By Mark Weber
President Franklin Roosevelt was a master of deceit. On at least one occasion, he candidly admitted his readiness to lie to further his goals. During a conversation in May 1942 with Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr., who was also a trusted adviser, the President remarked: “You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does … I may have one policy for Europe and one diametrically opposite for North and South America. I may be entirely inconsistent, and furthermore, I am perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths if it will help win the war.”
Roosevelt was not the first or the last American president to lie to the people. But rarely has a major American political figure given a speech of such brazen falsehood as he did in his “Navy Day” address of October 27, 1941, made at a large gathering at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC, and broadcast live over nationwide radio.
This was part of the President’s ongoing effort to persuade the American public that Hitler’s Germany was a grave and imminent threat to the United States, which therefore required large-scale U.S. military support to Britain and Soviet Russia. The campaign was not working as well as intended. Most Americans still opposed direct involvement in the European conflict.
President Roosevelt delivers his “Navy Day” speech, Oct. 27, 1941, which was broadcast live to the nation. This historic address was part of his effort to promote public support for war against Germany. This photo is a still from a newsreel report.
A lot had happened in the preceding months. On March 11, 1941, Roosevelt signed the Lend-Lease bill into law, permitting increased deliveries of military aid to Britain – a policy that violated U.S. neutrality and international law. In April Roosevelt illegally sent U.S. troops to occupy Greenland. On May 27 he claimed that German leaders were set on “world domination,” and proclaimed for the U.S. a state of “unlimited national emergency.” Following Germany’s attack against the USSR in June, the Roosevelt administration began delivering military aid to the beleaguered Soviets. These shipments also blatantly violated international law. In July Roosevelt illegally sent American troops to occupy Iceland. And in September Roosevelt announced a “shoot on sight” order to U.S. naval warships to attack German and Italian vessels on the high seas.
The President began his Navy Day address by recalling that German submarines had torpedoed the U.S. destroyer Greer on September 4, and the U.S. destroyer Kearny on October 17. In highly emotional language, he characterized these incidents as unprovoked acts of aggression directed against all Americans. He declared that although he had wanted to avoid conflict, shooting had begun and “history has recorded who fired the first shot.” What Roosevelt deliberately failed to mention was the fact that in each case the U.S. destroyers had been engaged in attack operations against the submarines, which fired in self-defense only as a last resort. In spite of Roosevelt’s “shoot on sight” order, which made incidents like the ones he so piously condemned inevitable, Hitler still wanted to avoid war with the United States. The German leader had expressly ordered his submarines to avoid conflicts with U.S warships at all costs, except to avoid imminent destruction.
And so, as part of his effort to convince Americans that Germany was a real threat to their security, Roosevelt continued his Navy Day speech with a startling announcement: “Hitler has often protested that his plans for conquest do not extend across the Atlantic Ocean … I have in my possession a secret map, made in Germany by Hitler’s government – by the planners of the new world order. It is a map of South America and a part of Central America as Hitler proposes to reorganize it.” This map, the President explained, showed South America, as well as “our great life line, the Panama Canal,” divided into five vassal states under German domination. “That map, my friends, makes clear the Nazi design not only against South America but against the United States as well.”
Roosevelt went on to reveal that he also had in his possession “another document made in Germany by Hitler’s government. It is a detailed plan to abolish all existing religions – Catholic, Protestant, Mohammedan, Hindu, Buddhist, and Jewish alike” which Germany will impose “on a dominated world, if Hitler wins.”
“The property of all churches will be seized by the Reich and its puppets,” he continued. “The cross and all other symbols of religion are to be forbidden. The clergy are to be forever silenced under penalty of the concentration camps … In the place of the churches of our civilization, there is to be set up an international Nazi church – a church which will be served by orators sent out by the Nazi government. In the place of the Bible, the words of Mein Kampf will be imposed and enforced as Holy Writ. And in place of the cross of Christ will be put two symbols – the swastika and the naked sword.”
Roosevelt emphasized the importance of his sensational claims. “Let us well ponder,” he said, “these grim truths which I have told you of the present and future plans of Hitlerism.” All Americans, he went on, “are faced with the choice between the kind of world we want to live in and the kind of world which Hitler and his hordes would impose on us.” Accordingly, “we are pledged to pull our own oar in the destruction of Hitlerism.”
The German government responded to the speech with a statement that categorically rejected the President’s accusations. The purported secret documents, it declared, “are forgeries of the crudest and most brazen kind.” Furthermore, the official statement went on: “The allegations of a conquest of South America by Germany and an elimination of the religions of the churches in the world and their replacement by a National Socialist church are so nonsensical and absurd that it is superfluous for the Reich government to discuss them.” German propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels also responded to Roosevelt’s claims in a widely read commentary. The American president’s “absurd accusations,” he wrote, were a “grand swindle” designed to “whip up American public opinion.”
At a press conference the day after the address, a reporter asked the President for a copy of the “secret map” document. Roosevelt declined, but insisted that it had come from “a source which is undoubtedly reliable.”
The full story did not emerge until many years later. The map did exist, but it was a forgery produced by the British intelligence service at its clandestine “Station M” technical center in Canada. William Stephenson (code name: Intrepid), head of British intelligence operations in North America, passed it on to U.S. intelligence chief William Donovan, who had it delivered to the President. In a memoir published in 1984, wartime British agent Ivar Bryce claimed credit for thinking up the “secret map” scheme.
It is not clear if Roosevelt himself knew that the map was a fake, or whether he was taken in by the British fraud and actually believed it to be authentic. In this case, therefore, we don’t know if the President was deliberately deceiving the American people, or was merely a credulous dupe.
The other “document” cited by Roosevelt, purporting to outline German plans to abolish the world’s religions, was – of course – just as fanciful as the “secret map.”
In 1941 few Americans could believe that their President might deliberately mislead the public with such seeming conviction about matters of the gravest national and global importance. Millions accepted his alarmist claims as true. In his historic Navy Day address, Franklin Roosevelt thus succeeded in further frightening Americans into supporting, or at least tolerating, his campaign to prod the U.S. into war.
This is the “secret map” document cited by President Roosevelt in his 1941 “Navy Day” address. In fact, it was a fraud, produced by British intelligence agents as part of a well-organized campaign to encourage American support for war.
John F. Bratzel and Leslie B. Rout, Jr., “FDR and The ‘Secret Map’,” The Wilson Quarterly (Washington, DC), New Year’s 1985, pp. 167-173.
James MacGregor Burns, Roosevelt: The Soldier of Freedom (New York: 1970), pp. 147-148.
Documents on German Foreign Policy, 1918 -1945 (Washington, DC), Series D, Vol. 13, pages 724 -727. Documents No. 439 and No. 441.
“Ex-British Agent Says FDR’s Nazi Map Faked,” Foreign Intelligence Literary Scene (University Publications of America), December 1984, pp. 1-3.
“Fälschungen gröbster und plumpester Art: Eine Amtliche Verlautbarung der Deutschen Reichsregierung,” Freiburger Zeitung, Nov. 3, 1941.
Ted Morgan, FDR: A Biography (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1985), pp. 600-603.
“President Roosevelt’s Navy Day Address on World Affairs,” The New York Times, Oct. 28, 1941.
“The Reich Government’s Reply To Roosevelt’s Navy Day Speech,” The New York Times, Nov. 2, 1941. ( http://ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1941/411101a.html )
Joseph Goebbels, “Kreuzverhör mit Mr. Roosevelt,” Das Reich, Nov. 30, 1941. Nachdruck (reprint) in Das eherne Herz (1943), pp. 99-104. English translation: “Mr. Roosevelt Cross-Examined.” ( http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb2.htm )
For Further Reading
Herbert C. Hoover, Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover’s Secret History of the Second World War and its Aftermath (George H. Nash, ed.). Stanford Univ., 2011.
Warren F. Kimball, The Juggler: Franklin Roosevelt as Wartime Statesman (Princeton Univ. Press, 1991)
Lynne Olson, Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh and America’s Fight Over World War II, 1939- 1941 (Random House, 2013), esp. pages 402- 403.
Joseph E. Persico, Roosevelt’s Secret War : FDR and World War II Espionage (New York: Random House, 2001), esp. pages 125-128.
Mark Weber, “President Roosevelt’s Campaign to Incite War in Europe: The Secret Polish Documents,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1983.
Mark Weber, “The ‘Good War’ Myth of World War Two.” May 2008.
( http://www.ihr.org/news/weber_ww2_may08.html )
This item was originally published in The Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1985 (Vol. 6, No. 1), pages 125-127. It was revised in Nov. 2010, in April 2016, and in Nov. 2019.
Non-jews who refuse to worship Israel, the jewish supremacists of this world, and their sick “laws” will be sentenced to death and decapitated.
Moses our Teacher was commanded by the Almighty to compel the world to accept the Commandments of the Sons of Noah. Anyone who fails to accept them is executed.” – Mishneh Torah (Rambam), Laws of Kings and Wars, 8.13
From Stop Noahide Law:
On March 20th 1991, the United States Congress passed H.J Res 104, which was then signed into law by President George H. W. Bush and became Public Law No. 102-14. The language of the law asserts that the “Seven Noahide Laws” are the ethical values of civilized society and are the basis on which the American nation was founded and that without these Seven Noahide Laws society stands in peril. It is also stated that it is our nation’s “responsibility” to transmit these “ethical values” to the generations of the future and that in the future the President of the United States will sign an “international scroll” pledging to return the world to the Seven Noahide Laws through education and charity.
Introduction by N. Wolf: The following is a collection of excerpts from The Myth of the Twentieth Century by Alfred Rosenberg, the greatest National Socialist philosopher. There are many important concepts and ideas presented in this masterpiece which he wrote, but the most important is the concept of the Race Soul. This idea, that there are two sides to race, the biological and the spiritual, is an idea that had not been widely acknowledged until Rosenberg’s work.
It is an unfortunate fact that many people do not take the time to read this book of wonderful insight either because they cannot acquire it or do not want to read it off of a computer. The purpose of these quotes gathered here is of course useful to summarize Rosenberg’s concept of the Race Soul so that it will be known and understood by more people.
THE MYTH OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, INTRODUCTION TO THE THIRD EDITION, ALFRED ROSENBERG
We on our side do not deny very diverse influences: landscape and climate and political tradition; but all this is outweighed by blood and the blood linked character. Things evolve around the reconquest of this order of rank.
To re-establish the ingeniousness of healthy blood, is perhaps the greatest task upon which man can set himself today. At the same time, this affirmation gives evidence of the sad situation of the body and the spirit, that such a deed has become a vital necessity. A contribution to this great coming act of liberation of the 20th century is what the present book intends to be. Not only the shaking up of many awakening men, but also of opponents, is the desired result.
THE MYTH OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, BOOK I THE CONFLICT OF VALUES, CHAPTER I, RACE AND RACE SOUL
Today one of those epochs is beginning in which world history must be written anew. The old images of the human past have faded, the outlines of leading personalities are distorted, their inner driving forces falsely interpreted, their whole nature for the most part totally misjudged. A youthful life force – which also knows itself to be age old – is impelled toward form; an ideology, a world view, has been born and, strong of will, begins to contend with old forms, ancient sacred practices, and outworn standards. This means no longer historically but fundamentally; not in a few special domains but everywhere; not only upon the heights but also at the roots.
And this sign of our times is reflected in a turning away from absolute values, that is to say, in a retreat from values held to be beyond all organic experience, which the isolated ego once devised to create, by peaceful or violent means, a universal spiritual community. Once, such an ultimate aim was the Christianising of the world and its redemption through the second coming of Christ. Another goal was represented by the humanist dream of mankind. Both ideals have been buried in the bloody chaos of the Great War, and in the subsequent rebirth out of this calamity, despite the fact that now one, and now the other, still find increasingly fanatical adherents and a venerable priesthood. These are processes of petrifaction and no longer of living tissue: a belief which has died in the soul cannot be raised from the dead.
Humanity, the universal church, or the sovereign ego, divorced from the bonds of blood, are no longer absolute values for us. They are dubious, even moribund, dogmas which lack polarity and which represent the ousting of nature in favour of abstractions. The emergence in the nineteenth century of Darwinism and positivism constituted the first powerful, though still wholly materialistic, protest against the lifeless and suffocating ideas which had come from Syria and Asia Minor and had brought about spiritual degeneracy. Christianity, with its vacuous creed of ecumenicalism and its ideal of HUMANITAS, disregarded the current of red blooded vitality which flows through the veins of all peoples of true worth and genuine culture. Blood was reduced to a mere chemical formula and explained in that way. But today an entire generation is beginning to have a presentiment that values are only created and preserved where the law of blood still determines the ideas and actions of men, whether consciously or unconsciously. At the subconscious level, whether in cult or in life, man obeys the commands of the blood, as if in dreams or, according to natural insight, as a happy expression describes this harmony between nature and culture. But culture, with the growth of all subconscious activity and of expanding consciousness and knowledge, becomes more and more intellectual, and ultimately engenders not creative tension but, in fact, discord. In this way, reason and understanding are divorced from race and nature and released from the bonds of blood. The ensuing generation falls victim to the individualistic system of intellectual absolutes, and separates itself more and more from its natural environment, mixing itself with alien blood. It is through this desecration of the blood that personality, people, race and culture perish. None who have disregarded the religion of the blood have escaped this nemesis – neither the Indians nor the Persians, neither the Greeks nor the Romans. Nor will Nordic Europe escape if it does not call a halt, turning away from bloodless absolutes and spiritually empty delusions, and begin to hearken trustingly once again to the subtle welling up of the ancient sap of life and values.
Once we recognise the awesome conflict between blood and environment and between blood and blood as the ultimate phenomenon beyond which we are not permitted to probe, a new and, in every respect, richly coloured picture of human history becomes manifest. This recognition at once brings with it the knowledge that the struggle of the blood and the intuitive awareness of life’s mystique are simply two aspects of the same thing. Race is the image of soul. The entire racial property is an intrinsic value without relationship to material worshippers who apprehend only discrete events in time and space, without experiencing these events as the greatest and most profound of all secrets.
Racial history is therefore simultaneously natural history and soul mystique. The history of the religion of the blood, however, is conversely the great world story of the rise and fall of peoples, their heroes and thinkers, their inventors and artists.
THE MYTH OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, BOOK III THE COMING REICH, CHAPTER VII THE ESSENTIAL UNITY
“This unity also holds for German history, for its men, its values, for the very old and new Myth, and for the supporting ideas of German folkhood. One form of Odin is dead, that is, the Odin who was the highest of the many gods who appeared as the embodiment of a generation still given up to natural symbolisms. But Odin as the eternal mirrored image of the primal spiritual powers of Nordic man lives today just as he did over 5,000 years ago. Hermann Wirth finds traces of decline also in the ancient world of gods and influences of the Eskimo race. This may be so, but does not influence what is actually Germanic. He embodies himself in honour and heroism, in the creation of song and or art, in the protection of law and in the eternal search for wisdom. Odin learned that through the guilt of the gods, through the breaking of the bond to the builders of Valhalla, the race of the gods must perish. Despite this decline, he nevertheless commanded Heimdall to summon the Aesir with his horn for the final decisive battle. Dissatisfied, eternally searching, the god wandered through the universe to try to fathom his destiny and the nature of his being. He sacrificed an eye so that he might participate in the deepest wisdom. As an eternal wanderer he is a symbol of the eternally searching and becoming Nordic soul which cannot withdraw self confidently back to Jehovah and his representatives. The headstrong activity of the will, which, at first, drives so roughly through the Nordic lands in the battle songs about Thor, showed directly at their first appearance the innate, striving, wisdom seeking, metaphysical side in Odin the Wanderer. But the same spirit is revealed once again with the great, free Ostrogoths and the devout Ulfilas. It is also revealed, in accordance with the times, in the strengthened Knights Order and in the great Nordic western mystics as seen in their greatest spirit, Meister Eckehart. When, in Frederick’s Prussia, the soul which once gave birth to Odin was revived at Hohenfriedberg and Leuthen, it was also reborn in the soul of the Thomas church cantor, Bach, and in Goethe. From this viewpoint our assertion will appear deeply justified, that a heroic Nordic saga, a Prussian march, a composition by Bach, a sermon by Eckehart, and a monologue by Faust, are only varied experiences of one and the same soul. They are creations of the same will. They are eternal powers which were first united under the name Odin and which later gained form in Frederick the Great and Bismarck. As long as these powers are operative, as long as Nordic blood mixes with a Nordic soul and will, Nordic man will be active and work in mystic union. This is the prerequisite of every true to type creation.”
The racially linked soul is the measure of all our ideas, our striving will and actions, the final measuring rod of our values.
It is no coincidence that religions are more stable than forms of government. They mostly tend to sink their roots deeper into the earth; they would not be conceivable at all without this broad folk.
Speech of May 10, 1933 in Berlin
In that the government is determined to undertake the political and moral detoxification of our public life, it creates and secures the prerequisites for a really deep return of religious life.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
The Reich government, which sees in Christianity the unshakeable fundaments of the folk’s ethics and morality.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
And no less have we taken up the struggle against the decomposition of religion. Without us committing ourselves to any denomination, we have nonetheless again given faith the prerequisite, because we were of the conviction that the folk requires and needs this faith. We have thus taken up the struggle against godlessness not with a few theoretical declarations, we have exterminated it.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
The discussion of the new state with both Christian denominations: Filled with the wish to secure for the German folk the great religious, ethical and moral values anchored in both Christian denominations, we have eliminated the political organizations, but strengthened the religious institutions. For a contract with the energetic National Socialist state is more valuable to a church than the struggle of denominational federations, which in their coalition-determined politics of compromise must also buy personnel advantages for party supporters with the surrender of ideals and of the really inner religious education and consolidation of the folk. We all, however, live in the expectation that the merger of the evangelical provincial churches and denominations into a German evangelical Reich church may give real satisfaction to the yearning of those, who believe they must fear in the absent-mindedness of evangelical life a weakening of the strength of the evangelical faith in itself. In that the National Socialist state has in this year proven its respect for the strength of the Christian denominations, it expects the same respect from the denominations for the strength of the National Socialist state!
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
We have endeavoured to produce the reconciliation of the denominations with the new state, are determined – insofar as the evangelical denominations are meant – to end their purely organizational fractionalization in a great evangelical Reich church, filled with the conviction that it is not acceptable to make a virtue out of the respect and consideration for the individual states, forced on Martin Luther by need, in a time when the states themselves already no longer exist. And we know: If the great reformer stood among us, then he would – happy to have escaped the need of that time – just like Ulrich von Hutten in his last prayer, think not of provincial churches, rather of Germany and his evangelical church.
Proclamation of September 5, 1934 in Nuremberg
The national government sees in both Christian denominations the most important factors for the preservation of our folkdom. It will respect the contracts made between them and the provinces. Their rights should not be infringed. It expects, however, and hopes that the work on the national and moral rejuvenation of our folk, which the government has made its task, likewise receives the same appreciation. It will deal with all other denominations with objective justice. But it cannot tolerate that membership in a specific denomination or in a specific race could be a release from the general legal obligations or even a license for unpunished committing or toleration of crimes. The concern of the government is directed at the honest coexistence of church and state.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
Not we, rather those before us, distanced themselves from it (from Christianity). We have merely made a clean separation between politics, which concerns itself with earthly things, and religion, which must occupy itself with the spiritual.
Speech of August 27, 1934 at Ehrenbreitstein
And above all, we have removed the priests from the marsh of political party conflict and led them back into the church again. It is our will that they should never return to an area, which is not created for them, which degrades them and must invariably bring them into opposition to millions of people, who inwardly want to be devout, but who want to see priests who serve God and not a political party!
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
Lord, you see, we have changed. The German folk is no longer the folk of dishonour, of shame, of self-mutilation, of faint-heartedness and of small faith. No, Lord, the German folk is strong again in its will, strong in its perseverance, strong in the endurance of all sacrifices. Lord, we will not depart from you! Now bless our struggle for our freedom and thus our German folk and fatherland!
Speech of May 1, 1933 in Berlin
by David Duke
This is a video preview of Dr. David Duke’s new book, The Illustrated Protocols of Zion is an historical and literary valuation of the original Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.
He presents the case that Protocols of Zion could well be titled the Protocols of „Zionism“ in that it predicts many of the horrific wars and conflicts right down to the issues in the Israel or „Zion“ of today and associated with Zionist power and influence that goes far beyond the borders of Israel.
In this video and his book upon which it is based, he shows that many of the most radical claims of the Protocols are today proclaimed by Zionists themselves around the world. such as domination of media, banking, and extensive power and influence in America, the EU and in many governments around the world.
He quotes leading and influential Zionists and Zionist media in showing that many of the most important underlying themes can be documented in historical and contemporary terms.
Dr. Duke points out its true history. He argues that the Protocols is obviously not the secret meeting of earlocked „Elders of Zion“ anymore than 1984 is a true account of Big Brother or Oceania.
He examines it as dystopian literature that is amazingly prescient and predictive since its publishing well over a century ago.
This video and the powerful underlying book The Illustrated Protocols of Zion are essential materials to understanding the Zionist issue from all perspectives.
A Phd in History, Dr. Duke shows how vital assertions of the Protocols can be historically and contemporaneously documented and that many of the most shocking claims of the Protocols can be found in even more extreme expression by modern Zionism.