correspondent of the Chicago Tribune in northern Europe, wrote a record of his observations, Onward, Christian Soldiers, in 1942. His English text was first published as a book in 1982. It was printed by William Morrison and appeared under the imprint of the Noontide Press of Torrance, California, As Professor Oliver pointed out in his review of that book in Liberty Bell for January, 1983, the text had been copied, with some omissions and minor changes, from an anonymously issued mimeographed transcription of a defective carbon copy of the author’s manuscript, which had been brought to the United States in someway, despite the vigilance of Franklin Roosevelt’s surreptitious thought-police.

That was not the first publication of Day’s book. A Swedish translation, Framat Krististridsman, was published by Europa Edition in Stockholm in 1944. (That paper cover, printed in red, green, and black, is reproduced in black-and-white on the following page.)


 Onward Christian Soldiers - Cover - Swedish

Copies of this book still survive in Sweden and are even found in some public libraries. There may still be a copy in the Library of Congress, where, however, it was catalogued and buried among the very numerous books of a different Donald Day, a very prolific writer who midwifed the autobiography of Will Rogers and produced book after book on such various subjects as American humorists, the folk-lore of the Southwest, the tourist-attractions of Texas, and probably anything for which he saw a market, including a mendacious screed entitled Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Own Story. By a supreme irony, the Library concealed Framat Kristi stridsman in its catalogue by placing it between the other Day’s Evolution of Love and his propaganda piece for the unspeakably vile monster whose millions of victims included one of the last honest journalists.

The Swedish translation contains some long and important passages that do not appear in the book published in California and are not found in the mimeographed copy. By translating these back into English, I can restore Donald Day’s meaning, but, of course, I cannot hope to reproduce exactly the words and style of his original manuscript. I can also restore from the Swedish the deficiencies of the mimeographed transcript.

It seems impossible to determine now whether the parts of Day’s work that are preserved only in the Swedish were deleted by him to shorten his text when he sent a typewritten copy to the United States or were added by him before he turned his manuscript over to the Swedish translator at about the same time. At all events, the Swedish now alone provides us with some significant parts of bay‘s book and many Americans will want to have Day’s Work complete and entire.

For the convenience of the reader, I have, by arrangement with the publisher of Liberty Bell, included corrections of the printed English text where it departs, through negligence or misunderstanding, from the mimeographed text from which it was copied. I have passed over obvious typographical errors in the printed book, and omitted small and relatively unimportant corrections. For example, near the end of p. 44 of the printed book, the sentence should read, “All reported that the officials of the Cheka, later known as the GPU and NKVD, were Jews.

Day did not use footnotes, so the reader will understand what all the footnotes [indicated by the symbol *] on the following pages are my own explanations of the text.

The supplements below are arranged in the order of pages of the printed book, as shown by the note in the small type that precedes each section, The three sources are discriminated typographically thus; Italics show what is copied from the printed text to give continuity.

Ordinary Roman type is used for what is in the mimeographed copy but was omitted from the printed version. This, of course, is precisely what Day wrote in English.

What I have translated back from the Swedish appears in this style of type. These passages, as I have said, convey Day’s meaning without necessarily restoring exactly the words he used in his English original, from which the Swedish version was made.





Editorial Note


Liberty Bell

With the foregoing supplements, we have at last as accurate a text of Donald Day’s Onward, Christian Soldiers as we are likely to have, barring the remote possibility that the manuscript Day gave to his Swedish translator may yet be discovered.

The Swedish translation is pedestrian, as indeed is Day’s English style, but a comparison of the Swedish with the extant parts of the English assures me of the translator’s general competence. In one passage, which we have only in the Swedish, in which Day reports his refusal to become a well-paid and dignified member of our Diplomatic Service with a “little Morgenthau” as an “adviser” to tell him what to do, the translator was evidently confused by the irony of some English phrase such as “executive for a Jew” and reversed Day’s obvious meaning;, this was corrected in the foregoing text.

The mimeographed version is evidently a transcription from Day’s carbon copy, with only such errors as only the most expert typists can entirely avoid. There is, however, one very odd error in the mimeographed version corresponding to our printed page 4 above; it reads “the Great Rocky mountains of the border of Tennessee and North Carolina.” That is geographically absurd, of course, and the Swedish (stora Rijkiga Bergen) shows that Day wrote “Great Smoky mountains,” as we have, printed above. It is probably only a coincidence that the Swedish word for “Smoky” could have suggested, to a person who knew no Swedish, the error made by the typist in California who copied Day’s carbon copy.

When Day relies on his recollection of what he was told years before, his memory is sometimes faulty, and we have naturally made no changes in what he wrote. He makes an obvious error on our page 4, where he says that the Cherokees were driven from their lands and moved to Indian Territory “toward the end of the last century.” Actually, the expulsion of the Cherokee Nation by an American army took place in 1838. The Cherokees, by the way, were the most nearly civilized of all the Indian tribes in the territory that is now the United States and Canada, and it is true that their expulsion from the lands that had been guaranteed to them by treaty inflicted great hardships on them: they lost most of their property, including their negro slaves, and large numbers of them perished as they were quite brutally herded from the Appalachians almost half way across the continent to what is now the southern border of Arkansas.

Ethnologists who have made intensive studies of the Indians of North America (e.g., Peter Farb) regard Sequoyah (Sequoia) as perhaps “the greatest intellect the Indians produced.” He was the son of a Cherokee woman by an unidentified white trader, and, growing up with the mother’s people, regarded himself as a Cherokee. He, however, was an exception to what Day says about half-breeds. Day may have been confused about the date of the expulsion because a few of the Cherokees succeeded in hiding from the perquisition in the wilds of the Great Smokies and were eventually given the small reservation they now occupy east of Bryson City in the toe of North Carolina. There was some agitation about them “near the end of the last century.

The circumstances in which Day’s carbon copy was smuggled into the United States remain obscure. When the mimeographed transcription was made and first issued, it contained a prefatory page on which an anonymous writer said,

It is my understanding that this book was published in; 1942, and then merely made an appearance at the book-sellers, when all copies were immediately withdrawn and destroyed without a single copy escaping the book-burners, I was also told that Mr. Day died shortly after this incident.

The page was presumably withdrawn when its author learned that Day was still alive at that time and an exile in Helsinki, since the Jews who rule the United States would not permit him to return to his native land.

It is curious that the man who made the transcription, which did effectively preserve Day’s work for the future, and who was evidently a resident of California, had heard a somewhat less plausible version of the rumor that was current in Washington in 1943. (See the review by Professor Oliver in Liberty Bell, January 1983, p. 27). It is quite possible that the source of both rumors was an effort by the apparatus of the great War Criminal in the White House to prevent the publication of the Swedish translation, which, as Day tells us in the last item in our supplements, was delayed in the press for two years by a “paper shortage” and it is noteworthy that the paper for it was finally obtained in Finland, not Sweden,* Until the book was finally published in 1944, the enemies of mankind could have imagined that their pressures on Sweden had effectively prevented Day’s exposure of one phase of their activity from ever appearing in print.

[* Day’s book was published by Europa Edition in Stockholm, which, however, had to have the printing done by Mercators Tryckeri in Helsinki. Although copies of the Swedish book have been preserved, Day’s work would not now be generally known — and would be supposed lost by Americans who heard of it — if the anonymous gentleman in California had not issued his mimeographed transcription.]



KATANA — The Liberty Bell article continues with a list of text to be added or amended to the Noontide edition. All these changes (indicated by the dark blue text) have been entered in this expanded version of Onward Christian Soldiers.



Word Totals for the Additional Text

Introduction – –

Permit Me To Introduce Myself – 5,738 (all new)

Chapter 1 – 23

Chapter 2 – 307

Chapter 3 – –

Chapter 4 – 653

Chapter 5 – 1,225

Chapter 6 – –

Chapter 7 – –

Chapter 8 – 408

Chapter 9 – –

Chapter 10 – 907

Chapter 11 – 6

Chapter 12 – –

Chapter 13 – –

Chapter 14 – –

Chapter 15 – –

Chapter 16 – –

Chapter 17 – 2,167

Chapter 18 – 1,179

Chapter 19 – 89

Total words in original = 85,311

Total additional words = 12,702


Total words in expanded version = 98,013










1920-1942: Propaganda, Censorship

and One Man’s Struggle to Herald the Truth

Suppressed reports of a 20-year Chicago Tribune

correspondent in eastern Europe from 1921

Donald Day

With an introduction by Walter Trohan,

former chief of the Tribune’s Washington bureau





Chapter 12









If frontiers make patriots then for many years Danzig had every reason to be considered the most patriotic city in the world. Its citizens detested its frontiers. The great majority lived for one purpose; they wanted to become Germans again. The Free City of Danzig did not want to be free.

 Onward Chritian Soldiers - Map Danzig

[Image] Map showing The Free City of Danzig

To be a Danziger was to be something incomplete. It was better to be German. It was unthinkable to the inhabitants that they should become Poles.

It was not a question of names. For many years the Danzig press chief was a big, heavy set, square-headed man named Lubianski, slow of speech and difficult to approach. His favorite sport happened to be my own. He was a passionate fisherman and through this we became friends.

Onward Chritian Soldiers - Danzig

[Image] The free city of Danzig (called Gdansk in Polish).

During this period the representative of PAT, Polska Agencja Telgraficzno, was an equally tall, but slender and round-headed man named Sonnenterg. I once had them both to lunch and suggested they might exchange their names.

Between the Danzigers and Poles, as between other nationalities in northeastern Europe, the chief difference seemed to be more one of culture than one of race or blood. There are many square-heads and other northern characteristics among the Poles. The plains of Poland have been overrun for centuries with armies of many different nationalities and races. All have left their mark upon the faces and skulls of the inhabitants.

[Page 146]

For Danzig freedom proved a curse. For many years the city had to rely on the League of Nations for protection. The various high commissioners appointed there proved unable to promote the slightest feeling of friendship and interdependence between Danzig and Poland. Both were jealous of their rights. The Poles continually sought means to extract more and more concessions from the Danzigers in the hope they might eventually Polanize the city. For Warsaw, possession of Danzig meant a firmer control of Poland’s corridor to the Baltic Sea. Poland tried to starve Danzig into submission by spending many millions of dollars in the construction of a new seaport, only a few miles away, at Gdynia.

On one of my visits to Gdynia in 1937, Polish officials escorted me on an auto drive through the town. Godlovski, editor of the local newspaper, asked for my impressions. I suggested the city architect by taken out and shot. The sightseeing tour aroused a feeling of indignation. Here was formerly a tiny fishing village situated at the mouth of a small river. Here was an opportunity to plan and erect a garden city which might have been easily made into the most beautiful municipality in Poland. Instead, the streets were flanked by the same disgraceful type of archaic tenements one could see in Bialostok, Warsaw and Lodz. Instead of creating a dimple to adorn the face of their country the Poles had created a wart.

Besides representing many years of graft, incompetence and waste, Gdynia was also a perpetual headache for the Danzigers who were obliged to be content with Poland’s more bulky exports-which were less profitable to handle-while Gdynia took the cream of the Polish trade.

When America’s newly appointed ambassador to Poland, John Cudahy, arrived in Gdynia on a Polish liner he had boarded in Amsterdam, he told the Poles their new harbor reminded him of Gary, Indiana. It was fortunate that none of his audience had been in Gary, for it is anything but a beautiful town.

Once while visiting Danzig, I had occasion to visit Mr. Pappe, then Polish high commissioner, in the large building which accommodated Warsaw’s ambitious representation. After the porter had taken my coat, I asked to be shown to the washroom. One becomes accustomed to filthy latrines in Poland where more than 80% of the population have neither seen nor used a water closet in their lives. But to discover an equally dirty latrine adjoining the reception hall of the Polish high commissioner in the cultured city of Danzig was a shock.

[Page 147]

I tried to inject the subject as gently as possible into our conversation and asked the high commissioner if Poland still claimed that Danzig should belong to Poland. He seemed surprised and said yes. I suggested if this be the case then he should immediately give an order to clean up his water closet and put it in commission again. If the Polish government wishes seriously to maintain its claim to be competent to administer the needs of Danzig, I remarked, then it should know how to keep a water closet in proper order.

At first Mr. Pappe seemed undecided whether to become angry or to treat the matter as a joke. Being a diplomat he found a formula to meet the occasion. He called in the porter, gave him a severe scolding, apologized to me and we continued our discussion of the latest squabble which had arisen between the Free City and Warsaw.

On another occasion, in 1932, the Reich authorities in Danzig invited me to visit the Marienberg castle and view the point where the frontiers of the Free City join with those of east Prussia and Poland on the Vistula river. At the last moment I was asked if I had any objection if another person joined our party. There was none, of course, and we were joined by Professor White of Princeton University, U.S.A.

The Marienberg castle is one of the really great sights of northern Europe. Its reconstruction took a long period of years and an enormous amount of research work by specialists of all kinds. The Germans, more especially the Prussians, are very proud of it and it is an historical monument that will continue to attract visitors for centuries to come.

After touring the castle, we were taken by car to several points on the river. At each stop a uniformed man appeared carrying a staff surmounted by an iron plaque upon which was embossed some salient facts and dates pertaining to the creation of the Free City and the locality. Next we were brought to see the village of Frauenwerder, situated right on the frontier, with its empty houses falling to ruin, grass growing between the cobbles on the street and presenting a picture of utter desolation and despair.


Onward Chritian Soldiers - Fortress Marienberg

[Image] Fortress Marienberg and the Old Bridge

That night we had a frugal but extremely pleasant supper with General Budding and talked about Danzig, the corridor and the future. The professor was tremendously impressed and came to my room to discuss the events of the day. To him the Danzig corridor problem, through this visit, had become one of Europe’s unsolved and acute crisis points.

My impression was somewhat different. I called his attention to how those minor officials and local guides whom we had met had recited their little explanation talks as though they had committed them to memory, how General Budding was obviously receiving guests like ourselves several times each week, how his home had been equipped like a modest, comfortable little hotel. All this indicated not only that in the course of a year hundreds of foreigners had been his guests and made this conducted tour, but it revealed the German government categorically rejected the existence of the Danzig Corridor and the Free City and its intentions to remedy someday the situation caused by the malignant idiots who had so mutilated Germany.

[Page 148]

The professor and I talked till late, for I knew Poland well enough to inform him that she was going to be divided for the fourth time. I had come to that conclusion on my first visit to Poland in 1922 when I voiced it in the presence of foreign officials. During my many visits to Poland in the intervening years, I had seen nothing to change this opinion but had seen and experienced much to confirm it.

To me Marienberg castle embodied the German vision of the peril and riches of the east. The fact that many tens of thousands of school children, youths and adults annually visited its magnificent battlements and halls during those years showed that the German people were instinctively aware of their great past. The great castle stands not only as a symbol of the past, but as a promise facing the future. The age of chivalry has come to life again in our day, and in Europe. The spirit which once dwelt within the red brick walls of Marienberg is again militant today. It is far afield and in the East it is again shattering the hordes of infidel barbarians, and many new knights are being created on the field of battle.

As one leans out of the castle windows, it is easy to picture the landscape of centuries ago when farms were smaller, the forests greater, the roads unpaved and narrow and, instead of the great levees protecting fertile farms from the raging freshlets of the mighty river which flows northwest into the Baltic, there were great swamps. Then the knights in armor, accompanied by squires and lackies, took many days of dangerous plodding to accomplish a journey which today we make in a few hours in a comfortable automobile. Generations have lived and died within these walls, and where are their graves? The castle is their monument and the prosperous farms and towns are their work. Far down the road there is a flash of metal, but where once rode a knight on horseback now rides a group of boys on bicycles. Everything about Marienberg reminds what the present owes to the past and the debt which carries towards the future.

Not so many miles away there is another great monument, Tannenberg. It is not so beautiful as the castle. It is grim and thought-provoking.

The great circular wall of red brick seems to say:

We shall eternally guard our heritage.

From that heritage has come faith in destiny. And through this faith Europe has been saved from defilement and destruction.

[Page 149]

In Danzig the foreigner is constantly being brought face to face with the past. For generations this was the wealthiest city on the Baltic sea. If the Danzigers had chosen the easier road of collaboration with Poland, a small group of the inhabitants would have prospered greatly in helping to handle Poland’s commerce. But the great majority would have had their standard of living dragged down to the misery and squalor which prevailed throughout Poland. The town would have quickly filled with Poles and Jews. The Germans would have had to migrate, just as the Germans had to migrate from Thorn, Bromberg, Posen and other towns in Western Poland.

Every Danziger knew this and despite the conflicting interests of the many political groups, they stood steadfast against Poland’s dream of expansion. The Danzigers managed to survive an economic and propaganda siege of twenty years duration. Their spiritual strength which formed the core of their resistance was founded on their German culture.

Bromberg and Thorn were only a few miles away in the corridor. They were a frightful example of what happened to a German community when it came under the rule of Poland.

Danzig’s lesson to Europe is one of patience, vigilance and endurance.

Victory came after twenty years to Danzig. The Danzigers deserved it.





Chapter 13





Estonia did not have a president. Its highest post was the State’s Oldest, a title and office similar to that of president in other countries.

Konstantin Piats was the first and last man to be elected to this post. He also held it for various terms during Estonia’s twenty two years of national existence. Piats spent the greater part of his life in the service of his country. Like his colleague, Karl Ulmanis of Latvia, Piats did not acquire personal wealth.

Outside Tallin (Reval), just behind the Piritta bathing beach, Piats had a small farm. On my many trips to Estonia I visited him there several times. Seated in his garden, where he could proudly contemplate his new modem cow barn, we would sip his homemade black current wine and talk frankly, like old friends.

One afternoon he gave me a glimpse into his life philosophy.

When I bought this bit of land many years ago, it was nothing but a scrub forest and mostly swamp. Now it is a lovely little farm which can provide a living for a family. Much of the work here I have done with my own hands. As I sit here I am filled with contentment. No matter what may come in the future I think I have accomplished my life’s work and the creating of this farm is the thing which gives me most satisfaction. We are here for a purpose. And if we take a piece of God’s earth and make it more beautiful and more fruitful, I think we have done something good, something we have been put here to do. I am very happy that I can look forward to leaving a small bit of the earth more beautiful than it was when I found it.

[Page 152]

Onward Chritian Soldiers - Map Estonia

[Image] Estonia and surrounding countries.

Piats’ countenance glowed as he spoke. The soul of the man looked through his face. That spark of the divine which has been given to all of us either to stunt, kill or cultivate, he had cherished and developed. Yes, Piats had made a small piece of the earth more beautiful. And he had also succeeded in maturing and beautifying his soul. We can live for ourselves alone and in varying degrees become self-seeking and ruthless. Or we can live also for others and help and sacrifice when need be. Piats was one of those men who leave the earth just a bit better than the earth he came to.

Perhaps this is a better way of judging whether a life has been really successful or not. Others will agree in my estimation that Piats was a successful man.

Piats had great hopes for the future of his country and like other leading Baltic statesmen he made continued peace a condition to this progress. Like most Estonians, Piats viewed the future optimistically. He and his government had great plans to develop the tremendous seams of rich oil shale which underlie a wide strip of land between Narva and Tallin. This shale is so heavy with oil that during the world depression period Estonia was able to use it as fuel for her locomotives and spare the import of coal. Asphalt and motor fuel could be extracted. Another valuable product was a fluid which could be used to effectively impregnate wood against decay, which proved even better than creosote in the treatment of railroad ties.

Piats told me his dream was to reduce taxation and believed this was approaching reality with the exploitation of the oil shale deposits. He was confident this store of natural wealth would make his country rich and prosperous.

In 1921, when I first saw it, Reval was another drab little city whose chief source of income in pre-world-war days was the Imperial Russian Baltic fleet which was stationed there. The city grew and flourished with the Estonian state. And the Estonians, who were famed as gardeners in old Russia, made Tallin one of the most beautiful and attractive cities on the Baltic Sea.

Like another nation around the Baltic, the Estonians did not need to be told to do things. They were not like the Slavs. In fact one of the greatest qualities in all these nations is personal initiative. That is seen best by traveling through the country year after year. Not only did the new farms gain an atmosphere of comfortable prosperity with maturity, but the small marketing centers and towns grew brighter with their modem dairies, mills, grain elevators, warehouses and cooperative buildings.

One noticed the first modem buildings to appear were the schools and the last were the comfortable little hotels. Children looked well cared for.

[Page 153]

People were well dressed and well fed. Everywhere one could see Estonia had justified her claim to be a free nation for she was continually improving the living and cultural standards of her people.

The northern part of Estonia is a plateau which breaks off with high chalk cliffs into the Finnish gulf. The soil is thin and the main crop is potatoes. This was the poorest region of the country until someone made the discovery that the Estonian potato, when used as seed in the Mediterranean countries, gave a tremendous crop. Grown in chalky soil the Estonian potato was immune to disease. As it quickly germinates in the warm southern climate the export of seed potatoes was growing quickly when the war arrived.

Tallin’s castle crowns a spur of this chalk plateau and the town is built on land which slopes into the sea. It is on this slope in the suburbs that the Estonians built a great stadium to hold their song festivals. These were unique events for some 20,000 singers dressed in national costumes would stand on the stadium and the great volume of their voices would roll up the slope over the heads of the one hundred thousand audience and crash against the heavens while the June sun dipped itself below the horizon for a couple of hours before beginning another day.

Onward Chritian Soldiers - Tallin Castle

[Image] Tallin’s Toompea Castle reconstructed from an ancient Estonian stronghold and continually supplemented from the 12th century on.

Twenty thousand singers. All with voices moulded and trained by folk songs. Estonia and Latvia had more choirs in proportion to their inhabitants than any other country in the world. Kristian Barons managed to collect 250,000 Latvian folk songs before his death and 12,000 people marched in his funeral procession, seven miles from the church to the cemetery. An unusual tribute to an unusual accomplishment! Yes, there is one volume containing naughty songs, for it is a complete collection.

Twenty years was too short a time for the Estonian and Latvian song festivals to attain world renown. They were great events in northern Europe and they will be heard again. Today these countries have voluntarily put armies into the fields to battle Bolshevism. The Baltic States bear scars of savagery which England and the United States today prefer to ignore while they make common cause with that communist excrescence which befouls them.

Estonia had no illusions about obtaining help from abroad when her crisis came in 1939 and Foreign Minister Salter was authorized by his government to sign the infamous treaty proposed by Moscow, giving the Red Army bases in Estonia, there was no appeal for help abroad. No even to the Finns, the racial brothers of the Estonians across the Finnish gulf.

Professor Piip, several times Estonian foreign minister who succeeded Salter, told me in 1939 the Estonians knew that any appeal to Finland would only embarrass the Finns and draw them into a crisis which Estonia hoped Finland would be spared.

[Page 154]

Salter, who had been enticed to Moscow to pay a visit to the All Russian Agricultural Exhibition, was bullied and insulted by the Commissars in the Kremlin. Shadanov, Commissar of the Leningrad district, talked smugly of the Red Army overwhelming and wiping out the population of the Baltic States. Soviet generals, to whom Salter and the Estonian delegation were introduced, were very warlike and said they would like nothing better than to have the Estonians resist.

Estonian had only one alliance, a mutual defense pact signed with Latvia in 1923 and still in force. But this proved just another one of those platonic agreements with neither feeling nor resolve behind it. Estonia received her death sentence stoically. The great majority of the people refused to believe the Bolsheviks were still as villainous as they had been during the revolution, civil war and class war in Russia. They thought Russia was being ruled by the Russians and did not realize the Soviet government was nothing more than a sadistic Jewish satrapy. They hoped against hope that Estonia would be treated with the same consideration the Soviets were reported to have employed in the organization of the Mongolian Soviet Republic where, so Moscow alleged, there was no Communist party at all but instead a national government operating under the beneficent guidance of Russia.

Estonia, like Finland, Sweden and Denmark, further believed that since she had very few Jews in her country that she had no Jewish problem. Estonia treated the Jews exceptionally well. A Zionist delegate visiting Tallin informed the Estonians that their remarkable tolerance towards the Jews had resulted in Estonia’s name being inscribed into the Golden Book of Tel Aviv, the first 100% Jewish city in the modem world, which is in Palestine.

Two Jews showed the Estonians their mistake. One was Herman Gudkin, 25 years old, son of an Estonian senator who was educated in England and was serving as a noncommissioned officer in the Tallin artillery regiment. When the Red Army seized Estonia he obtained sick leave. The following day he presented himself at his regiment’s headquarters in the Estonian uniform with a red band around his arm. He demanded the officers haul down their flag and surrender their arms.

His demands were rejected and he returned a short time later with Soviet tanks and armored cars and forced the surrender of the regiment, arresting the officers and confining the troops to barracks. Later this order was countermanded and the officers released. They attempted to arrest Gudkin as a deserter but he was protected by the Red Army.

[Page 155]

The next morning Gudkin, accompanied by another Jew, Victor Fagin, an ex-clothing dealer of Dorpat, climbed to the top of Pike Herman, an old stone tower which rises from the ancient castle housing the Estonian parliament and took the Estonian flag from the staff and hoisted the red soviet flag. The same afternoon a procession of Jewish residents led by Godkin and Fagin carried this Estonian flag through Tallin’s streets to the front of the Soviet legation where they tore it to pieces. I reported these facts to The Tribune which published them on 4th, July 1940, after deleting the word “Jew” from my message.

Fifteen months later I returned to Tallin in the company of three Finnish, three German and three Italian correspondents. I found a city of 150,000 with its entire merchant class exterminated, its industries in ruins and the men who owned and operated them shot. Its stores boarded up and empty of goods. Its educated class decimated by mass deportations which separated husbands from wives and mothers from children.

One third of Tallin’s male inhabitants had been mobilized, regardless of age or occupation, and taken into Soviet Russia.

For twenty one years I had been visiting Tallin two or three times each year. I had made many friends and acquaintances. Searching for two days I managed to find two of them. All the rest were gone, executed or exiled.

Tallin was not so much a victim of the war between Germany and Russia as she was a victim of Bolshevism’s class war which is really a war of the east against the west.

And after all that happened it is not surprising that there are no Jews left in Estonia today.

One of the two friends who survived the Red Terror in Tallin is Alexander Schultz, born in Vilna, an officer of one of the guard regiments and who married one of the grand daughters of Count Pitte. Alexander edited a small Russian newspaper and in 1921 it was he who first introduced me to Piats. A year under the Red Terror had left Alexander a nervous wreck.

Each night he and his wife went to bed expecting a visit from the GPU.

They each had their little satchel packed with a few essentials. He was frequently called to the GPU headquarters in Tallin for examination, or rather, to be bullied and threatened. The GPU wanted him to write a series of articles for the Moscow Isvestia against the Greek Orthodox church in Estonia. Each time Alexander refused he was threatened.

Soviet occupation was for him, as it was for many others, literally hell on earth. Alexander was a Russian. He did not speak German and made no attempt to repatriate with the Estonian Baits to Germany.

[Page 156]

It was in Tallin that I attended my second putsch. During the first six years of her independence the Estonian government followed a liberal policy and did not declare the communist party illegal. In 1924 the government was forced to take action. A little more than 100 members of the communist party were arrested and on 11 November they were placed on trial in Tallin. I came from Riga to follow the proceedings and noticed the attitude of the prisoners was arrogant. One of them, who continually interrupted the court martial, was taken out and summarily shot. This cowed the remaining prisoners who were duly convicted of conspiring to overthrow the government by force and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment.

After the trial was over I telegraphed to The Tribune that I found the situation threatening and intended to remain for a time in Estonia. This cable was relayed back to the press of the Baltic States from the Paris edition of our newspaper and the largest Latvian dally, The Jaunakas Sinas, published a violent attack against me urging that I be expelled from Latvia for sending out such a tendentious story. (The Communist putsch occurred a few days later.)

On the night of the thirtieth of November Alexander Schultz and myself, together with our wives, had dinner in the Linden restaurant in Tallin. We remained late and at another table I saw a group of Estonian officers.

At five in the morning I was awakened by the hotel porter who told me to get up, that there was a revolution in the town. Half awake, I questioned him and he told me to listen out the window and I would be able to hear the shooting. I got dressed quickly and placing a gun in my pocket and tying a white handkerchief around my. arm I started towards the telegraph office. Underway I met the party of Estonian officers who had been celebrating in the restaurant. They were led by General Podder. I loaned one of them my gun.

General Podder was the first to enter the telegraph office. On the stairway was standing a man with a rifle who raised it and leveled it at the general. He was standing on the second flight of stairs and was at a left angle to us. General Podder then made one of the best shots I ever saw.

When he glimpsed the man aiming his gun he shot him over his left shoulder. The bullet hit the Red in the chin and penetrated up into his brain and he fell dead. I accompanied the officers when they went through the telegraph offices. They found five other reds there and shot them all dead. Two of them were busy sending messages to Russia asking for aid when they met death. There was nobody to send off my message and those on duty had been sent home by the putschists. We then proceeded to the railroad station where we arrived in time to participate in the charge of the cadets who bayonetted a number of communists and seized other prisoners. This group of fifty armed reds had “captured” the railroad station and had telephoned the minister of communications and summoned him to the station by reporting a serious wreck had occurred.

[Page 157]

When he got out of his car he was shot on the spot. The cadets surprised the putschists at the moment they were preparing to execute a number of Estonian officers who had arrived on an early train. These men were being forced to undress as the communists wanted to use their uniforms.

The communists had also captured the airfield and had broken into the residence of the president. The officer on guard had time to spring from the window and alarm the guard across the street who was able to arrive in time to save the president, M. Akel, from assassination. Some twenty policemen, soldiers and private citizens were murdered by the putschists before order was restored. Investigation revealed this plot had been organized and directed from Russia. Several hundred communists were smuggled in freighters from Soviet Russia into Estonia where they were met and led by other imported and local revolutionists. The Estonian authorities showed no mercy. Every one of the reds captured in the Tallin putsch was executed.

It was only after this attempt that the Estonian government followed the example of Latvia, Lithuania and Poland and passed a law making the communist party an illegal organization.

Together with their brothers, the Finns, the Estonians cultivated close ties with Sweden. As the smallest of the Baltic republics grew older and more prosperous more and more Swedes began to spend their summer vacations at Estonian resorts where modem hotels and casinos made their appearance. It took many years for Sweden to get interested in her little neighbors across the Baltic, but finally King Gustav paid Estonia and Latvia a visit. King Gustav is the only foreign visitor who has ever made a crowd of Latvians break into cheers. Sweden has great traditions in the Baltic and she has left memories of “good times” in Estonia and northern Latvia which she ruled from 1561 to 1710.

So let us visit a country exceptionally favored by geography, Sweden.










* Images (maps, photos, etc.) have also been added that were not part of the original Noontide edition.



Knowledge is Power in Our Struggle for Racial Survival


(Information that should be shared with as many of our people as possible — do your part to counter Jewish control of the mainstream media — pass it on and spread the word) … Val Koinen at KOINEN’S CORNER


Click to go to >> OCS – Part 1: Reviews; Background Information

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 2: Introduction; Permit Me to Introduce Myself

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 3: Why I Did Not Go Home; The U.S.

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 4: Lativa

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 5: Meet the Bolsheviks

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 6: Alliance With the Bear

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 7: Poland

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 8: Trips; The Downfall of Democracy

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 9: Jews

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 10: Russia

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 11: Lithuania

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 12: Danzig; Lithuania

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 13: Sweden; Norway

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 14: Finland

Click to go to >> OCS – Part 15 (last) : England; Europe; Epilogue; Index of Names







PDF of this blog post. Click to view or download (3.0 MB).

>>Onward Christian Soldiers by Donald Day – Part 12 Ver 2





Version History

 Version 2: Mar 28, 2015 – Added images.
Version 1: Published Mar 28, 2015

Read Full Post »