Fake Holocaust Rumors
excerpts from Francis Neilson's 'The Makers of War'
Wilson blackmail to involve US in WWI
Benjamin Freedman's Hidden Tyranny ... establishes that Treaty of Versailles was overwhelmingly controlled by Jews.
Untermyer: "Just over 100 years ago Disraeli pointed out that strange people had power to direct the actions of gov- ernments. Sidonia, one of the characrers in his novel, says: "So you see, my dear Coningsby, the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes." Untermyer was so much behind the scenes that he stood in the prompt entrance and rang up the curtain on the tragedy which, six years later, was to embroil the nations of the world in utter disaster. His campaign was really started in April, 1933, when it was launched unofficially at a meeting to dedicate a memorial theater as part of the Hebrew University in Palestine. ... It took a few weeks, however, to work up the propaganda to fever heat, and it was not until he made his radio speech in August that some people in America realized that Untermyer seemed bent upon provoking a war. He tried to whip up the general interest by telling of the "fiendish torture, cruelty and persecution that are being inflicted day by day upon these men, women and children," and saying that when their full story was known it would present a picture “so fearful in its barbarous cruelty that the hell of war and the alleged Belgian atrocities will pale into insignificance as compared to this devilishly, deliberately, cold-bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people."
In putting together this synopsis of the Ipo itical and
In future, the investigator in this branch of the art
This was finished in Fefiruary, 1950, before anyone
August 1, 1950
Looking back upon the condition of Europe after the
Underlying these disrurbances of foreign policy there
When politicians are in control, as they are today,
Bureaucracy today is a vested interest-the most pow-
erful the world has ever known. In other respects, it
Your English forefathers did all this. Do you think
thought you would enjoy and which would lead to
Now let us see how we got into the maze of European
politics. We rambled into it fifty years ago, and we give
As the commitments of the British Government be-
The insane armament race be an about 1897. Taking the
The visit of the French fleet to Kronsradt in 1892 and
All the great naval powers were interested to some
No clearer evidence of what the race for armaments
There is another line of approach that must be taken
This should not be overlooked in a search for the
The pressure of hard facts increased in many competi-
The high-tariff legislation of the McKinley adminis-
Great Britain had been caught napping. The smug,
When the South African War began in 1899, the or-
The military correspondent of the Newcastle Cbrcmicle,
The mass of the British people never knew the truth
The plot of Joseph Chamberlain, Cecil Rhodes, and
It was a national crime in 1881! Eighteen years later
What thinking man would now challenge that state-
Some writers whose articles appeared in the monthly
A series of articles appeared in The Time: during World
In the 1890's the conditions which had given Britain
The last sentence is significant, but its meaning was
THE SOUTH AFRICAN WAR LEFT BRITAIN WITHOUT A
The Entente Cordiale was a diplomatic tour de force. Some
In studying the expenditures of the great powers upon
linking her fortunes with France, was committed as
The ink was scarcely dry on the signatures appended
Already while the expedition was on its way, light began
The expeditionary force complains, he gravely records, of the
The horror of the light of the colonists in Fez deeply
John Dillon desired to know to what extent Britain
His Majesty's Government have been informed by the
There were men in the House who took the trouble
The second lie is about the political status of Morocco.
The story, as it was known to independent French
Honesty would in Morocco. and the Congo have been the
The private interests! Or, as they were afterwards
The French "group" included the Cie. des Forges de
gier, etc.; the Spanish " group" included the Marquis de Villa-
mejor, and so on.
France and Britain were to pay dearly for the hoax.
The generosity of a democracy was never more no-
Durin this time the diplomatic bfimcfiers of Germany
acific speeches from platforms in the country had little
When the Archduke was murdered at Sarajevo, the
When Germany sided with Austria, Great Britain
War patriotism is a madness for which there is no
It is marvelous what punishment the proletarians
The main point, however, is that the proletarian will
It was in the winter of 1907-08 that many men became
Arthur Balfour was anxious about the future. In the
During this visit, White had several conversations
BALPOUR (somewhat lightly): "We are probably fools not
to find a reason for declaring war on Germany before she
builds too many ships and takes away our trade.
WHITE: “You are a very high-minded man in private life.
How can you possibly contemplate anything so politically
immoral as provoking a war against a harmless nation which
has as go a right to a navy as you have? If you wish to
BALPOURI “That would mean lowering our standard of
Wan-a: “I am shocked that you of all men should enunci-
BALPOUR (again lightly): “Is it a question of right or
White also had a talk with the Foreign Minister, and
Not long after this, a reason was found for arming
It was one of the most disgraceful, cooked-up con-
Now this is the truth: En land has seven "Dreadnau hts"
It is doubtful if, even so late as May last, a German "Dread-
naught" had been commenced.
The damage was done, and from that time prepara-
The two principal questions put to the electors in
After the Agadir affair, the Prime Minister sent
Secretly, the Committee of Imperial Defence carried
It should be unnecessary here to go into the matter of
That treaty, even at the time it was signed by the
The terms of peace were yesterday delivered [May 7, 1919]
The impression made by it is one of disappointment, of
It must be admitted in honesty that the League is an
The League as now constituted will be the prey of greed
find few readers. When a war is over, the ordinary
et back to the normal condition of things. No matter
The books that would give him some notion of how
His efforts to save civilization are penalized by tons
as won prestige and honor in defeating his fellow-
The Boer War and World War I provided some his-
The people, however, backed the Crimean War. It
No one attempts to expfain the extraordinary change
The steady stream of books that have come from the
A well-known bookseller remarked that most of the
Influential seCtions of men in public positions in
It is very difficult to get at the truth of anything
The search for truth is the task of tasks. Perhaps only
It may very well be that the proletariat thinks it is
During the past two years I have followed the corre-
uency. I have no doubt that those w o complain of
There are many truths that should be placed before
They did not do so badly when they got down to
Let us consider the glorious wars for a minute or two.
Consider what that means. England spent thirty-five
The Radical member for Northampton knew his book.
We have suffered ourselves to be deceived by names and
a common cause," and many more Such expressions, w1t out
any Other meanin than to exhaust our wealth, consume the
profits of our trage and 'load our posterity with intolerable
The great slogan of World War II was "the common
But how the proletariat could be humbugged about
It rises ucp before me when I think of it as a ghastly phan-
tom which uring one hundred and seventy years, whilst it
has been worshipped in this country, has loaded the nation
of families, and has left us, as the great result of the profli‘gate
expenditure it has caused, a doubled peerage at one end 0 the
social scale, and far more than a doubled pauperism at the
It is amazing to witness, in war after war, how the
In trying to drag a little truth from history, it is
out to us. Read this letter that Smith wrote to Lady
Europe, and prorecring mankind: I mm t ink a little of
myse f. I am sorry for the Slpaniards-I am sorry for the
Greeks-I deplore the fate o the Jews; the people of the
Sandwich Islands are groaning under the most detestable
tyranny; Bagdad is oppressed; do not like the present state
of the Delta; Thibet is not comfortable. Am I to fight for all
these people? The world is bursting with sin and sorrow.
Am I to be champion of the Decalogue, and to be eternally
raising fleets and armies to make al men good and happy?
We have just done saving Europe, and I am afraid the conse-
quence will be, that we shall cut each other's throats. No
war, dear Lady Greyl-No eloquence; but apathy, selfishness,
Ma the vengeance of Heaven" overtake all the Legiti-
in such a cause to be a luxury; but the business of a prudent,
sensible man, is to guard against luxury.
There is no such thing as a "just war," or, at least, as a
Savile “is one of the most brilliant of politicians and
Anyone who took the trouble to search the speeches
Proletarians never seem to get tired of spoof. They
Peace campaigns usually end in war. It was so before
Arthur Balfour crossed the Atlantic with Edward
President Roosevelt never dreamed of sending an
Poor old proletarian! He never seems to get tired of
The toral bill for World War II exceeds the financial
According to Wbitaker': Almanac-k, the national debt
An article published in Newaeek for December 12,
Nat one American in a hundred realizes that total tax
In fan, the best-kept secret in the country today is the Size of
the tax load.
Small wonder shopkeepers complain of a consumer's
No one seems prepared to face the music, but the
So long as the workers in Great Britain look to the
No bureaucrat talks of saving the taxpayers, and the
The modern man we hear so much about has no time
What, therefore, can be expected from a dphysically
Thinking is a bore; the moron is a very happy
Short-cuts to knowledge are the bane of e ucation.
The same may be said of other studies. The waste of
Since the introduction into our colleges of such
Read Chapter Five-"The Grand Inquisitor"-in
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet, and
say to us, "Make us your slaves, but feed us." They will
understand themselves, at last, that freedom and bread enough
be able to share between them! They will be convinced, too,
that they can never be free, for they are weak, vicious, worth-
less and rebellious.
Is that what it all comes to? Was the author a prophet
THERE IS NO CONFESSIONAL FOR THE POLITICAL SINNER,
Certainly whitewash has been applied in excess since
Stupidity in foreign affairs is not easily detected-not
If you make a mistake in your foreign affairs; if you enter
into unwise treaties; if you conduct campaigns upon vicious
principles; if the scope and tendency of your foreign system are
No one will quarrel with that statement. But the
Their excuses for the conflagration they started in
One of the chief reasons why progress in reconstruc-
There will never be peace in Europe until the lie that
Surely the peace of the world is of more importance
In taking up this task, students must understand that
Recently a new light has been thrown upon documents
In a letter to the writer from a well-known prelate,
Lord Haldane saidz.”Grey and I were dining at Queen
Then, in the prelate's letter, the details are given
In the White Papers published by the government,
The German Army had its advance posts on our frontiers
This is an accurate translation of the first sentence of
L'amie allmande a u: aunt-porter .mr no: bomr-frontiirer,
Not long after the war broke out, suspicion was cast
However, there are stranger things than that about
Worse still, and far more difficult to understand, are
It must be noted that the first one is not from the
The only reason I can find for the exchan e of these
It would require courage to tell the country the truth that
an adequate military force of our own.
Before the House rose, Mr. Amery moved to reduce
But the speeches of Grey's critics are net suflicient to
That is the point that he insists upon in his memoirs.
But every subterfuge failed to impress those who, for
There was a reticence and a secrecy which practically ruled
out three-fourths of the Cabinet from the chance of making
any genuine contribution to the momentous questions then
of the world.
He states in his War Memoir: that Lord Northcliffe,
The situation on Sunday, August 2nd, was desperate
Lord Hugh Cecil: “The right hon. gentleman [Asquith]
but a pacific foreign policy, and we are far from saying that
their policy is in any way an aggressive one; but certainly we
The Prime Minister: "Will the noble lord define a little
Lord Hugh Cecil: "I am only anxious not to use words
The Prime Minister: "1 do not complain.”
Lord Hugh Cecil: "There is a very general belief that this
The Prime Minister: "I ought to say that it is not true."
himself was informed. After the war, I made it my
Sir Edward Grey consulted the Prime Minister, Sir Henry
Why, therefore, should Asquith try to deceive the
MY om Baum,
There would be a row in Parliament here if I had used
It was T. P. Conwell-Evans who discovered this letter
Suppose that engagement had been made publicly in the
Now the Proletarian may ask, "What is the good of
been threatened with war, and today the gigantic debt
Now the military experts in America are preparing
Do you know that the British army and navy esti-
Under terms of the loan, Britain had the privilege of
This was written on December 25, 1949. Such things
The importance of resurrecting the "old stufim set out
From the outset of the war I have been thrown into the
Never were men "in the know" so sure of a speedy
Perhaps no man in the House of Commons desired
There it is! The course that he had pursued since he
In 1920, Herbert Morrison was Secretary of the Lon-
All the governments of all the warring nations deliber-
Therefore, he called on all trade unionisrs to say:
Never again shall leaders of labor or their rank and file be
When we entered this war we were too credulous-we
In 1939 these men were politicians. Both were mem-
Ask your grandfather about the situation as he found
Lloyd George says, in his War Memoirr, that on Sun-
The world was exceptionally unfortunate in the quality
If, then, cabinet ministers, other members of Parlia-
Bismarck knew them well, but I cannot find a direct
But how is the elector to know what goes on behind
The proletarian may ask what chance he has to edu-
Yet, it is possible for an intelligent man to get some
Shortly after the pamphlet was issued, anOther trade
I formally accuse the big cosmopolitan banks, at least the
I cannot remember reading in a single work by an
The speeches of ministers of State and the dis atches
In such a course some light might be thrown upon
We are in the hands of an organization of crooks. They
He was in a position to gather the facts and know
In the United States in the past few years there have
No one attempts to make a direct reply to this, and
The pretext of defending Belgium in the First World
It was a commercial war, planned chiefly by Delcassé
Underlying all the frictions and animosities of the
Of what importance would the yonng navy of Germany
When Woodrow Wilson returned to America for the
Why, my fellow-citizens, is there an man here, or any
The German bankers and the German merchants and the
It did more than “spoil the plans" of the German
In cutting down a trade rival, Great Britain discov-
The statistics of the economic interdépendence of Germany
In our own case we sent more exports to Germany than
A rather cruel wit, during the Peace Conference at
The Treaty of Versailles was a catastrophe from which
The situation of this country at the successful close of a
Where are Britain's friends today? Outside the Com-
Put your thinking caps on and commune with your-
The cold-blooded pessimist who is dealing with facts
Anyway, suppose we grant that you saved it: what
There we are! That gentleman hit the nail squarely
barbarians. In the past we thou ht that education would
usy they have had no time to use it, and it has gone.
Years ago, John Watson, the behaviorist, told us that
Now that the white savages of Europe are over-running
When the division bell rings and the tellers have
Some of you, if prompted, will remember the maze of
When we consider what German politicians passed
I spent some months in Germany in 1921, and on
prepared to deal with the Allies, if it were free to do so.
commercial disorder of Central Europe affected British
The men who thought as he did were many and had
Wherever I went in Europe, from Vienna to Bordeaux,
My other visits to Germany before the rise of Hitler
One of the most significant thin s I noticed, month
I spoke to my friends in Munich about these hikers,
I have not been able to explain to myself or to anyone
Three years after his first volume was published, I
However, there was so much bitter controversy
itterly denounced by another. Then people who had
When the unex urgated edition appeared in English,
As a matter of record, however, it was not any part
I fully appreciate the difficulties one must encounter
But the greatest obStacle one has to surmount is the
Some papers Cpermit popular columniSts to print what
Here it should be clearly understood that the propa-
He has a hard road to travel during a war. The patriOts
Now that the fighting is over for a while, these ani-
aid to the problem of how anather war is to be averted.
hat means they will have to find out for themselves.
However, few will be inclined to make an effort to learn
Somehow war-time myths sink deeper into the con-
However, all were agreed upon the necessity of de-
They have been a positive cause of friction and ill-will,
A statesman out of office is a very different rson
Should a taxpayer care to understand this difference,
M213! people would like to see, or would have liked to
I find no reference, in his speeches delivered while he
There were warnings-very definite ones- based on
The work was published in the United States in
Then came the invasion of the Ruhr. To that adventure,
I think Powell was the firsc man to take the Nazi
As I shall have something to say about Germany re-
refuses to believe that the French stand in perpetual fear of
another German onslaught. Fully aware of the defenseless and
enfeebled condition of his own country and the overwhelming
Infantry regiments 223 21
Cavalry “ 86 18
Artillery “ 104 7
Tank “ 19 none
Engineer battalions S6 7
Heavy artillery groups 282 none
Aviation squadrons 136 none
Balloon companies 18 none
Tatal peace establishment 541,154 men 99,191 men
“The trouble with France," a distinguished American
The most discouraging‘feature of the whole business is the
What Europe needs, and needs desperately, is a political
80 long as the diplomatic system exists, there will
One thing is certain now-there is no way of checking
The agitation for open diplomacy, which followed
Was there ever a more ignominious example of the
Before we ever fired a shot, the spoils of our joint Vietory
Mn. CHURCHILL wnorn A LETTER TO HIMSELF oN MAY 1,
He then asks the question: "How much is the Hitler
Now it must be remembered that this letter was not
When I read this letter, a few days after it was pub-
Now by the time that he published these letters to
Toward the end of this letter, he gives the German
All this has gone into makin the mosr destructive war
It must be remembered that this was written to him-
A taxpayer wishing to understand the vagaries of the
Let us take a volume published in 1937, about two
Owing to a fortunate conjunction of cirCumstances, I was
Roberts declares himself to be a democratic individual-
I must also pay tribute to the ordinary people of Germany
Their [the General StaE's] problem was a difficult one-
It became obvious, then, that it would take years to (give
This statement from an unprejudiced observer can
Here are figures taken from the League of Nations
Professor Roberts tells us that "France and Czecho-
Another question that may be resented by the thought-
The taxpayer who really desires information about
flGerman} by Cesare Santoro, a forei n press correspondent
Unlike Professor Roberts, the democratic individual-
Historically this book is invaluable. The statistics
A few days after the announcement of Germany's with-
But already on March 17, the French Government, in its
There are books enough to enlighten men who wish
In America, a staff study, made under the direction of
German industry and German aircraft production facili-
The work is called, "Foreign Logistical Organiza-
The report reveals that in 1938 Germany produced only
The report is far too long to be dealt with adequately
Germany was not prepared in 1939-contrary to demo-
|THE HIDDEN TYRANNY, Benjamin Freedman|
THE HIDDEN TYRANNY
By Benjamin Freedman, Jewish Conspirator Emeritus
Seven U.S. Presidents -- Masters of Deception -- Jewish Pawns
The names of Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F.Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon will certainly be found one day inscribed in big red letters in the official annals of the rise and fall of the United states. These seven masters of deception incurred their guilt by debasing their solemn oaths of office on behalf of undisclosed domestic and foreign principals without any apparent qualms or misgivings, to enhance their political fortunes totally oblivious of the threat to United States security and survival. These seven masters of deception knowingly and willingly in effect and in fact "poisoned the wells" of security and survival for the United States. Without any evident scruples, they individually betrayed the sacred traditions enshrined in the letter and spirit of their oaths of office, that precious heritage bequeathed to each of these seven masters of deception as successors to that high office exalted by the immortalized first president of the United States, the venerated George Washington. The disclosures which follow here are now revealed for the first time anywhere. They now expose for the first time to the grass roots population of the United States the secret un-American, non- American and anti-American strategy to which these seven masters of deception knowingly subscribed. The uninhibited practice of that strategy by these seven masters of deception is primarily responsible for desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East. Very early in their political careers, these seven masters of deception by their determination acquired their proficient skill in detecting on which side their political bread was buttered. Their remarkable perfection in that skill provides the answer to why these seven masters of deception went so far and so fast in so few years in the political world in which they moved. Throughout their political careers these seven masters of deception demonstrated that political shrewdness invariably identified with the immoral dogma of 20th century politicians who preach and practice "any means justifies all ends." Accordingly, future grass roots populations of the United States will one day find inscribed in the history of the rise and fall of the United States the verdict that the "means" today advocated by these seven masters of deception were primarily responsible for the "end" of the United States. It is today a well recognized fact of life in political circles in the United States that the censorship exercised today by Zionists over the media for mass information constitutes a virtual monopoly. It is likewise today a well recognized fact of life in political circles in the United States since President Wilson won his first election in 1912 as president of the United States, that elections in the United States are seldom won or lost today based upon the candidates' qualification for office. Elections in the United States since 1912 are won or lost on the battlefields of the media for mass information by character assassination. Zionist ownership of media for mass information, or by Zionist control exercised by some devious corporate device in effect and in fact censors the news and editorial policies of as the leading daily and Sunday newspapers, all the weekly and monthly news magazines, all leading radio and television stations and networks, the entire motion picture industry, the entire entertainment world and the entire book publishing industry, in effect and in fact the entire complex of media for mass information in the United States, truly a brainwashing monopoly.
Talmudist Jews Control News and editorial Policies of Mass Media
As a result of that condition in the United States, for approximately the past fifty years the grass root population of the United States has only read, heard and seen what passed Zionist censorship and best served Zionist objectives, instead of reading, hearing and seeing what best served the interests of the grass roots population of the United States. The Zionist-ruled media for mass information in the United States never informed the grass roots population of the United States how and why President Woodrow Wilson lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East. In their consideration recently of the alleged theft of the so-called Pentagon Papers, the United States Supreme Court declared "the public has a right to know the truth." The Supreme Court should have said "the public has a right to know the WHOLE truth." The reason half-truths often are more harmful than lies. The United States declared war against Germany on April 6, 1917. On April 2,1917 President Wilson addressed both houses of Congress and pleaded with them to declare war against Germany. President Wilson's appeal to Congress to declare war against Germany in effect and in fact was primarily President Wilson's liquidation of his obligation to his blackmailers. The following incontestible facts confirm that conclusion beyond all question of any doubt. President Wilson's hand trembled as he read his address. The members of Congress present had no reason to suspect why President Wilson's hand trembled. By the time the grass roots population finish reading this, they will know the reason President Wilson's hand trembled as he read his message to Congress. By the time President Wilson finished reading his appeal to Congress, many of his listeners were in tears but not for the reason the grass roots population of the United States today will be in tears when they finish reading this manuscript. When President Wilson asked Congress to declare war against Germany, President Wilson was in effect and in fact conspiring to pay the debt he obligated himself to pay to the Zionists. Congress only declared war against Germany because President Wilson informed Congress that a German submarine had sunk the S.S. Sussex in the English Channel in violation of international law and that United States citizens aboard the S.S. Sussex had perished with the ship. After General Pershing's troops were fighting in Europe, the hoax was exposed. The alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex was used as the "pretext" to justify a declaration of war against Germany by the United States. The S.S. Sussex had not been sunk and no United States citizens had lost their lives. The United States was now at war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. That is what Great Britain and the Talmudists ("Jews") of the world conspired to achieve in their crooked diplomatic underworld. The discovery of the hoax by the British Navy shocked many honorable Englishmen. A large segment of the British public were shocked to learn the S.S. Sussex had not been sunk. The S.S. Sussex was available for anyone to visit who might care to do so to see the S.S. Sussex for themselves with their own eyes. In that war the United States mobilized 4,734,991 men to serve in the armed forces, of whom 115,516 were killed and 202,002 were either injured or maimed for life. The Right Honorable Francis Neilson, a member of Parliament, wrote a book in England called Makers of War (pp. 149150). Mr. Neilson's book created such a sensation that Mr. Neilson was compelled to resign his seat in Parliament. Things became so intolerable for Mr. Neilson in Great Britain as a Result of the exposures in his book that he was compelled for his personal safety to flee from his home in Great Britain and to make his home in the United States. In Mr. Neilson's book Makers of War (pp. 149-150), he discloses many unsuspected and undisclosed reasons for the outbreak of World War I in Europe in August 1914. With reference to the alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex in the English Channel, Mr. Neilson emphasizes: "/n America, Woodrow Wilson, desperate to find a pretext to enter the war, found it at last in the 'sinking' of the Sussex in mid-channel. Someone invented a yarn that American lives had been lost. With thus excuse he went to Congress for a declaration of war. Afterwards, the Navy found that the Sussex had not been sunk, and that no lives had been lost. " This author crossed the English Channel many times on the S.S. Sussex. The alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex was the figment of an over-worked Zionist imagination. The alleged sinking of the S.S. Sussex was conceived in the imagination of a Zionist to facilitate the purpose planned and successfully executed.
President Wilson Blackmailed
Shortly after President Wilson's first inauguration, he received a visitor in the White House by the name of Mr. Samuel Untermeyer. Mr. Untermeyer was a prominent New York City attorney who contributed generously to the National Democratic Committee that installed President Wilson in the White House in Washington in the 1912 election. Mr. Untermeyer was a very welcome guest and President Wilson was very glad to welcome him to the White House. They had met before during the campaign. Mr. Untermeyer surprised President Wilson when he finally stated what brought hum to the White House. Mr. Untermeyer informed President Wilson that he had been retained to bring a breach of promise action against President Wilson. Mr. Untermeyer informed President Wilson that his client was willing to accept $40,000.00 in lieu of commencing the breach of promise action. Mr. Untermeyer's client was the former wife of a Professor at Princeton University at the same time President Wilson was a professor at Princeton University. Mr. Untermeyer produced a packet of letters from his pocket, written by President Wilson to his colleague's wife when they were neighbors at Princeton University. These letters established the illicit relationship which had existed between President Wilson and the wife of his colleague neighbor. He had written many endearing letters to her, many of which she never destroyed. President Wilson acknowledged his authorship of the letters after examining a few of them. President Wilson left Princeton University to become the Governor of New Jersey, In 1912 he was elected to his first term as president of the United States. In the interim, President Wilson's former sweetheart had divorced her husband and married again. Her second husband resident in Washington with a grown son who was in the employ of one of the leading banks in Washington. Mr. Untermeyer explained to President Wilson that his former sweetheart was very fond of her husband's son. He explained that this son was in financial trouble and suddenly needed $40,000.00, as he told the story, to liquidate a pressing liability to the bank for which he worked. The details are not relevant here except that the son needed the $40,000.00 badly and quickly. President Wilson's former sweetheart thought that Wilson was the logical prospect for that $40,000,00 to help her husband's son. Mr. Untermeyer visited President Wilson at the White House to break the news to him about the breach of promise action being considered. Wilson expressed himself as very fortunate that his former sweetheart went to Mr. Untermeyer to seek his assistance. The publicity could have proven very embarrassing to President Wilson if his former sweetheart had instead consulted a Republican attorney. President Wilson quickly set Mr. Untermeyer's mind at rest by informing him that he did not have $40.000.00 available for any purpose. Mr. Untermeyer suggested that President Wilson should think the matter over and said he would return in a few days to discuss the matter further. Mr. Untermeyer used the next few days in Washington looking into the credibility of the son's story about his pressing need for $40,000.00 to liquidate a pressing liability. He learned that the son's story was not misrepresented in any way to his mother by her son. Mr. Untermeyer returned to President Wilson a few days later as they had agreed. President Wilson did not hesitate to inform Mr. Untermeyer that he did not have the $40,000.00 to pay his blackmailer. President Wilson appeared irritated. Mr. Untermeyer considered the matter a few Moments and then volunteered a solution to President Wilson for his problem. Mr, Untermeyer volunteered to give President Wilson's former sweetheart the $40,000.00 out of his own pocket on one condition: that Wilson promise Untermeyer to appoint to the first vacancy on the United States Supreme Court a nominee to be recommended to Wilson by Untermeyer. Without further talk, President Wilson accepted Mr. Untermeyer's generous offer and Mr. Untermeyer promptly paid the $40,000.00 in currency to President Wilson 's former sweetheart. The contemplated breach of promise suit was never heard of after that. Mr. Untermeyer retained in his possession permanently the packet of letters to insure against any similar attempt at some future time. President Wilson was most grateful to Mr. Untermeyer for everything he was doing to solve problem. Mr. Untermeyer was a man of great wealth . The law firm in New York of which he was the leading partner, Messrs. Guggenheim, Untermeyer and Marshall, is still today one of the nations most prominent and most prosperous law firms. Mr. Untermeyer organized the Bethlehalem Steel Company for his friend, Mr. Charles M. Schwab, who resigned from the United States Steel Company to form his company in competition with it.
Justice Brandeis--The Pay Off
As anyone might reasonable suspect, Mr. Untermeyer must have had something in mind when he agreed to pay President Wilson's former sweetheart $40,000.00 out of his own pocket. He paid the money out of his own pocket in the hope that it might bring to pass a dream close to his heart--a Talmudist ("Jew") on the United States Supreme Court on which none had ever served. The day soon arrived when President Wilson was presented with the necessity of appointing a new member of the United States Supreme Court. Mr. Untermeyer recommended Louis Dembitz Brandeis for the vacancy, who was immediately appointed by Wilson. President Wilson and Justice Brandeis became unusually intimate friends. Justice Brandeis knew the circumstances of his appointment to the Supreme Court by President Wilson. In l9l4 Justice Brandeis was the most prominent and most politically influential of all Zionists in the United States. As a Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Brandeis was in a better position than ever before to be of service to Talmudists ("Jews") both at home and abroad. The first opportunity to perform a great service for his Zionist followers soon became available to Brandeis. Justice Brandeis volunteered his opinion to President Wilson that the sinking of the S.S. Sussex by a German submarine in the English Channel with the loss of lives of United States citizens justified the declaration of war against Germany by the United States. Relying to a great extent upon the legal opinion of Justice Brandeis, President Wilson addressed both houses of Congress on April 2, l9l7. He appealed to Congress to declare war against Germany and they did on April 7, l9l7. After the October l9l6 agreement was concluded between the British War Cabinet and the World Zionist Organization, the Talmudists throughout the world were hopeful that an international incident would soon occur to Justify a declaration of war against Germany by the United States. The declaration of war against Germany by the United States guaranteed the Talmudists throughout the world that Palestine was to be turned over to them upon the defeat of Germany. The defeat of Germany was certain if the United States could be railroaded into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. Prior to the October 1916 London Agreement, Talmudists throughout the world were pro-German. The German Emancipation Edict of 1822 guaranteed Talmudists in Germany all civil rights enjoyed by Germans. Every country in Europe had quotas for Talmudists. The quota systems had existed for centuries in all European countries. Under the quota system in European countries, Talmudists were Limited in all activities to a small percentage of the Christian population of the country. The quota systems applied to all occupations. After the Emancipation Edict In 1822, Germany was the only country in Europe which did not place restrictions on Talmudists under a quota system limiting their civil rights. Talmudists throughout the world were informed by cable from London about the October 1916 London Agreement. That information transformed them from pro-German to pro-British. Great Britain placed at the disposal of Talmudists in London their secret codes and worldwide cable facilities to inform Talmudists throughout the world about Great Britain's pledge to turn over Palestine to them as compensation for railroading the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain s ally in their war against Germany. Talmudists enlisted in great numbers in October 1916 in Great Britain's Department of Defense. Their purpose was to facilitate transforming Talmudists throughout the world from pro-German to pro-British. After the London Agreement was concluded, Great Britain left no stone unturned to impress Talmudists in London with the necessity of immediately notifymg Talmudists throughout the world about Great Britain's pledge to turn over Palestine to them for their future sovereign Zionist state. Guided by the recommendation of Justice Brandeis that the sinking of the S.S. Sussex justified a declaration of war under international law against Germany by the United States, President Wilson addressed a joint session of both houses of Congress on April 2, 1917. In that address President Wilson pleaded with Congress to declare war against Germany. Congress met on April 6. 1917. and declared war against Germany without justification. On April 6, 1917, President Wilson and Justice Brandeis knew something the grass roots population of the United States did not know--they knew full particulars about the October 1916 London Agreement. They also knew the declaration of war against Germany by the United States activated this agreement and that Talmudists of the world would not have to wait long for Palestine, their sovereign Zionist state, if their plan worked. On this same day, Wilson and Brandeis knew something else the grass roots population of the United States did not know--they knew that the declaration of war by the United States against Germany discharged President Wilson from his obligation to his blackmailers. Wilson's declaration of war was to satisfy his commitment to his blackmailers. There was seldom any address made to Congress that stirred the people of the United States, and the world, as did President Wilson's April 2, 1917, plea to Congress to declare war against Germany. Wilson was aware when he addressed Congress that Germany had not committed any act against the United States which justified a declaration of war by the United States against Germany under international law. This author at that time knew President Wilson was informed to that effect before he made his plea to Congress.
Prime Minister Lloyd George - A Zionist Tool
There were great numbers of Talmudists in the United States who questioned the reality of the October 1916 London Agreement. They found it extremely difficult to believe that Great Britain would promise to turn over Palestine to them as compensation for railroading the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. These Talmudists could not believe that Great Britain would promise anything to anyone that Great Britain did not own as compensation. That appeared inconceivable to Talmudists familiar with Great Britain's reputation for respect of property rights under their laws. To overcome doubts that existed in the minds of Talmudists in the United States, Prime Minister Lloyd George immediately sent Mr. Josiah Wedgewood to the United States. Mr. Wedgewood was one of the most respected and dedicated members of Parliament. Prime Minister Lloyd George, a rabid well-known Zionist, was unexpectedly appointed Prime Minister on December 4, 1916. He rushed Mr. Wedgewood to the United States on December 5, 1916, under pressure by Talmudists in London. The prime minister whom Lloyd George succeeded was unsympathetic Toward Zionist objectives. He was replaced at that time because Zionists could not rule him. Great Britain was helpless in October 1916. It was seriously considering surrender to Germany. Germany had made several peace offers to Great Britain earlier to discontinue the war. Mr. Lloyd George considered Mr. Wedgewood's hasty trip to the United States vital to Great Britain's survival. Mr. Wedgewood went to the United States with documented evidence proving the reality of the October 1916 London Agreement with the Talmudists.
Colonel House - a Conspiring Enigma
Mr. Wedgewood arrived in the United States on December 23, 1916. Upon his arrival he was met at the pier by Colonel Edward Mandel House, President Wilson's closest personal friend and most trusted adviser. Col. House in early life negotiated cotton purchases in the United States for Rothschild interests in Great Britain. Col. House did not claim or disclaim his Talmudist ancestry to this author. He had arranged with Mr. Wedgewood to live in his apartment on 54th Street during his stay in the United States. Col. House quickly made arrangements for the meeting at which Mr. Wedgewood was to prove the reality of the October 1916 London Agreement. The meeting was to be held on Sunday afternoon, December 25, l916, at the old Hotel Savoy at 59th Street and Fifth Avenue in New Yolk City. There were fifty-one invited Talmudists present there when Col. House introduced Mr. Wedgewood to the audience. Mr. Wedgewood then presided. Mr. Wedgewood presented evidence there that left no doubt in the minds of the fifty-one Talmudists present about the reality of the October 1916 London Agreement. On behalf of Mr. Lloyd George, Mr. Wedgewood further vouched for the reality of Great Britain pledge that Palestine would be turned over to Talmudists of the world by Great Britain upon the defeat of Germany as compensation for railroading the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. After concluding the October 1916 London Agreement, Talmudists in England were invited by Great Britain to take an increasingly active participation in Great Britain's Department of Defense for the duration of the war. The Talmudists who accepted the invitation were trained as experts in the use of Great Britain's codes and Great Britain's worldwide diplomatic cable facilities. The available data in Great Britain's archives for World War I will dispel all existing doubt whether the information cabled to Washington from London alleging the sinking of the S.S. Sussex and the loss of United States lives was the invention of Talmudists in London in Great Britain's Department of Defense to facilitate and expediate railroading the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. The hoax was discovered by the British Navy. It was also confirmed by other equally reliable sources for information on the subject by qualified united States experts. The reality of the October l9l6 London Agreement was known to the Germans shortly after it was concluded, in fact, on the same day. Germany thereafter exercised great care both on land and on sea not to commit any act which, under international law, could provide the United States with justification to declare war against Germany. German military and naval commanders leaned over backwards in their effort not to provide the United States with that justification and they were successful. In the crisis in October 1916, Germans had reason to feel if the war in Europe continued a few more months without the entrance of the United States into the war, that Great Britain would be compelled to surrender to Germany by circumstances beyond Great Britain's power to control. Germany made another peace offer to Great Britain in October 1916. Great Britain this time welcomed the offer but it was also declined like several previous peace offers. In referring to the declaration of war against Germany by the United States, Sir Winston Churchill said in an interview with a prominent editor, published in Scribner's Commentator in 1936, that he "could never understand why he put us in in 1917," referring to President Wilson. In that interview Sir Winston Churchill stated further: ''America should have minded her own business and stayed out of the World War. If you hadn't entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in the spring of 1917. Had we made peace there would have been no collapse of Russia followed by Communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism, and Germany would not have signed the Versailles Treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all of these 'isms' wouldn't be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government, and if England made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American and other lives. Germany's peace offer to Great Britain asked for neither indemnities nor reparations. Germany offered to restore the territorial status and the political independence of every country with whom Great Britain was at war, as they existed in August l9l4 when the war in Europe started. Germany demanded no benefits.
Talmudist Jews Select America 's Ally for First World War
Germany's October 1916 peace offer was on the table before the British War Cabinet; it needed only one signature to end the war. Great Britain would have quickly accepted Germany's peace offer if the World Zionist Organization had not Interfered. The British War Cabinet was then taking their instructions from Talmudists in London. When the British War Cabinet decided to accept Germany's peace offer, the World Zionist Organization offered to railroad the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally if Great Britain promised the Talmudists of the world Palestine as compensation after Germany's defeat with the United States as an ally. Talmudist pressure in London and New York prevailed. President Wilson had little choice in the matter, it seemed. He was the captive of circumstances in his early life that could not be altered. His April 2, 1917, address to Congress was about to decide the fate of the world. Congress, without hesitation, declared war against Germany for him. The Germans attributed their crushing defeat in World War I to the entry of the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. Germany considered the October 1916 London Agreement a stab in the back by Talmudists of the world. In view of the Emancipation Edict in Germany in 1822, Germans regarded the London Agreement as a double-cross by Talmudists in Germany. Quota systems then existed in all other countries in Europe. There was no quota system in Germany after the Emancipation Edict of 1822 for Talmudists.
Talmudist Jews Promote Germans Victory, Then Stab them in the Back
The Kaiser provided the World Zionist Organization with the offices for their world headquarters in Berlin. He, his family and government officials were constantly extending assistance to Theodore Herzl. Germany extended opportunities to Talmudists not available in other European countries. The Kaiser himself arranged the personal beeting between the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire and Theodore Herzl. Bleichroeder & Company in Berlin were the private bankers of the Kaiser's family for generations. They were Talmudists. Warburg & Company of Hamburg were the world's largest merchant bankers. They were Talmudists. The head of the German General Electric Company, then the world's largest industrial enterpnse, was a Talmudist. The head of the Hamburg- American and North German Lloyd steamship companies, the two largest steamship companies in the world, second only to the Cunard Line, was a Talmudist. Countless prominent German industrialists, bankers and merchants were Talmudists The attitude of Germans towards Talmudists in Germany and throughout the world worsened much after the October 1916 stab in the back by Talmudists. Mr. Samuel Landman, the secretary of the World Zionist Organization in London from 1917 to 1922, wrote in his Great Britain, the Jews and Palestine, published in London in 1936, on page six: "The fact that it was Jewish help that brought the U.S.A. into the war on the side of the Allies has rankled ever since in German- - especially Nazi--minds and has contributed in no small measure to the prominence which anti-Semitism occupied in the Nazi programme." The sentiments of prominent German leaders were expressed in the Jewish Daily Bulletin of New York City on October 30, 1934, in an article reprinted on page three from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency dispatch from Berlin which stated: "The New Germany persists toward the complete extermination of the Jew because it was Jews who instigated the United States to enter the World War, accomplishing the defeat of Germany, and who later caused the inflation in Germany, Herr Richard Kunze, a leading Nazi Parliament figure, declared at a mass meeting in Magdeburg yesterday." Talmudists throughout the world made bad matters worse on August 7, 1933, when they declared their "holy war" to destroy the German nation "by destroying their export trade upon which their very existence depends." Under the leadership of Mr. Samuel Untermeyer, Talmudists of the world declared a world boycott on all German goods and services. They asked their "Christian friends" to join their worldwide boycott of German goods and services. Mr. Samuel Untermeyer arranged for the "International Boycott Conference" in Amsterdam in July 1933. There he was elected the president of the "World Jewish Economic Federation." Talmudists throughout the world had tried in vain since 1919 to silence German resentment against them for railroading the United States into the war in Europe without justification or provocation by the United States as Great Britain's ally. Talmudists were held responsible for Germany's defeat and for every disadvantage that resulted from that defeat. The New York Times of August 7, 1933, published the Talmudists' declaration of their "holy war" against Germany in a three-column report of Mr. Untermeyer's address to the nation from the Columbia Broadcasting Company's studio on the night of his arrival home from Europe. Mr. Untermeyer, among other things, stated: "...holy war...in which we are embarked..it is a war which must be waged unremittingly...the Jews are the aristocrats of the world... the economic boycott against all German goods, shipping and services...boycott is our only really effective weapon...bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends...we shall force them to learn...it is not sufficient that you buy no goods in Germany...you must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods...we will drive the last nail in the coffin... " That statement was made on August 7, 1933, when not a hair on the head of a Talmudist in Germany had been touched. Germany was plunged into a depression difficult to describe in a few words, Germany's export business suddenly ending as if by magic. Talmudists hoped that way to stop Germans from continuing to talk about why they lost the war. Talmudists in Germany were finding it difficult to live that down. Germans then felt the way Sir Winston Churchill in 1936 expressed himself about the entry of the United States into World War I in 1917.
Zionist Worldwide Boycott Against German Merchandise Creates Domestic Crisis
The eminent Rabbi Maurice L. Perlman, head of the British Section of the World Jewish Congress, stated to a Canadian audience as reported by The Toronto Evening Telegram of February 26, 1940, that: "The World Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years. " Senator Wayne Morse of Oregon delivered an address on December 20, 1951, as reported in The National Jewish Post of Indianapolis of December 28, 1951, in which he stated: "One of the major causes for our going to war against Hitler was the persecution of the Jews in Germany. " Dr. Donald C. Blaisdell, professor of government at the College of the City of New York, published an important document entitled American Policy for the near East in a publication called Issues published in New York, the official organ of the American Council for Judaism, in the fall issue in 1959, in which Dr. Blaisdell stated: "No minority of Irish. of German, of Polish, Italian, or Greek extraction has been able to manipulate policy to its advantage as have the Zionist leaders of American Jews. Nor does there appear to be any politically feasible means by which the American government can place the claims of its important clientele in proper perspective. Like American Jews who are presumed to be members of Israel 's American clientele are never allowed to forget it, so the American government, Congress and Executive branch alike, is never permitted to free itself from the pressure, propaganda and power emanating from the same Zionist sources. " This author has been in a position since 1912 to witness what was going on behind the scenes. This author served on the National Democratic Committee in the 1912 campaign that elected President Wilson to his first term. No doors have been closed to this author since then. This author was ushered into this world in 1890 by Dr. Simon Baruch, the father of Mr. Bemard M. Baruch. Mr. Bemard Baruch was a good friend of this author's family and would very often consult this author on this situation.
Franklin Roosevelt Manipulated by Talmudic Jews
President Franklin D. Roosevelt was a captive of the Talmudists from the time he went to Albany as govemor of the state of New York. President Roosevelt was long beholden to the Talmudists. The story of how President Roosevelt lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East is not a long story. It is the story of how President Roosevelt railroaded the United States into the Second World War: Germany and Poland had agreed upon a formula giving Germany access across the Danzig Corridor. President Wilson, in 1919, created the Danzig Corrjdor which separated Gemmany into two halves. In order to keep Germany weak, at the instigation of Talmudists at theVersialles Peace Conference, President Wilson cut Germany into two halves, separated by a strip of German territory granted to Poland which divided Germany into two halves. Crossing the Danzig Corridor from western Germany to eastern Germany or vice versa was like traveling from one country to another. The inconveniences, the delays and the annoyances to Germany and Poland had finally worked out their acceptable arrangement that eliminated a majority of German objections to the Danzig Corridor. Germany and Poland reached a basis that would serve to prevent Germany's resort to more aggressive action. Adolf Hitler was the head of the German government at the time. Talmudists throughout the world opposed the peaceful adjustment between Germany and Poland of the Danzig Corridor situation. Unrestricted access of traffic between the western half and the eastern half of Germany would soon make Germany again the most powerful country in the world. Talmudists throughout the world dreaded the thought. In spite of the difficulties placed in the way of reaching a solution for the Danzig Corridor problem, Germany and Poland finally agreed upon a formula. Preparations were being made to consummate their understanding in a treaty. Both Germany and Poland were satisfied the formula agreed upon served both governments. Shortly before the agreement with Germany was to be signed, Poland secretly signed a treaty with Great Britain dated August 25, l939. Great Britain agreed in that treaty to hasten the military assistance of Poland "with all the support and assistance in its power" if Poland were attacked by Germany. With that assurance from Great Britain, Poland broke off negotiations with Germany. Germany did not understand the reason for Poland's sudden change of mind and decided to proceed with the terms of the arrangement agreed upon with Poland. That was the start of World War II. Great Britain knowingly deceived Poland when Great Britain actually promised military assistance to Poland if Poland were attacked by Germany. Great Britain could not come to Poland's assistance and Great Britain knew it when Great Britain's offer of military assistance to Poland was made. Poland fell into Great Britain's trap and discontinued negotiations with the Germans. Poland's unexplained discontinuance of negotiations with Germany to complete the Danzig Corridor agreement resulted in Germany's troops moving into the Danzig Corridor without an agreement with Poland. Great Britain knew exactly what would take place in that event, that it would mean the beginning or World War II. The rest is history. Talmudists of the world welcomed a war against Germeny in l939 to somehow crush the Nazi government as the Talmudists of the world crushed Germany in World War I in 1917 by railroading the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. President Roosevelt tried his hardest in 1939 to railroad The United States into the war in Europe to accommodate Talmudists in the United States. Germany learned by experience in World War I that the entry of the United States into thc war in Europe in 1939 could prove equally disastrous to Germany if the United States were raiiroaded into war in Europe as Great Bntain's ally. Germany exercised extraordinary caution not to provide the United States with justification under internationai law to declare war against Germany. That situation presented President Roosevelt with a problem. President Roosevelt decided if it were impossible for him to get into the war in Europe through the front door that he would railroad the United States into the war in Europe through the back door. Through the back door meant through Japan. Presidcnt Roosevelt finally did railroad the United States into the war in Europe through the back door, through Japan.
Secretary of Defense Stimson During World War II Makes Startling Revelation
Germany and Japan had a treaty under which if either Germany or Japan were attacked by a third powcr, the country which was not attacked by the third power automaticaily is at war with that third power. President Roosevelt planned to provoke Japan so Japan would attack the United States. Japan in December 1941 attacked Pearl Harbor. The United States immediately declared war against Japan and automatically was at war with Germany. The personal diary of the Hon. Mr. Henry L. Stimson and all his papers are in Yale University Lihrary. Mr. Stimson each day entered in his personal diary in his own handwriting the important events in his life that day. Mr. Stimson was President Roosevelt's secretary of defense. Mr. Stimson's diary was introduced as evidence in the United States Senate investigation of the Pearl Harbor attack by Japan over the strong objections of friends of President Roosevelt. Mr. Stimson entered in his diary on November 25, 1941, two weeks before Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, that at a meeting with President Roosevelt and his cabinet that morning at the White House, President Roosevelt told those present that he wished to be at war against Japan but that he "did not want it to appear that the United States fired the first shot."
Zionist Conspirators Provoke Pearl Harbor Incident
President Roosevelt knowingly provoked Japan to attack the United States. President Roosevelt advised Japan they could purchase no more steel scrap or oil from the United States. Japan was in the midst of a war against China. Without scrap steel and without oil Japan would be unable to continue that war. Japan was totally dependent upon the United States for both steel scrap and oil. Professor Charles Callan Tansill, professor of diplomatic history at Georgetown University in Washington, wrote a classic work he called Back Door to War, published by Henry Regnery of Chicago in 1952. Professor Tansill spent five years after the war in the confidential files of the State Department doing research there on World War II. Professor Tansill's book has 652 pages all filled with alarming authenticated facts little known to the public during the war. In a scholarly detailed manner easily understood, Professor Tansill supplies facts which are incontrovertible proof showing how President Roosevelt railroaded the United States into World War II in Europe. President Roosevelt's desire to please Talmudists among his friends, influenced his better judgment. He overlooked that he was president of all the people of the United States. President Roosevelt realized if he expected political support by Talmudists in the United States to continue he must find some way to railroad the United States into the war then in progress in Europe against Germany. Surely nobody can any longer question that railroading the United States into World War II was President Roosevelts contribution to the desperate predicament in which the United States today funds itself in the Middle East. President Harry S. Truman made his great contribution to the desperate predicament in which the United States today funds itself in the Middle East when he recognized as a sovereign state an armed uprising in Palestine by 800,000 armed aliens transplanted into Palestine in a conspiracy organized by Talmudists throughout the world. President Truman in 1946 suffered from a pathological obsession that he must be elected president of the United States in 1948 on his own account. Mr. Clarke M. Clifford, Secretary of War under President Lyndon B. Johnson, deserves a great deal of credit for the recognition of the State of Israel on May 14, 1948, by the United States. Mr. Eliahu Epstein, the United States representative of the Jewish Agency in Washington in 1948, told the story in his three- page article in the Jewish Chronicle of London in its 10th anniversary issue of June 1958 celebrating the 10th anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel. Mr. Clifford undoubtedly was anxious to help because President Truman had confided in his close friends that he wished to recognize the Zionist state in the "first hour of its birth" as he did. The State of Israel was officially "proclaimed" in Tel Aviv at midnight on May 14, l948. President Truman recognized the birth of the State of Isreal eleven minutes after midnight. President Truman finally advised this author that he did not wish to carry on the discussion of the Zionist question with him any further. He wrote to this author that he had turned over the entire Palestine question to "the Hon. David Niles." Talmudists were willing to carry out their part of their bargain with President Truman after he recognized the State of Israel. Although the odds in President Truman's election in 1948 were 20 to 1 against his election, President Truman romped home the winner over Governor Dewey assisted by the invisible and invincible Zionist political steam-roller that always elects their candidates. President Truman not only used the power and prestige of the United States to compel the United Nations to admit the State of Israel as a peace-loving nation, the regime of an armed uprising in Palestine by transplanted aliens, but he made billions of United States taxpayers dollars available to Talmudists to make the State of Israel powerful. When the day to vote for the admission of the State of Iseral arrived they were short two votes. The plan was about to collapse. In the emergency, Mr Charles H. Silver engaged Cardinal Spellman to make two trips to South America to change their votes in the United Nations against the admission of the State of Israel into the United Nation to vote in favor of the admission of the State of Israel into the United Nations as a member. The newspapers around the world on June 11, 1964, published Mr. Silver's "confession" of a "secret I have kept for fifteen years." The "secret" Cardinal Spellman kept with Mr. Silver was that Cardinal Spellman was sent to South America by Mr. Silver on behalf of the Talmudists in New York to "persuade" the South American countries to change their votes against admitting the State of Israel to the United Nations to vote in favor of admitting the State of Israel to the United Nations as a member. This author was a close personal friend of Cardinal Spellman for twenty-five years. Cardinal Spellman "confessed" to this author several years ago that he felt he had committed an irreparable sin by conspiring with the Talmudists in the United States to elect the State of Israel a member of the United Nations. In the midst of that bloody fighting in the Middle East in June 1967, Cardinal Spellman told this author when alone with him in his study that he felt personally responsible for all the lives lost in the 1967 invasion of the United Arab Republic and Syria by the State of Isreal.
H.J. 117 a Talmudic Creation-Eisenhower Steps in Line
The story of how President Dwight D. Eisenhower lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East is not a complicated story. Talmudists m the United States pressured President Eisenhower into sponsoring Joint Resolution by Congress of H J Res. 117, on January 5, 1950, which was then refined by Congress to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. President Eisenhower knew less about what he was doing than a new born babe. It was pitiful for this author to witness a great general being figuratively pushed around by Talmudists unfit to shine his shoes. President Eisenhower was always friendly towards this author. This author met President Eisenhower when he was being considered by Mr. Thomas M. Watson, Sr., as a presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket. Mr. Watson was the founder of the International Business Machines Company. He told this author at that time that he believed General Eisenhower as a Civilian would make a great president. As president of the United States, General Eisenhower was faithful to these Talmudist supporters whose friendship he first cultivated in Europe during his political activities in Germany after the end of World War 11. Talmudists curried his favor after World War 11. They knew that as president of the United States, General Eisenhower in their hands would be like clay in the hands of the potter. In 1956 it appeared that Middle East countries were undergoing changes in their governments. The Zionist illegal occupation of Palestine still existed. Populations in Middle East countries were growing restless. Talmudists recognized something must be done to silence the unrest. President Eisenhower then obliged the Talmudists. Lebanon is the heart of Middle East political activity. To nip action in the bud, by native populations aiming to assert their independence from domination by Talmudists, Talmudists arranged with President Eisenhower to occupy Lebanon with fourteen thousand (14,000) troops and to station the Sixth Fleet off the coast To make it legal, Talmudists had Congress pass a Joint resolution like the Tonkin Bay Resolution passed by Congress to legalize the war in Vietnam.
President Eisenhower Performs Fulfillment of Zionist Demands in Middle East
President Eisenhower occupied Lebanon with fourteen thousand (14,000) United States troops and stationed the sixth Fleet off the Lebanon coast. President Eisenhower was warning the Middle East nations not to attempt to regain Palestine from the Zionists in illegal possession of Palestine. President Eisenhower must have had a consortium of the smartest Talmudists the state defense and justice departments prepare that joint resolution. The intent of that unclear language is to conceal the purpose of the joint Resolution not to explain its purpose. The purpose was to have a joint resolution in record that would permit President Eisenhower to use the United States armed forces and navy to aid and abet the Zionist thieves to hold onto their stolen loot without any necessity to ask Congress to declare war. Every word President Eisenhower uttered to defend the crooks in occupation of Palestine was a lie which contributed to the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East. Talmudists in the United States were able to camouflage their illegal aggression in the Middle East behind the glamour of President Eisenhower's record as a great soldier. The story of how President John F. Kennedy lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East is very distressing. President Kennedy's future was uncertain after digressing on August 25, l960, from the straight and narrow path he had followed all his life. President Kennedy could not escape the consequences of his betrayal of the high principles to which he aimed to dedicate his life. President Kennedy surrendered to the lure of Talmudists who pledged to put him in the White House as the president of the United States. On August 23 1960, in the United States Senate office building in Washington President Kennedy, at that time a senator, gave this author a copy of the address he was to deliver in New York City on August 25, 1960. In the copy of that address he stated among other things: "Israel...three weeks ago I said in a public statement 'Israel is here to stay...my flat prediction that Israel is here to stay...will endure and flourish...a special obligation on the Democratic Party...it was President Truman who first recognized the new State of Israel and gave it status in world affairs...may I and...my hope and my pledge to continue the democratic tradition...if the Democratic platform is to have any meaning...the White House must take the lead...American intervention.. will not now be easy...I propose that we make it crystal clear...we will act promptly and decisively...I propose that we make it clear...our guarantee that we will act with whatever force and speed are necessary..the risk of war..." President (Senator) Kennedy was giving Talmudists his pledge that as the president of the United States he would send sons, husbands and brothers of the grass roots population of the United States to fight in Palestine under the flag of the United States in a war in Palestine to help crooks hold onto stolen loot, to aid and abet thieves retain possession of their stolen plunder. This author met President Kennedy for the first time in his father's office at 230 Park Avenue, in New York City, on the day after he was elected for the first time as a Congressman in November l946. This author was in a conference with Ambassador Joseph Kennedy and Judge Landis, an associate of Ambassador Kennedy. In his private office they were consulting this author on the Middle East situation which had recently taken an ugly turn in the United Nations.
President John Kennedy Pledges Zionists He Will Act in Their Favor Even at the Risk of War
Ambassador Kennedy discussed the subject matter for a short while with those present. The Congressman then asked to leave as he was catching a train for Washington. This author invited the Congressman to lunch and he accepted. After lunch Congress Kennedy asked if this author had nothing else to do than ride to Washington with him on the train. This author was willing and rode to Washington with him. From that day in November l946 to August 23, l960, this author saw the Congressman, and the Senator, countless times in his office in Washington and New York City This author was happy to enlighten Senator Kennedy on the Palestine question. Without a doubt there were soon few people in the world who were better informed on this subject than Senator Kennedy. In the fourteen years this author had the honor of enjoying the confidence of President Kennedy he never failed to express his appreciation for this author's interest in his career. President Kennedy also appreciated the friendship this author demonstrated for his father, Ambassador Kennedy. Ambassador Kennedy was blackmailed by President Roosevelt. President Roosevelt told Ambassador Kennedy not to write the book he planned to write. President Roosevelt removed Ambassador Kennedy as Ambassador to the Court of St. James in London for circulating what Neville Chamberlain told Ambassador Kennedy in London in l938.
The Senior Kennedy Liquidated Politically by Franklin Roosevelt
for Reporting Talmudic Conspiracy
Ambassador Kennedy reported to Washington in 1938 that Neville Chamberlain told him that the United States and Talmudists throughout the world forced Great Britain into the Second World War. Chamberlain also told Ambassador Kennedy in 1938 that Great Britain had nothing with which to fight Germany, that Great Britain should not risk going to war against Germany. Chamberlain complained to Ambassador Kennedy that United States Ambassador to France William C. Bullit in 1938 was urging President Roosevelt that Germany must be "faced down" in their attitude towards Poland in the Danzig Corridor matter. President Roosevelt recalled Ambassador Kennedy to silence him. Ambassador Kennedy planned to return to the United States to write a book telling what he knew that he thought the grass roots population of the United States should be told. President Roosevelt sent for Ambassador Kennedy upon his return to the United States to come to Washington to see him. President Roosevelt told Ambassador Kennedy that he had heard that he was planning to write a book which he asked him not to do. After Ambassador Kennedy's unpleasant meeting with President Roosevelt in Washington after his recall from London for daring to circulate what Chamberlain had told him about Talmudists, his ambition in life was to see one of his sons in the White House as president of the United States. The story of how President Lyndon Baines Johnson lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East is not a long story. It commences with a telephone call to this author in New York from Congressman Ed Gosset in Washington to come there at once. Congressman Gosset represented Amarillo, Texas, in the House of Representatives. Congressman Gosset was alarmed that the Senate Armed Services Committee the day before confirmed the appointment of Anna M. Rosenberg as Assistant Secretary of Defense without a public hearing. The only witness who appeared to testify concerning Anna Rosenberg's fitness to serve as Assistant Secretary of Defense was Ann Rosenberg herself. That by itself aroused suspicion among the country's leaders. Congress Gosset took this author to Senator Johnson's office and explained to him the reason for the visit. Senator Johnson was a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee which had confirmed Anna Rosenberg's appointment the previous day. Senator Johnson was very much interested in learning about Anna Rosenberg's associations with communists. Senator Johnson asked this author if he would assist him in looking into the matter further by producing a communist who knew Anna Rosenberg. Upon this author's return to New York that day, he mentioned Senator Johnson's request to his attorney, Mr. Hallam Richardson. Within a few hours, Mr. Richardson produced Mr. Ralph de Sola, a prominent communist, the head of film photography of documents by communist Organizations in the United States. After Anna Rosenberg's confirmation by the Senate Armed Services Committee was withdrawn, another hearing was held to confirm her second appointment. Anna Rosenberg testified she was born m Hungary and came to the United States in 1912 at the age of eleven years. The second hearing brought out some interesting facts--it confirmed her extended appointment for four years. In this author's meetings with Sen. Johnson, this author had occasion to discuss the Palestine question with him. senator Johnson was very interested in the Palestine question. That subject was of great interest to the Senate Armed Services Committee. The occupation of Palestine by the Zionists concerned the Armed Services Committee.
Lyndon Johnson Master-Minded Six Day War
Senator Johnson was vice-president before the death of President Kennedy elevated him. He then became president of the United States. As president of the United States, Johnson was aware of the possibility of armed conflict in the Middle East in which the United States might become involved. President Johnson understood the power Talmudists exerted in the United States and in the United Nations. One of his closest friends in Washington was Mr. Abe Fortas, a prominent Zionist, whom President Johnson appointed to the Supreme Court. President Johnson knew he was violating the letter and spirit of his oath of office as the president of all the people of the United States when he filled the pipe lines of the State of Israel with munitions of war paid for with the money of Christian taxpayers in the United States. President Johnson cannot plead ignorance of the facts. Though a very close mutual friend, this author kept President Johnson constantly informed on developments in the Middle East. President Johnson will be the first to admit he lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East if he will glance at the promises, pledges and predictions he made to Talmudists in the United States while he occupied the White House as president of the United States. President Johnson now seeks to justify his generosity with United States taxpayers' money by referring to a "commitment." President Johnson knows that he is in error. The only commitment the taxpayers in the United States recognize is President Johnson's commitment to serve the best interests of the grass roots population of the United States. According to the Pentagon Papers he was not very successful in that respect. President Johnson does not display mature judgment when he squanders billions of the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars to aid and abet crooks to hold onto their stolen loot, their stolen plunder. President Johnson would feel differently if the Soviet Union financed an invasion of Texas by Mexicans who expelled Texans from their homes with only shirts on their backs to survive in refugee camps in the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico on six cents a day for food provided by the United Nations. Mexicans have a more legitimate claim to the territory called Texas today than the eastern European Talmudists ever had to Palestine. What would President Johnson's attitude have been if the Soviet Union contributed thirty-two billion dollars ($32,000,000,000.00) to go towards entrenching these Mexican invaders in Texas, and then supplying the Mexican invaders with sophisticated military hardware to threaten the other forty-nine United States if they interfered with the illegal possession of Texas by the Mexican invaders in illegal occupation of Texas, without having paid one cent to the lawful landowners for a square foot of Texas. The story how President Nixon lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself is of great interest to the grass roots population of the United States every time President Nixon grants the Zionists, in illegal occupation of Palestine, another five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000.00) of United States tnxpayers' money. Is President Nixon serving two masters? President Nixon is as guilty as the other six masters of deception who lied the United States into the desperate predicament in which the United States today finds itself in the Middle East. President Nixon is both an eminent lawyer and President of the United States. President Nixon cannot produce any evidence of a legitimate "commitment" to anyone to support President Nixon's generous use of United States taxpayers' money for financing the permanent possession by thieves of their stolen loot. Does President Nixon mean the "commitment" by political leaders to the Talmudists in the United States who control the media for mass information? President Nixon belittles himself as well as the United States Administration for whom he speaks when he talks about a "commitment" of the United States to underwrite the perpetual possession of the illegal and immoral theft of Palestine by Talmudists. President Nixon's generosity has reached epidemic proportions. Each of the additional five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000.00) of United States taxpayers' money he donates to the so-called State of Israel is that many more nails in the coffin of the United States. These seven masters of deception mock the elementary and equitable principles upon which the United States was founded when they throw hard-earned United States taxpayers' dollars by the billions to criminals in possession of their stolen loot as if it were stage money. Have they no shame or conscience? When there were civil wars recently in the Congo, in Nagana, in Pakistan and other countries in this century, did the United States "recognize" the populations as independent indigenous populations who planned to secede and form their sovereign independent states? Then why recognize transplanted alien invaders financed by Talmudists? If these seven masters of deception reflected the honorable attitude the United States should exhibit, they would not traffic with thieves, murderers, and scoundrels as they are doing with the hooligans from the State of lsrael. The United States refused to "recognize" the independence of Katanga, of Biafra, of East Pakistan, of Quebec and of total Ireland, but they rushed to "recognize" the hooligans of an armed Palestine uprising by transplanted aliens as a legitimate sovereign state. What next?
Talmudic Hidden Hand Controls the U.S. Vote in the United Nations
The one hundred and twenty-five other members of the United Nations know that the United States was as crooked as a cork screw to recognize the so-called State of Israel as a lawful representative government of the indigenous population. The other nations of the world all know by this time that Talmudists elect the presidents of the United States and members of Congress. If these Talmudists in the United States were paupers, they could not elect a dog catcher in the United States. How rotten can the political system in the United States get before it drops into the lap of a more honorable nation like a rotten piece of fruit falls from a tree?
Rothschild Conspiracy Fulfilled
The so-called State of Israel is positive that the United States must at the request of the State of Israel veto any resolution introduced in the Security Council to expel the so-called State of Israel. Consequently, this so-called State of Israel feels as smug as a bug in a rug regardless of what they do. The Talmudists control the delegation in the United States. Nobody but a fool or an ignoramus doubts that today. The Talmudists always instruct the delegates of the United States how to vote in the Security Council. If a resolution is ever introduced to expel the so-called State of Israel, the United States must veto the resolution. The grass roots population of the United States deserves to know the truth about the Middle East crisis. They will pay with their lives unless they soon acquire a better understanding about why the Middle East crisis exists. The United States finds it convenient to blame everything that goes wrong anywhere in the world on Communism. Communism provides a convenient whipping boy for politicians. The arch villains behind the world's difficulties are the Rothschilds. For the moment, this author will only deal with the Rothschilds interest in the subject matter of this article, the Middle East desperate predicament of the world. This author can speak with confidence on this subject as his knowledge was obtained first hand from members of the Rothschild dynasty in London, New York and elsewhere. The extent of the Rothschild wealth cannot be estimated with any degree of certainty. A conservative guess of the total value of the Rothschild fortunes would be billions of dollars, if that amount can be imagined. The important thing is the major portion of this wealth is in the Far East. The Rothschild interest in Europe, and the Western Hemisphere, are tremendous. However, in comparison to their wealth in the Far East, it is significant. A most vital single thing in the world to the Rothschild dynasty is access to the Far East. Access to the Far East through the Mediterranean is know as Great Britain's lifeline. The Rothschild dynasty had plunged Great Britain into many wars only to preserve their lifeline to the Far East. History tells that story. The Suez Canal was not constructed by the Rothschilds. They did their utmost to prevent its construction. The Suez Canal was constructed by the Frenchman, de Lesseps, and the Khedive of Egypt. The Rothschilds refused to invest one cent of their money in the company which obtained the concession to construct the Suez Canal. The Suez Canal was completed in 1869. It, from the very start, proved a great success. The Rothschilds swindled a forty percent (40%) interest in the Suez Canal Company from the Khedive of Egypt. They found a forty percent (40%) interest insufficient for their purpose as the value of the Suez Canal had been demonstrated after it was in use two years. The Rothschilds decided they must control their lifeline to their fortune in the Far East. Without justification or provocation of any description, the Rothschilds had Great Britain occupy Egypt exactly as a defeated power is occupied by the victor. The British ran the schools, the banks, the railroads, the courts, and Egypt ceased to be Egypt except in name. Naturally, the Suez Canal came under complete control of Great Britain. The original concession for the Suez Canal was for ninety-nine years. The more important the Suez Canal became to the Rothschilds, the more the Rothschilds worried what was going to happen when the ninety-nine year concession for the Suez Canal expired in 1969 and reverted to Egypt as the concession provided. Great Britain spent large fortunes and spilled much blood in many wars to maintain uninterrupted and undisturbed possession of the Suez Canal. The Rothschilds knew that Egypt would be free to grant a new concession for the Suez Canal to a power unfriendly to Great Britain, like France, Germany or Russia, when the concession expired. The Rothschilds feared the consequences should the Suez Canal fall into the hands of an unfriendly power and Great Britain had many powers in mind who could make good use of the Suez Canal politically also against the British Empire.
Rothschild Fortune Risked Collapse Without Middle East Controls Under Zionist Supervision
The Rothschild dynasty's fortune and Great Britain's authority would diminish in the Far East if Great Britain no longer controlled the Suez Canal. Looking ahead, the Rothschilds planned their future without the Suez Canal. The First World War ended in l9l8 and the Rothschilds had their plan ready. Their plan was very simple. Under the October 1916 London Agreement, Great Britain planned to turn over Palestine to the Zionists after the war. The eastern European Talmudists had no money. Without money Palestine was a headache to the Zionists. The Rothschilds in London promised the Zionists unlimited financial assistance with which to develop Palestine, but on one condition--that as soon as Palestine was turned over to the Zionists, they apply for admission to the British Empire as a member. The Rothschilds planned to construct a canal in Palestine from Ashkelon on the Mediterranean to Aqaba on the Gulf of Aqaba. They planned to construct a modern steel and concrete canal with two lanes for ships. The canal would be on British territory in perpetuity enjoying the advantages of defense by Great Britain if needed and international recognition as a member of the British Empire. Great Britain occupied Palestine from 1921 to 1948 as the Mandatory of the League of Nations. During that period the British Empire fell apart. By the time the Zionists established a Zionist state in Palestine, the British Empire had fallen apart and no longer existed. Palestine under the Zionists could not apply for admission to the British Empire. There was no British Empire. When the Rothschilds realized what was happening, they were compelled to alter their plans. The Rothschilds were determined that Great Britain must turn over Palestine to the Zionists for a sovereign Zionist state. The idea of a United Nations was then a reality and the Rothschilds planned upon getting the sovereign Zionist state admitted to the United Nations. The United Nations would provide Palestine with the same advantages that the British Empire would have provided once upon a time. If the sovereign Zionist state could be admitted to the United Nations, Palestine's future was assured. Rothschilds did not know what to do. Then in October 1916, the World Zionist Organization entered the picture. When Great Britain was considering surrender to Germany, the World Zionist Organization and the British War Cabinet entered into the October 1916 London Agreement. The Rothschild dynasty was astonished when, on April 6, 1917, the United States declared war against Germany. By July 1917 it appeared that Germany would be defeated after the entry of the United States into the war. The Rothschild dynasty sought out Mr. Chaim Weizmann and cultivated his friendship. The Rothschilds realized that the World Zionist Organization must be recognized. The Rothschilds purchased a Prince Albert frock coat and a silk hat for Chaim Weizmann and treated him as though he was already the head of the government of Palestine, which he eventually became. The Rothschilds renewed their interest in the plan to finance the Zionist movement in Palestine in exchange for the concession to construct their modem canal across Palestine in competition with the Suez Canal. Great Britain was certain to defeat Germany. Great Britain had agreed to turn over Palestine to the Talmudists of the world for railroading the United States into the war in Europe as Great Britain's ally. The only link missing now was the existence in Palestine of an independent sovereign Zionist state. The Rothschilds financed transplanting 600,000 eastern European Talmudists into Palestine and arranged to remove the last of General Allenby's 200,000 British troops from Palestine.
In collaboration with President Truman in the United States the armed 600,000 transplanted alien Talmudists on May 18, 1948, began their expulsion from Palestine of the Christian and Moslem disarmed and defenseless 1,350,000 population and at the same time declared their armed uprising the State of Israel. The Rothschilds were now satisfied. The only unfinished business was to force the Middle East nations to recognize the State of Israel. The Rothschilds commenced their final stage by building the present oil pipeline from Ashkelon on the Mediterranean to Aqaba, along the route of their future modern long-planned steel and concrete two-lane canal. The Middle East situation is the result of the Rothschild efforts to secure permanent and secure access to the Far East. This nonsense about the "repatriation" of "Gods chosen people" to "their promised land" has been revealed the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind. The single purpose of the Rothschilds was to secure permanent and secure access to their vast natural resources in the Far East. This author has had the patience and the time to inform seven presidents of the United States about the underlying reason for the Middle East aggression by the Talmudist throughout the world. These seven masters of deception were all briefed by this author on the reason for the aggression in Palestine. This author spent a small fortune acquainting members of Congress and political and industrial leaders in the United States with all these facts, supplying them with photostat reproductions of documentary evidence to support every statement made by this author. It cries out to heaven that this country and the world has been put to the expense of billions of billions of dollars to see the Rothschilds have secure and permanent access to their unlimited wealth in the Far East. If the Talmudists of the world say they are willing to see another world war fought to establish "God's chosen people" in "their promised land" to rule the world from Palestine, then it is time to tell the grass roots of the United States population what all the excitement is about. This issue must be dragged into the light for the grass roots of the population of the United States to see why they are expected to die in an unnecessary war with a smile on their face.
The Jewish Declaration of War
on Nazi Germany
The Economic Boycott of 1933
Article from The Barnes Review, Jan./Feb. 2001, pp. 41-45.
The war by the international Jewish leadership on Germany not only sparked definite reprisals by the German government but also set the stage for a little-known economic and political alliance between the Hitler government and the leaders of the Zionist movement who hoped that the tension between the Germans and the Jews would lead to massive emigration to Palestine. In short, the result was a tactical alliance between the Nazis and the founders of the modern-day state of Israel - a fact that many today would prefer be forgotten.
To this day, it is generally (although incorrectly) believed that when Adolf Hitler was appointed German chancellor in January of 1933, the German government began policies to suppress the Jews of Germany, including rounding up of Jews and putting them in concentration camps and launching campaigns of terror and violence against the domestic Jewish population.
While there were sporadic eruptions of violence against Jews in Germany after Hitler came to power, this was not officially sanctioned or encouraged. And the truth is that anti-Jewish sentiments in Germany (or elsewhere in Europe) were actually nothing new. As all Jewish historians attest with much fervor, anti-Semitic uprisings of various degrees had been ever-present in European history.
In any case, in early 1933, Hitler was not the undisputed leader of Germany, nor did he have full command of the armed forces. Hitler was a major figure in a coalition government, but he was far from being the government himself. That was the result of a process of consolidation which evolved later.
Even Germany's Jewish Central Association, known as the Verein, contested the suggestion (made by some Jewish leaders outside Germany) that the new government was deliberately provoking anti-Jewish uprisings.
The Verein issued a statement that "the responsible government authorities [i.e. the Hitler regime] are unaware of the threatening situation," saying, "we do not believe our German fellow citizens will let themselves be carried away into committing excesses against the Jews."
Despite this, Jewish leaders in the United States and Britain determined on their own that it was necessary to launch a war against the Hitler government. MORE
The following is a transcript of Samuel Untermyer's speech made on WABC, declaring a 'holy war' by the Jews against Germany, and appealing to the masses of non-Jewish humanity to boycott German-made imports and all merchants who have German-made items in their establishments. The entire speech was published in the New York times on the morning following the broadcast (August 7th, 1933) which was mentioned byBenjamin Freedman in his talk before a group of patriots.
A short excerpt from The World's Trouble Makers gives further insight to this speech:
When Hitler had been soundly established, Samuel Untermeyer, a New York Jewish Lawyer, called for war on Germany. The call was made through radio station WABC on 8-7-33. He had just returned from a world conference of Jews at The Hague. In the broadcast, he said he was calling for a "holy war", and described the Jews as "the aristocrats of the world".
This same gentleman was connected with the Foreign Policy Association of New York and the worldwide organisation to move Jews out of Germany, not only into the United States, but to Palestine and other countries. These activities were tied in with the organisation known as the "International Boycott on German Goods", of which Untermeyer was the head!
We have all, on a world-wide scale, been sold the myth (lie) of the so-called Holocaust... "Six million Jews killed..." Note Untermyer's mention of the "600,000 souls we must save". That is from the horse's mouth, in 1933, during the time the Jews were leaving Germany by the thousands.
The "holocaust" lie has created a great guilt complex in people all over the world who had nothing to do with the murder of even one Jew, never mind the fallacious figure of six million allegedly killed in foreign countries.
The fact that more than 20 million people were killed by Joseph Stalin in the Bolshevist-controlled USSR -- mostly Christians -- is never mentioned; nor are the tens of millions slaughtered by Mao-Tse-Tung in Communist China. I was told several years ago by an educated and intelligent person that, "That was different. It was their own people that they killed."
It's called brain-washing, folks. Thought control and mind control to the max. It's okay if a despot puppet-ruler kills "his own people". But... the holocaust myth of 6 million Jews is a crime/sin with which we must all live forever more. And pay, and pay and pay. It is time for the lying to stop.
Why was Adolf Hitler so vilified? Because he had created a state money system, non-gold-backed, and had negotiated trade with other nations that didn't use the International Banker's monetary system. They were bartering! By-passing the usurers.
Hitler continued, despite the boycott, to further his barter-trading and if enough nations had had the opportunity to participate, it would have been the end of the strangle-hold, the unbridled power in the hands of a few creatures lusting after World Dominion. Money is the name of their deceitful and dangerous game. Hitler called it "bogus money".
There is much about Hitler we don't know, so this is not intended to be a Hitler- apologist commentary. I am sharing information gleaned from many and varied sources which I believe to be credible, including historian Nesta Webster.
Mrs. Webster, along with other writers, had also written that Hitler had kicked the International Bankers out of Germany. In his speech, Untermyer claims that 'wealthy Jews are financing Hitler'. Untermyer was intimately connected with the wealthy Jews. Since they are the masters of lies, perhaps the statement was made to confuse the issue. It remains for the time being an unanswered question for me.
A thought which has been recurring for weeks now as a result of a recent reading frenzy... a thought and a question:
Given the Political Zionists have controlled the media for a couple of hundred years, why would we believe that everything we've heard/read about Adolf Hitler in the Zionist-controlled media was true? - Jackie --
More on Samuel Untermyer in Who Was Cyrus Scofield?
The New York Times, Monday, August 7, 1933
Text of Untermyer's Address
Following is the text of Samuel Untermyer's address last night over Station WABC after his return from Europe:
What a joy and relief and sense of security to be once more on American soil! The nightmares of horrors through which I have passed in those two weeks in Europe, listening to the heartbreaking tales of refugee victims, beggar description.
I deeply appreciate your enthusiastic greeting on my arrival today, which I quite understand is addressed not to me personally but to the holy war in the cause of humanity in which we are embarked. Jews and non-Jews alike, for we are equally concerned that the work of centuries shall not be undone, and that civilization shall not be allowed to die.
It is a war that must be waged unremittingly until the black clouds of bigotry, race hatred and fanaticism that have descended upon what was once Germany, but is now medieval Hitlerland, have been dispersed. If we will but enlist to a man and persist in our purpose, the bright sun of civilization will again shine upon Germany, and the world will be a safer place in which to dwell.
As our ship sailed up the bay today past our proud Statue of Liberty, [a gift to the U.S. from the Grand Orient - Illuminati - Lodge of France] I breathed a prayer of gratitude and thanksgiving that this fair land of freedom has escaped the curse that has descended upon benighted Germany, which has thereby been converted from a nation of culture into a veritable hell of cruel and savage beasts.
The World's Concern
We owe it not only to our persecuted brethren but to the entire world to now strike in self-defense a blow that will free humanity from a repetition of this incredible outrage. This time the Jews are the victims, next time it may be the Catholics or the Protestants. If we once admit, as is brazenly insisted by the German Government, that such fiendish persecution of the people of one race or creed is an internal domestic affair and not a world concern, how are we to know whose turn will be next?
Now or never must all the nations of the earth make common cause against the monstrous claim that the slaughter, starvation and annihilation, by a country that has reverted to barbarism, of its own innocent and defenseless citizens without rhyme, reason or excuse is an internal affair against which the rest of the world must stand idly by and not lift a hand in defense.
I have seen and talked with many of these terror-stricken refugees who have had the good fortune to escape over the border, though forced to leave their property behind them, and I want to say to you that nothing that has seeped through to you over the rigid censorship and lying propaganda that are at work to conceal and misrepresent the situation of the Jews in Germany begins to tell a fraction of the frightful story of fiendish torture, cruelty and persecution that are being inflicted day by day upon these men, women and children, of the terrors of worse than death in which they are living.
When the tale is told, as it will be some day if the impotent League of Nations ever sufficiently awakens from its Rip Van Winkle slumbers to the realization of its power and duty to prosecute an investigation into the facts, the world will confront a picture so fearful in its barbarous cruelty that the hell of war and the alleged Belgian atrocities will pale into insignificance as compared to this devilishly, deliberately, cold-bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people -- a people who love and have shed their blood for their Fatherland, and to whom Germany owes in large part its prosperity and its great scientists, educators, lawyers, physicians, poets, musicians, diplomats and philosophers, who are the backbone of its past cultural life.
Back to Dark Ages
But why dwell longer upon this revolting picture of the ravages wrought by these ingrates and beasts of prey, animated by the loathsome motives of race hatred, bigotry and envy. For the Jews are the aristocrats of the world. From time immemorial they have been persecuted and have seen their persecutors come and go. They alone have survived. And so will history repeat itself, but that furnishes no reason why we should permit this reversion of a once great nation to the Dark Ages or fail to rescue these 600,000 human souls from the tortures of hell as we can with the aid of our Christian friends, if we have the will to act.
Protests and pleas from all corners of the earth, from the leaders of all creeds, having proven as vain and unavailing as was the idealistic dream of our martyred President of making the world safe for democracy and of protecting minorities, what then are to be the lines of our defensive campaign against these atrocities, on which we are already actively embarked? Are we right in our plan? If so, what steps shall now be prosecuted to attain success?
Our campaign is twofold -- defensive and constructive. On the defensive side will be the economic boycott against all German goods, shipping and services. On the constructive side will be an appeal to the League of Nations to construe and enforce the labor union provisions of the Versailles Treaty and the written promises made by Germany, while the treaty was under negotiation, to protect its minorities, which have been flagrantly violated by its disfranchisement and persecution of the German Jews.
What Boycott Means
As in the boycott, strange to say a mere handful in number, but powerful in influence, of our thoughtless but doubtless well-intentioned Jews seem obsessed and frightened at the bare mention of the word "boycott". It signifies and conjures up to them images of force and illegality, such as have on occasions in the past characterized struggles between labor unions and their employers. As these timid souls are capitalists and employers, the word and all that it implies are hateful to their ears.
In point of fact, it signifies nothing of the kind. These gentlemen do not know what they are talking or thinking about. Instead of surrendering to their vague fears and half-baked ideas, our first duty is to educate them as to what is meant by a purely defensive economic boycott, and what we are doing and proposing.
Admittedly, the boycott is our only really effective weapon. These gentlemen who are taking counsel of their groundless fears to the exclusion of their reason have done nothing and have no program except to attempt to arouse world opinion, which is and has been from the outset on our side, as it was bound to be because of this brutal, senseless, unprovoked assault upon civilization.
It is not necessary to belittle or underrate that accomplishment, if their aimless, fruitless endeavors in that direction may be so dignified in recognition of their good intentions, barren of results as they have been.
It is sufficient that their efforts have proven unavailing and that the campaign of Schreckligheit not only goes on unabated in the face of unanimous world opinion; but that it is increasing in intensity and that the masses of the German people, misled by government propaganda and suppression of free speech and of the press, are either voluntarily, or through fear of punishment at the hands of their despotic rulers, supporting their government in this hellish campaign.
What then have these amiable gentlemen accomplished and what do they hope or expect to accomplish in the way of stemming this conflagration of civilization by their "feather-duster" methods? You cannot put out a fire, and especially that kind of a fire, by just looking on until the mad flames, fanned by the wind of hate, have destroyed everything.
What we are proposing and have already gone far toward doing, is to prosecute a purely defensive economic boycott that will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.
"Force Them to Learn"
They have flaunted and persisted in flaunting and defying world opinion.
We propose to and are organizing world opinion to express itself in the only way Germany can be made to understand. Hitler and his mob will not permit their people to know how they are regarded by the outside world. We shall force them to learn in the only way open to us.
Revolting as it is, it would be an interesting study in psychology to analyze the motives, other than fear and cowardice, that have prompted Jewish bankers to lend money to Germany as they are now doing. It is in part their money that is being used by the Hitler regime in its reckless, wicked campaign of propaganda to make the world anti-Semitic; with that money they have invaded Great Britain, the United States and other countries where they have established newspapers, subsidized agents and otherwise are spending untold millions in spreading their infamous creed.
The suggestion that they use that money toward paying the honest debts they have repudiated is answered only by contemptuous sneers and silence. Meantime the infamous campaign goes on unabated with ever increasing intensity to the everlasting disgrace of the Jewish bankers who are helping to finance it and of the weaklings who are doing nothing effective to check it.
The Hitler regime originated are fiendishly prosecuting their boycott to exterminate the Jews by placarding Jewish shops, warning Germans against dealing with them, by imprisoning Jewish shopkeepers and parading them through the streets by the hundreds under guard of Nazi troops for the sole crime of being Jews, by ejecting them from the learned professions in which many of them had attained eminence, by excluding their children from the schools, their men from the labor unions, closing against them every avenue of livelihood, locking them in vile concentration camps, starving and torturing them, murdering and beating them without cause and resorting to every other conceivable form of torture, inhuman beyond conception, until suicide has become their only means of escape, and all solely because they are or their remote ancestors were Jews, and all with the avowed object of exterminating them.
Appeal to Mankind
As against this, the foulest boycott in the annals of time, we are appealing to all mankind to enforce a counter-boycott. That appeal is meeting with the conviction that idealism and justice are still alive.
There is nothing new in the use of the economic boycott as an instrument of justice. The covenant of the League of Nations expressly provides in these identical words for its use to bring recalcitrant nations to terms. President Roosevelt, whose wise statesmanship and vision are the wonder of the civilized world, is invoking it in furtherance of his noble conception for the readjustment of the relations between capital and labor under the terms of the sweeping Industrial Recovery Act, to the end that labor shall receive a more just share of the wealth it creates. He is about to enlist the consumers of the country in a national campaign in which they pledge themselves to boycott all manufacturers, jobbers and retailers who fail to subscribe to the codes and to buy only from those who have assented and who are thereby privileged to fly the blue eagle of NRA [National Recovery Act]. What more exalted precedent do our timid friends want?
With this explanation of our aims, I appeal to the American Jewish Committee, whose public spirit and good intentions I do not for a moment question, but the wisdom of whose judgment I challenge, no longer to hold aloof but to rid themselves of their timid and ill-considered prejudices and join in actively pressing this boycott as our only weapon except the appeal to the League, which I shall discuss at a later time.
I purposely refrain from including the American Jewish Congress in this appeal because I am satisfied that 95 per cent of their members are already with us and that they are being misrepresented by two or three men now abroad. Of them I ask that, prior to the meeting to be held this month in Prague by their executive committee, they instruct these false leaders in no uncertain terms as to the stand they must take on this all-important subject and demand that they shall either openly represent their views or resign their offices. One of them, generally recognized as the kingpin of mischief makers, is junketing around the Continent engaged in his favorite pastime of spreading discord, asserting at one time and place that he favors and supports the boycott and at another that he is opposed or indifferent to it, all dependent on the audience he is addressing; but always directly or indirectly delivering a stab in the dark.
Progress So Far Made
There is not time now, but I hope and expect in the near future to be able to report to you the steps that have been taken and that are already under way, and the surprising and gratifying progress already made in many countries toward the success of the economic boycott in which we are engaged. Although considerable progress in that direction has already been made in Great Britain and in the United States, you will be surprised to learn that they are the least advanced and as yet the most inadequately organized of all the countries that were represented at theAmsterdam World Economic Conference, where the boycott was unanimously and enthusiastically approved by formal resolution by a rising vote.
With us in America the delay has been due in part to lack of funds and the vast territory to be covered, but it is hoped, and expected, that this condition will soon be corrected. The object-lesson we are determined to teach is so priceless to all humanity that we dare not fall.
Each of you, Jew and Gentile alike, who has not already enlisted in this sacred war should do so now and here. It is not sufficient that you buy no goods made in Germany. You must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods or who patronizes German ships or shipping.
To our shame be it said that there are a few Jews among us, but fortunately only a few, so wanting in dignity and self-respect that they are willing to travel on German ships where they are despised and meet with the just contempt of the servants who wait upon them and of their fellow passengers. Their names should be heralded far and wide. They are traitors to their race.
In conclusion, permit me again to thank you for this heartening reception and to assure you that, with your support and that of our millions of non-Jewish friends, we will drive the last nail in the coffin of bigotry and fanaticism that has dared raise its ugly head to slander, belie and disgrace twentieth century civilization.
UntermyerGardens Germanness and Jewishness:
Under other circumstances, inviting a foreign ambassador to speak—and
flying his country’s flag—would be a diplomatic courtesy. But in a crowded
meeting of the United German Societies of New York on September 18, 1933,
the issue was a heated one. The ambassador, Hans Luther, represented Hitler’s
Germany, and the flag in question bore the swastika. Unfortunately for the
opposition, pro-Nazi sympathizers had packed the meeting hall, and the motion
to invite Luther was accepted. In response, the Jewish delegates at the meeting
immediately staged a walkout. Before departing, one of them expressed
the reason for his disgust: “German Jews … have not refused the [German]
flag. The flag has refused them.” In subsequent weeks, Jewish organizations
formally withdrew from the United German Societies, and the split became a
Historians of early-twentieth-century immigrant history have only recently
begun to explore overlaps between German-American and Jewish-American
Even terminology presents an obstacle, as illustrated by the loaded
term “German Jews.” Does it refer to all Jews from German-speaking Europe,
those who belonged to German-American organizations, or those who adhered
to German traditions? In other cases, the term has been even more subjective,
suggesting affluent, assimilated Jews, the proverbial “old immigrants,” who
looked down on newcomers.3
Indeed, much work can be done to sort through
these connotations and to shed light on the connections between the two
In helping to link the stories of Germans and Jews in America, it is helpful
to examine German identity among individuals commonly thought of as
Jewish leaders. Samuel Untermyer and Felix Warburg, Jewish Americans of
German background, make for good case studies, especially in their respective
responses to Nazism. While Untermyer and Warburg pursued starkly different
strategies in reacting to Nazi Germany, there are important similarities in their
stories. Both the American-born Untermyer and the immigrant Warburg had
a demonstrable record of German immigrant nationalism prior to 1933, and
subsequently they acted in the name of a nation that, they argued, had been
hijacked by the Hitler movement. In addition, their centrality in the world of
Jewish philanthropy placed them in the middle of American Jewish debates over
how to combat Nazism. Finally, their stories demonstrate the ongoing—and
increasing—difficulties of traditionally German leadership within the larger
Jewish community in the mid-twentieth century.4
26 • American Jewish Archives Journal
The Jewish-German-American World
As with other immigrant groups, it is easy to oversimplify the JewishAmerican
story. But while scholars have rightly questioned the labeling of
pre- and post-1880 waves of Jewish immigrants as “German” and “eastern
European,” there is no denying that German culture predominated in nineteenth-century
American Jewry. A majority of the 250,000 pre-1880 arrivals
came from German-speaking lands, and many of them felt at home within
Social distinctions persisted between Jewish
and gentile German-Americans, but many nineteenth-century Jewish organizations
operated in the German language. Reform Judaism, which originated in
Germany, also found broad support in the United States.6
At the beginning of the twentieth century, during the Progressive Era,
urban-based reformers sought to apply professional expertise and organizing to
better manage American cities and improve the lives of their inhabitants.7
context, many Jewish organizations hoped to Americanize newcomers, in part to
prevent an antisemitic backlash that could threaten their social positions. By this
time, however, a growing number of eastern European immigrants—a majority
of the 2.5 million post-1880 arrivals—were challenging the older leadership
and its “assimilationist” aspirations.8
These developments had already begun to
strain the German foundations of Jewish organizational life well before Hitler’s
appointment as Reich Chancellor in January 1933.
Within German-American communities, gentile as well as Jewish, the
twentieth century brought a multitude of problems. For decades, “mass culture,”
as exemplified by modern advertising and forms of entertainment that
reached broader portions of the population, had pulled individuals from ethnic
affinities into a larger, more national identity. At the same time, social identities
based on race rather than on countries of origin had sapped the strength of
German ethnic consciousness. Worse yet, a hostile atmosphere during World
War I convinced many Americans of German descent to shed their ethnic
To counter these forces, German-American organizations in the
twentieth century pushed for ethnic revitalization. Their efforts culminated
in the First German-American National Congress, held in Philadelphia in
1932, which pledged to re-energize German communities. The rise of Nazism
shattered whatever unity that movement helped to create, however, as German
organizations staked positions ranging from strong support of Hitler to active
protest against him. The divisions were especially sharp between Jewish and
gentile German-Americans, as the example of the New York societies has demonstrated.10
Even avowedly apolitical groups such as the Philadelphia-based Carl
Schurz Memorial Foundation faced rapid declines in Jewish membership and
donations.11 Nazism, like demographic shifts and assimilation, sent shockwaves
through the German-American organizational world.
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 27
Samuel Untermyer and Felix Warburg were part of that turbulent world.
Untermyer was an American-born attorney who placed himself at the head
of the effort to fight Nazism through an international boycott. Warburg, an
immigrant tied to the European and American banking worlds, pursued a
much more cautious strategy in response to the Third Reich. Despite their
different trajectories, both stories reflect important trends in American ethnic
life, particularly among Jews.
Samuel Untermyer as a German-American
Untermyer was prominent in New York politics and philanthropy in the
interwar period. Born in Virginia in 1858, Untermyer started a highly successful
law firm in New York City with his half-brother, Randolph Guggenheimer.
Untermyer also became active in the Democratic Party, supporting antitrust
and regulatory efforts by both Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. He
sometimes felt spurned by the Democratic Party, however, since he never received
a national political appointment.12
Untermyer’s frustration with the Democratic Party was one reason why
he increasingly shifted his attention toward Jewish organizations. In the early
1920s Untermyer established himself as a philanthropist and a key member of
several important Jewish groups. In the wake of World War I, he supported the
international relief efforts of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee
(JDC), as well as various Jewish charities within the United States. Also in
the early 1920s, he served as the president of the Keren Hayesod, or Palestine
Foundation Fund. The American-born Untermyer considered himself a cultural,
rather than political, Zionist. As an Americanized German Jew, he helped the
Keren Hayesod collect donations from a larger spectrum of the American Jewish
community, especially those who shied from political Zionism. Beyond this
work, a vast array of Jewish societies valued Untermyer’s financial and public
It is also significant, if often overlooked, that Untermyer identified himself
as a German-American. Both he and his wife, Minnie Carl of St. Louis, had
been raised in immigrant households, and his in-laws boasted of their friendship
with the late senator and German-American hero, Carl Schurz.14 Untermyer
supported the German Theater in New York and was a member of Freundschaft,
an ethnic fraternity in the city. In 1916 he served on the memorial committee for
the late Herman Ridder, publisher of the New Yorker Staats-Zeitung, the nation’s
largest German-language daily. He vacationed in Imperial Germany, often
patronizing German ocean liners. These activities indicate that Germanness
was no small part of his identity, and one can infer from his active participation
that other German-American leaders regarded him as a peer.15
Untermyer’s business connections to Germany often blended with his
affinities for that country, even during the period of American neutrality in
28 • American Jewish Archives Journal
World War I. Prior to 1914, his law firm had represented a number of GermanAmerican
brewing companies. After the outbreak of the war, Untermyer joined
other German-Americans in regarding British and French propaganda with
suspicion.16 While his wife, Minnie, coordinated efforts to buy milk for German
babies, Samuel consulted with German investors in the United States and even
attempted to broker a deal to put the New York Sun into the hands of German
propagandists. In these efforts, Untermyer left a record of interactions with
George Sylvester Viereck, a virulently pro-German writer and paid German
propagandist. He also met with Heinrich Albert, a Reich diplomat who was
publicly exposed as a coordinator of German espionage in the United States.
While the Sun deal fell apart, it created suspicions about Untermyer’s loyalty
once the United States entered the war. A lack of hard evidence ultimately
enabled him to dodge the accusations, however.17 Untermyer enthusiastically
supported the American war effort after April 1917, another move that helped
him to counter questions about his loyalties.18
Untermyer’s advocacy for Germany and German-Americans continued after
the armistice. He considered himself a Wilsonian, but he denounced the “spirit
of conquest and robbery” that had shaped the Versailles Treaty. Viereck—who
would be prosecuted in the 1940s as a Nazi agent—entreated Untermyer in
1914 to finance his Fatherland magazine, which was dedicated to countering
pro-Allied sentiment. While it is unclear whether Untermyer provided monetary
assistance, he did periodically contribute articles decrying anti-German attitudes
after 1919. Untermyer also maintained business interests within Germany. He
owned shares in a German utility company and real estate holdings outside
Berlin. The freezing of these assets by the Nazi government after 1933 later
served as a concrete representation of the severing of Untermyer’s connections
Felix Warburg as a German-American
Unlike Untermyer, Warburg had grown up in Germany; however, the two
men’s careers bore similarities. The Moritz Warburg family had built up the
M.M. Warburg banking firm in Hamburg, Germany, in the late nineteenth
century. By the time of Mortiz’s death in 1910, three of his sons had gained
prominence in transatlantic business. The eldest, Max, headed the family firm,
sat on the board of the Hamburg-America Steamship Line, and became a
financial adviser to Kaiser Wilhelm II. Paul, a year younger, married Nina Loeb,
connecting him to the Kuhn, Loeb and Company banking firm in New York.
He moved to the United States in 1902 and became a U.S. citizen nine years
later, although he still spent considerable time in Hamburg. Felix, originally
trained in the diamond and pearl business, had moved to the United States
in 1894 and married the daughter of Jacob Schiff, a Manhattan banker and
fellow German-Jewish immigrant. Felix received a Kuhn, Loeb partnership in
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 29
1897. He quickly became a New York socialite and an active philanthropist.
Geography now divided the brothers, but they forged links between Kuhn,
Loeb and M.M. Warburg, empowering both companies.20
By 1914, Paul Warburg found his Germanness to be a liability as he
worked to reform the American monetary system. Within a year of his arrival
in New York in 1902, Paul sketched a proposal for a central banking system
that eventually evolved into the Federal Reserve. He served on the Federal
Reserve Board in 1914, despite the fact that he had become a target of nativist
anger. One congressman, for example, opposed his nomination to the Federal
Reserve on the grounds that he was “a Jew, a German, a banker and an alien.”
Although Paul was a naturalized citizen who worked actively to Americanize,
his transatlantic connections were never far from view. Paul helped to direct
the American war economy in 1917 while his older brother Max filled the same
role for the German Reich. Such connections later provided fodder for Nazi
propagandists, who accused the brothers of orchestrating both the start and
the end of the Great War “in the interest of the Jewish race.”21
Felix, three years Paul’s junior, was more outspoken and more active in
social circles. He took U.S. citizenship in 1900, quickly becoming comfortable
in American society. He joined his father-in-law, Jacob Schiff, in reform work
that emphasized Americanization. In turn-of-the-century New York, they
sponsored the Henry Street Settlement and joined the Educational Alliance, an
organization that catered to poor Jews. His charitable work became “so diverse as
to defy easy summary,” as biographer Ron Chernow explains, but a major realm
of activity was international relief. In 1906 he joined Schiff in co-founding the
American Jewish Committee (AJC), an elite philanthropic organization. He also
became the chair of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC),
created in 1914 to provide support for victims of the European war. Warburg’s
reputation as a “democratic aristocrat” helped the JDC to soften animosities
between established and recently arrived Jews. He increasingly devoted his
time to the JDC, and his stature as a philanthropist increased accordingly.22
By 1917, Warburg had also established himself within the German-American
community. He became a member of the Chamber of German-American
Commerce; the German Society of New York, a philanthropic society; and the
Germanistic Society of America, dedicated to preserving German culture in
the United States. Like Untermyer, he demonstrated sympathy for the German
Reich. In 1915 he donated funds anonymously to the Hilfsverein deutscher Frauen
(German Women’s Aid Organization) and other groups that supported German
“war sufferers.” As a partner at Kuhn, Loeb, he helped prevent the company
from issuing a loan to the Allies in 1915, a decision that brought scorn from
pro-Allied elements of the American press and public.23
Following American entry into the war in April 1917, Warburg moved
quickly to support the U.S. war effort. He devoted time and money to the
30 • American Jewish Archives Journal
United Service Organization,
donated his own resources to
the war effort, and ostentatiously
reduced his level of
consumption. In 1918, his
brother Paul gave in to growing
criticism of his German
ancestry, resigning from the
Federal Reserve Board. Upset
by the treatment of Germans
in the United States, both
brothers became active in
the Carl Schurz Memorial
Foundation, dedicated to
heritage. Felix, meanwhile,
threw himself into the work of
the JDC and added investment
in Palestine to his already massive
record of philanthropy.24
Hitler’s accession to power in
January 1933, Jewish organizations
in America sought a
proper response to a regime suffused with antisemitism. By March, a movement
was underway to mount an economic boycott of Nazi Germany. When
the divided American Jewish Congress initially hesitated on the matter, the
Jewish War Veterans assumed leadership of the movement. Soon, however,
the momentum passed to organizations founded specifically to promote the
boycott, foremost among them the American League for the Defense of Jewish
Rights (ALDJR).25 Jewish leaders diverged on the subject, and Untermyer and
Warburg were no exception.
Untermyer actively supported the anti-Nazi movement in America, and he
became the head of the ALDJR. He now openly expressed regret for his own
pro-German sentiments prior to World War I. As he looked back, he recalled
that “German-Jewish advisers” like himself had naively worked for peace, in
contrast to the “Hitler–von Tirpitz type” who drove toward war in both the
1910s and 1930s.26 In another attempt to reconcile his older views with his new
stance, he compared Nazi propaganda to the “British-French war fables” of 1914,
Advertisement for Gala Concert for the Benefit of
German Jewish Relief, 28 September 1933
(Courtesy American Jewish Archives)
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 31
referring to the Allied campaigns to
exaggerate and, in some cases, fabricate
German atrocities to steer American
public opinion. Americans would no
longer accept foreign propaganda at
face value. “We … have learned our
lesson in the ways of counteracting that
kind of poison,” Untermyer declared
His speeches against Nazism also
reflected the sense of betrayal that he
and other Jews of German background
felt in the 1930s, both in Europe
and the United States. Untermyer
cited a long record of Jewish military
service in Germany, as well as Jewish
contributions to culture, science, and
business, all of which were ignored by
“the blind bigotry and fanaticism of
the Hitler platform.”28 Undoubtedly,
many German-American Jews shared
his sentiments, harboring “the strongest
feeling of sympathy toward the
German people” alongside a “corresponding
feeling of revulsion” against
the Nazis. As one who had considered
himself German, Untermyer was the
ideal spokesperson for the ALDJR’s
position that the German people were
unhappy under Hitler and could be
persuaded, through economic pressure,
to remove him from power.29
Untermyer sometimes used his
German background and perspective
to lend credibility to the anti-Nazi
movement. In a May 1933 speech, he shared his thoughts on his “old friend,”
Herman Metz, who represented the I.G. Farben corporation in the United States
and who worked to improve the Nazis’ image abroad. Having talked privately
with Metz, Untermyer declared that “Mr. Metz knows what he has seen with his
own eyes in Germany.” Sadly, he said, Metz’s economic interest compelled him
to defend the Nazis, rather than speak the truth. Citing his personal relationship
with Metz provided Untermyer with a unique means of refuting pro-German
“Violators” List distributed by the
Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi League of
New Jersey, April 1939
(Courtesy American Jewish Archives)
32 • American Jewish Archives Journal
propaganda. This view of Metz also reinforced Untermyer’s assertions about
the importance of economic pressure.30
Warburg, too, loathed Nazism, but his reaction was notably different than
that of Untermyer. Warburg was a member of the traditional—and stereotypically
“German Jewish”—philanthropic elite. He was a prominent officer of
the AJC, founded in 1906 to aid victims of Russian pogroms. For the affluent
leaders of the committee, philanthropy had long provided a means of steering
Jewish communities and Americanizing newcomers. The committee was so
effective in shaping Jewish community life that one scholar has described it as
a “self-perpetuating oligarchy.”31
Warburg had long favored assimilation but still retained an affinity for his
country of birth. As a result of Nazism, he became ambivalent about GermanAmerican
cultural life. His relationship with the German Society of New York
illustrates this ambivalence. When the charitable organization invited Warburg
to serve on its 150th Anniversary Committee in 1934, he declined, saying that he
could not “join a committee on which I may meet some people whose attitude
toward the present German Government may be more favorable than mine.”
He did, however, maintain his membership in the society.32
Warburg took a quieter, more cautious stance toward Nazi Germany than
did Untermyer. This attitude stemmed, in large part, from his desire not to
draw attention to his relatives in Europe. His brother Max, after all, was trying
to maintain both the family firm and his own physical well-being in Hamburg.
As a result, Felix refused to comment publicly on reports of anti-Jewish violence
in the spring of 1933. In April, when Reichsbank president Hjalmar Schacht
came to the United States, other leaders of the AJC asked Warburg whether
they should meet with the German official. Warburg’s secretary replied that
the committee should do so but that Warburg himself could not be involved,
and his name was to be kept out of any communication. A few years later he
sponsored refugee professors through the Emergency Committee in Aid of
Displaced Foreign Scholars, but only with the understanding that his name
never appear in its records.33
For Warburg and Untermyer, and for their respective organizations, the
campaign to boycott imports from Germany remained a heated issue throughout
the 1930s. Untermyer, president of the ALDJR after May 1933, became the
boycott movement’s most visible spokesperson. The ALDJR saw his status as an
American-born, affluent figure as a way to broaden its appeal, both within and
beyond the United States. The calculation seems to have met some success, as a
federation of pro-boycott groups chose Untermyer to appeal their case before the
League of Nations in the summer of 1933.34 As Untermyer often reiterated, the
boycott was not simply the most effective means of protest, but the only means.
“There is no longer a free press or freedom of speech in Germany,” he explained.
“If world opinion does not reach [the Germans], there is just one way, and
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 33
only one.” Economic
pressure would “reach
t he m a s s e s” a nd
force a repudiation
insisted on the boycott
becoming more than
a “Jewish” movement.
He characterized it
as “the spontaneous
uprising of outraged
[the] ‘Mad Dog of
Europe.’” Indeed, the
need for broad—especially
convinced Untermyer to change the group’s name to the Non-Sectarian AntiNazi
League to Champion Human Rights (NSANL) in November 1933.36
The movement spread beyond New York, with the Jewish War Veterans and its
women’s auxiliaries helping to disseminate information. The American Jewish
Congress finally joined the boycott in August 1933, although it and the Jewish
Labor Committee eventually created the Joint Boycott Council as a rival to
the NSANL.37 Differences of personality and strategy, including Untermyer’s
autocratic leadership style, fueled divisions, but by 1937 the NSANL’s InterState
Conference received progress reports from chapters in Detroit, Cleveland,
Baltimore, Philadelphia, and other localities.38
The AJC, whose leadership included Warburg, remained a vocal opponent
of the boycott effort, although there is evidence that he initially considered lending
his support. He mused in one letter that the German people might change
their tone if “their pocketbooks [were] attacked by their own foolishness.” But
observing the situation from Germany, where any Nazi retaliation over the
boycott would actually occur, his brother Max disagreed. His impassioned pleas
against confrontation convinced Felix and the AJC to withhold their support.
Meanwhile, the JDC, of which Felix was president, also decided against the
boycott. Comparing itself to the Red Cross, it cited a need to remain apolitical.39
In effect, the AJC, the JDC, and B’nai B’rith became the leading organizations
that opposed, or at least avoided, the boycott.40
The AJC summarized its case against the boycott in August 1933. The group
believed that economic action would provide a pretext for intensified persecution.
It also feared alienating Christians, antagonizing German-Americans,
and fueling global antisemitism. Instead, the committee favored using personal
Samuel Untermyer returning to New York from London,
6 August 1933
(Courtesy American Jewish Archives)
34 • American Jewish Archives Journal
contacts to exert pressure on prominent Reich officials and citizens. One memo
even suggested that, in private conversations with Germans, committee members
cite the boycott as evidence that the Nazis should mitigate their policies. In
this way, it noted, even the reckless boycott movement “may be utilized for a
The turbulent relationship between Untermyer and Warburg reflected that
of the organizational world as a whole. The two had not always been amicable—
Untermyer had antagonized the Warburgs in 1912 by investigating the Kuhn,
Loeb firm as part of an alleged “Money Trust”—but in the 1920s they had
found common ground in that both considered themselves non-Zionists in the
political sense. Committed simply to supporting Jewish cultural development
in Palestine, Warburg joined Untermyer’s Keren Hayesod, and Untermyer
supported Warburg’s JDC. Even in the 1930s, Untermyer was at times willing
to acknowledge the Warburg family’s precarious circumstances. “I suppose we
shall continue to differ as to the policy of the boycott,” he wrote Warburg in
1935, “but your position and that of your people in Germany is quite understandable.”
At the same time, however, Untermyer cut off his donations to the
JDC, citing its opposition to the boycott.42
In public, Untermyer attacked the AJC and B’nai B’rith for their inaction.
He undoubtedly had people like Warburg in mind when he railed against those
who opposed his movement:
[W]hen our persecuted, defenseless people are knocked over the head with a
club, … these self-constituted leaders retaliate with a cry of pain and strike
back by shaking a feather-duster in the faces of their tormentors, and pass
eloquent resolutions of protest and appeal, but refuse to use the only effective
weapon at hand, by way of defense.43
In turn, when Untermyer criticized Secretary of State Cordell Hull for
ignoring evidence of Nazi propaganda in America, the AJC publicly denounced
Untermyer as irresponsible.44
The rejection of public action by Warburg and his associates paralleled that
of the United States government. William Dodd, the American ambassador to
Germany until 1938, was an unabashed critic of the Nazis, yet he opposed the
boycott as counterproductive to “the helps [sic] we apply quietly and unofficially.”
Secretary Hull advised President Roosevelt to keep his distance from boycott
leaders to prevent any suspicion that the White House supported their actions.45
Critics of the Warburg family read much into this inaction. Because James
Warburg, Felix’s nephew, was an economic advisor to the Roosevelt administration,
some detractors even concluded that the Warburgs were shaping official
policy on Germany.46 Thus, at the exact same time that the Nazis blamed the
Warburgs for the Versailles Treaty, the Bolshevik Revolution, and other events,
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 35
the family came under fire in the United States for being appeasers of Hitler.47
Such was the price of remaining quiet in a noisy, ideologically polarized era.
Despite his cautious public stance, Warburg did commit to a range of
activity to aid German Jews. After hearing an account of persecution in April
1933, he declared:
I am sufficiently enraged, and so are all German Americans, even the Christian
ones, … to take some drastic steps, unfriendly to Germany and seemingly
unfriendly to M.M. [Warburg], in order to get [the Jews] out of the undignified
position in which they find themselves.
To this end, he supported the philanthropic activity of his brother, Max,
who remained in Germany. Max chaired the Hilfsverein der deutschen Juden
(Aid Society for German Jews) and cofounded several other groups to provide
mutual aid within Germany and to sponsor resettlement. These aid organizations
even tried—with negligible results—to lobby Reich officials on behalf of
Responding to criticism of his brother for remaining in Germany, Felix
Warburg insisted that the family was trying to aid those unable to leave. The
JDC aligned itself with such efforts. In a 1933 letter, its fundraising chair
described its goals as “maintaining [German Jewish] institutions, keeping
up their morale and preventing them from falling into panic.” The letter also
defended quiet action. While “one would expect the whole world to rise and
protest,” it said, this was not the case. “Until that time comes, it is the duty of
every Jew to protect, if he cannot protest.”49 Such a statement could only have
incensed boycott leaders.
Within the divided Jewish organizational world, one strategy—refugee
aid—provided some common ground. In March 1934 the JDC’s United Jewish
Appeal campaign in New York, chaired by Warburg, merged the efforts of
the JDC and the American Palestine Campaign. In the following two years it
raised more than four million dollars for resettlement. Untermyer, despite earlier
refusals, donated generously to the JDC in 1938, stipulating that his money
be used only to get people out of Germany. Meanwhile, the JDC, the AJC,
and the American Jewish Congress all collaborated in resettling and educating
German Jewish children. Felix and Max Warburg cofounded the Council for
German Jewry, dedicated to relocating 100,000 German Jewish youth. While
its controversial plan to rescue Jews through economic incentives to the Reich
never got off the ground, the council did help the JDC and other groups to
sponsor exiles.50 The level of cooperation regarding refugees was undoubtedly
welcome in light of other differences among Jewish organizations. Ultimately,
however, not even this work was immune to division.
36 • American Jewish Archives Journal
The Decline of Elite Leadership
Because the United States could not—or would not—absorb many refugees
from Germany, the central question became where to send them. For Warburg
and the JDC, the answer was simple: anywhere. Working with the League of
Nations High Commission for German Refugees, for example, the JDC lobbied
countries throughout the Western Hemisphere to open their borders, with little
success. The most obvious answer, Palestine, became a divisive one, however. In
America, the prospect of a Jewish home in Palestine had generally appealed to
poorer and recently arrived Jews. For those who had already established themselves
in American society—such as prominent members of the AJC—pushing
for a state in Palestine offered more problems than solutions. Many feared that
endorsing Zionism would only raise questions of loyalty. Equally important was
the fact that Zionist groups constituted new rivals to traditional leadership.51
Since the early 1920s, Warburg had supported Jewish development in
Palestine, but he eschewed political Zionism, which he considered antithetical to
his assimilationist views. Ever a believer in the power of philanthropy, Warburg
thought that generous investment alone might repair Arab-Jewish relations.52
In the 1930s, however, calls for a Jewish state increased in response to Nazism.
Zionists consolidated control of both the Jewish Agency for Palestine and
Hebrew University, a favorite charity of Warburg’s. As the unofficial leader of
the non-Zionists, Warburg remained committed to Arab-Jewish coexistence.
Many Zionists, including World Zionist Congress president Chaim Weizmann,
increasingly favored a partition of Palestine. Warburg traveled to Zurich in
August 1937 to plead his case to the Jewish Agency Council, but his opponents’
momentum was too great, and his efforts failed. Warburg died in October 1937,
his plans for compromise in tatters. Warburg’s defeat, along with his death,
symbolized a final phase in the transfer of Jewish-American leadership from
the traditional elite to large, broad-based, and generally Zionist groups. Still,
even Warburg’s critics acknowledged his work on behalf of Jewish communities.
Commenting on the philanthropist’s death, Samuel Untermyer reflected that
Warburg “could always be counted on” for charitable causes.53
Untermyer, already in poor health, curtailed his activism less than a year
after Warburg’s death. It is apparent that, by the late 1930s, he had become
alienated from the NSANL. In addition to differences of personality, not all
boycott leaders agreed with his insistence on nonsectarianism, and the issue
exacerbated existing divisions.54 Already disillusioned by apathy and disunity
in December 1937, Untermyer vented his frustrations in his last major public
address. He wondered aloud why “Americans generally have been so indolent,
callous and short-sighted as to have failed … when they have within easy reach
the means of self-protection for themselves and their brethren in Germany.” He
resigned as president of the NSANL in April 1938. Until his death in March
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 37
1940, he fought to have his name removed from NSANL letterhead, a testament
to both his prestige within the boycott movement and his alienation from it.55
There has been a long-running scholarly discussion over the failure of
American Jews to oppose Nazism effectively.56 Historian Gulie Ne’eman Arad
has specifically noted the ambivalence of Jewish German-Americans, who
misunderstood the threat of Nazism. According to Arad, their position was a
mixture of ongoing affinity for the German people and a view of the Jewish
people as “eternal,” able to withstand yet another antisemitic regime.57 There is
much in the stories of Untermyer and the Warburgs to support this assertion.
Their identification with Germany, as demonstrated by their actions during
and after World War I, informed their disparate reactions to Nazism. The
American-born Untermyer based his advocacy of a boycott on the belief that
economic pressure would spur the German nation to topple the Hitler regime.
Felix Warburg, whose family in Germany made him leery of open confrontation,
tried to protect German Jews by defusing tensions and, later, by trying to move
them out of harm’s way until the threat passed. Over time, events showed that
both men underestimated the Nazis’ staying power.
The careers of Untermyer and Warburg also reflect the weakening of elite
leadership styles in Jewish organizational life at the same time that Nazi persecution
boosted calls for a Jewish state. Warburg’s attempts to use elite power
to protect Reich Jews, effect peace in Palestine, and unify Jewish communities
brought hostility from other leaders. Untermyer’s leadership style, along with
his commitment to nonsectarianism, similarly fostered infighting. As their
stories help to show, the 1930s and 1940s saw the completion of the effort by
broad-based groups to supplant the older style of philanthropic leadership.58
One must be careful, however, not to undervalue these leaders’ efforts in the
1930s. While the direct financial impact of the boycott is unclear, a study by
Moshe Gottlieb has asserted that damaging the Reich’s economy was but one
goal of the boycott. It severed symbolic ties to Germany, he argues, and helped
to wrest Jewish-American leadership away from cautious elites. Furthermore,
although Untermyer’s efforts did not stop the persecution of Reich Jews, they
helped to bring the violence in Germany into the view of the American public,
exacerbating a diplomatic problem for the Nazis.59
Nor can one dismiss the less confrontational activities undertaken by figures
like Felix Warburg. He broadened the ideological range of support for refugee
relief and Palestine aid, just as Untermyer did for the boycott. In addition, the
efforts of the Warburg-led JDC yielded quantifiable results. In 1934 the JDC’s
United Appeal campaign in New York funded the relocation of 17,000 German
Jews. In 1935 the JDC gave nearly $1 million to relief efforts within the Reich
and spent approximately the same amount on resettlement. Donations to the
38 • American Jewish Archives Journal
JDC for refugee relief increased every year under Warburg’s leadership, reaching
$2,374,062 in 1936. His own timidity and naïveté have brought valid criticism,
but no one could deny the impact of a man who, along with his wife, personally
donated over $13 million to charity.60
An epilogue to the Warburg story shows that ethnic identity grew more
complicated in the late 1930s but that echoes of earlier years remained. A few
months after the November 1938 Kristallnacht pogroms in Germany, Max
Warburg emigrated to the United States, taking Felix’s place on the JDC’s executive
committee. He worked closely with the Carl Schurz Memorial Foundation
to identify refugee scholars in need of aid, and he stressed the need to show
the world “how many Germans … worked for honest democracy.” Felix’s son,
Eddie, served intermittently as JDC chair from 1941 to 1965. National Socialism
convinced him, like many others, of the need for a Jewish state, and in 1940
he reunited the JDC with the Zionists.61 His cousins James (Paul’s son) and
Eric (Max’s son) served in the United States military during World War II. All
three cousins lobbied against a harsh peace settlement at the war’s conclusion,
and Eric even returned to the board of his family’s firm in Hamburg.62 In the
postwar era, at least among the Warburgs, Germanness endured.
Gregory Kupsky is a historian in the World War II section at the Joint POW/MIA
Accounting Command. He holds a bachelor’s degree from Knox College and a master’s
from The University of Tennessee. He received his doctorate in modern U.S. History
from The Ohio State University in March 2010. His dissertation was a study of
German-American organizations’ responses to National Socialism.
“German Societies Meeting Is Disrupted by Row over the Flying of a Nazi Flag,” New York
Times (19 September 1933): 3; “Jews Again Quit German Societies,” New York Times (3 October
See Mark Bauman, “On German American and American Jewish History,” Journal of American
Ethnic History 29, no. 1 (Fall 2009): 67–71.
On the definitions of “German Jews,” see Tobias Brinkmann, “Jews, Germans, or Americans?
German-Jewish Immigrants in the Nineteenth-Century United States,” in The Heimat Abroad:
The Boundaries of Germanness, ed. Krista O’Donnell et al. (Ann Arbor, MI: The University of
Michigan Press, 2005), 132–134.
Portions of this article draw on chapter one of Gregory Kupsky, “‘The True Spirit of the German
People’: German-Americans and National Socialism, 1919–1955,” doctoral dissertation (The
Ohio State University, 2010).
Hasia Diner concedes that the model of two waves, while oversimplified, carries a measure
of validity. In her analysis, which is otherwise rich with statistical evidence, Diner does not
place specific numbers on the Germanness of the 1820–1880 wave. Presumably because of the
problems inherent in trying to quantify a hard-to-define pool of “German Jews,” Diner simply
asserts that the 1820–1880 wave “tended to come heavily” from areas that eventually became
Germany, or where “an urban elite [was] deeply influenced by German culture.” Diner, The
Jews of the United States, 1654 to 2000 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2004),
79. Elsewhere, Diner has described the German subgroup as a “slim majority” of the pre-1880
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 39
migration. Diner, A Time for Gathering: The Second Migration, 1820–1880 (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 2005), 1.
Brinkmann, 114, 119; Cornelia Wilhelm, “The Independent Order of True Sisters: Friendship,
Fraternity, and a Model of Modernity for Nineteenth Century American Jewish Womanhood,”
American Jewish Archives Journal 54, no. 1 (2002): 54; Michael Meyer, Response to Modernity: A
History of the Reform Movement in Judaism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 210–212.
A good overview of the Progressive Era is Arthur Link and Richard McCormick, Progressivism
(Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan-Davidson, 1983).
Diner, 79; Gerald Sorin, “Mutual Contempt, Mutual Benefit: The Strained Encounter between
German and Eastern European Jews in America, 1880–1920,” American Jewish History 81, no.
1 (Autumn 1993): 34–59.
Russell Kazal, Becoming Old Stock: The Paradox of German-American Identity (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 2004), 2. While Peter Connolly-Smith notes that World War I served
as an easy scapegoat for an ethnic decline that actually started decades earlier, one cannot ignore
the sharp decline in the number of German-American organizations and German-language
media immediately before and during the war. Of 552 German newspapers in America in
1910, for example, approximately half remained in 1920. Conolly-Smith, Translating America:
An Immigrant Press Visualizes American Popular Culture, 1895–1918 (Washington, DC: The
Smithsonian Institution, 2004); Frederick Luebke, Bonds of Loyalty: German-Americans and
World War I (Dekalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 1974), 271.
10Erster National-Kongress der Amerikaner deutschen Stammes (New York: Deutsch-amerikanische
Konferenz von Gross-New York und Umgebung, 1932). The fragmentation of ethnic German
organizations is the subject of Kupsky, “‘The True Spirit.’”
11Carl Schurz Memorial Foundation Sixth Annual Report, 30 April 1935, National Carl
Schurz Association Papers, Box 44, Folder 2, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
(hereafter cited as NCSA); Wilbur Thomas to Dietrich Gristede, 2 December 1935, Box 2,
Folder 11, NCSA.
12Richard Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe’: Samuel Untermyer and the Boycott of Nazi
Germany, 1933–1938,” American Jewish History 93, no. 1 (March 2007): 21–50; Hawkins,
“Samuel Untermyer and the Zionist Project: An Attempt to Reconcile the American ‘Melting
Pot’ with Zionism,” Australian Journal of Jewish Studies 21 (2007): 116; Hawkins, “American
Boomers and the Flotation of Shares in the City of London in the Late Nineteenth Century,”
Business History 49, no. 6 (November 2007): 802–822; correspondence between Untermyer and
Roosevelt, 1929–1930, Papers as Governor of New York, Box 80, Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Library; Untermyer’s secretary to William Julian, 15 July 1920, Samuel Untermyer Papers
(MS-251), Box 2, Folder 1, American Jewish Archives, Cincinnati, OH (hereafter cited as AJA);
Untermyer, “Some of America’s Social and Economic Follies,” 17 February 1931, MS-251, Box
4, Folder 9, AJA; Untermyer statement, 12 March 1933, MS-251, Box 4, Folder 9, AJA.
13Hawkins, “Zionist Project,” 114, 116, 119; Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 22; “The Purim
Association Ball,” New York Times (23 February 1902): 10; Untermyer to Paul Baerwald, 7 May
1920, MS-251, Box 1, Folder 1, AJA. See, for example, the letters in MS-251, Box 3, Folder 4, AJA.
14“Mrs. S. Untermyer Dies at Greystone,” New York Times (17 August 1924): 24.
15Circular from the Executive Komitee für Subvention des deutschen Theaters, May 1914, Felix
Warburg Papers (MS-457), Box 165, Folder 3, AJA; “Freundschaft is in New $500,000 Home,”
New York Times (18 June 1914): 11; “German Squadron in Hudson To-Day,” New York Times
(9 June 1912): 5; “To Honor Ridder’s Memory,” New York Times (17 February 1916): 14.
16Hawkins, “American Boomers,” 804; “Untermyer Points the War’s Lessons,” New York Times
(23 August 1914): 9.
17Untermyer also allegedly bankrolled other troubled papers with pro-German slants. “Milk for
German Babies,” New York Times (13 November 1915): 2; “Fight to Hold Wireless,” New York
Times (4 June 1915): 2; “New Yorkers Deny Disloyal Taint,” New York Times (7 December 1918):
40 • American Jewish Archives Journal
2; “Untermyer Again Defends Loyalty,” New York Times (8 December 1918): 3; “Untermyer
Denies Aiding Propaganda,” New York Times (9 December 1918): 9; “Ousted as Proally,”
Washington Post (12 December 1918): 2; “Untermyer Tells of His Call on Editor,” New York Times
(30 December 1918): 18; “Palmer Retorts to Untermyer,” New York Times (26 January 1921): 3.
18Hawkins, “Zionist Project,” 115; Untermyer to General Crowder, 27 November 1917, MS-
251, Box 1, Folder 4, AJA.
19Untermyer to Frank Cobb, 9 September 1919, MS-251, Box 1, Folder 4, AJA; George Sylvester
Viereck to Samuel Untermyer, 1 August 1914, MS-457, Box 166, Folder 1, AJA; Untermyer,
“Justice for German-Americans,” American Weekly (24 April 1918): 189; “Samuel Untermyer
Shows How Germany Was Wronged at Versailles,” American Monthly (January 1925): 354.
Statement on Untermyer by Jim Larkin, RG 59, Series 1930–1939, Box 4729, Folder 3, National
Archives and Record Administration, College Park, MD (hereafter cited as NARA); Edward
Russell, Randolph Guggenheimer, and Samuel Untermyer to Cordell Hull, 11 June 1938, RG
59, Series 1930–1939, Box 1671, File 362.115, NARA; Guggenheimer and Untermyer to State
Department, 2 July 1940, and Paul Culbertson to Guggenheimer and Untermyer, 16 July 1940,
RG 59, Series 1940–1944, Box 1246, File 362.1143/783, NARA.
20Ron Chernow, The Warburgs: The Twentieth-Century Odyssey of a Remarkable Jewish Family
(New York: Random House, 1993), xvi, 32, 46–48, 53, 69, 85–86, 89–90, 105, 108, 123.
21“Mr. Warburg Urges Government Bank,” New York Times (14 November 1907): 8; Chernow,
86–90, 130–40; Der Stürmer (September 1938), quoted in Chernow, 474; Chernow, 216.
22Chernow, 86, 99–101; JDC Statement on Felix Warburg, January 1917, MS-457, Box 168,
Folder 16, AJA.
23Heinrich Charles to Felix Warburg, 10 June 1914, MS-457, Box 165, Folder 1, AJA; J.P. Meyer
to Warburg, 28 January 1916, MS-457, Box 168, Folder 15, AJA; Franz Boas to Members of
Germanistic Society, 15 November 1920, MS-457, Box 188, Folder 4, AJA; Chernow, 168–169.
24Chernow, 181–182, 186–189, 220, 223–224, 246, 249–252; “Warburg a Victim of War
Prejudice,” American Weekly (18 September 1918): cover. On the Warburgs’ connections to
the Carl Schurz Memorial Foundation, see Guest List, 8 May 1933, Box 1, Folder 3, NCSA;
CSMF By-Laws, Box 1, Folder 10, NCSA; and M. Habrich to Helene Wittmann, 11 February
1932, and Joseph Marks to Wilbur Thomas, 27 July 1932, MS-457, Box 285, Folder 3, AJA.
25“Nazi Foes Here Calmed by Police,” New York Times (20 March 1933): 5; “Boycott Advocated
to Curb Hitlerism,” New York Times (21 March 1933): 10; “Anti-Hitler March to be Led by
O’Brien,” New York Times (5 May 1933): 9; “Jews Here Decree Boycott on Reich,” New York
Times (15 May 1933): 1.
26“Untermyer Scores Congress on Nazis,” New York Times (17 April 1933): 6.
27Untermyer, “Germany’s Medieval Challenge to World Jewry and Civilization,” 7 May 1933,
MS-251, Box 4, Folder 9, AJA. On the “war fables” themselves, see John Horne and Alan Kramer,
German Atrocities, 1914: A History of Denial (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001).
28Untermyer, “Germany’s Medieval Challenge.”
29Quoted in Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 23.
30Sander Diamond, The Nazi Movement in the United States, 1924–1941 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 1974), 109; “Address of Mr. Samuel Untermyer before the American League
for the Defense of Jewish Rights,” 14 May 1933, MS-251, Box 4, Folder 9, AJA.
31Naomi Cohen, “The Transatlantic Connection: The American Jewish Committee and the Joint
Foreign Committee in Defense of German Jews, 1933–1937,” American Jewish History 90, no.
4 (December 2002): 353–384. See also Cohen, Not Free to Desist: A History of the AmericanJewish
Committee, 1906–1966 (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1972).
32J.P. Meyer to Warburg, 5 October 1934; Warburg to Meyer, 8 October 1934; and German
Society of New York to Warburg, 25 January 1934, MS-457, Box 295, Folder 8, AJA.
Germanness and Jewishness: Samuel Untermyer, Felix Warburg, and National Socialism • 41
33Julius Meier to Warburg, 25 March 1933, and James Rosenberg to Meier, 26 March 1933,
MS-457, Box 286, Folder 3, AJA; American Jewish Committee Memo, 28 April 1933, MS-
457, Box 286, Folder 6, AJA; Memo of Conversation between Miss Emanuel and William
Rosenwald, 21 May 1936, and John Whyte to Miss Emanuel, 5 December 1936, MS-457, Box
321, Folder 7, AJA.
34Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 24, 31; Untermyer, “Celebration of the Dedication
Ceremonies Held at the Hebrew University,” 13 April 1933, MS-251, Box 4, Folder 9, AJA.
35Untermyer Statement on the Boycott, 18 September 1933, MS-251, Box 1, Folder 2, AJA.
36Untermyer to George Gordon Battle, 10 April 1935, MS-251, Box 1, Folder 2, AJA; Hawkins,
“‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 38.
37Jewish War Veterans Message to Ladies’ Auxiliaries, 10 September 1937, Bertha Corets
Papers (MS-307), Box 1, Folder 2, AJA; List of Auxiliaries That Did Not Respond to Boycott
Questionnaire, undated, Box 1, Folder 5, Ms-307, AJA; Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’”
38Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 39–41; Moshe Gottlieb, American Anti-Nazi Resistance,
1933–1941: An Historical Analysis (New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1981), 226; Minutes of
Inter-State Conference of NSANL, 7 March 1937, MS-307, Box 1, Folder 2, AJA.
39Warburg to Hans Meyer, 3 April 1933, MS-307, Box 285, Folder 14, AJA; Chernow, 372–373;
Warburg to Louis Rittenberg, 8 August 1933, MS-307, Box 288, Folder 8, AJA; Joseph Proskauer
to Committee on Policy, 22 May 1933, and Warburg to Proskauer, 24 May 1933, MS-457, Box
287, Folder 2, AJA; “$2,000,000 Sought to Aid Reich Jews,” New York Times (20 May 1933): 2.
40B’nai B’rith reversed course in 1937, however, and thereafter supported the boycott. Gottlieb,
American Anti-Nazi Resistance, 341.
41Statement, “Shall The Jews Engage in an Official Boycott Against Germany?” 17 August 1933,
MS-457, Box 287, Folder 1, AJA; Memo, “Counter Boycott Propaganda,” undated, MS-457,
Box 286, Folder 8, AJA.
42Hawkins, “Zionist Project,” 121, 132, 134–136, 141; Correspondence between Untermyer
and Warburg, June 1935, MS-457, Box 307, Folder 10, AJA; Untermyer to Jonah Wise, 24
November 1933, MS-457, Box 291, Folder 11, AJA.
43Untermyer, “The Economic Boycott of Germany,” 27 June 1933, MS-251, Box 4, Folder 9, AJA.
44“Untermyer Turns Attack upon Hull,” New York Times (4 November 1933): 8; Hawkins,
“‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 25–26; Untermyer to Samuel Dickstein, 3 May 1934, Samuel Dickstein
Papers (MS-8), Box 5, Folder 6, AJA.
45William Dodd to Stephen Wise, 1 August 1933, William Dodd Papers, Box 43, Folder 7,
Library of Congress; Dodd to Leo Wormser, 26 September 1933, William Dodd Papers, Box
43, Folder 6, Library of Congress; Cordell Hull to Louis Howe, 6 September 1933, Papers as
President, Official File, File 198-a, Box 2, Franklin Delano Roosevelt Library.
46The detractors included Rabbi Stephen Wise of the American Jewish Congress. See the public
statement by Felix Warburg, 9 August 1933, Ms-457, Box 285, Folder 14, AJA.
47Chernow, 181, 387–388, 391, 407.
48Warburg to Hans Meyer, 3 April 1933 and 11 April 1933, MS-457, Box 285, Folder 14, AJA;
49Concert Program, 28 September 1933, MS-457, Box 291, Folder 10; Jonah Wise Fundraising
Letter, 23 November 1933, and Form Letter, 28 July 1933, MS-457, Box 291, Folder 11, AJA.
50“$3,000,000 Drive On to Help Refugees,” New York Times (23 March 1934): 18; “3,250,000
Sought for Jewish Relief,” New York Times (11February 1935): 36; “$10,000,000 Agency Will
Aid Refugees,” New York Times (22 July 1935): 1; “Jews Split Drives of United Appeal,” New
York Times (30 October 1935): 19; Untermyer to Paul Baerwald, 18 November 1938, MS-251,
Box 2, Folder 1, AJA; “250 Reich Children To Be Brought Here,” New York Times (7 September
42 • American Jewish Archives Journal
1934): 12; “Quakers Aid Vienna Jews,” New York Times (22 April 1938): 12; “To Take More
Refugees,” New York Times (27 May 1939): 6; Gottlieb, American Anti-Nazi Resistance, 277.
51Chernow, 292–296; Address by Felix Warburg in St. Louis, Missouri, 25 January 1936, MS-
457, Box 319, Folder 4, AJA.
52Chernow, 248–251; Rafael Medoff, “Felix Warburg and the Palestinian Arabs: A Reassessment,”
American Jewish Archives Journal 54, no. 1 (2002): 14, 16.
53Chernow, 253, 448–449, 454–456; “Weizmann Drafts Program for Zion,” New York Times
(10 August 1937): 17; “F.M. Warburg Off for Zurich Parley,” New York Times (12 August
1937): 13; “U.S. Non-Zionists Bolt at Zurich,” New York Times (20 August 1937): 1; “Palestine
Parley Asked by Warburg,” New York Times (4 September 1937): 15; “Warburg Career Widely
Extolled,” New York Times (21 October 1937): 18.
54Jeffrey Gurock, America, American Jews, and the Holocaust (New York: Routledge, 1998),
245–246; Gottlieb, “The Anti-Nazi Boycott Movement in the United States: An Ideological
and Sociological Appreciation,” Jewish Social Studies 35, nos. 3/4 (July–October 1973): 226.
55Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 49–50; B. Dubovsky to E.W. Russell, 27 April 1938, and
E.W. Russell to NSANL, 28 April 1938, MS-251, Box 1, Folder 2, AJA; Dubovsky to Untermyer,
13 May 1939, and Untermyer to Dubovsky, 11 May 1939, MS-251, Box 1, Folder 3, AJA.
56A recent, and valuable, summary of the overall historiography is Steven Bayme, “American
Jewish Leadership Confronts the Holocaust: Revisiting Naomi Cohen’s Thesis and the American
Jewish Committee,” American Jewish Archives Journal 61, no. 2 (2009): 163–186.
57Gulie Ne’eman Arad, America, Its Jews, and the Rise of Nazism (Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press, 2000), 109–111, 122–123.
58Rafael Medoff, “‘Our Leaders Cannot Be Moved’: A Zionist Emissary’s Reports on American
Jewish Responses to the Holocaust in the Summer of 1943,” American Jewish History 88, no.
1 (March 2000): 115–126. A concise article that makes several references to the fading power
of Jewish elites is Henry Feingold, “Crisis and Response: American Jewish Leadership during
the Roosevelt Years,” Modern Judaism 8, no. 2 (May 1988): 101–118.
59Hawkins, “‘Hitler’s Bitterest Foe,’” 50; Gottlieb, American Anti-Nazi Resistance, 344–349.
60“Felix Warburg,” New York Times (21 October 1937): 22; “$2,374,062 Raised for Jewish
Fund,” New York Times (26 October 1936): 18; “$2,654,500 Is Spent on European Jews,” New
York Times (5 December 1935): 10; “F.M. Warburg Left Estate to Family,” New York Times
(29 October 1937): 17.
61Chernow, 512, 602; Max Warburg to Wilbur Thomas, 14 September 1944, Box 41, Folder
62James Warburg, Foreign Policy Begins at Home (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company,
1944), 280–283; James Warburg, Germany: Bridge or Battleground? (New York: Harcourt, Brace
and Company, 1946), 4; Chernow, 525, 537–538, 576–577, 581–582.
|Fake Holocaust Rumors top|
Wikipedia Samuel Untermyer (whitewash)
|Samuel Untermyer (March 6, 1858 – March 16, 1940, although some sources cite March 2, 1858, and even others, June 6, 1858 also known as Samuel Untermeyer) was an American lawyer and civic leader as well as a millionaire. He was born in Lynchburg, Virginia but after the death of his father the rest of the family moved to New York, where he studied law. After admission to the bar, he soon gained fame as a lawyer, focusing on corporate law, and became a staunch advocate of stock market regulations, government ownership of railroads, and various legal reforms. He was also as a civic leader, frequently attending the Democratic National Convention as a delegate. An active Zionist Untermyer was an able advocated for the Zionist liberation movement and was President of the Keren Hayesod, the agency through which the movement was conducted in America. Untermyer was born in Lynchburg, Virginia on March 6, 1858 to Isadore Untermyer and Therese Laudauer, both of whom were German Jews who emigrated to the United States from their native Bavaria. His father, who had been a lieutenant in the Confederate Army, died in 1866, soon after the close of the Civil War. The family then moved to New York. On August 9, 1880 he married Minnie Carl, daughter of Mairelius Carl of New York City. They had three children, Alvin, who served in the 305th Field Artillery in France during the Great War; Irwin, a justice of the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, and Irene, a philanthropist who married Louis Putnam Myers and, after his death, became the wife of Stanley Richter. Upon the outbreak of World War I, Untermyer, his wife, and two servants were vacationing in Carlsbad, Germany, and returned to the United States aboard the Baltic via London in late August. The gravesite of Samuel Untermeyer in Woodlawn Cemetery Untermeyer died March 16, 1940, in Palm Springs, California. His body was interred at Woodlawn Cemetery, Bronx, New York. His obituary was published in the New York Times (March 17, 1940, pg 1). Untermyer Park Part of Untermyer Park, the former estate of Samuel Untermyer Untermyer developed elaborate gardens at his 150-acre riverside estate Greystone, in Yonkers, New York, on land adjacent to the Hudson River. Greystone had previously been owned by defeated Presidential candidate Samuel Tilden, and was purchased by Untermyer when Tilden died in 1899. When Untermyer himself died in 1940, his plan had been to donate the whole estate to the Nation, or the State of New York, or at least to the City of Yonkers. Eventually the city of Yonkers agreed to accept part of the estate gardens; this parcel of land was renamed Untermyer Park in his honor. It was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1974. Legal practice Interior of Samuel Untermyer's tomb at Woodlawn Cemetery, Bronx NY He was educated at the College of the City of New York and received his LL.B. from Columbia Law School in 1878. He was admitted to the bar, and started practice with his half-brother Randolph Guggenheimer in New York city. A younger brother Maurice Untermyer was later admitted, and then in 1895 Louis Marshall joined and the name was changed to Guggenheimer, Untermyer & Marshall, a name it held for 45 years. Between the start of his practice and the end of 1921 he was counsel in many celebrated cases covering almost every phase of corporate, civil, criminal and international law, specifically: "I Like a Little Competition" – J.P. Morgan by Art Young. Cartoon relating to one of J.P. Morgan's replies to Untermyer at the Pujo Committee. As counsel for H. Clay Pierce he prevented the Standard Oil Co., after its dissolution in 1910, from dominating the Waters-Pierce Co. In the same year he effected the merger of the Utah Copper Co. with the Boston Consolidated and the Nevada Consolidated Co.'s involving more than $100,000,000. In 1912, as counsel to the Kaliwerke Aschersleben and the Disconte Gesellschaft in the controversy arising out of the control of the potash industry by the German Government, he assisted in reaching a settlement. In 1903 he undertook the first judicial exposure of " high finance " in connection with the failure of the U.S. Shipbuilding Co., organized only a year before as a consolidation of the larger shipbuilding companies in America including that subsequently known as the Bethlehem Steel Co. As a result of the sensational exposures connected with that company, a reorganization was effected under the name of the Bethlehem Steel Co., in which Untermyer became a large shareholder. After this he conducted a number of similar exposures. In 1911 he delivered an address entitled, "Is There a Money Trust?" which led the following year to an investigation by the Committee on Banking and Currency of the U.S. House of Representatives headed by Arsène Pujo. Untermeyer was counsel to the Committee and famously cross-examined J.P. Morgan and other New York bankers. This so-called Pujo Money Trust Investigation resulted in the passage of remedial legislation, including the establishment of the Federal Reserve System. Untermyer for years agitated before Congress and state legislatures such measures as the compulsory regulation of stock exchanges. He for many years conducted agitations and wrote magazine articles dealing with reforms in the criminal laws, the regulation of trusts and combinations and other economic subjects. He was counsel for many reorganization committees, including those of the Seaboard Air Line, the Rock Island railway, the Central Fuel Oil Co., and the Southern Iron and Steel Co. In 1915 he acted as a counsel for the U.S. Government in the suit brought against the Secretary of the Treasury and the Comptroller of the Currency by the Riggs National Bank of Washington, D.C., which charged there was a conspiracy to wreck it; the defendants were cleared. He took an active part in preparing the Federal Reserve Bank law, the Clayton bill, the Federal Trade Commission bill, and other legislation curbing trusts. He was a delegate to the Democratic National Convention in 1904, 1908, 1912, and delegate-at-large for the state of New York in 1916. He was a strong supporter of President Wilson's administration. After America entered the Great War he was adviser to the U.S. Treasury Department regarding the interpretation of the income tax and the excess profits tax laws. He was appointed by President Wilson to serve on the U.S. section of the International High Commission, which sat at Buenos Aires in 1916, for the purpose of framing uniform laws for the PanAmerican countries. Detail of Samuel Untermyer's tomb at Woodlawn Cemetery, Bronx NY In 1920 - He was counsel for the Lockwood Committee, appointed by the state Legislature to investigate an alleged conspiracy among the building trades of New York City. It was charged that labor leaders were using their power by extorting bribes for the prevention of strikes, by preventing independent bids and by forcing building awards to favorites. Many illegal acts were disclosed and numerous convictions secured. Robert P. Brindell, who was at the head of the labor council of the building trades with a membership of 115,000 was prosecuted by Untermyer, who conducted the case in person as a special attorney-general, and convicted of extortion and sentenced to five-to-ten years in state prison. At the end of 1921, when the prosecutions were being continued, more than 600 indictments had been found as a result of the investigation and many more were said to be pending. There were more than 200 convictions including pleas of guilty by employers, labor leaders and others and over $500,000 had been collected in fines. In connection with the exposure of abuses and acts of illegality among the labour unions, all unions in the state were required, under the threat of criminal prosecution and of submitting to incorporation, to amend their constitutions and bylaws by eliminating these abuses; this they all agreed to do. It was shown that in many of the building trades both manufacturers and dealers, often with the collusive aid of labour leaders, had organized to fix prices and prevent competition. Subsequent prosecutions established the fact that these and other unfair practices were an important element in preventing building operations and increasing rental charges for dwelling property. Public opinion, especially in view of the housing shortage, reacted sharply to these revelations, and it was felt that Untermeyer's work in this connection had been performed with admirable public spirit, energy and courage. It was generally believed, moreover, that the evils brought to light by the committee were not confined to New York, and a demand for similar investigations arose in other parts of the country. As special counsel until 1933 in the famous New York City transit suits, he helped maintain the five-cent subway fare. Untermeyer was a staunch advocate of stock market regulations, government ownership of railroads, and various legal reforms.|
|Interactive 9/11, JFK & Holocaust Spreadsheet|
|Nazi Era Timeline|
|Clinton 9/11 Truth Timeline|