A. J. P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War

In The Origins of the Second World War, A. J. P. Taylor challenges the "official version" of the causes for World War II.  This landmark study focuses on events leading to the declaration of war on Germany by Great Britain and France.  The author¡¯s thesis is that Hitler had no master plan for world domination; rather, through their fear of war and efforts at conciliation, Great Britain and France continually presented Hitler with territorial acquisitions or concessions which led him to believe that they would avoid war at all costs.  When the Polish government obstinately refused to negotiate, the author asserts that Hitler was bound by his own timetable to proceed with his plans, gambling that Great Britain and France were now sufficiently estranged from their ally to renege on their treaty agreements.  The author believes that they would have done so had public opinion in Great Britain not demanded a firm line.  Fearful that his government might fall, Neville Chamberlain finally issued an ultimatum to Hitler and France followed suit, thus ensuring war.

Hitler did not have a plan for world domination.  On the contrary, the author says, "His foreign policy was that of his predecessors, of the professional diplomats at the foreign ministry, and indeed of virtually all Germans.  Hitler, too, wanted to free Germany from the restrictions of the peace treaty; to restore a great German army; and then to make Germany the greatest power in Europe from her natural weight".  The author goes on to say:  "This is not the accepted view.  Writers of great authority have seen in Hitler a system-maker, deliberately preparing from the first a great war which would destroy existing civilisation and make him master of the world.  In my opinion, statesmen are too absorbed by events to follow a preconceived plan.  They take one step, and the next follows from it.  The systems are created by historians".

As the author outlines the events which led to the war, he continues to assert that Hitler waited patiently as the leaders of Great Britain and France, ever fearful of war, presented him with everything he wanted and more.  Again asserting that Hitler did not have a master plan, the author states:  Whatever his long-term plans (and it is doubtful whether he had any), the mainspring of his immediate policy had been "the destruction of Versailles".¡­He had assumed that the process would take many years and that he would encounter great difficulties. ­Actually the destruction of Versailles and Locarno alike took only three years; and it raised so few alarms that we now wonder why Hitler did not do it more quickly.  The author goes on to say that "t was never Hitler's method to take the initiative.  He liked others to do his work for him; and he waited for the inner weakening of the European system, just as he had waited for the peace settlement to crumble of itself"  The author says that, "The German reoccupation of the Rhineland was, from the British point of view, an improvement and a success for British policy".  Appeasement was the policy of both the British and French governments, the author states:  "British ministers wanted peace for the sake of the taxpayer; French ministers, in order to carry out their programme of social reform.  Both governments were composed of well-meaning, elderly men who rightly shrank from a great war, if it could possibly be avoided; and it was against their nature to reject in foreign affairs the policy of compromise and concession which they applied at home".  British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden defined the object of Western policy a "peace at almost any price".

Austria was the first plum  The author says that Hitler was convinced that he could accomplish his objectives by "the threat of war, not necessarily war itself".  Furthermore, the author states that, "Hitler was gambling on some twist of fortune which would present him with success in foreign affairs, just as a miracle had made him Chancellor in 1933.  There was here no concrete plan, no directive for German policy in 1937 and 1938.  Or if there were a directive, it was to wait upon events".  Again the author reiterates:  "Hitler did not make plans¨ for world conquest or for anything else.  He assumed that others would provide opportunities, and that he would seize them.  The author states that Chamberlain believed "that Germans were the victims of national injustice".  The author says that Chamberlain was sympathetic to the view that, "There were six million Germans in Austria, to whom national reunification was still forbidden by the peace treaties of 1919; three million Germans in Czechoslovakia, whose wishes had never been consulted; three hundred and fifty thousand people in Danzig who were notoriously German".  The author asserts that the incorporation of these areas and peoples into the Reich "was a programme for the pacification of Europe".  It was devised by Chamberlain, not thrust upon him by Hitler.  In November 1937, British Foreign Secretary Halifax met with Hitler and basically told him that he could do whatever he wished in Central Europe, so long as he did so without making war.  When German Ambassador to Austria Papen visited France about the same time, he was told the same thing by the Premier and the Finance Minister.  Italian dictator Mussolini was of the same mind.  Hitler concluded that he had a free hand.  However, he chose to wait until circumstances proved more agreeable.  He had not long to wait.  The author states that, "In January 1938 the Austrian police raided Nazi headquarters, and discovered detailed plans for an armed rising".  Austrian Chancellor Schuschnigg hoped to use this to obtain Europe-wide condemnation of the Austrian Nazis.  However, it back-fired  and Hitler bullied him into making concessions:  Seyss-Inquart, an Austrian Nazi, was to be made Minister of the Interior and givencontrol of the police and Austria was to coordinate her economic and foreign policy with that of Germany.  The author contends that the Austrian affair ­had not been launched by Hitler.  It was sprung on him by surprise, and he took a chance as always.  There was no planned aggression, only hasty improvisation.  A few weeks later, in March 1938, Schuschnigg decided to challenge Hitler by calling a plebiscite "to ask the Austrian people whether they wished to remain independent.  This was a slap in the face to Hitler.  The author states that Hitler "either act or be humiliated.  Hitler moved troops to the Austrian border".  German General Hermann Göring called Seyss-Inquart and told him to replace Schuschnigg, but Austrian President Miklas refused to appoint Seyss-Inquart, so Seyss-Inquart appointed himself Chancellor.  He was told to ask for German help in order to restore law and order, and he promptly complied. 

Germany invaded, or rather, the author says, they were marching in to the general enthusiasm of the population.  Hitler arrived the next morning and, caught up in the enthusiasm himself, the author states, he made a sudden, unexpected decision:  instead of setting up a tame government in Vienna, he would incorporate Austria in the Reich.  Seyss-Inquart was told to issue a law, ordering himself and Austria out of existence, which he did the following day.  The author calls a myth the assertion that Hitler's seizure of Austria was a deliberate plot, devised long in advance, and the first step toward the domination of Europe .  He claims that, "The crisis of March 1938 was provoked by Schuschnigg, not by Hitler.  There had been no German preparations, military or diplomatic.  Everything was improvised in a couple of days' policy, promises, armed force.  Though Hitler certainly meant to establish control over Austria, the way in which this came about was for him a tiresome accident, an interruption of his long-term policy, not the maturing of carefully thought-out plans".

Next came Czechoslovakia  The author says that the three million Germans in Czechoslovakia were driven "to ungovernable excitement" by events in Austria.  Again the author reiterates, "Hitler did not create this movement.  It was waiting for him, ready, indeed eager¨ to be used.  Even more than in the case of Austria, Hitler did not need to act.  Others would do his work for him.  The crisis over Czechoslovakia was provided for Hitler.  He merely took advantage of it".  The author contends that, "He meant to succeed by intrigue and the threat of violence, not by violence itself".  The author asserts that it was the British who were the cause of the unfortunate events which occurred in Czechoslovakia in 1938.  He states that, By seeking to avert a crisis, the British brought it on. The Czechoslovak problem was not of British making; the Czech crisis of 1938 was.

France was allied with Czechoslovakia; however, the author says that France was so weak at this point that they looked to the British to take the lead in affairs. Britain decided, and France followed, that they would "urge concessions" from the Czech government but would not fight on its behalf .  Strangely enough, the author asserts that, "The British also urged Hitler to make demands".  The author states that, "This took him by surprise", but he was not to be rushed.  The more the question was delayed and tension mounted, the more the Western Powers would do his work for him.  A show of strength by the Czech government caused the British and French governments to panic, the author asserts.  The British government decided to force the Czech government to make concessions.  However, when shrewd Czech President Edward Benes gave the Sudeten Germans everything which they had demanded and this was rejected, public opinion went against them and Hitler.  Nonetheless, the British government still planned upon the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia.  The author contends that Hitler "committed himself to war only when the other side had already surrendered".  Until then he kept his hands free.  During August he was still trying to find a back door.  The leaders of Britain and France worked themselves into a fearful frenzy all during the month of September, looking for a final way to sign away the future of Czechoslovakia.  Finally, on 28 September, Chamberlain announced that Britain, France, Germany, and Italy would meet to conclude the Czech problem.  The author says that, "The Czechs were excluded from the meeting for fear that they might raise difficulties".  The author states that, although the terms of the agreement were "drafted by the German foreign ministry" they were forwarded to Mussolini who "produced the terms with the air of a impartial mediator; and Hitler was able to display conciliation by agreeing to them". ­Right to the end, Hitler did not make demands; he graciously accepted what was offered by others.  The British and French told the Czechs that, "Czechoslovakia must accept by 5 p.m., or take the consequences".  Abandoned, Benes surrendered.

Russia accuses Poland of starting Second World War
Russia has accused Poland of provoking the outbreak of the Second World War by refusing to accede to the "very modest" demands of Nazi Germany.

By Adrian Blomfield in St Petersburg
The Telegraph
June 4, 2009

The Russian defence ministry posted a potentially inflammatory essay on its website which claimed Poland resisted Germany's ultimatums in 1939 only because it "wanted to obtain the status of a great power".

The lengthy diatribe, which is unlikely to be welcomed in Warsaw, also lashed out at Britain and France for giving the Poles "delusions of grandeur" by promising to intercede if the Nazis invaded.

"Anyone who has been minded to study the history of the Second World War knows it started because of Poland's refusal to meet Germany's requests," the statement read. "The German demands were very modest. You could hardly call them unfounded."

Appearing to take Germany's demands at face value, the defence ministry insisted that the Nazis were interested only in building transport links across the Polish Corridor to East Prussia and assuming control of Gdansk, which had been designated as a free city at the time.

Western historians largely recognise that Poland would have lost its independence had it acceded to the demands, pointing to Hitler's policies of Lebensbraum and the creation of a Greater Germany as evidence.

Germany invaded Poland on Sept 1, 1939, prompting the British Empire and France to declare war over the next two days. Germany and the Soviet Union then carved up Poland under the terms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

The statement, written by Col Sergei Kovalev, a senior researcher at the defence ministry, appears to be part of a new Kremlin campaign to push its view of Soviet era history.

Poland’s foreign ministry said it would summon Russia’s ambassador to Warsaw to demand an explanation, as the allegations showed signs of triggering a major row between the two countries.

Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, last month created a commission to identify foreign "revisionists" who disparage the country's prestige and "falsify" its history.

Col Kovalev's paper, which appears under a section titled 'History: Lies and Falsifications', claims that British support for Warsaw caused Poland to "lose all sense of reality."

It also attacked the Western press for suggesting that the Soviet Union carried some blame for the War by its alliance with Hitler under the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, which carved up Europe into two spheres of influence to be headed by Hitler and Stalin.

"No representative of a Western democracy has the right to discuss any treaty between the Soviet Union and Germany," given that Neville Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement of 1938 giving Germany control of the Sudetenland.

As for the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, Col Kovalev wrote, it was merely a time-buying mechanism after Britain refused to sign a mutual defence treaty with the Soviet Union.

Under the pact the Soviet Union took control of two-thirds of Poland as well as the Baltic states, but only, he wrote, in order to create a buffer zone that would allow Moscow to marshal its defences ahead of an inevitable war with the Third Reich.

Under planned legislation, backed by Mr Medvedev, any Russian or foreigner who claims that the Soviet Union occupied Poland or the Baltic States could face up to five years in prison.

Before the deluge:  Poland  The Ukraine was a plum which Hitler desired to pick.  However, Poland lay between Germany and the Ukraine.  The author states that although Germans cared about other Germans in Poland, Hitler really was not concerned about them.  Additionally, the author says that the Poles "regarded themselves an an independent Great Power".  This was to prove their undoing.  The Poles chose to remain independent of both Germany and the Soviet Union.  The author asserts that, "Hitler¡¯s objective was alliance with Poland, not her destruction".  The author says that Hitler viewed Danzig as "a tiresome preliminary to be got out of the way," whereas Polish Foreign Minister Beck kept it in the way.  So long as Danzig stood between Poland and Germany, he could evade the embarrassing offer of a German alliance, and so, as he thought, preserve Polish independence  The author states that the German occupation of Prague in March 1939 had ignited an underground explosion of public opinion in Britain against Hitler.  When it seemed that Poland might be in danger, the British government was finally induced to offer some military guarantees.  Due to their shameful behavior regarding Czechoslovakia, the author contends that the leaders of Britain "could no go back on their word again, if they were to keep any respect in the world or with their own people".  The author states that, "British policy had, without design, made Danzig the decisive question for 1939" even though "Danzig was the most justified of German grievances".  The author further asserts that Hitler "had wished to solve the question of Danzig so that Germany and Poland could remain on good terms".  However, the author says, Danzig became "the symbol of Polish independence" and the Poles were determined to not give way.  The author states that, "Hitler contributed little to the course of diplomacy between April and August 1939.  As on previous occasions, he was content to prepare and to wait, confident that the obstacles would somehow disintegrate before him".  The author states that Britain's alliance with Poland effectively committed France to Poland.  To counteract this, the author says, the French worked "to drag the British into alliance with Soviet Russia also".  Since Britain did not wish to be allied with Russia, the author says that she purposely let talks drag out and become ineffective.  The author asserts "that the Soviet government turned to Germany only when this alliance proved impossible".

The final showdown came, the author asserts, because Hitler and the Poles were "political gamblers of the same school".  Neither one would back down.  Hitler had hoped that Britain and France would be shaken into offering concessions in Poland as they had in Czechoslovakia when they learned of Germany'¯s nonaggression pact with Russia.  However, the author states, the Poles were obstinate.  Despite British and French efforts, the Poles would not send a "plenipotentiary" to Berlin to negotiate .  Hitler had set the invasion of Poland for 1 September, but he had hoped ¨anticipated¨ that negotiations would make invasion unnecessary.  As the deadline neared, efforts were made to come to a peaceful conclusion, but the Poles refused to negotiate.  The author asserts that if Hitler had had "another twenty-four hours," the "breach" between Poland and her British and French allies would have been "wide open".  The author contends that Hitler "was a prisoner of his own time-table".  Gambling that the division between Poland and her allies was sufficient to avert war with Britain and France, "on 31 August Hitler decided that the attack should proceed".  Warsaw was bombed the next morning. 

Prince Michel Sturdza, former foreign minister of Romania,  in The Suicide of Europe narrates: "Only hours after the outbreak of hostilities between Germany and Poland, Mussolini, renewing his efforts for peace, proposed to all the interested powers an immediate suspension of hostilities and the immediate convocation of a conference between the great powers, in which Poland would also participate. Mussolini’s proposals were, without any delay, accepted by all governments concerned except Great Britain".

The leaders of Britain and France hesitated.  The author states that then "in Great Britain public opinion took charge".  Once Chamberlain was warned "that the government would fall unless it sent an ultimatum to Hitler before the House met again," he "gave way.  The objections of the French were overruled".  War was declared on Germany by both Great Britain and France on 3 September 1939.

The author has used a wide range of primary sources, as well as several secondary sources in preparing this work.  Radically departing from the standard position regarding the origins of World War II, the author has presented some very thoughtful and well-supported insights into his theories as to the causes of the war.  He asserts that Great Britain and France were weak and conciliatory, neither one wanting a return to war after the ravages of World War I.  The author claims that Great Britain, in particular, was sympathetic to German claims of injustice.  Additionally, the author brings up some very good points regarding Hitler¡¯s wish not to go to war against England and France.  For example, the author asserts that, "Against all expectations, Hitler found himself at war with the Western Powers before he had conquered the East.  Nevertheless, Eastern expansion was the primary purpose of his policy, if not the only one".  Again, the author states, "Hitler probably intended a great war of conquest against Soviet Russia so far as he had any conscious design; it is unlikely that he intended the actual war against Great Britain and France which broke out in 1939".  Furthermore, the author contends that, "The war of 1939, far from being welcome, was less wanted by nearly everybody than almost any war in history".  And, using Hitler's own words, the author states:  "He spoke of the British in very different terms:  praised the British Empire as "an inestimable factor of value for the whole of human economic and cultural life"; rejected the idea of destroying it as "nothing but the effluence of human wanton destructiveness'".  The author repeatedly states that Germany was not ready for war especially not a general war.  Finally, the author asserts that "the cause of war was ­as much the blunders of others as the wickedness of the dictators themselves".

Although the author has done well in refuting specific claims of historians adhering to the standard theory of the causes of the war, such as his rebuttal of the "Hossbach memorandum", one senses that much has been left out regarding the overall view. One would like much more information from many other viewpoints before deciding for oneself whether or not the author's assertions are true.  And although he does provide quite a bit of evidence and sound arguments, one feels as though something is missing¨ More supporting evidence, evidence to the contrary, and evidence which may not as yet have been uncovered, perhaps never will.  Nonetheless, the author has courageously presented an original viewpoint contrary to accepted dogma and for that he should be commended.

The Origins of the Second World War is an insightful commentary on the causes of World War II.  Radically departing from standard, textbook tenets regarding the origins of World War II, Taylor breaks new ground by asserting that Hitler did not have a master plan for world domination, but was rather handed his initial territorial acquisitions by Great Britain, who at first sympathized with German grievances, and by a weakened France who was simply following Britain's lead.  Once British public opinion was aroused against Hitler, the party of appeasement led by Chamberlain, which by now was operating from fear rather than sympathy, and which had shamefacedly handed Czechoslovakia over to dismemberment, was finally forced to honor its agreements.  The author asserts, however, that had Hitler an additional twenty-four hours, the rift which was forming between Poland and her allies would have been great enough for the allies to lay the blame on Polish obstinacy and renege.  As it was, Hitler was tied to a timetable, and Chamberlain's government, fearful of falling if it failed to act decisively, declared war and France followed.

The author, while presenting many sound arguments regarding specific issues and events, still leaves the reader wondering if there may not be more to it.  While cogently arguing his case and discrediting various contrary arguments, the author, nonetheless, leaves the reader sensing that more evidence is needed and more viewpoints offered in order to decide the question critically and with conviction.  Nevertheless, this work, as a voice in the wilderness, deserves thoughtful consideration and the points the author raises further research.  Taylor is to be commended for breaking away from the crowd and presenting an original and radical departure from comfortable, perhaps too comfortable, dogmas regarding the origins of the Second World War.

To understand how the war in 1939 between Poland and Germany, and consequently WW2, unfolded, it is not sufficient to look at - and accept - the widely-held view that peace-loving and weak little Poland was attacked by an ever-marauding National Socialist Germany. Rather, one must look much deeper into history.

This conflict which cost many millions of lives did not originate with the German invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, as is still claimed today by over-simplifying historians. It is not just a black-and-white story, but a complex one. It was also not caused by the Polish mobilization of her army two days previous, on August 30, 1939, although the mobilization of a country's army, according to international standards, is equal to a declaration of war on the neighboring country.

"Poland's decision of August 30, 1939 that was the basis for general mobilization marked a turning point in the history of Europe. It forced Hitler to wage war at a time when he hoped to gain further unbloody victories"

- Kazimierz Sosnkowski, Polish General and Minister-in-Exile, 31 August 1943

As early as January 1941, Hitler was making extraordinary efforts to come to peace terms with England. He offered England generous terms. He offered, if Britain would assume an attitude of neutrality, to withdraw from all of France, to leave Holland and Belgium . . . to evacuate Norway and Denmark, and to support British and French industries by buying their products. His proposal had many other favorable points for England and Western Europe. But England’s officials did not want peace. They wanted war. Had they not celebrated their declaration of war by laughing, joking and drinking beer?

~McLaughlin, Michael, For Those Who Cannot Speak

Hitler allowed the British to escape at Dunkirk

He did not want to fight England. German General Blumentritt states why Hitler allowed the British to escape: "He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence,  and the civilization that Britain had brought into the world. He remarked with a shrug of the shoulders, that the creation of the Empire had been achieved by means that were often harsh, but “where there is planing there are shavings flying.” He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere."

-- Barnes, Harry Elmer, Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace. The last sentence in the paragraph just quoted should put an end to any claim that Hitler wanted to capture the world.

Blumentritt’s statement is not the only notice about Hitler’s hope of peace and friendship with England. Hitler was confused  about Britain’s refusal to accept his peace offers: He “felt he had repeatedly extended the hand of peace and friendship to the British, and each time they had blacked his eye in reply.” Hitler said, “The survival of the British Empire is in Germany’s interests too because if Britain loses India, we gain nothing thereby.” {Irving, David, Hitler’s War, paperback edition, Avon History] Harry Elmer Barnes says that Hitler lost the war because he was too good.

While the theory of Hitler’s diabolism is generally accepted, there are very well informed persons who contend that he brought himself and Germany to ruin by being too soft, generous and honorable rather than too tough and ruthless. They point to the following considerations: he made a genuine and liberal peace offer to Britain on 25 August 1939; he permitted the British to escape at Dunkirk to encourage Britain to make peace, which later on cost him the war in North Africa; he failed to occupy all of France, take North Africa at once, and split the British Empire, he lost the Battle of Britain by failing to approve the savagery of military barbarism which played so large a role in the Allied victory; he delayed his attack on Russia and offered Molotov lavish concessions in November 1940 to keep peace between Germany and Russia; he lost the war with Russia by delaying the invasion in order to bail Mussolini out of his idiotic attack on Greece; and he declared war on the United States to keep his pledged word with Japan which had long before made it clear that it deserved no such consideration and loyalty from Hitler. [The Barnes Trilogy, section “Revisionism and Brainwashing”]

David Irving’s descriptive account of Hitler’s love for Great Britain confirms what others had to say of Hitler’s desire to do no harm to England: "For 20 years Hitler had dreamed of an alliance with Britain. Until far into the war he clung to the dream with all the vain, slightly ridiculous tenacity of a lover unwilling to admit that his feelings are unrequited. As Hitler told Maj. Quisling on August 18, 1940: “After making one proposal after another to the British on the reorganization of Europe, I now find myself forced against my will to fight this war against Britain. . . ."

This was the dilemma confronting Hitler that summer. He hesitated to crush the British. Accordingly, he could not put his heart into the invasion planning.

As early as 1933 and several times in 1935 Adolf Hitler suggested an international pact with a view to make an air war on the civilian population impossible. The British government turned down his proposals.

On 10 May 1940, the RAF began the air war against civilians with a raid on the open town of Freiburg, although the German air force had never carried out a single raid on a town in the British isles. 57 civilians, including 29 children, died in that attack on Freiburg. After that, more and more German towns were bombed by Bomber Command.

One of the cynical methods Churchill used in an attempt to drag the United States closer and closer to the brink of war occurred, when he said to Ambassador Kennedy in June or July, 1940:

"You watch, when Adolf Hitler begins bombing London and bombing towns in Britain like Boston and Lincoln, towns with their counterparts in the United States, you Americans will have to come in. Won't you? You can't just stand aside and watch us suffering".

But he knew from the code breaking; and he knew from reading the German Air Force signals which had been broken on 26 May 1940, that Hitler had given orders that no British town was to be bombed on any account . London was completely embargoed under pain of court-martial. The German Air Force was allowed to bomb ports, harbors and dock yards, but not towns as such.

On 16 October 1939, German JU 88s from the island of Sylt, attacked naval ships in the harbour at Rosyth, Scotland. About to enter dry dock for repairs was the battle cruiser HMS Hood, but the pilots had strict orders not to attack. A personal order from Hitler stated "Should the Hood already be in dock, no attack is to be made, I won't have a single civilian killed". After the raid, in which the 9,100 ton cruiser HMS Southampton was damaged, Spitfires from RAF Turnhouse, near Edinburgh, attacked the departing JUs and one was shot down, hitting the sea off Port Seton. This was the first enemy plane to be brought down by RAF Fighter Command.

The all-out saturation bombing of London, which Hitler's strategic advisers Räder, Jodl, and Jeschonnek all urged upon him, was vetoed for one implausible reason after another. Though his staffs were instructed to examine every peripheral British position—Gibraltar, Egypt, the Suez Canal—for its vulnerability to attack, the heart of the British Empire was allowed to beat on, unmolested until it was too late.

And Churchill was greatly grieved by this and he wondered how much longer Hitler could avoid carrying on a war like this, but Hitler carried on until September, 1940, without bombing any English towns. The embargo stayed in force; it is in the German archives.

So there was no way that Churchill could drag in the Americans that way unless Hitler could be provoked to do it. Which is why on 25  August 1940, Churchill gave the order to the British Air Force to go and bomb Berlin.

Although the Head of Bomber Command, the Chief of Staff of the British Air Force, warned him that if Berlin was bombed, Hitler might very well lift the embargo on bombing British towns, Churchill just twinkled. This was what he wanted, of course. At 9:15 that morning he telephoned Bomber Command personally to order the bombing of Berlin - 100 bombers to go and bomb Berlin. They went out and bombed Berlin that night and Hitler still didn't move. Churchill ordered another raid on Berlin and it went on for the next seven to ten days until finally on 4 September, Hitler lost his patience and made that famous speech in the Sports Palace in Berlin in which he said, "This mad man has bombed Berlin now seven times; if he bombs Berlin once more, then I shall not only just attack their towns, I shall wipe them out." [Ich werde ihre Städte ausradieren] A very famous speech. Of course, German school children are now told about the Hitler speech; but they are not told what went first. They are not told how Churchill set out deliberately to provoke the bombing of his own capital, and how on the following day Churchill ordered Berlin bombed again.

In these months an adjutant overheard Hitler heatedly shouting into a Chancellery telephone, “We have no business to be destroying Britain. We are quite incapable of taking up her legacy,” meaning the empire; and he spoke of the “devastating consequences” of the collapse of that empire. [Irving]

Hitler told Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles, March 2, 1940, (1) that he had long been in favor of disarmament, but had received no encouragement from England and France; (2) he was in favor of international free trade; (3) Germany had no aim other than the return of the “German people to the territorial position that historically was rightly theirs”; (4) he had no desire to control non-German people and he had no intention to interfere with their independence; and (5) he wanted the return of the colonies that were stolen from Germany at Versailles. [Tansill, Charles Callan, Back Door to War]

Churchill wanted war. Churchill was a war criminal. Churchill did not want peace. He wanted the war to continue as long as possible.

In a January 1, 1944, letter to Stalin, Churchill said: "We never thought of peace, not even in that year when we were completely isolated and could have made peace without serious detriment to the British Empire, and extensively  at your cost. Why should we think of it now, when victory approaches for the three of us?"

~Walendy, Udo, The Methods of Reeducation

This is a confession even by Churchill that Hitler never did want war with England. Churchill in his July 1943 Guildhall speech stated quite plainly, "We entered the war of our free will, without ourselves being directly assaulted."

~Martin, James J., The Saga of Hog Island

When Churchill was leaving London to meet Roosevelt for a conference in Quebec late in the summer of 1943, a reporter asked if they were planning to offer peace terms to Germany. Churchill replied: “Heavens, no. They would accept immediately.” [Martin, James J., Revisionist Viewpoints]

So the war went on from August 1943 until May 1945—for 22 more months just because peace terms were not offered.

Churchill wanted England to be in war with Germany as early as 1936. [Neilson, Francis, The Churchill Legend]

Franklin Roosevelt often lied to further his goals. In a radio address broadcast to the nation on 23 October 1940, forexample, he gave "this most solemn assurance" that he had not given any "secret understanding in any shape or form, direct or indirect, with any government or any other nation in any part of the world, to involve this nation in any war or for any other purpose." But American, British and Polish documents (mostly released many years later) proved that this "most solemn assurance" was a bald-faced lie. Roosevelt had, in fact, made numerous secret arrangements to involve the U.S. in war.

American popular sentiment in 1940 strongly opposed entry into the European War; and Roosevelt's pledge, "Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars, except in case of attack" helped him win an unprecedented third term.

"Regardless of his oft-repeated statement, ‘I hate war,’ he was eager to get into the fighting since that would ensure a third term".

-- Jones, Jesse H., with Edward Angly:: Fifty Billion Dollars: My Thirteen Years with the RFC: 1932-1945, New York: the Macmillan Company, 1951

"But the combination of the British propaganda machine with an American President set on undermining neutrality proved too difficult for the isolationists to overcome.

"While the president repeated he did not want war and had no intent to send an expeditionary force to Europe, the militant secretaries of the Navy and of the War Department, Knox and Stimson, denounced the neutrality legislation in speeches and public declarations and advocated an American intervention in the Atlantic Battle. As members of the cabinet they could not do it without the president’s consent".

-- Fehrenbach, T.F., F.D.R.’s Undeclared War 1939 to 1941

When the press quoted Frank Knox as saying: “The only hope for peace for the United States would be the battering of Germany,” FDR did not rebuke him.

Dr. Milton Eisenhower, Gen. Eisenhower’s brother, said, “President Roosevelt found it necessary to get the country into World War II to save his social policies.” [Grieb, Conrad, American Manifest Destiny and the Holocaust]

On 11 March 1941 Roosevelt signed the Lend-Lease bill into law, permitting increased deliveries of military aid to Britain in violation of U.S. neutrality and international law.

In a memorable speech, Churchill asked America "Give us the tools and we will finish the job." But America wouldn't 'give' anything without payment. After two years of war, Roosevelt had drained Britain dry, stripping her of all her assets in the USA, including real estate and property. The British owned Viscose Company, worth £125 million was liquidated, Britain receiving only £87 million. Britain's £1,924 million investments in Canada were sold off to pay for raw materials bought in the United States. To make sure that Roosevelt got his money, he dispatched the American cruiser, Louisville to the South African naval base of Simonstown to pick up £42 million worth of British gold, Britain's last negotiable asset, to help pay for American guns and ammunition.


Not content with stripping Britain of her gold and assets, in return for 50 old World War I destroyers, (desperately needed by Britain as escort vessels) he demanded that Britain transfer all her scientific and technological secrets to the USA. Also, he demanded 99 year leases on the islands of Newfoundland, Jamaica, Trinidad and Bermuda for the setting up of American military and naval bases in case Britain should fall.


Of the 50 lend-lease destroyers supplied to Britain, seven were lost during the war. The first was taken over by a British crew on September 9, 1940. After 1943, when no longer useful, eight were sent to Russia, while the others were manned by French, Polish and Norwegian crews. These destroyers were renamed when they arrived in Britain. All were given the name of a town or city, hence the term 'Town Class' destroyer. During the course of the war, Britain had received 12 Billion, 775 Million dollars worth of goods under the Lend-Lease program.

In April Roosevelt illegally sent U.S. troops to occupy Greenland. On 27 May he proclaimed a state of "unlimited national emergency," a kind of presidential declaration of war that circumvented a power constitutionally reserved to Congress. Following the Axis attack against the USSR in June, the Roosevelt administration began delivering enormous quantities of military aid to the beleagured Soviets. These shipments also blatantly violated international law. In July Roosevelt illegally sent American troops to occupy Iceland.

Following the Axis attack against the USSR in June, the Roosevelt administration began delivering enormous quantities of military aid to the beleagured Soviets. These shipments also blatantly violated international law. In July Roosevelt illegally sent American troops to occupy Iceland.

Some U.S. officials were concerned about British wartime efforts to deceive the American government and people. In a  5 September 1941 memorandum forwarded to Secretary of State Cordell Hull, Assistant Secretary of State Adolf Berle warned that British intelligence agents were manufacturing phony documents detailing supposed German conspiracies. Americans should be "on our guard" against these British-invented "false scares," Berle concluded.

The President began his 1941 Navy Day address broadcast over nationwide radio on 27 October 1941 by recalling that German submarines had torpedoed the U.S. destroyer Greer on 4 September 1941 and the U.S. destroyer Kearny on 17 October. In highly emotional language, he characterized these incidents as unprovoked acts of aggression directed against all Americans. He declared that although he had wanted to avoid conflict, shooting had begun and "history has recorded who fired the first shot."

What Roosevelt deliberately failed to mention was the fact that in each case the U.S. destroyers had been engaged in attack operations against the submarines, which fired in self-defense only as a last resort. Hitler wanted to avoid war with the United States, and had expressly ordered German submarines to avoid conflicts with U.S warships at all costs, except to avoid imminent destruction. Roosevelt's standing "shoot on sight" orders to the U.S Navy were specifically designed to make incidents like the ones he so piously condemned inevitable.

Roosevelt then made an astonishing claim:  "I have in my possession a secret map, made in Germany by Hitler's government, by planners of the new world order. It is a map of South America and part of Central America, as Hitler proposes to organize it".

This map, the President explained, showed South America, as well as "our great life line, the Panama Canal," divided into five vassal states under German domination. "That map, my friends, makes clear the Nazi design not only against South America but against the United States as well".

Roosevelt went on to reveal that he also had in his possession "another document made in Germany by Hitler's government. It is a detailed plan to abolish all existing religions -- Catholic, Protestant, Mohammedan, Hindu, Buddhist, and Jewish alike" which Germany will impose "on a dominated world, if Hitler wins."

"The property of all churches will be seized by the Reich and its puppets. The cross and all other symbols of religion are to be forbidden. The clergy are to be liquidated. In the place of the churches of our civilization there is to be set up an international Nazi church, a church which will be served by orators sent out by the Nazi government. And in the place of the Bible, the words of 'Mein Kampf' will be imposed and enforced as Holy Writ. And in the place of the cross of Christ will be put two symbols: the Swastika and the naked sword".

In a memoir published in late 1984, war-time British agent Ivar Bryce, who worked under Churchill's man William Stephenson, who had been given his mission: 'Provoke America to go to war with Germany'. claimed credit for thinking up the "secret map" scheme. Of course, the other "document" cited by Roosevelt, purporting to outline German plans to abolish the world's religions, was just as fraudulent as the "secret map." 

As Nicholas John Cull relates in his book, Selling War: The British Propaganda Campaign Against American "Neutrality" in World War II "Whatever the exact origin of the map, the most striking feature of the episode was the complicity of the President of the United States in perpetrating the fraud."

The German government immediately responded to Roosevelt's speech by denouncing his "documents" as preposterous frauds. The Italian government declared that if Roosevelt did not publish his map "within 24 hours, he will acquire a sky high reputation as a forger." At a press conference the next day, a reporter rather naturally asked the President for a copy of the "secret map." But Roosevelt refused, insisting only that it came from "a source which is undoubtedly reliable."

While FDR indeed was a steadfast advocate for a more active US role in the unfolding conflict, he was up against formidable internal resistance to entry into war. It was the British who had more to gain from American involvement, because they had everything to lose. In this phase of the conflict, Britain stood virtually alone, Nazi Germany controlling most of the European continent and kicking Soviet butt in the early months of Operation Barbarossa, the German invasion of the Soviet Union. The US would only be dragged into the war after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, later that same year, on 7 December 1941.

Rep. Hamilton Fish made the first speech in Congress on 8 December 1941, asking for a declaration of war against Japan. In his book, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin, Fish says he is ashamed of that speech today and if he had known what Roosevelt had been doing to provoke Japan to attack, he would never have asked for a declaration of war.  Fish said Roosevelt was the main firebrand to light the fuse of war both in Europe and the Pacific.

In his address to Congress calling for war, after Pearl Harbor, FDR did not even mention Germany. Yet Hitler stunned the world by declaring war on America. Why? Among the reasons cited by Germany was the provocation of FDR's Navy Day speech and fake map.

"Germany is perhaps the only great nation, which has never had a colony either in North or South America, or otherwise displayed there was any political activity, unless mention is made of the emigration of many millions of Germans and of their work, which, however, has only been to the benefit of the American Continent and of the U.S.A."

from Declaration of War on the US by Adolf Hitler 11
December 1941

During a conversation on 14 May 1942 with his close Jewish adviser, Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr., the President candidly remarked: "I may have one policy for Europe and one diametrically opposite for North and South America. I may be entirely inconsistent, and furthermore, I am perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths if it will help us win the war .

Clare Booth-Luce shocked many people by saying at the Republican Party Convention in 1944 that Roosevelt “has lied us [the U.S.A.] into the war because he did not have the political courage to lead us into it." However, after this statement proved to be correct, the Roosevelt followers ceased to deny it, but praised it by claiming he was “forced to lie” to save his country and then England and “the world.”

Stephenson's forgery was a triumph, and although he used fraud and blackmail to goad the U.S. into a war that killed and wounded a million Americans, he is the hero of the best-seller A Man Called Intrepid. And not only has FDR been forgiven, he has been celebrated. His lies, it is said, were noble lies, to rouse an isolationist America into doing its duty and ridding the world of Adolf Hitler.

For Britain, desperate times called for desperate measures, one of which would have been the forgery of this map, the point of which was to instill in the Americans the notion that the Nazis, if victorious in Europe, would not leave the American continent alone, thus challenging the Monroe Doctrine. The story behind the map, as produced by the British intelligence services, went like this:

In October 1941, a British agent managed to snatch this map from the bag of a German courier straight after the latter’s involvement in a car crash in Buenos Aires. The map showed how the Nazis intended to reorganise South America into five satellite states, each one a Gau with a German Gauleiter:

• Guyana (encompassing British, Dutch and French Guyana, but wholly under the tutelage of the – collaborating – French government headquartered in Vichy);
• Neuspanien (New Spain, an agglomeration of Venezuela, Colombia, Equador and Panama – meaning the Panama Canal, at that time under US sovereignty, would at least indirectly come under Nazi control);
• Chile (being a fusion of Peru, part of Bolivia and Chile itself, dissected halfway by an Argentinian corridor to the Pacific port of Antofagasta);
• Argentina (Argentina itself, Uruguay and Paraguay, and the aforementioned Antofagasta corridor);
• Brazil (being Brazil, plus part of Bolivia).

Interestingly, the map’s legend stresses: Luftverkehrsnetz der Vereinigten Staaten Süd-Amerikas – Hauptlinien. (‘Air Routes in the United States of South America – Main Lines’), indicating that these states would be joined in a well-connected subcontinent-wide political union (most likely a Nazi-induced shotgun wedding). Such a unified behemoth under German control would inevitably pose a threat to the US. 

As it turned out, World War II hardly touched South America. Only after the war did it gain some notoriety as the hideout of many top-level Nazis, including Eichmann (caught by the Israelis in Argentina) and Mengele (died peacefully in Brazil).


Bratzel, John F., and Leslie B. Rout, Jr., "FDR and The 'Secret Map'," The Wilson Quarterly (Washington, DC), New Year's 1985, pp. 167-173.

"Ex-British Agent Says FDR's Nazi Map Faked," Foreign Intelligence Literary Scene (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America), December 1984, pp. 1-3.

"President Roosevelt's Navy Day Address on World Affairs," The New York Times, 28 October 1941

Just as [Woodrow] Wilson ... led the United States into World War I, ‘to make the world safe for democracy’ – so Franklin D. Roosevelt ... led it into World War II, in the name of the ‘Four Freedoms.’ ... In the case of World War II, [those overwhelmingly opposed to war ... were silenced and] smeared as ‘isolationists,’ ‘reactionaries,’ and ‘American-First’ers.’

World War I led, not to [Wilson’s] ‘democracy,’ but to the creation of three dictatorships: Soviet Russia, Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany. World War II led, not to [Roosevelt’s] ‘Four Freedoms,’ but to the surrender of one-third of the world’s population into communist slavery.

- Ayn Rand

Roosevelt’s real policy was revealed when the Germans were able to search through Polish documents and found in the archives in Warsaw the dispatches of the Polish ambassadors in Washington and Paris which laid bare Roosevelt’s efforts to goad France and Britain into war. In November 1938, William C. Bullitt, his personal friend and ambassador in Paris, had indicated to the Poles that the president’s desire was for “Germany and Russia [to] come to blows, whereupon the democratic nations would attack Germany and force her into submission”; in the spring of 1939, Bullitt quoted Roosevelt as being determined “not to participate in the war from the start, but to be in at the finish.”

Oliver Lyttelton, wartime British production manager, was undeniably correct when he declared: "America was never truly neutral. There is no doubt where her sympathies were, and it is a travesty on history ever to say that the United States was forced into the war. America provoked the Japanese to such an extent that they were forced to attack".

The Japanese were begging for peace before the atom bombs were dropped, and MacArthur recommended negotiation on the basis of the Japanese overtures. But Roosevelt brushed off this suggestion with the remark: “MacArthur is our greatest general and our poorest politician.” [Chamberlin, William Henry, America’s Second Crusade] These statements tell the whole history of World War II from the beginning to the end, The war was started to keep Roosevelt in office and it was allowed to go on much longer than necessary—it could have been over any day from 1943 on. At the same time American boys were battling to end World War II, leading American politicians were doing all they could for political reasons to continue the conflict.

August-September 1943: Tokyo tried to reconcile Stalin with Hitler

Anatoly Koshkin for RIA Novosti

Several years ago the U.S. National Archives published correspondence between the Japanese Ambassador in Berlin, Hiroshi Oshima, and the Japanese Foreign Ministry that had been intercepted and decoded by American secret services during World War II.

From this correspondence, it transpired that after the defeat of the German armies in the Battle of Stalingrad in 1943, the Japanese government had tried to act as an intermediary for Moscow and Berlin. Tokyo made several attempts to arrange separate talks on the cessation of hostilities on the Soviet-German front. For example, Oshima reported to Tokyo that Hitler had ostensibly agreed to halt the war against the U.S.S.R. if the Soviet leadership gave him Ukraine. Itar-Tass reported at the time that, "It is not clear from Oshima's encrypted correspondence whether Moscow received this proposal."

After the disaster at Stalingrad, Berlin indeed wanted to ascertain the Soviet position on "reconciliation" with Germany. As an ally of Germany, the Japanese undertook the task of sounding out Moscow, although they pursued their own objectives as well.

In February 1943, after heavy fighting, the Japanese troops were forced to abandon the strategically important Guadalcanal Islands (the Solomon Islands). The Germans simultaneously surrendered at Stalingrad. Realizing that the tide of the war had turned against the Axis powers, the Japanese government decided to resort to diplomacy.

Tokyo elaborated a plan to mediate peace talks between Germany and the U.S.S.R. The Japanese hoped that even if the talks failed, the very fact that Moscow had established contacts with Berlin would make the U.S. and Britain suspicious and mistrustful of the Kremlin: the Big Three had agreed that they would not hold separate talks with the enemy.

At the same time, the Japanese hoped that if the negotiations were successful, and the war on the Soviet-German front was brought to an end, Germany would be free to concentrate all of its forces against Britain and the U.K. In turn, this would weaken the Western Allies in the Pacific, and Japan would be able to change the situation in its favor.


At a meeting in Ankara in January 1943, the heads of the Japanese information offices in Europe decided that their main task was to contribute to the end the Soviet-German war by means of an agreement between the two warring states. The U.S. intelligence services found out about these plans. The Americans informed Moscow through their Ambassador to the U.S.S.R. that the Germans had been making strong reprimands to Japan; and that Japan had replied by asking why Germany had declared war on the U.S.S.R, and why Germany was not trying to conclude peace with the U.S.S.R. and turn it into an ally.

U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was apparently concerned by the Japanese maneuvers. In a telegram to Stalin congratulating the Soviet leader on the victory at Stalingrad, he wrote that it was very important to do everything possible to achieve the ultimate defeat and unconditional surrender of the common enemy. In reply, Stalin said he was confident that joint combat operations by the armed forces of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union would soon lead to victory over the common enemy. He therefore indicated that reconciliation with Germany was totally out of the question.

An order by Stalin, Supreme Commander-in-Chief, published in Pravda on 1 May 1943, reiterated this position: "This talk about peace in the Nazi camp only shows that they are in deep crisis. What peace can be made with the imperialist scoundrels from the Nazi camp, who have flooded Europe with blood, and covered it with gallows?"

Yet the heads of the Japanese information offices in Europe still went ahead with their scheduled meeting in Berlin in August 1943. This was after the Germans had lost the Battle of Kursk. By that time, officials of the Japanese General Staff were openly expressing doubts that the U.S.S.R. could be destroyed by military means. The meeting in Berlin also concluded that Germany might have already lost the war, and that its defeat might only be a matter of time. Tokyo was concerned that after defeating Germany, or even before, the U.S.S.R. might help its Allies and intervene against Japan to end World War II as quickly as possible. This caused the advocates of German-Soviet reconciliation to redouble their diplomatic efforts.

The Japanese Foreign Ministry instructed its embassy in Moscow to try to arrange peace talks between Moscow and Berlin. But when the Japanese Ambassador to Moscow Naotake Sato raised this subject with Vyacheslav Molotov on September 10, 1943, the Soviet People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs dismissed the idea out of hand: "In the current situation, in conditions of war, the Soviet government completely rules out any possibility of a truce or peace with Nazi Germany or its satellites in Europe".

Despite the Soviet government's outright rejection of the proposal, a year later, Japanese War Minister Field Marshal Hajime Sugiyama, as well as colleagues who supported his position, began once again advocating Japanese mediation of Soviet-German peace talks. They said that changes in the situation were conducive to this.

Speaking at a session of the Japanese Supreme War Council on 5 September 1944, Sugiyama assessed Japan's chances of being successful as an intermediary as follows: "On the basis of intelligence, the Army Command believes that since the start of the war with Germany, the Soviet Union has already lost more than 15 million lives and a large part of its material resources, and is now experiencing war fatigue. Moreover, the international situation points to tensions between the U.S.S.R. and Britain in the Mediterranean, in southeast Europe, in the northern seas, and in other regions. It is even possible that there will be an armed clash between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. On the other hand, even though Hitler is once again planning an offensive on the Eastern Front, he is fully aware that he does not stand to gain from a continuation of the war against the U.S.S.R. For this reason, the time is ripe for Japan to play an active role in mediating German-Soviet truce talks".

Tokyo's major goal was not so much to achieve a German-Soviet reconciliation, as to make a goodwill gesture to Moscow that would prevent it from intervening against Japan. The Kremlin was fully aware of this.

In 1944, the Japanese government continued its attempts at mediation: it officially proposed to the Soviet government that a special Japanese mission be sent to Moscow. Having surmised the true objectives of the Japanese, the Soviet leadership instructed the Soviet Ambassador in Washington Andrey Gromyko to inform the U.S. government of the Japanese approaches. On 23 September 1944, Molotov sent a telegram to the ambassador instructing him to confidentially inform the Americans that: "Being well aware that the proposed mission would be more concerned with assessing the possibility of a separate peace between Germany and the U.S.S.R than with Soviet-Japanese relations, the Soviet government rejected the proposal of the Japanese government".

Anatoly Koshkin is a Doctor of History and professor at the Oriental University

The Price We Paid for Roosevelt's "Unconditional Surrender"

By George Fowler
August 21, 2009

Such references as the Normandy invasion, the Hürtgen Forest and the "Battle of the Bulge" would have no meaning to Americans today (not to mention the awesome casualties resulting from these and other late-World War II events) had America's president not held to his policy of total destruction of the European enemy.

A half-century (now 64 years) after the conclusion of World War II, very few people, even those who consider themselves well-informed students of history, have any idea that FDR spurned an equitable European peace in 1943. Thus they have never envisioned the infinitely better postwar world we could have known.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt's apologists rationalize their hero's capitulation to Stalin at Yalta as the result of his being a sick and tired man, near death. To many serious and even casual students of that era, this is nonsense. They view the Yalta agreements as totally consistent with 12 years of pro-Soviet policies emanating from the White House, beginning with the president's 1933 recognition of the Soviet Union following directly on the heels of Stalin's Ukraine genocide.

"Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda. There is no actual starvation or deaths from starvation but there is widespread mortality from diseases due to malnutrition".

-- as reported by the New York Times correspondent and Pulitzer-prize winner Walter Duranty

Denial of the famine by Soviet authorities was echoed at the time of the famine by some prominent Western journalists, like Walter Duranty. The Soviet Union adamantly refused any outside assistance because the regime officially denied that there was any famine. Anyone claiming the contrary was accused of spreading anti-Soviet propaganda. Outside the Soviet Union, Western governments adopted a passive attitude toward the famine, although most of them had become aware of the true suffering in Ukraine through confidential diplomatic channels.

In fact, in November 1933, the United States, under newly elected president Franklin D. Roosevelt, chose to formally recognized Stalin's Communist government and also negotiated a sweeping new trade agreement. The following year, the pattern of denial in the West culminated with the admission of the Soviet Union into the League of Nations. Stalin's Five-Year Plans for the modernization of the Soviet Union depended largely on the purchase of massive amounts of manufactured goods and technology from Western nations. Those nations were unwilling to disrupt lucrative trade agreements with the Soviet Union in order to pursue the matter of the famine.

In the ensuing decades, Ukrainian émigré groups sought acknowledgment of this tragic, massive genocide, but with little success. Not until the late 1980's, with the publication of eminent scholar Robert Conquest's "Harvest of Sorrow," the report of the US Commission on the Ukraine Famine, and the findings of the International Commission of Inquiry into the 1932–33 Famine in Ukraine, and the release of the eye-opening documentary "Harvest of Despair," did greater world attention come to bear on this event. In Soviet Ukraine, of course, the Holodomor was kept out of official discourse until the late 1980's, shortly before Ukraine won its independence in 1991. With the fall of the Soviet Union, previously inaccessible archives, as well as the long suppressed oral testimony of Holodomor survivors living in Ukraine, have yielded massive evidence offering incontrovertible proof of Ukraine's tragic famine genocide of the 1930's.

On 28 November 2006, the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament of Ukraine) passed a decree defining the Holodomor as a deliberate Act of Genocide. Although the Russian government continues to call Ukraine's depiction of the famine a "one-sided falsification of history," it is recognized as genocide by approximately two dozen nations, and is now the focus of considerable international research and documentation.

Early estimates of the death toll by scholars and government officials varied greatly; anywhere from 1.8 to 12 million ethnic Ukrainians were said to have perished as a result of the famine. Recent research has since narrowed the estimates to between 2.4 and 7.5 million. According to the decision of Kyiv Appellation Court, the demographic losses due to the famine amounted to 10 million, with 3.9 million famine deaths, and a 6.1 million birth deficit.

And to the relative few familiar with its particulars, nothing personifies FDR's betrayal of his office, his nation and his civilization more completely than his Unconditional Surrender edict at Casablanca in early 1943.

Even overwhelmingly uninterested people have some grasp of the terrible human and material costs that the United States and Europe bore over nearly half a century following the war; an awesome blood and treasure tax levied by the geopolitical resolution of World War II. Specifically, could military and some highly important diplomatic problems have been solved considerably earlier than the date of Germany's capitulation in May, 1945?

Beyond the bitter recollections of many U.S. Third Army veterans (who drove all the way to Czechoslovakia before being pulled back by Allied summit agreements), Americans in overwhelming numbers have assumed that little could have been done to alter post-war Europe's national boundaries.

We may have felt that the lands of the pre-World War I Czarist, Hapsburg and Ottoman empires, plus Prussia-East Germany, had fallen under the mailed fist of Soviet rule as a matter of historical kismet; in other words, that fate had divided vast areas of land and great numbers of people into essentially good and overwhelmingly evil camps as a test of Western civilization's staying power.

However, the contention that individuals and not unfathomable destiny dictate the tide of events is consistent not only with biblical wisdom but with history's record. In this incredibly consequential case, the record shows that President Roosevelt repeatedly shunned a prime opportunity to end the European part of WWII in 1943, thereby averting the awful carnage and destruction that unfolded during the final two years of conflict. Such a resolution would have greatly enhanced the West's position in the post-war era.

Pre-Pearl Harbor America was vehemently divided over FDR's campaign to get the United States into that war. But few would argue with the premise that, once we were in - for better or for worse - the president had a paramount obligation to win it as quickly and mercifully as possible, while preserving our long-range interests.

Throughout the 40-plus years of the Cold War, anti-communists consistently made a distinction between the peoples of the USSR and their Kremlin masters; the peoples of the captive nations and the Red puppet governments controlling them. But FDR, particularly with the Axis military situation darkening as 1943 dawned, never attempted to shorten the war by separating the German people (and the impressive host of anti-Nazi and non-Nazi figures within that still-formidable country) from their leadership.

Granted, the analogy between the German people under Hitler and Eastern peoples under communism is a highly imperfect one. The Germans felt, it is fair to say overwhelmingly, great loyalty toward the man who had returned their nation to greatness following its humiliating post-World War I period of sadistically imposed revenge.

But for many millions of Germans, gratitude for past miracles could not cloud post-Stalingrad realities. By early 1943 even Josef Göbbels' propaganda efforts could not mask the precariousness of Germany's situation. Had the American and British governments been so disposed, this period marked the first major time-frame (save for mid-1940, when Churchill refused to entertain Germany's honorable peace overtures) when an initiative for peace could have succeeded.

In Through the Looking Glass, a recounting of British intelligence activities by a former top MI6 operative, this crucial point was made: "The British Intelligence Service considered the surrender of Germany's Sixth Army at Stalingrad to be the start of the Cold War. From that point, top MI6 figures concluded, Soviet expansion aims should have been a primary consideration in Western Allied war planning. Instead, FDR, meeting with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill at Casablanca, slammed the door on what many would consider not only an option but a paramount responsibility to avert further bloodshed and destruction".

The mid-January 1943 Casablanca conference was held some two months after the American invasion of French North Africa. It dealt largely with the upcoming Sicily-Italy campaign. At a press conference toward the end of the meetings, Roosevelt stated that the Allies would accept only the "unconditional surrender" of the Axis powers. Subsequently this diktat was revised in regard to Italy, in the belief (borne out the following summer) that it could be dissuaded from further honoring its alliance.

Of the momentous announcement, former Ambassador to Moscow (and by then hardening anti-communist) Charles P. "Chip" Bohlen wrote: "Responsibility for this unconditional surrender doctrine rests almost exclusively with President Roosevelt. He announced it . . . ostensibly because there was nothing that he and Churchill had to tell the press of any particular interest. According to Churchill, he was surprised at the announcement".

FDR's son Elliott, present at Casablanca as an aide to his father, quoted the president as saying: "Of course, it's just the thing for the Russians. 'Unconditional surrender.' Uncle Joe might have made it up himself".

Long time New York Times correspondent and military analyst Drew Middleton wrote in his book Retreat From Victory that Churchill told him years later: "I was startled by the announcement. I tried to hide my surprise. But I was his ardent lieutenant".

It appears that Sir Winston was attempting to deceive Middleton, among others. In Winston S. Churchill - Road to Victory 1941-1945, Martin Gilbert, Churchill's official biographer, recounted a telegram Churchill sent from Casablanca to Labor Party War Cabinet member (and Churchill's 1945 successor as PM) Clement Attlee. In it Churchill explained how he had emphasized unconditional surrender.

In part, the telegram read: "We propose a declaration of firm intention of the United States and the British Empire to continue the war relentlessly until we have brought about the 'unconditional surrender' of Germany and Japan".

Churchill added that the omission of Italy was designed "to encourage a breakup there." He further stated that Roosevelt "liked the idea" of such a declaration. Quite likely with an eye toward Moscow in particular, the PM noted that the unconditional surrender statement would "stimulate our friends in every country."

Of this announcement Middleton wrote: "The president's apologists have argued that the statement was necessary to convince the Russians of the good faith of the American and British governments and their determination to continue the war against Hitler to complete victory ... Had not the Americans and the British proven their good faith and determination at Guadalcanal and Alamein?"

Interestingly, a "show of good faith" toward Stalin was a rationalization used to justify the February, 1945 massive destruction of the virtual "open city" of Dresden. And with figures loyal to Moscow highly placed in both the British and American governmental structures, in addition to highly sympathetic ones such as FDR himself, what more assurance of continuing self-defeating Western allied policies did the Soviet dictator require?

To those who continue to embrace the fallacy that total victory at massive cost was necessary, possibly they will open their minds to the quite practical alternative that FDR and Sir Winston spurned. An American figure central to negotiated peace attempts in 1943 was then-former Pennsylvania Governor George H. Eade. In early January, 1943, just before leaving Washington for Casablanca, Roosevelt appointed Earle U.S. naval attaché at Istanbul, Turkey. Like that neutral nation's inland capital of Ankara (and prominent neutral sites such as Stockholm and Lisbon), Istanbul was a wartime hotbed of negotiations, deals and intrigues as fascinating as those of any fictional thriller. And it was one of the settings where the greatest intrigue of all was ventured. Incredibly, following WWII, Earle's story did not attract the interest of prestigious publications, and it first saw print in a late 1950s issue of that decade's top scandal magazine, Confidential.

The Casablanca conference had coincided with events that ranking British intelligence operatives considered a fertile time to begin working toward some way of ending the war in the West. The American invasion of North Africa in November spelled doom for Germany's hold in that region. And the Stalingrad encirclement would mean the inevitable capitulation of the Sixth Army and the loss of 300,000 German soldiers. The highest card up the Allied sleeve was Abwehr (German intelligence) chief Admiral Wilhelm Canaris. MI6 figures knew what Canaris' boss didn't suspect: this swishy and furtive mastermind of intrigue was disloyal to Hitler, and had been for years.

Head British spy Gen. Stewart Menzies submitted a proposal to the Foreign Office that Canaris be approached regarding the possibility of a Hitler overthrow. His proposal was promptly turned down "for fear of offending Russia," as Menzies commented after the war. Subsequently, SIS Chief of Air Intelligence and Menzies confidante Frederick Winterbotham wrote "... but why we should fall over backwards to appease those who were, and are, pledged to destroy our way of life I shall never understand."

Statements at the time by Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden, one of the most prominent pro-war bloc figures in England, made it clear that he neither wanted nor had any instructions from the PM to pursue a negotiated peace based on a successful displacement of Hitler.

German contact with George Earle, referred to in Der Spiegel correspondent Heinz Hohne's biography Canaris as "an arch conservative who yearned to end the ill-starred conflict between the non-communist powers," was set in motion by Capt. Paul Leverkühn. He headed the German War Organization suboffice in Istanbul and before the war had been an internationally known lawyer who numbered OSS spy chief William J. Donovan among his acquaintances. In fact Donovan, who had been another of Roosevelt's "ardent lieutenants" in working toward U.S. entry into the war, had made anti-Nazi German connections in Spain but was ordered to break them off.

Leverkühn suggested to fellow conspirators that Baron Kurt von Lernsner, who headed a German cultural group in Turkey, approach Earle. Lernsner had headed the German delegation during the Versailles peace conference that followed WW1, but had been given an inconsequential wartime post due to a fraction of Jewish blood. After an initial positive meeting between the two, Earle agreed to meet with Canaris.

A few days later a short, middle aged man in civilian clothes showed up at Earle's residence. The former Pennsylvania governor and the German intelligence chief talked at length. Canaris expressed his deep concern over Roosevelt's recent unconditional surrender declaration. He said it would play into Soviet hands and that it boded ill for all the Western nations. He pointed out that it left the highly placed anti-Nazi movement in Germany virtually no bargaining power, that it meant war to the bitter end - with the Soviet Union emerging as the dominant influence in Europe.

Gov. Earle agreed with his caller that FDR's stated policy contained disastrous implications. Sensing that Canaris had cards to play, he asked what the German had in mind. Canaris asked Earle whether he thought Roosevelt really meant "unconditional" surrender. He emphasized that Germany's generals, central to any anti-Hitler move, could never swallow such a policy.

"What terms would they consider?" Earle asked. Canaris ended the discussion by answering: "Perhaps you will take the matter up with your president. I am leaving Istanbul this afternoon. I will return in 60 days. I hope you will have something to tell me." Canaris had been vague, but Earle considered it an important feeler from one of the key figures in the German government. Earle sent Roosevelt a detailed dispatch in the next diplomatic pouch to Washington. He received no reply from the president.

In March, 1943 an attempt on Hitler's life failed on a return flight from the Eastern Front to his East Prussia "Wolf's Lair" headquarters. An acid-timed "pencil" bomb hidden in a gift package of brandy froze when Hitler's pilot went to a high altitude to avoid turbulence.

That month Earle's phone rang and he heard Canaris' voice: 'I'm the gentleman who called on you unannounced two months ago. Has there been any progress regarding the matter we discussed?" Earle thought of his urgent message to FDR, then replied, "No, no progress." Subsequently Earle arranged to meet with von Lernsner at a location five miles from Istanbul. The two spoke for three hours, and von Lernsner capped the meeting with the question: If the anti-Nazi leaders succeed in either killing or incarcerating Hitler and his leading functionaries, could an honorable surrender be arranged? It would be with the understanding that a democratic provisional government would take the reins in Berlin. Also, the Germans wanted to arrange military cooperation between the American-British forces and the Wehrmacht, in order to keep the Soviet armies out of Europe.

Earle again made coded contact with the White House. He pleaded with President Roosevelt, an acquaintance of many years, to look into what these people had to offer. Subsequently Earle wrote that "as the weeks passed (with no reply to this second appeal) the Red Army continued to grind its way westward, feeding itself on the tools of war Roosevelt's Lend Lease program provided. I continually pressed the matter with hopeless communiqués, until I sensed the real snag; von Lernsner and his anti-Nazi countrymen had taken an absolute stand against communist expansion. This was disturbing to FDR, a man who had great faith in the integrity of Stalin. During the late spring and early summer of 1943 von Lernsner kept after me, but still no word of encouragement was heard from Washington."

In late summer 1943 von Lernsner outlined a specific plan. In addition to many top military and civilian leaders, a plot was being readied that included Count von Helldorf, the Berlin chief of police, and Freiherr von Böslager, whose brigade was prepared to surround and take Hitler's Wolfschanze (Wolf's Lair) headquarters. In Berlin Gen. von Beck, one of the highest ranking army officers, was prepared to seize command and to begin moving troops to the Eastern Front once a cease fire with the Western powers had been arranged. Plotters held key positions in Paris and other strategic locations. In fact the network was so widespread that to this day those interested in this period are amazed that Hitler, even allowing for his intelligence chiefs treason, did not get wind of it.

Canaris had sent Count von Moltke to Istanbul in June, where Moltke contacted two OSS-connected professors. He suggested arrangements for a German General Staff officer to travel to England to begin personal contact with the British and American governments. In speaking with the OSS-academics, Moltke echoed the necessity of retracting the Casablanca declaration. This particular overture drew the attention of OSS chief William Donovan. Donovan got Leverkühn to sign a paper, typed on official German Embassy stationery, promising no opposition to an Allied landing in France if the German terms were met. Donovan's interest was so strong that he decided to try Roosevelt again, but to no avail.

The plotters attempted Allied contacts through seven countries, such as neutral Sweden. But they considered a highest-level Spanish-British liaison of highest import. Canaris had been personally involved with Spanish affairs even before his intrigues behind Hitler's back to prevent Spain's joining the Axis powers. He had been told by Madrid contacts that Generalissimo Francisco Franco, whose admiration for Hitler had waned steadily since Germany's indispensible assistance during the Spanish Civil War, would be most willing to help.

Following World War II Jose Maria Doussinague, Director General of the Spanish Foreign Office, wrote: "To us, the war's solution had always meant an acceptance of our view that the National Socialist regime should be overthrown without, however, destroying Germany. And the anti-Hitler elements had brought us proof that this was not only feasible but comparatively simple."

As 1943 progressed the conspiratorial plot boiled ever more rapidly. The only ingredient necessary to assure success was Western Allied approval. And one individual, sitting in the White House, had merely to signal a green light. Again Earle appealed to the president. All the Germans asked was for Roosevelt's signature on a document of agreement to their basic plan.

To guarantee that this all-important message reached America's commander-in-chief, Earle sent it by both Army and Navy channels as well as the regular State Department pouch. If FDR agreed, Earle was to be flown to Germany to initiate preliminary terms with the Hitler opposition. After many days passed, Earle finally received a reply from the president: "All such applications for a negotiated peace should be referred to the supreme Allied commander, General Eisenhower. "

Of this Earle said: "Although phrased in diplomatic terms, this was an absolute brush-off. Here was clear-cut indication that that president had no interest in a valid plan laid by desperate but honest men to end the war and save countless lives".

As is well known, the final desperate attempt against Hitler's life was an 11th hour snafu. In early summer of 1944 two attempts were called off; one because the plotters wanted to get Himmler and Göring with the same bomb and the second due to Hitler's leaving a meeting unexpectedly.

On July 20 at the Wolf's Lair, Count von Stauffenberg, a handsome nobleman and highly decorated Russian front veteran who had lost an arm and an eye in combat, attended a Hitler conference. Within his briefcase was an English-made delayed-action bomb. Stauffenberg gave his report and, at about 1 pm, left the room. He had placed the lethal briefcase under a table near Hitler.

After Stauffenberg's departure Hitler left his position near the bomb and walked to a wall map across the room. Then someone unwittingly placed the briefcase behind a heavy table stand, away from the Führer. To compound the bad luck of the conspirators, the conference site had been changed; from a concrete bunker under repair to a small wooden building. Thus the concussion factor was minimized when the device exploded.

The tremendous blast killed four and wounded Hitler slightly in one arm. Stauffenberg watched the small structure explode and determined that no one could have lived through it. He instantly phoned key plotters in Berlin: Hitler is dead. Proceed with the takeover. But within a few hours Hitler was addressing the nation by radio, telling Germany of the "treachery" of "a clique of ambitious and criminal officers." He called failure of the attempt a sign from providence that he had been spared to fulfill his mission.

Nazi retribution was swift and incredibly ugly. Some 7,000 military and civilian figures were rounded up, and 5,000 of them were executed. Von Stauffenberg's relatives throughout Germany were thrown in concentration camps, where some died. Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, the famed "Desert Fox" and an outer-rim figure in the conspiracy, was given his choice of suicide and a state funeral (death attributed to war wounds) or a court martial and very unhappy consequences for his wife and son (he chose the former). Canaris, who withdrew from the bomb plot because he felt that Hitler & Co. should be spared so they could be imprisoned and subsequently tried by the Allies, was hanged from a meat hook.

Thus the abortive final coup attempt came a year or so later and in a much more haphazard manner than would have been the case had Allied cooperation been forthcoming.

Following the final failed attempt on Hitler's life, Germany proceeded to dig in for the awful nine and a half months to come. Hitler lifted the long time ban on political activity in the armed forces, and every general staff officer was to be a "National Socialist officer-leader." The party also demanded the Nazi salute from all officers rather than the conventional military salute. Ironically, Hitler and other top Nazis had long expressed contempt for communist political trappings within the Soviet military.

In a March, 1985 column the highly respected John Chamberlain noted that we've never gotten the true story of the Roosevelt circle's war aims in Europe; that is, why American and British armies were held back from a dash to take Berlin during the months following the attempt on Hitler's life.

Chamberlain wrote that "What we really need is an exposure of the agreements made well before the end of World War II which set specific limits to the Eastward sweep of the Eisenhower and Montgomery armies." The actual chain of command was Eisenhower with Montgomery and Omar Bradley as co-subordinates. And the two main driving forces were those of Montgomery's command and George Patton's Third Army. As Supreme Allied Commander, Eisenhower was carrying out the strategic designs of the president through his handpicked political general, Chief of Staff George C. Marshall.

Drew Middleton wrote in Retreat from Victory that both Patton and the previously cautious Montgomery were convinced that they could drive their armies to and beyond Berlin, split the Reich and end the war. Middleton, for many years New York Times military affairs editor, noted that of the many German commanders and military experts he had spoken with in subsequent years, all had agreed that a determined thrust by either army would have succeeded.

Middleton concluded: "The advantages to the Western allies of victory in 1944 rather than in 1945, as the result of a successful offensive by Montgomery or Patton, are obvious today. They certainly were obvious to a great number of soldiers and politicians, Americans as well as British, in 1944. But not to Eisenhower|.

In the minds of many, questions regarding Ike's wretched strategy of slow advance along a broad front, against a terribly depleted German army with virtually no air support and awesome logistical problems, have never been satisfactorily answered. Eisenhower rationalized his cautious (and costly) approach to Germany in his postwar best seller Crusade in Europe. But almost certainly the strategic call was made from the Roosevelt inner circle and relayed to Marshall to Eisenhower. Ike ordered the frustrated field commanders to slow down in the closing stages of the war and meet the advancing Red Army at the Elbe River, in the heart of Germany.

In the 1943 book The World of the Four Freedoms, written by Roosevelt's Groton-Harvard schoolmate and his undersecretary of state, Sumner Welles (who was in many respects the actual secretary of state, as Cordell Hull bitterly realized), there is a map showing the intended borders of postwar Germany. These 1943-drawn borders, largely along the Elbe, became almost exactly the East-West zones of postwar occupation, and subsequently, the borders of East and West Germany. This realization may be of little comfort to those diehards who still believe "Roosevelt was a sick man incapable of standing up to Stalin at Yalta."

However, as stated previously, individuals and not historical destiny dictate the tide of events. In this case there is a solid body of evidence spelling out how President Roosevelt rejected a prime opportunity to end the European war in 1943. Had Roosevelt seized the moment, he would have strengthened the West's hand immeasurably and cut the legs from under a murderous despot named Josef Stalin.

Following the Dunkirk evacuation and France's capitulation, Hitler had in effect told Churchill: "Let us stop this now. My interests lie to the East, and the British Empire should remain a structure for the maintenance of world stability." But in an address broadcast throughout the United Kingdom and publicized worldwide, the man who had recently succeeded Neville Chamberlain as prime minister retorted: "We will never parley; we will never negotiate with Hitler and his gang."

These words were celebrated as evidence of Sir Winston's magnificent fighting spirit, setting a No. 10 Downing Street tone in marvelous counterpoint to the anguished and spent image of Mr. Chamberlain. Few realized that such bravado was expressed with knowledge of the American president's full commitment to war, or Mr. Churchill's ensnaring debt to those financiers and war profiteers who had more than once saved him from financial ruin.

The abject failure of the 1943 German peace attempts indicates that the British and American warlords would "parley" with no one, not even those who risked everything, their families included, in opposing Hitler. Many have concluded that they had always looked beyond Hitler, to the destruction of Germany itself.

If this be the case, as the record clearly indicates, Churchill was departing from Britain's long-held policy of alliances aimed at divide and conquer; to side with weaker allies against the strongest perceived threat to the realm and thereby assure British supremacy. Unconditional surrender also ensured a critical sapping of Britain's resources and guaranteed the full postwar billowing of the "Four Freedoms" socialist tide that washed away European empires. The still-endless decades of post-colonial starvation and chaos are eloquent if bitter testimony to this truth.

Thus the eloquent wordsmith was eventually forced to consume one of his most determined utterances: "I have not become the King's First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire."

Roosevelt, who came in with Hitler in 1933, went out with him in 1945. Winston Churchill lived for two decades following the silencing of the European and Pacific guns. He saw his beloved empire crumble, Britain enter succeeding stages of economic and social rot, and Germany re-emerge as Europe's leading nation. Ironically, one must conclude that those who placed their heads on the block to kill Hitler might have heeded his words and saved themselves the trouble. The Führer had stated on more than one occasion that it was not only him that his enemies wanted out of the way. They were bent on destroying Germany in any case.

FDR later claimed unconditional surrender `just popped into my head'. An amazing number of historians have accepted this explanation. It is belied by a typed copy of the President's remarks, which he had in his lap during the press conference, which now resides in the files of the Roosevelt library. There was nothing accidental about the announcement. In the words of one aide, unconditional surrender had been `deeply deliberated'.

Among Churchill's British colleagues, dislike of unconditional surrender was widespread. Chief of British Intelligence General Sir Stewart Graham Menzies considered the policy disastrous because it wrecked certain operations he had in progress with his counterpart, Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of the Abwehr, Germany's secret service. The silver-haired admiral doubled as one of the clandestine leaders of the German Resistance to Hitler. Air Marshal Sir John Slessor maintained to the end of his life that were it not for the policy, air power alone could have ended the war.

The feeling of dismay was shared by a number of VIP Americans who attended the Casablanca conference. General Dwight Eisenhower thought unconditional surrender could do nothing but prolong the war and cost American and British lives. General Ira Eaker, head of the 8th Air Force, later recalled: "Everybody I knew at the time when they heard this [unconditional surrender] said: "How stupid can you be?"

Army Chief of Staff General George Marshall told Field Marshal Sir John Dill, the British liaison officer in Washington DC, that he, too, considered unconditional surrender a blunder.

In Berlin, Roosevelt's announcement sent Göbbels, Hitler's propaganda chief, into euphoria. He called it `world historical tomfoolery of the first order'. To one of his colleagues, Göbbels admitted: "I should never have been able to think up so rousing a slogan. If our Western enemies tell us, we won't deal with you, our only aim is to destroy you, how can any German, whether he likes it or not, do anything but fight on with all his strength?"

Elsewhere in the German capital, Admiral Canaris turned to one his deputies and said: "I believe that the other side have now disarmed us of the last weapon with which we could have ended [the war]".

The Abwehr chief saw unconditional surrender as the death knell of his hopes that the German Resistance could persuade the Wehrmacht's generals to join them in overthrowing Hitler. The admiral's intuition was confirmed by a message from Field Marshal Erwin von Witzleben, commander of the Berlin garrison, who had declared himself ready to do everything in his power to depose the Führer. Now Witzleben said: "No honourable man can lead the German people into such a situation"

Compounding the folly of unconditional surrender was its timing.

Roosevelt announced it on the very day that the Russians trapped the German Sixth Army at Stalingrad, virtually guaranteeing the demise of the Third Reich. It would have been the ideal moment for the German Resistance and their allies among the generals to stage a coup.

Source: The Barnes Review, 1995

Recommended reading:

 David Irving, Churchill's War, Volume I
 Udo Walendy, Truth for Germany: The Guilt Question of the Second World War

Did Hitler Want War?
Patrick J. Buchanan – September 1, 2009

On 1 September 1939, 70 years ago, the German Army crossed the Polish frontier. On 3 September, Britain declared war.

Six years later, 50 million Christians and Jews had perished. Britain was broken and bankrupt, Germany a smoldering ruin. Europe had served as the site of the most murderous combat known to man, and civilians had suffered worse horrors than the soldiers.

By May 1945, Red Army hordes occupied all the great capitals of Central Europe: Vienna, Prague, Budapest, Berlin. A hundred million Christians were under the heel of the most barbarous tyranny in history: the Bolshevik regime of the greatest terrorist of them all, Josef Stalin.

Ask any Westerner to name the most evil figure of the past century. Almost always, the same answer comes up: Hitler. Sustained brainwashing has done its job...Der Führer still towers above all rivals as modern history's greatest demon. But increasingly, research proves that we have been persuaded to fixate on the wrong dictator. History's airbrush has worked overtime on the most criminal monster of them all: Josef Stalin.

Stalin's murderous ruthlessness was, by any standard, far more horrible than Hitler's. A psychopath who modelled himself on Ivan the Terrible, Stalin instituted a reign of terror without parallel, exterminating opponents or perceived opponents by the multi-million. How many died in his murderous stranglehold?

Many people also believe Mao was the greatest mass-murderer of all time. However, Professor R.J. Rummell, who has made the study of mass murder a major part of his academic career, indicates that is mistaken, and that it is Stalin who deserves this particular honor, with a body count of 42.7 million. Mao is a very close second at "only" 37.8 million, with Hitler coming in third at 21 million. Then comes Chiang Kai-shek (10.2 million), Lenin (4 million), and Tojo (4 million).

What cause could justify such sacrifices?

The German-Polish war had come out of a quarrel over a town the size of Ocean City, Md., in summer. Danzig, 95 percent German, had been severed from Germany at Versailles in violation of Woodrow Wilson’s principle of self-determination. Even British leaders thought Danzig should be returned.

Why did Warsaw not negotiate with Berlin, which was hinting at an offer of compensatory territory in Slovakia? Because the Poles had a war guarantee from Britain that, should Germany attack, Britain and her empire would come to Poland’s rescue.

But why would Britain hand an unsolicited war guarantee to a junta of Polish colonels, giving them the power to drag Britain into a second war with the most powerful nation in Europe?

Was Danzig worth a war? Unlike the 7 million Hong Kongese whom the British surrendered to Beijing, who didn’t want to go, the Danzigers were clamoring to return to Germany.

Comes the response: The war guarantee was not about Danzig, or even about Poland. It was about the moral and strategic imperative “to stop Hitler” after he showed, by tearing up the Munich pact and Czechoslovakia with it, that he was out to conquer the world. And this Nazi beast could not be allowed to do that.

If true, a fair point. Americans, after all, were prepared to use atom bombs to keep the Red Army from the Channel. But where is the evidence that Adolf Hitler, whose victims as of March 1939 were a fraction of Gen. Pinochet’s, or Fidel Castro’s, was out to conquer the world?

From the very first day onward, Hitler had taken great pains to settle all differences with the Great Powers and especially with Germany's neighbours in a peaceful manner, but when he found that he was never met half-way he eventually resorted to those politics that were inevitable in light of the inconsistent attitude of the former enemy nations. However, he always maintained his wish to avoid a war.

In the Polish Question indisputable documents prove beyond any doubt that he proceeded so cautiously that a settlement must have been reached if only the other side had been willing; and indeed there were circles on the other side - the British Ambassador Henderson among these first and foremost - which desired a settlement, but were not sufficiently decisive forces in the matter. It is amazing to see with what patience Hitler took up each and every offer of mediation, right up to 3 September 1939. Since this fact is particularly annoying to those who would falsify history to Germany's detriment - and this also includes German historians - they invent the lie that at the Conference in Berchtesgaden on 22 August 1939 Hitler had allegedly expressed concern that "some son of a bitch might interfere at the last minute with an offer to mediate." At least one officer, General Hermann Böhm, Admiral (ret'd.), has taken it upon himself to refute, under oath, this and other lies contained in the so-called minutes of this Conference.  

After Munich in 1938, Czechoslovakia did indeed crumble and come apart. Yet consider what became of its parts.

The Sudeten Germans were returned to German rule, as they wished. Poland had annexed the tiny disputed region of Teschen, where thousands of Poles lived. Hungary’s ancestral lands in the south of Slovakia had been returned to her. The Slovaks had their full independence guaranteed by Germany. As for the Czechs, they came to Berlin for the same deal as the Slovaks, but Hitler insisted they accept a protectorate.

Now one may despise what was done, but how did this partition of Czechoslovakia manifest a Hitlerian drive for world conquest?

Comes the reply: If Britain had not given the war guarantee and gone to war, after Czechoslovakia would have come Poland’s turn, then Russia’s, then France’s, then Britain’s, then the United States.

We would all be speaking German now.

But if Hitler was out to conquer the world — Britain, Africa, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, South America, India, Asia, Australia — why did he spend three years building that hugely expensive Siegfried Line to protect Germany from France? Why did he start the war with no surface fleet, no troop transports and only 29 oceangoing submarines? How do you conquer the world with a navy that can’t get out of the Baltic Sea?

If Hitler wanted the world, why did he not build strategic bombers, instead of two-engine Dorniers and Heinkels that could not even reach Britain from Germany?

Why did he let the British army go at Dunkirk?

Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell?

Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser’s fleet? Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez? Why did he beg Benito Mussolini not to attack Greece?

Because Hitler wanted to end the war in 1940, almost two years before the trains began to roll to the camps.

Hitler had never wanted war with Poland, but an alliance with Poland such as he had with Francisco Franco’s Spain, Mussolini’s Italy, Miklos Horthy’s Hungary and Jozef Tiso’s Slovakia.

Indeed, why would he want war when, by 1939, he was surrounded by allied, friendly or neutral neighbors, save France. And he had written off Alsace, because reconquering Alsace meant war with France, and that meant war with Britain, whose empire he admired and whom he had always sought as an ally.

As of March 1939, Hitler did not even have a border with Russia. How then could he invade Russia?

Winston Churchill was right when he called it “The Unnecessary War” — the war that may yet prove the mortal blow to our civilization.

Was the Holocaust Inevitable?
by Pat Buchanan
December 1,  2012

"What Would Winston Do?"

So asks Newsweek's cover, which features a full-length photo of the prime minister his people voted the greatest Briton of them all.

 Quite a tribute, when one realizes Churchill's career coincides with the collapse of the British empire and the fall of his nation from world pre-eminence to third-rate power.

That the Newsweek cover was sparked by my book Churchill, Hitler and The Unnecessary War seems apparent, as one of the three essays, by Christopher Hitchens, was a scathing review. Though in places complimentary, Hitchens charmingly concludes: This book "stinks."

Understandable. No Brit can easily concede my central thesis: The Brits kicked away their empire. Through colossal blunders, Britain twice declared war on a Germany that had not attacked her and did not want war with her, fought for 10 bloody years and lost it all.

Unable to face the truth, Hitchens seeks solace in old myths.

We had to stop Prussian militarism in 1914, says Hitchens. "The Kaiser's policy shows that Germany was looking for a chance for war all over the globe."

Nonsense. If the Kaiser were looking for a war he would have found it. But in 1914, he had been in power for 25 years, was deep into middle age but had never fought a war nor seen a battle.

From Waterloo to World War I, Prussia fought three wars, all in one seven-year period, 1864 to 1871. Out of these wars, she acquired two duchies, Schleswig and Holstein, and two provinces, Alsace and Lorraine. By 1914, Germany had not fought a war in two generations.

Does that sound like a nation out to conquer the world?

As for the Kaiser's bellicose support for the Boers, his igniting the Agadir crisis in 1905, his building of a great fleet, his seeking of colonies in Africa, he was only aping the British, whose approbation and friendship he desperately sought all his life and was ever denied.

In every crisis the Kaiser blundered into, including his foolish "blank cheque" to Austria after Serb assassins murdered the heir to the Austrian throne, the Kaiser backed down or was trying to back away when war erupted.

Even Churchill, who before 1914 was charging the Kaiser with seeking "the dominion of the world," conceded, "History should ... acquit William II of having plotted and planned the World War."

What of World War II? Surely, it was necessary to declare war to stop Adolf Hitler from conquering the world and conducting the Holocaust.

Yet consider.

Before Britain declared war on him, Hitler never demanded return of any lands lost at Versailles to the West. Northern Schleswig had gone to Denmark in 1919, Eupen and Malmedy had gone to Belgium, Alsace and Lorraine to France.

Why did Hitler not demand these lands back? Because he sought an alliance, or at least friendship, with Great Britain and knew any move on France would mean war with Britain — a war he never wanted.

If Hitler were out to conquer the world, why did he not build a great fleet? Why did he not demand the French fleet when France surrendered? Germany had to give up its High Seas Fleet in 1918.

Why did he build his own Maginot Line, the Western Wall, in the Rhineland, if he meant all along to invade France?

If he wanted war with the West, why did he offer peace after Poland and offer to end the war, again, after Dunkirk?

That Hitler was a rabid anti-Semite is undeniable. Mein Kampf is saturated in anti-Semitism. The Nuremberg Laws confirm it. But for the six years before Britain declared war, there was no Holocaust, and for two years after the war began, there was no Holocaust.

Not until midwinter 1942 was the Wannsee Conference held, where the Final Solution was on the table.

Judicial notice has all but been attained in German courts with respect to the Wannsee Conference Protocol, but it is not an indictable offense to 'qualify', to 'trivialize', to question or to dispute the authenticity of the conference or the protocol.

The constant repetition of the allegation that the Wannsee Conference represents the act of planning the genocide of the Jews, as the media have injected it into the conscious and (what is worse) the subconscious minds of mankind for many years now, has resulted in this allegation being considered to be gospel truth today.

In recent times, however, more and more persons who previously regarded the Wannsee Conference Protocol as one of, if not the most significant proof for the 'Führer order for the destruction of the European Jews' have been changing their minds.

The meeting in the Wannsee Villa on 20 January 1942 was nothing else, but an unofficial ministerial gathering and not a conference to decide upon the extermination of the Jews.

It was the custom that the higher echelon of the ministries in Berlin met once a month in informal gatherings to discuss issues. In the year 1942 the Wannsee Villa was chosen for possibly the simple reason to avoid any interruptions from the frequent bombing alarms in the city. At this meeting there were only 15 members present from various ministries in Berlin and not all of them members of the Nazi Party. The leadership of the discussion was given to SS-Gruppenführer (Major General of the SS) Reinhard Heydrich who explained that Hitler had delegated the settlement of the Jewish question to him. It was never mentioned that there was a "Jewish Solution" in the sense of a plan of extermination of all Jewry, but rather the original Madagascar plan, whereby the Jews were to develop their own government, which evidently became an impossibility due to developments in the war. Furthermore, there would be territory made available in the East for the Jews, where they could establish their own state.

This resettlement plan, not extermination plan, was confirmed by the Holocaust professor Yehuda Bauer: "And all this converged in the decisive demand of Hitler to resettle the Jews in the framework of an international agreement".

--Yehuda Bauer, Ransoming the Jews? , Jüdischer Verlag, Frankfurt 1996

Besides that, this Holocaust professor toured the world during his lifetime giving lectures. The assertion that at the Wannsee conference it was decided upon the extermination of the Jews, was declared to be nothing but a "silly tale" and this criticism was endlessly repeated:

"An Israeli Holocaust scholar has debunked the Wannsee Conference, at which top Nazi officials are said to have gathered at a villa in a Berlin suburb in 1942 to draw the blueprints of the ‘Final Solution’ ... According to Prof. Yehuda Bauer of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Wannsee was a meeting, ‘but hardly a conference’, and ‘little of what was said there was executed in detail". … The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that extermination of the Jews was arrived at in Wannsee ....'Wannsee' was "but a stage in the unfolding of the process of mass murder"

--The Canadian Jewish News, January 30, 1992

After the Jewish Holocaust professor effectively cleared the way to declare that the Wannsee story was nothing but a "silly story" at the beginning of 1992 even the Bundesrepublik fell into step with Yehuda Bauer. The BRD parliament itself, or more precisely, the house newspaper Das Parlament as the voice of the parliament, established once and for all, that nothing had been planned that could be connected with a story of the "extermination of the Jews at the Wannsee".

"An unbiased study of the minutes (of the Wannsee-Conference) establishes that those who met there had not concluded anything that could be evaluated as an intellectual, or ordered, initiation of the crime. Unfortunately historical science was not able to satisfy the need for a precise picture regarding the Wannsee matter, its representatives were unable to produce a logical alternative to the false Wannsee image. ... Eventually it seems that they have at least successfully shattered the popular erroneous picture [that the extermination of the Jews was mapped out at Wannsee]. However, altered versions, still quite remote from the truth, of this image could recently be found in the press again, stating that on January 20, 1942, the participants of the Wannsee-Conference had concluded 'coordinating measures for the murder of 11 million Jews from European countries'".

-- Politics and Contemporary History (supplement of Das Parlament, the official German parliament magazine) B 1-2/92 - 3 January 1992

The Wannsee Conference - Truth and Myth
Gilad Atzmon
January 31, 2012

Last week, as Jewish Lobbies continue to invest enormous efforts in dictating and imposing a rigid and unquestionable Holocaust narrative, Israeli Haaretz published a short, succinct and courageous report challenging the validity of the Wannsee Conference as proof of the Nazi 'Final Solution\.

Just ahead of Holocaust Memorial Day, the Israeli paper reported that  Dr. Norbert Kampe (63), director of the "Wannsee Conference" Memorial  Centre in Berlin, has challenged some of the most widely-accepted historical ‘facts’ associated with the conference and its meaning.

Jewish Holocaust scholars have always insisted that the master plan for the Nazi Judeocide was conceived at the Wannsee Conference but Dr. Kampe is quoted as saying that the conference dealt only with “operational matters” instead of being a platform of any form of “decision making”. To prove his point, Kampe pointed to the fact that Hitler and his ministers were not present at the conference. Furthermore, he says, "At the time, January 1942, there was no organized plan for extermination camps".

And yet, Haaretz admits, “Make no mistake. Kampe is not anti-Semitic. Certainly not a Holocaust denier. On the contrary. As expected of a professional historian, he studied countless relevant texts, documents and testimonies on the particular event…His conclusion is the direct outcome of an educated analysis of written material in his possession”.

Only one copy of the Wansee Conference protocol, found in 1947, survived the war, others having been deliberately destroyed by the Nazis in an effort to conceal evidence. This protocol is the only authentic documentation as to what happened in Wannsee and one of the few that made explicit use of the term "final solution". However, Haaretz concedes that, like any historical document, the Wannsee document should be read carefully. The words "death" or "murder" do not appear in the conference protocol. Instead, it refers to “natural diminution", "appropriate treatment", "other solution options" and "different forms of solutions." In fact, the only explicit references in the document deal with deportation rather than extermination. Even the famous table attached to the protocol that counts the Jews in each occupied country, does not state that those Jews are destined to be destroyed..

That conference was not convened until Hitler had been halted in Russia, was at war with America and sensed doom was inevitable. Then the trains began to roll.

The allies thoroughly scoured Germany for every scrap of paper that might be used to incriminate the defeated regime Never before or since have a nations records been so completely ransacked In addition to official government papers including countless secret documents tracing Germanys Wartime Jewish Policy the allies confiscated the records of the National Socialist Party and its affiliated organizations as well as those of numerous private firms institutions and individuals The sheer quantity of paper seized is amazing. For example the records of the German Foreign Office confiscated by U S officials amounted to some 485 tons of paper

From this mountain of paper U S military personnel selected some two thousand documents considered most incriminating for use in the main Nuremburg trial. The tons of confiscated records were later shipped to the United States It is estimated that in the U S National Archives alone more than one million pages of documents on the Third Reich Jewish Policy are on file. Many documents have since been published notably the 42-volume blue series, the 15-volume green series and the 11-volume red series

In the years since the Nuremburg trials historians in many countries have carefully sifted through the German records including many documents that were not available to the Nuremburg prosecutors Historians have been able to compare and cross check the records of different ministries and agencies as well as private diaries and papers

Yet out of this great mass of paper not one single document has ever been found that confirms or even refers to an extermination program.

Arno Mayer, in his book Why Did The Heavens Not Darken? The 'Final Solution' In History, writes that the failure to take Moscow, and the entry of the U.S.A. into the war (even if only in an economic role), made ultimate defeat plain to Hitler in December 1941, rather than a year later after Stalingrad. Thus according to Mayer "the Nazi fundamentalists and their accomplices ... turned to venting their rage on the Jews." It was "a decision to exterminate the Jews [although no] written document containing or reporting an explicit command to exterminate the Jews has come to light ... the presumption must be that the order or informal injunction to mass-murder Jews was transmitted orally (probably by Hitler himself)." The stalling of the invasion of the Soviet Union, implying ultimate defeat, made the Germans so angry that they took it out on the Jews, although originally there had been no intention to exterminate them.

Although the Einsatzgruppen activities in the early phases of the Russian campaign certainly liquidated many Jews, Mayer claims, contradicting both the Holoscribes and the alleged written reports of the Einsatzgruppen, that their "methodical mass slaughters of Jews ... did not start until the fall of 1941, after the Red Army had slowed the German advance [and] the eastern campaign had begun to run aground."

It is implausible that the Germans could have viewed the Einsatzgruppen as the means of "extermination" of the Jews of the Soviet Union. For one thing, a great many Jews were evacuated by the Soviets before the Germans arrived. Numbers are of course difficult to arrive at. Mayer throws out, with no particular support, a guess of 1.5 million evacuated out of 4 million originally resident in territories occupied by the Germans and allies. In any case, "extermination" could not under the circumstances have been achieved. For another thing, the personnel of the Einsatzgruppen numbered only 3,000 men (as Mayer notes), a force that must have been quite strained in performing only its primary security and counterinsurgency functions and could not possibly have contemplated performing "extermination" activities in such a vast theater, if the Jews were there to exterminate..

And why did Hitler invade Russia? This writer quotes Hitler 10 times as saying that only by knocking out Russia could he convince Britain it could not win and must end the war.

Hitchens mocks this view, invoking the Hitler-madman theory: "Could we have a better definition of derangement and megalomania than the case of a dictator who overrules his own generals and invades Russia in wintertime ... ?"

Christopher, Hitler invaded Russia on June 22.

The Holocaust was not a cause of the war, but a consequence of the war. No war, no Holocaust.

Britain went to war with Germany to save Poland. She did not save Poland. She did lose the empire. And Josef Stalin, whose victims outnumbered those of Hitler 1,000 to one as of September 1939, and who joined Hitler in the rape of Poland, wound up with all of Poland, and all the Christian nations from the Urals to the Elbe.

The British Empire fought, bled and died, and made Eastern and Central Europe safe for Stalinism. No wonder Winston Churchill was so melancholy in old age. No wonder Christopher rails against the book. As T.S. Eliot observed, "Mankind cannot bear much reality."


The Illuminati was a secret society in Bavaria in the late 18th century. They had a political agenda that included republicanism and abolition of monarchies, which they tried to institute by means of "subterfuge, secrecy, and conspiracy," including the infiltration of other organizations.They fancied themselves to be "enlightened" but they had little success and were destroyed within fifteen years of their origin.

Paranoid Conspiracy Theorists (PCTs) believe the Illuminati cabal still exists, either in its original form or as a paradigm for later cabals. Many PCTs believe "that large Jewish banking families have been orchestrating various political revolutions and machinations throughout Europe and America since the late eighteenth century, with the ultimate aim of bringing about a satanic New World Order.

In the paranoid mind, the Illuminati succeeded in their goals, and have now infiltrated every government and every aspect of society. They are responsible for every evil and every unjust act that ever occurs anywhere; the fact that absolutely no evidence of their existence can be found only serves to make them stronger and more frightening. They are the demon in the closet, and will probably never disappear from the paranoid fantasy world of right-wing conspiracy theorists.

--New England Skeptical Society

The New World Order
The Rise of Hitler and Pearl Harbor

Since the Persian Gulf War, the term "New World Order" has become well known. However, there has never really been an explanation as to what the term meant, only that it represented a new spirit of cooperation among the nations of the world in order to further the cause of peace. And peace is good, so therefore the New World Order is good and should be accepted. Not so fast. Like the old saying, you can't tell a book by its cover, there is more here than meets the eye.

The term "New World Order" was actually first used many years ago. Adolf Hitler said: "National Socialism will use its own revolution for the establishing of a New World Order." The Associated Press reported that on 26 July 1968, New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller said in a speech to the International Platform Association at the Sheraton Park Hotel in New York, that "as President he would work toward international creation of a New World Order."

World War II  

As a youth, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) fled Austria, and went to Germany to escape the draft. He was arrested, and in February 1914, a report was put in his file, which read in part: "Unfit for military or auxiliary service; too weak; incapable of bearing arms".

This was the man that the Illuminati would choose to further their goals. As a puppet of the Illuminati, he was used to set the stage for the conflict which would eventually lead to the establishment of the United Nations, a major step towards one-world government; and to shame the world into allowing the State of Israel to be established.

Edward George Bulwer-Lytton (1803-73), a graduate of Cambridge University, and a Mason, who became a member of the British Parliament, wrote a novel in 1871 called Vril: The Power of the Coming Race, about a super-race of white Aryans that took control of the world. Researchers consider him responsible for the birth of the Nazi movement, because Hitler was said to have been influenced by this book, and another novel, Rienzi: The Last of the Roman Tribunes, which was adapted into a major opera by German composer Richard Wagner. After seeing Rienzi for the first time in November, 1906, Hitler talked about a “mandate which, one day, he would receive from the people, to lead them out of servitude to the heights of freedom.” He believed that he would be entrusted with a special mission. He later told Frau Wagner, the composer’s widow: "In that hour it began" (the Nazi movement known as National Socialism.

History shows that Hitler ordered the death of six million Jews during the holocaust in Europe. Why he did, has become a mystery, since it really hasn’t been established that he had an intense hatred for Jews.

A U.S. Office of Strategic Services psychological report by Walter C. Langer, later published as The Mind of Adolf Hitler, says that the young Hitler was befriended by Jewish art dealers who “paid generously for his mediocre watercolors.” Because of his financial situation, a Jewish landlady charged him only a nominal rent, and even moved out of her apartment on one occasion so that Hitler and a friend could have more room. A Jewish used-clothing dealer gave him a long black overcoat, which he wore constantly. When he was a lance-corporal during World War I, Hitler was awarded the Iron Cross (First and Second Class), a rare honor for a soldier of such low rank, who hadn’t really done anything to deserve such a distinction. He learned later, that the commendation was the result of the “efforts of the regimental adjutant, Hugo Gutmann, a Jew.”

When he became Führer, Hitler hired a Jewish maid to do his cooking. On one occasion, when it was suggested that he get rid of her, he became furious. Dr. Eduard Bloch, a Jewish physician, had been the Hitler family doctor since Hitler was a child. Bloch had treated Hitler’s mother when she was dying of cancer. After her funeral, Hitler accompanied his sisters to thank him, and said: “I shall be grateful to you forever.” He sent the doctor two postcards, one that he hand painted. Both of them said: “From your ever grateful patient, Adolf Hitler.”

Hitler had even wondered if he himself was Jewish. This idea stemmed from the fact that Hitler’s father, Alois, was illegitimate, and the identity of his grandfather had never been established. During Hitler’s rise to power, his half-brother’s son threatened to reveal that Hitler was of Jewish ancestry. One investigation discovered that Hitler’s grandfather had been the son of a Jewish family called Frankenburger, in Graz, who employed Hitler’s grandmother, Maria Anna Schicklgruber, as a maid. She had become pregnant by their son, while she was working in their home. The family sent her money for a year and a half to help support the child. Another investigation said that Alois was conceived in Vienna, where Hitler’s grandfather was employed as a servant in the home of Baron Rothschild. Maria was sent home to Spital, where Hitler’s father was born.

In Hitler's War, written in 1977 by British author and historical revisionist, David Irving, he revealed that Hitler didn’t order the Jewish massacres, and didn’t find out about it until late in the war. There is no record of Hitler ever visiting a concentration camp, although he did watch films and see photographs.

So what turned Hitler against the Jews, if indeed he was; or was there someone else making decisions for him.

As early as 1919, he spoke of removing Jews altogether; and in his book Mein Kampf, written while he was in prison in 1924, for the ‘Beer Hall Putsch,’ spoke of the overthrow of “world Jewry”: "I believe that I am today acting according to the purposes of the almighty Creator. In resisting the Jew, I am fighting the Lord’s battle".

On 30 January 1939, he said in a speech to the Reichstag: "Today I want to be a prophet once more: if international finance Jewry inside and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into another world war, the consequence will not be the bolshevization of the earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe".

In a public speech in Munich, on November 8, 1942, he said that “International Jewry will be recognized in its full demonic peril; we National Socialists would see to that.”

Hitler had read the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and in 1942, was told by Himmler, that they were forged, however, Hitler disregarded that fact and said: “We shall regain our health only by eliminating the Jew.” He attributed the weakness of the German economy to the Jews, and considered the Treaty of Versailles, a Jewish document. He even accused the Jews of spreading communism; yet in a speech on 5 February 1941, said that “basically, National Socialism (Naziism) and Communism are the same.”

Why does the life of Hitler seem to be a series of contradictions? One clue was revealed in The Secret Diaries of Hitler's Doctor, written in 1983 by David Irving, which revealed that Hitler had taken 75 different medications. He was given strychnine and belladonna (for gas), cocaine and adrenalin (for conjunctivitis), amphetamines, painkillers, and sedatives, including Eukodal, a synthetic morphine derivative. One has to wonder if Hitler was even aware of what he was being given. Were they being given to him for the sole purpose of making him mentally unstable, so he could be controlled by advisors, who were acting on behalf of the forces that Hitler wrongly identified as the Jewish bankers.

There may also be a more sinister reason which contributed to Hitler’s state of mind. Hitler and some of his officers had been linked to various occult groups and the use of the swastika gave evidence of that. In its normal usage, it is a sign of the power of light; but in its reverse form, as used by the Nazis, it represents the power of darkness. According to writer Joseph Carr: "We know that Hitler and his top luminaries were either dabblers in the occult, or, outright Satanists.”

As a youth, Hitler had been influenced by George Lanz von Liebenfels, an Austrian magician who in 1907 founded “The Order of the New Templars,” which used the Swastika as its emblem. He wrote in a 1932 letter that Hitler was one of his pupils and that one day he would “develop a movement that will make the world tremble".

Hitler joined a secret group in 1919, called the Thule Society, which practiced black magic and worshipped Satan. They wanted to form a political party to rally the people against communism. Its members were drawn from the upper echelon of Society. The founder, Dietrich Eckart, was one of the seven founding members of the Nazi Party, and said on his deathbed: "Follow Hitler. He will dance, but it is I who have called the tune! I have initiated him into the ‘Secret Doctrine,’ opened his centres in vision and given him the means to communicate with the Powers. Do not mourn for me: I shall have influenced history more than any other German".

Hitler grew to fear those around him who practiced the black arts, and it was discovered that along with the Jews, Masons and occult practitioners were also killed and imprisoned in the concentration camps.

Some of the reported book burnings were actually the confiscation and destruction of Masonic libraries.

Karl Ernst Haushofer (who created the Vril Society, which made up the inner circle of the Nazi Party), also of the Thule Society, was the University professor who schooled Hitler on geopolitics. Hitler was also influenced by the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche. In 1943, Hitler’s birthday gift to Mussolini, was The Collected Works of Nietzsche.

In the fall of 1919, Hitler joined the German Workers’ Party, and soon became one of its leaders. In the summer of 1920, it was renamed the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, and then in 1923, it became known as the Nazi Party.

Because of Hitler’s failed November revolt, he was jailed on 1 April 1924, sentenced to five years, but was released after eight months, so he could be built up to national prominence. Though Mein Kampf was published as a work of Adolf Hitler while he was in prison, it was discovered later that it was actually written by Nazi politicians Rudolf Hess and Hermann Wilhelm Göring (and possibly Haushofer), as a follow-up to the Karl Marx book A World Without Jews. The Illuminati made sure the book was well circulated, and it became the springboard for Hitler’s political career.

In 1925, Dr. Carl Duisberg, I. G. Farben’s first Chairman, and founder of the Bayer Co. in the United States, said: "Be united, united, united. This should be the uninterrupted call to the parties of the Reichstag. We hope that our words of today will work, and will find the strong man who will finally bring everyone under one umbrella ... for he is always necessary for us Germans, as we have seen in the case of Bismarck".

The depressive economic situation in Germany at the time, created by the Versailles Treaty, made it possible for Hitler’s leadership to take root, and he became Chancellor in January 1933.

Since 1924, the Dawes Plan flooded Germany with a tremendous amount of American capital, which enabled Germany to build its war machine. The three largest loans went into the development of industries, such as I. G. Farben Co. (the German company which became the largest corporation in Europe, and the largest chemical company in the world, after a $30 million loan from the Rockefeller’s National City Bank after World War I, and who created a process of making high grade fuel from low quality coals) and Vereinigte Stahlwerke (who produced about 95% of Germany’s explosives). In 1939, Standard Oil of New Jersey sold I. G. Farben $20,000 worth of high quality aviation fuel.

I. G. Farben’s assets in the United States were controlled by a holding company called American I. G. Farben Chemical Corp. On the Board of Directors of this corporation was Edsel Ford (President of the Ford Motor Co.), Charles E. Mitchell (President of National City Bank in New York City), Walter C. Teagle (President of Standard Oil of New York), Paul Warburg (Chairman of the Federal Reserve), and Herman Metz (Director of the Warburg’s Bank of Manhattan). Several Germans on this Board were found guilty of war crimes at Nuremburg. A U.S. War Department investigation revealed that without Farben’s support, “Germany’s prosecution of the war would have been unthinkable and impossible.”

Hitler received support and financing from the aristocracy and elite of Germany, including Gustav Krupp (industrialist), Carl Duisberg (founder of I.G. Farben), Ernst Tengelmann (director of the Ruhr coal mining operation), Dr. Hjalmar Schacht (prominent banker), and Fritz Thyssen (Chairman of the Board of United Steel Works, Germany’s largest company). Hitler maintained that the Nazi Party would continue “only until the German people had been freed from the threat of Marxism and could reach a decision as to whether the final form of government would be a republic or a monarchy.” Thyssen told the Kaiser that Hitler was made Chancellor only as “a transitional stage leading to the reintroduction of the German monarchy.”

America’s Ambassador to Germany, William Dodd, reported to President Roosevelt in August, 1936:  "At the present moment, more than a hundred American corporations have subsidiaries here or cooperative understandings. The DuPonts have their allies in Germany that are aiding in the armament business. Their chief ally is the I. G. Farben Company (the primary supporter of Hitler) ... Standard Oil Company (of New York) sent $2,000,000 here in December, 1933, and has made $500,000 a year helping Germans make Ersatz gas for war purposes; but Standard Oil cannot take any of its earnings out of the country except in goods ... The International Harvester Company President told me their business here rose 33% a year but they could take nothing out. Even our airplane people have secret arrangements with Krupps. General Motors Company and Ford do enormous business here through subsidiaries and take no profits out. I mention these facts because they complicate things and add to war dangers".

Germany’s two largest tank producers were Opel, a subsidiary of General Motors (controlled by J. P. Morgan and the du Ponts), and Ford A. G., a subsidiary of the Ford Motor Company. International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) held a substantial interest in Focke-Wolfe, an airplane manufacturer who produced German fighter aircraft.

Prior to World War II, the Round Table organization, through various means, made sure Hitler was not stopped in Austria, the Rhineland, or Sudentenland. His financing was done through the Warburg-controlled Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam; and the J. Henry Shroeder Bank (financial agent for the Nazi government), which had branches in Frankfurt, London, and New York. The Chief Legal Counsel for the Schröder Bank, was the firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, whose senior partners included CFR members John Foster Dulles (who was the top policy-making director for the International Nickel Co. who helped negotiate an agreement with Farben which helped the Nazis to stockpile nickel for war purposes) and his brother Allen Dulles (who was a Director on the Board of the J. Henry Schroeder Bank, and later became the head of the CIA). They were cousins to the Rockefellers (who later got a controlling interest in Farben).

Hitler indirectly received financing from the Krupps, Kennedys, and the Rothschilds. The liaison between Hitler and Wall Street was Hjalmar Horace Greely Schacht, the President of the Reichsbank, who aided in the rebuilding of Germany. His father worked in the Berlin office of the Morgan-controlled Equitable Trust Co. of New York. Without a shadow of a doubt, Hitler was controlled by the Illuminati.

The holocaust had begun with the Jews being stripped of their German citizenship; and from 1939-45, Hitler’s death camps claimed the lives of six million Jews, or about 1/3 of the entire Jewish race. The world turned against him, and his actions instigated World War II, which had actually been planned years before.

Another reason for World War II, was to make it possible for Russia, our ally at the time, to gain strength and receive recognition as a world power. Although they were our ally, they were still a Communist nation, with growing designs on world domination. There is an incredible amount of evidence that indicates the willingness of our government to allow the spread of Communism, because of the efforts of Communists who had been employed and were acting on behalf of the Illuminati.

In May 1943 the Allies had pushed the Germans out of Africa, invading Sicily in June, and in September, pushed their way through Italy, on the way to Southern Germany, their weakest point. However, the U.S. withdrew troops from the invasion force so they could be used in a later invasion of France. In his 1950 book Calculated Risk, Gen. Mark Clark said that this decision was “made at high level and for reasons beyond my field and knowledge.” Churchill had wanted the attack to “bring the Central European and Balkan countries under Allied control, before they were allowed to slip into Red slavery.” But instead, under the leadership of Gen. Dwight David Eisenhower, the German advance was spread out, which allowed the Russian forces to advance. Was this an intentional move on the part of the United States to allow the Russians an opportunity to pursue their ulterior motives. It certainly seems so.

In the spring of 1943, a faction within the German Secret Service was prepared to assassinate Hitler, and surrender, on one condition – that the Soviets would not be allowed to advance into Central Europe. Roosevelt refused to accept, and postponed a planned European invasion, in order to give the Russians more time to advance, and occupy more land. According to military documents released in 1970, Gen. Eisenhower allowed the Russians to get to Berlin first, before the Americans, which eventually allowed part of the city to fall under Communist control.

Russia was able to come away from 1945 Conference in Yalta with so much, because Roosevelt believed that the Russians were “perfectly friendly: "They aren’t trying to gobble up the rest of Europe. These fears that have been expressed by a lot of people here that the Russians are going to try and dominate Europe, I personally don’t think there is anything do it ... I have just a hunch that Stalin ... doesn’t want anything but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can, and ask nothing in return, he won’t try to annex anything and will work for a world of democracy and peace".

Russia walked away from the bargaining table with Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, eastern Poland, east and central Europe, N. Korea, the Kuril Islands, and the northern part of Sakhalin.

An American General, Albert C. Wedemeyer, was convinced that Russia was the only winner of World War II. He said: "Stalin was intent on creating favorable conditions for the realization of Communist aims throughout the Balkans and Western Europe. He emerged as the only winner of the War. We insured the emergence of a more hostile, menacing predatory power than Nazi Germany, one which has enslaved more people than we liberated".

Gen. George S. Patton wanted to retire because he planned on being able to speak his mind about America being “soft on Communism”. However, before resigning his Commission, he died after an automobile accident forced him to be hospitalized. In 1979, Douglas Bazata, a former Secret Service agent for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS, the predecessor of the CIA) revealed that he was ordered by the Director ‘Wild Bill’ Donovan to kill Patton in 1944. Although he did not, he knows who did, and said that Patton was killed with cyanide at the hospital he was taken to after the accident.

Frank Murphy, appointed by Roosevelt to the post of Attorney General in 1938, and later, as a Supreme Court Justice, told Congressman Martin Dies: "We’re doomed! The United States is doomed! The Communists have control completely ... They‘ve got control of Roosevelt and his wife as well".

In 1949, upon waiting to be released from a Detroit hospital, he "died" of a heart attack.

James Forrestal, a partner and President of Dillon, Read and Company, was appointed Secretary of the Navy in 1944, then the Secretary of Defense in 1947, till Truman asked him to resign in 1949. After the War, he became dedicated to destroying Communism, because it seemed as though the United States was constantly yielding to them. Truman believed Forrestal was under a lot of mental stress, and had him admitted to the U.S. Naval Hospital at Bethesda, Maryland.

His personal diaries, consisting of 15 loose-leaf binders, about 3,000 pages, were removed from his office at the Pentagon, and held at the White House. Forrestal had told a friend that he was being followed, and that his phone was tapped. He noticed the beginnings of the Korean War, fifteen months before it actually started.

Once he was in the hospital, he was allowed no visitors. On 22 May 1949, his brother, Henry Forrestal, decided to take his brother for a ride into the country. That same day, James Forrestal, allegedly jumped from the 16th floor of the hospital. Found on a third floor projection, the cord of his bathrobe was tied around his neck, and the hospital released a statement that he committed suicide, even though there was not enough evidence to prove that he had.

In 1951, his diaries were published by Viking Press, but they were heavily censored by the White House, the Pentagon, and Walter Millis, of the New York Tribune, so the full story could never be known. His family priest, Monsignor Maurice S. Sheehy said: "Many, many times in his letters to me, Jim Forrestal wrote anxiously and fearfully and bitterly of the enormous harm that had been; and was unceasingly being done, by men in high office in the United States government, who he was convinced were Communists or under the influence of Communists, and who he said were shaping the policies of the United States government to aid Soviet Russia and harm the United States".

To this day, Forrestal continues to be labeled as being insane, and the cause of his death remains unknown.

Towards the end of 1949, three men visited the office of Sen. Joseph McCarthy to show him an FBI report detailing the Communist penetration of the State Department and other government spy networks. On 9 February 1950, in a speech before the Ohio County Women’s Republican Club of Wheeling, West Virginia, he said: "I have in my hand 57 cases of individuals who would appear to be either card-carrying members or certainly loyal to the Communist Party, but who nevertheless are still helping to shape our foreign policy".

A Special Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was established to investigate where there were disloyal people employed at the State Department. However, instead of investigating the accusations, they investigated McCarthy, and a wave of anti-McCarthy sentiment swept the country. On 23 September 1950, McCarthy revealed what would happen because of the Yalta Conference in 1945: "Here was signed the death warrant of the young men who were dying today in the hills and valleys of Korea. Here was signed the death warrant of the young men who will die tomorrow in the jungles of Indochina. (Vietnam)"

McCarthy was accused of smearing the reputation of innocent people, and on 30 July 1954, Sen. Ralph Flanders introduced a resolution condemning him for “conduct unbecoming a member.” The speech by Flanders was written by the National Committee for an Effective Congress, which had been created by Arthur Goldsmith, who compiled the charges against McCarthy. He was originally charged with 46 counts, but after the hearings, only two remained, and the Senate voted only to “censure” him, which is a milder punishment than “condemning” him.

McCarthy died on 2 May 1957 at the Bethesda Naval Hospital of “acute hepatic failure.” No autopsy was ever performed, leading many to believe that he was killed because he was closer to the truth than most people ever dreamed. Of the 81 security risks that McCarthy said was in the State Department, by November, 1954, they had all been removed, either by dismissal or resignation. Over a year later, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee revealed that they had a list of 847 security risks in the State Department.

Louis Budenz, a former Communist, said: "The destruction of Joe McCarthy leaves the way open to intimidate any person of consequence who moves against the Conspiracy. The Communists made him their chief target because they wanted him a symbol to remind political leaders in America not to harm the Conspiracy or its world conquest designs".

All of this information should proves the contention, that the invisible forces at work within our government used World War II as a means of promoting the Russian goal of conquest, and allowed the spread of Communist propaganda.

The Deception of Pearl Harbor

In the Pacific Theater, the stirrings of World War II actually began years before. China had allowed Japan to drill for oil in several provinces, because Standard Oil’s price for kerosene was too high. Through contacts in the Chinese government, Standard Oil had been able to keep anyone from drilling, until the Japanese came and developed huge fields. Standard Oil pushed them out, but the Japanese vowed to return, even going as far as saying that they would seize China to recover their oil investments.

When the Japanese invaded China in the 1930’s, one of their first acts was to destroy Standard Oil property, because they had been responsible for their ouster.

In 1931, Henry L. Stimson, the Secretary of State (a Rockefeller lawyer and agent), met with President Herbert Hoover, on behalf of the Illuminati, to make a deal. The international bankers promised to end the Depression if Hoover would declare war on Japan, and send in the military to protect Standard Oil property. Even though Hoover accommodated the bankers in many cases, this was one deal that he refused.

So Stimson pitched the idea to Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt (who has a dozen U. S. Presidents in his family tree), who was indebted to them because of his philanthropic operation at Georgia’s Warm Springs.

Roosevelt was born at Hyde Park, New York, in 1882. He graduated from Harvard, received a law degree from Columbia Law School, and in 1910, was elected to the New York State Senate (re-elected in 1912). He was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy by Wilson in 1913, on orders from Col. House. According to House biographer Arthur D. Howden Smith, Col. House “picked Roosevelt as a natural candidate for the Presidency long before any other responsible politician.” In the 1920 Presidential election, Roosevelt was James Cox’s running mate, but the Democratic team suffered from the mistakes of the Wilson Administration, and lost miserably to the Harding-Coolidge ticket. Roosevelt later became a two-term governor of New York. After the 1932 Democratic convention in Chicago, where Roosevelt became the Party’s nominee, he met with Col. House at his Massachusetts home. House told another biographer, Charles Seymour, in 1938: "I was close to the movement that nominated Roosevelt ... He has given me a free hand in advising (Secretary of State, Cordell) Hull. All the Ambassadors have reported to me frequently".

The Illuminati put all their political power behind Roosevelt to get him elected, and in 1940, Roosevelt appointed Stimson (a CFR member) to the post of Secretary of War, even though he was a Republican. House, who was 75 years old, did not become Roosevelt’s ‘alter ego.’ That role was filled by another Wilson advisor, Bernard Baruch, who became the liaison between Roosevelt and the bankers. FDR’s uncle, Frederic Delano, was a member of the Federal Reserve Board, and in 1925, became the Chairman of the League of Nations Committee. In 1934, he was appointed as Chairman of the National Resources Planning Board, and in 1936, became Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank in Richmond, Virginia.

Roosevelt was a 32nd degree Mason, a Knight Templar, and a member of the Shrine. He is a direct descendent of socialist Clinton B. Roosevelt, the New York assemblyman who wrote The Science of Government Founded in Natural Law, where he revealed a plan for world government. Clinton Roosevelt and Horace Greeley (founder and owner of the New York Tribune and New Yorker magazine) were the pioneers of social engineering research. In the February, 1953 edition of the Empire State Mason, the official publication of the Grand Lodge of New York, the claim was made that if one-world government ever came about, FDR should get much of the credit.

In 1932, Major General Smedley Butler of the U. S. Marine Corps was approached by Grayson Mallet-Provost Murphy (a director of Guaranty Trust), Robert S. Clark (a banker who inherited a fortune from the founder of the Singer Sewing Machine Co.), and John W. Davis (a 1924 Presidential candidate, who was an attorney for J. P. Morgan), with a plan to lead a revolution to overthrow the government and establish a Fascist dictatorship, Butler was to “seize the White House with a private army (of 500,000 veterans), hold Franklin Roosevelt prisoner, and get rid of him if he refused to serve as their puppet in a dictatorship they planned to impose and control.”

Butler chose to expose the plot, rather than lead it, supposedly because of his patriotism. Or was it because he recognized their true aim, which was for Roosevelt to impose a dictatorship during a national emergency, so the government could take complete control. Butler is on record as having said: "War was largely a matter of money. Bankers lend money to foreign countries and when they cannot repay, the President sends Marines to get it".

When the planned revolt didn’t materialize, other plans were developed. Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor, reported: "At the first meeting of the Cabinet after the President took office in 1933, the financier and advisor to Roosevelt, Bernard Baruch, and Baruch’s friend, General Hugh Johnson, who was to become the head of the National Recovery Administration, came in with a copy of a book by Gentile, the Italian Fascist theoretician, for each member of the Cabinet, and we all read it with care".

Future plans called for the government to be moved towards Fascism, and government control without a revolution. They decided that the best method was through war, and Jim Farley, Roosevelt’s Postmaster General, said that during the second Cabinet meeting in 1933: “The new President again turned to the possibility of war in Japan.” Gen. Johnson wrote: “I know of no well informed Washington observer who isn’t convinced that, if Mr. Roosevelt is elected (in 1940), he will drag us into war at the first opportunity, and that, if none presents itself, he will make one.”

Roosevelt wanted Japan to withdraw, not only from Indo-China, but also China (Manchuria). To enforce his demands, he froze all Japanese assets in this country, and cancelled a 1911 commercial treaty. He had their fuel supplies cut and placed an embargo on 11 raw materials which were necessary for their military. In December 1939, this was extended to light steel. In England, Winston Churchill, and later the Dutch government, followed suit. Former President Herbert Hoover observed the various political manipulations, and said in August, 1941: "The American people should insistently demand that Congress put a stop to step-by-step projection of the United States into undeclared war..." 

On 28 September 1940, Japan, Germany, and Italy signed the Tripartite Treaty, which declared that if any of the three were attacked, all three had to respond. So if Japan attacked the U.S., and the U.S. would declare war against Japan, they would also be at war with Germany and Italy.

In October, 1940, part of FDR’s strategy to push Japan into committing an overt act of war, was to move America’s Pacific fleet out of California, and have it anchored at Pearl Harbor. Admiral James Richardson, the commander of the Pacific Fleet, expressed to Roosevelt his strong opposition to putting the fleet in harm’s way. He was relieved of his command. Richardson later quoted Roosevelt as saying:  "Sooner or later the Japanese will commit an overt act against the United States and the nation will be willing to enter the war".

Roosevelt and Churchill had already been working on a plan to get America to enter the war in Europe. After the German ship Bismarck sank the British ship, known as the Hood, Churchill suggested in April, 1941, “that an American warship should find the Prinz Eugen (the Bismarck’s escort ship) then draw her fire, ‘thus providing the incident for which the United States would be so thankful’ i.e., bring her into war.” While Roosevelt planned for such a provocation in the Atlantic, Hitler told his naval commanders in July 1941, to avoid confrontation with the United States while his Russian campaign was in progress.

Joseph C. Grew used his post as the U.S. Ambassador to Japan to encourage the Japanese to enter a state of military preparedness. They were shipped steel scrap from the entire 6th Avenue Elevator Railroad of New York. The Institute of Pacific Relations, through a $2 million grant, funded communist spies who were to help induce the Japanese to strike back at the United States.

Since then, it has become common knowledge that the attack was not the surprise it was claimed to be. On 27 January 1941, Grew sent a telegram to the Secretary of State to report the following: "The Peruvian minister has informed a member of my staff that he heard from many sources, including a Japanese source, that, in the event of trouble breaking out between the United States and Japan, the Japanese intended to make a surprise attack against Pearl Harbor".

(Source: U.S., Department of State, Publication 1983, Peace and War: United States Foreign Policy, 1931-1941, Washington, D.C.: U.S., Government Printing Office, 1943)

In August 1941, Congressman Martin Dies, Chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, collected evidence that the Japanese were planning to attack Pearl Harbor. The Committee was in possession of a strategic map, prepared by the Japanese Imperial Military Intelligence Department that clearly indicated their plans to attack Pearl Harbor. Dies was told not to go public with his information. An Army Intelligence officer in the Far East discovered the plan for the Pearl Harbor attack, and prior to the attack, sent three separate messages to Washington detailing the plan.

Soviet agent Richard Sorge told the Russian Government in October 1941 that “the Japanese intend to attack Pearl Harbor in the next 60 days,” and received a response from his superiors that the information had been passed onto President Roosevelt. Dusko Popov, a British double agent, received information from Germany about Japan’s plans, and passed the information onto Washington. It was never acted on.

As early as 1944, Presidential candidate, New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey, said that Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor, before it happened. In documents declassified by the National Security Agency in 1981, America had broken the Blue (diplomatic) and Purple (naval) secret codes of the Japanese, knew all the details of the attack, and the whereabouts of the Japanese fleet. From September, 1941, until the attack itself, all Japanese communications had been intercepted and decoded by American intelligence, and indicated an impending attack on Pearl Harbor.

One transmission, from a fake weather report broadcast on a Japanese short-wave station contained the words “higashi no kaze ame,” which means “east wind, rain,” which the Americans already knew was the Japanese code for war with the United States. Top military officials denied that the “winds” message existed and attempted to destroy all traces of its receipt.

Late in November 1941, the following order was sent out to all U.S. military commanders: "The United States desires that Japan commit the first overt act".

According to Secretary of War Stimson, this order came directly from Roosevelt. According to Stimson’s diary, 9 people in the war cabinet, all the military people, knew about FDR’s plan of provocation.

The State Department knew on November 20, that a naval force, which included four of the largest Japanese aircraft carriers were heading towards Hawaii, and this information was passed on to Pearl Harbor on November 27. However, the American base in Hawaii was not given this information. Three days before the attack, Australian Intelligence spotted the Japanese fleet heading for Hawaii. They sent a warning to Washington, but it was dismissed by Roosevelt who said it was a politically motivated rumor circulated by the Republicans.

On 1 December 1941, the head of the Far East Division of U.S. Naval Intelligence wrote in his report to head of the Pacific Fleet: "War between the United States and Japan will begin in the nearest future".

The Report never made it to the commander’s desk, because it had been ‘accidentally’ detained by his superiors. Early in December, Army Intelligence knew that the diplomats at the Japanese Embassy in Washington had been ordered to destroy all codes, and to return to Japan. Washington also knew that Japan had ordered all of its merchant ships home, because they would be needed to transport soldiers and supplies for the war. On December 5, Col. Sadtler from U.S. Military Communications transmitted the following telegram to his superiors, based on information he had received: "War with Japan will begin immediately; exclude all possibility of a second Port Arthur".

This telegram never got to its destination.

In 1932, the U.S. Navy had conducted tests at Pearl Harbor which indicated that it was vulnerable to an attack from sixty miles away without being able to detect it. Admiral J. O. Richardson, Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific fleet, wanted the fleet withdrawn to the west coast of the United States, because they were inadequately manned for war, and because the area was too exposed. It was not done. In January, 1941, Richardson was relieved of his command. It was later revealed that Roosevelt wanted him to create a naval blockade around Japan, to provoke them into a response, so the United States could declare war. He refused to do it, saying it was an act of war.

Besides knowing about the security weaknesses at the base in Pearl Harbor, and having previous knowledge about the impending attack, Roosevelt guaranteed a slaughter by ordering that the planes be grouped in circles, with their propellers facing inward, because he claimed that he wanted to protect them against ‘acts of sabotage.’ Rear Admiral Robert A. Theobold, USN, Retired, author of The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor, and Col. Curtis B. Dall, the son-in-law of FDR, in an interview with Anthony Hilder for his book Warlords of Washington, admitted that they knew about the Pearl Harbor attack before it occurred. Theobold, the Commander of all the destroyers at Pearl Harbor, said in his book, that Roosevelt knew about the attack 21 hours before it happened. So the result of this positioning of the aircraft, made it difficult for them to get out of the circle, and up in the air, because they didn’t have a reverse gear.

Theobold wrote: "An incontestable fact in the true history of Pearl Harbor is the repeated withholding from Admiral Kimmel and General Walter C. Short (Navy and Army Command in Pearl Harbor) of supremely important military information ... There’s never been a case in history when a commander was not informed that his country will be at war within a few hours and that his forces will most likely become the first object of attack at sunrise". 

Theobold also cited the testimony of Admiral Harold Stark (head of Navy Headquarters in Washington) who did not reveal Japan’s de facto declaration of war to Admiral Kimmel, and said he was acting on orders from a “higher authority,” referring to Roosevelt, because Marshall did not outrank Stark. Marshall merely passed on the Roosevelt directive of December 4th, which said that no communications could be sent to Pearl Harbor, unless it was cleared by Marshall. On 26 November 1941, Roosevelt had sent an ultimatum, insisting that the Japanese withdraw all their troops. He refused any negotiations with Prince Konoye, the Japanese Prime Minister, even though Joseph Grew (CFR member, and Rockefeller agent), the Ambassador to Japan, said that such a meeting would prevent war with the Japanese. The Japanese response from Tokyo to the Japanese embassy, encrypted in the “purple code,” was intercepted by the Navy, decoded, and given to Roosevelt on the evening of December 6th. The thirteen-point communiqué revealed, that because of the intense pressure of the economic sanctions, diplomatic relations with the United States were being terminated at 1:00 PM Eastern time on Sunday, December 7. For all intents and purposes, this was a declaration of war, and upon reading it, Roosevelt said: “This means war.” It was not passed onto Pearl Harbor command, and it was at that time that the attack began.

While FDR was pushing Japan into drawing first blood, he told the American public in his famous campaign statement of 1940: "While I am talking to you mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, and I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars". 

Then he said later that he would not send our boys to war unless we were attacked.

Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum worked for Naval Intelligence in Washington and was the communications routing officer for FDR. All the intercepted Japanese messages would go to McCollum, who would then route them to Roosevelt. In October, 1940, he wrote a memo which contained the basis for FDR’s plan for provoking the Japanese into attacking at Pearl Harbor. It was given to two of Roosevelt’s closest advisors. The memorandum revealed his sentiments that it was inevitable that Japan and America were going to war, and that Germany was going to be a threat to America’s security. He said that American had to go to war, but he also understood that public opinion was against that. So public opinion had to be swayed, and Japan had to be provoked into attacking America. He named eight specific suggestions for things that America should do to make Japan more hostile towards us, ultimately pushing them into attacking us. That would rally the country behind the war effort. Because he was born and raised in Japan, he said that he understood the Japanese mentality, and knew how they would react. This included moving the Pacific fleet to Hawaii, and decimating Japan’s economy with an embargo. McCollum said: "If you adopt these policies the Japan will commit an overt act of war". 

Although there is no proof that FDR actually saw this memo, he ended up implementing all eight of McCollum’s points.

The Administration discovered that in 1941 a Japanese naval officer was working at the Japanese consulate in Honolulu under an assumed name. They followed him, and began to intercept his messages to Japan, which enabled the Japanese to develop a timetable for the attack, and even bomb plots. They never stopped him, and it enabled the Japanese to prepare themselves for an attack against us.

Fleet Admiral Halsey wrote: "Our intelligence data spoke of a likely attack by Japan on the Philippines or the Dutch East Indies. Although Pearl Harbor wasn’t excluded from discussion, everything relayed to us pointed to other objects of attack. If we had known that the Japanese were continually collecting detailed information about the exact location and movements of our warships in Pearl Harbor (which is made clear by intercepted reports), we naturally would have concentrated our efforts on preparations to repel an attack on Pearl Harbor".

Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, after meeting with the Roosevelt administration on November 25, 1941, wrote in his diary: "The discussion was about how we should maneuver to force the Japanese to fire the first shot, while not exposing ourselves to too great a danger; this will be a difficult task".

Admiral Husband E. Kimmel wrote in his memoirs: "It was part of Roosevelt’s plan that no warning be sent to the Hawaiian Islands. Our leaders in Washington, who deliberately didn’t inform our forces in Pearl Harbor, cannot be justified in any way. The Pearl Harbor Command wasn’t informed at all about ... the American note of 26 November 1941, delivered to the Japanese ambassador, which practically excluded further negotiations and made war in the Pacific inevitable. The Army and Navy Command in the Hawaiian Islands received not even a hint about intercepted and deciphered Japanese telegrams which were forwarded to concerned parties in Washington on the 6th and 7th of December, 1941".

The Pacific fleet had consisted of nine battleships, three aircraft cruisers, and some smaller ships. The aircraft carriers, and the smaller, more mobile ships, were moved prior to the attack, because Roosevelt knew they would be needed for a war at sea. On November 28, Fleet Admiral William F. Halsey (under Kimmel’s command) sailed to Wake Island with the carrier Enterprise, three heavy destroyers and nine small destroyers; and on December 5, the Lexington, three heavy cruisers and five destroyers were sent to Midway, and the Saratoga went to the Pacific Coast. The other battleships were considered dispensable, because they had been produced during and prior to World War I, and were viewed as old and obsolete. They were to be sacrificed. [And the sailors were expendable.]

On 7 December 1941, the Japanese attacked the U.S. fleet at Pearl Harbor, instead of attacking Russia, as they originally intended to do. The ‘sneak attack’ gave Roosevelt a reason to direct the full force of America’s military might against Japan. The next day, Roosevelt asked Congress to declare war on Japan: "We don’t like it– and we didn’t want to get in it– but we are in it and we’re going to fight it with everything we’ve got".

On 1 January 1942, the 25 allied nations who went to war against Germany and Japan, signed a “Declaration by the United Nations,” which indicated that no one nation would sign a separate armistice, and Gen. Douglas MacArthur was appointed as the ‘United Nations Commander of the South Pacific,’ becoming the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces in the Pacific Theater.

The attack on Pearl Harbor resulted in the deaths of 2,341 American soldiers, and 2,233 more were injured or missing. Eighteen ships, including eight battleships, two destroyers, two squadron minesweepers, were sunk or heavily damaged; and 177 planes were destroyed. All of this, just to create an anti-Japanese sentiment in the country, and justify American action against Japan.

General George C. Marshall (Supreme Commander of the U.S. Army), and Admiral Harold R. Stark (Supreme Commander of the U.S. Navy) in Washington, testified that the message about the attack was not forwarded to Kimmel and Short because the Hawaiian base had received so many intercepted Japanese messages that another one would have confused them. In truth, Marshall sat on the information for 15 hours because he didn’t want anything to interfere with the attack. The message was sent after the attack started. Internal Army and Navy inquiries in 1944 found Kimmel and Short derelict of duty, but the truth was not revealed to the public.

Two weeks before the attack, on November 23, Kimmel had sent nearly 100 warships from the Pacific fleet to, what turned out to be, the exact location where Japan planned to launch their attack. Unquestionably, he was looking to prevent the possibility of a sneak attack. When the Administration learned of his actions, he was criticized for “complicating the situation.”

Eleven days after the attack, the Roberts Commission, headed by Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, made scapegoats of Kimmel and Short, who were denied open hearings, publicly ruined, and forced to retire. Short died in 1949, and Kimmel died in 1968.

The most incredible of the eight investigations was a joint House-Senate investigation that echoed the Roberts Commission. Both Marshall and Stark testified that they could not remember where they were the night the declaration of war had come in. A close friend of Frank Knox, Secretary of the Navy, later said that Knox, Stark, and Marshall spent most of that night with Roosevelt in the White House, waiting for the bombing to begin, so they could enter the war.

According to historian John Toland, Marshall told his top officers: "Gentlemen, this goes to the grave with us".

In 1995, a Department of Defense study concluded that "Army and Navy officials in Washington were privy to intercepted Japanese diplomatic communications ... which provided crucial confirmation of the imminence of war".

The full extent of the deception came to the forefront with the publishing of the book Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor by Robert B. Stinnett, a retired Oakland Tribune photographer who served in the Pacific during World War II. After retirement, he began his investigation by interviewing former American military communications personnel, and filing Freedom of Information requests with the National Security Agency. For 17 years he gleaned through volumes of previously classified messages which had been intercepted from the Japanese.

Stinnett discovered that on 25 November 1941, Japan’s Admiral Yamamoto dispatched a radio message to the group of warships that would be used to attack Pearl Harbor. It read, in part: "...the task force, keeping its movements strictly secret and maintaining close guard against submarines and aircraft, shall advance into Hawaiian waters, and upon the very opening of hostilities shall attack the main force of the United States fleet in Hawaii and deal it a mortal blow".

From November 17th to 25th, the U.S. Navy intercepted 83 messages that Yamamoto sent to his carriers.

This Pearl Harbor scenario was a repeat of the American battleship ‘Maine,’ which was ‘sunk’ by a Spanish mine in the port of Havana in 1898. The rallying cry of “Remember the Maine,” was used to stir up anti-Spanish hysteria in America to justify us declaring war on Spain. Years later, when the ship was examined, it was established that the hull had been blown out by an explosion from inside the ship.

So what did World War II accomplish for the Illuminati? With the Japanese prepared to surrender in February 1945, the war was prolonged in order to destroy much of the industrial areas of Japan with a devastating air attack of incendiary atomic bombs. This allowed the ground to be cleared for the Illuminati to rebuild Japan with new industries so they could use cheap labor to flood the American market with cheaply manufactured goods. This would turn the United States into a nation that consumed more than it produced, creating unemployment and financial instability.

As stated previously, on the European front, the War enabled the Russians to gain control of Eastern Europe, promote Communism, paved the way for the United Nations, and the creation of the nation of Israel.

At a cost of about $400 billion, the War raised our National Debt to $220 billion, and pushed us deeper into the clutches of the Illuminati’s international bankers. Because of all the intricate angles involved in this conflict, it would not be an understatement to say that World War II was probably the most costly event in American history. We may have won, but, in the long run, we lost.

Site Meter