The Fatherland

Here is the excellent Edmund von Mach again, speaking to the very issue we've been discussing here at cy.net, re our specific European ethnic identification, or lack of it. I was going to post an article or two about the “Money Trust” next, but when I read this I just had to post it first. Von Mach manages to stand up for what is German without ever seeming too partisan or un-American. He is quite a scrupulous character, while remaining honest and penetrating.-cy

v. 3 no. 8    September 29, 1915    Page 14

OPEN LETTER TO OSWALD GARRISON VILLARD

By Dr. Edmund von Mach, Author of “What Germany Wants”

Mr dear Mr. Villard:

By Carolyn Yeager

I WENT THROUGH THE EARLIER ISSUES once again to find what I remembered seeing about Russian barbarism on the WWI eastern front. In doing so, I came upon some other interesting reports on “English barbarism” like the one just below, and other stories that confirm that the issues at play in WWII were very much in play in WWI first – supporting my contention that WWI and II were the same war, separated by a failed peace attempt of 20 years duration.

From the Dec. 2, 1914 issue of THE FATHERLAND, I begin with two excerpts that describe the extreme hatred generated against German immigrants living in Anglo countries at the outbreak of war.

The question arises: Did Jews copy their 'Never Again' slogan from the English? It can't be the other way around, since the following was written in 1914, not 1941! “Never Again” is obviously not original with the Jews. And also note the words I have underlined which became so full of 'meaning' when spoken by the National Socialists some years later.

ON MAY 7, 1915 the Cunard ocean liner RMS Lusitania, on its way from New York to Liverpool, was hit by a single torpedo from the German U-boat U-20 eleven miles off the coast of Ireland. The U-boat captain wrote in his log:

Torpedo hits starboard side right behind the bridge. An unusually heavy detonation takes place with a very strong explosive cloud. The explosion of the torpedo must have been followed by a second one [boiler or coal or powder?]... The ship stops immediately and heels over to starboard very quickly, immersing simultaneously at the bow...

More from THE FATHERLAND in the spring of 1915 by the most excellent writers Frederick Schrader, Houston Stewart Chamberlain and Dr. Edmund von Mach. The amount of munitions delivered to England from American factories is receiving more and more criticism, along with the obvious favoritism for England from the self-proclaimed “neutral” United States and it's biggest newspapers. This post contains five articles in all.

v. 2 no.13   May 5, 1915   Page 7

ARE WE ENGLAND'S SECRET ALLY?

Prof. Roland G. Usher Declares the US is in a Coalition to Help England, France and Russia in Return for Concessions—Alliance Aimed to Crush Germany-Austria

By Frederick F. Schrader

IS there a secret alliance between the United States and England? The question may startle those who have not given the subject of our present relation with the world powers and our statecraft, within the past twenty years, more than perfunctory consideration. It is undeniable that with the Spanish War [1898] the American Government turned into new channels of diplomacy and established new relations with England. Many things have occurred since then which the average American cannot easily explain to himself.

I LIKED THIS ARTICLE in the March 3, 1915 issue of THE FATHERLAND because of the overview it provides of English outrages against any competitor or source of wealth that presented itself. It puts the Great War into perspective very well, but is a bit too optimistic as to the hoped-for outcome. At this time, the United States was still seen as the fair-minded uninvolved arbiter, a role it totally failed to fulfill in this war, and the next. -Carolyn

v. 2 no. 4   March 3, 1915     Page 11

ENGLAND AND PROVIDENCE

By Dr. Edmund von Mach

NATIONS, like individuals, are the tools of Providence. We may think we understand the reasons of our actions, but we do not know the aims of Providence until the results are achieved.

By Carolyn Yeager

THESE FIRST FOUR ITEMS COME FROM the No. 26 issue of THE FATHERLAND newspaper, [No. 24 shown at left] meaning that after 26 consecutive weeks it was still going strong. Also going strong was discussion of the United States-declared 'Neutrality' in regards to the war raging in Europe. We know today that U.S. neutrality was a sham, but at the time those Americans who were not pro-England or pro-Russian were struggling to bring attention to the situation.

The Fatherland v.1 no.26 P 5

N.Y. Staats Zeitung editorial, January 25, 1915

“On Our Knees to England”

"IN a letter to United States Senator Stone, but intended for general consumption, Secretary Bryan has undertaken to justify the attitude of the administration toward the warring nations and to reply to the attacks which have been provoked by the attitude of the Government on this subject. It is well that the letter bears the signature of Mr. Bryan, as otherwise it might have been assumed that it had been composed in London, or the British Embassy in Washington, except that British diplomats would probably have gone about it with more skill and discretion than our Secretary of State...."

Ashkenazi Jew Henry Morgenthau Sr. (left) was part of Woodrow Wilson's administration in the important role of Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire at the time it was allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary … and his son, Henry Jr., became Franklin Roosevelt's Treasury Secretary (1934-45). Both were Democrat Party administrations. Grandchildren of Henry Sr. include Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney of Manhattan for 35 years and 'Pulitzer-prize-winning' historian Barbara W. Tuchman. THE FATHERLAND raises an interesting question about Amb. Morgenthau in 1914. -cy

v 1 no 20   Dec. 23, 1914   Page 12

AMBASSADOR MORGENTHAU IS “ACTIVE” 

TWICE the United States has narrowly escaped being drawn into the European war. Once when a warning shot was fired across the bow of a launch of the Tennessee from a Turkish fort to impede its entry into mined waters, an act described by Capt. Decker as “not hostile,” though this qualifying statement was suppressed in Washington for several days for mysterious reasons; and again when our [US] ambassador to Turkey, Mr. Henry Morgenthau, informed the Porte that he would demand his passports* unless the British colony in Constantinople was allowed to leave the city.

It's hard to find any images that show the level of viciousness against Germans stirred up by the British once they had declared war. I don't believe there are any images extant of the concentration camps in England into which they threw any German or German-named civilian  man they got their hands on, including Americans. These camps are reported to have been of the lowest quality, where some Germans who tried to complain about the inedible quality of the food were shot! Nothing like this ever occurred in Germany.

By Carolyn Yeager

THIS IS A MUST-READ FOLLOW UP OF THE PREVIOUS POSTED REPORT asking whether American citizens are entitled to protection by the U.S. State Department. The answer unfortunately is “not always” and there will probably be more personal accounts like these two as I continue to read The Fatherland issues. I am publishing this  2nd “installment” next, but in order to do so I had to forego another important and truly heart-rending article that I was going to post next. I urge everyone to read it for themselves in the Dec. 2, 1914 issue, page 6, titled ENGLISH BARBARISM by Hans F. Kammeyer. It's incredible and extremely sad. But even though it hurts, it's what we need to know. This kind of thing has been covered up for too long. We're still protecting the guilty from these two major wars and we are the worse off for it. Time to free the long-suffering Germans.

IN THE NOVEMBER 18, 1914 ISSUE OF THE FATHERLAND, two articles struck me as especially powerful proofs that the popular feelings about this at-that-time-3-month-old war were being driven by British propaganda and the cooperation of the Press in most countries save Germany and Austria-Hungary. These two articles, copied below, speak against the narrative already being set in stone via the newspapers that it was the German “barbarians” who were out to take over and dominate Europe through undemocratic force. In truth, we know it was England that elected long before to utilise war as the means to weaken any European nation that successfully competed with it. It is Great Britain that was not above using illegal means to assure its dominance, including ignoring and abusing the rights of American citizens. -Carolyn

Why is the establishment press always pro-England, anti-Germany?  

By Carolyn Yeager

MOST HAVE LEARNED BY NOW that the descriptions of atrocities carried out by German soldiers on Belgian and French civilians in the opening weeks of the Great European War were not true, were in fact British lies happily repeated by the press. But they were believed at the time, and these fictional atrocities were of the most gruesome kind—chopping off the hands of children, raping and bayoneting women, burning down churches and other buildings after locking civilians inside. The American newspapers carried these stories and a great many people believed them. It wasn't until after the war was over that Britain began to admit, under pressure of evidence to the contrary compiled by the German Foreign Office, that they were propaganda lies designed to gain the sympathy, and arouse the indignation, of the public—and most especially the Americans. However, there was never an official apology or correction.

Such lies were obviously designed to create hatred and fear of the German Army and even the entire German nation. The English justify such tactics in the name of saving England and the world from great evil. The major newspapers were owned and managed by people who were pro-Britain and whomever Britain was allied with. The German-American editors of The Fatherland were wise to this and devoted some space in most issues to explaining and exposing it to their readers. Sometimes it was the readers who wrote to instruct the magazine about the “unbelievable” and so very “un-German” behavior attributed to the military of a country and people they admired or were kin to.