“The Fatherland” 1914-17

By Carolyn Yeager

SINCE GEORGE SYLVESTER VIERECK CAME TO MY ATTENTION, I haven't been able to get enough of him. Being especially intrigued by his publication THE FATHERLAND, you can imagine my delight upon finding a website with every issue available for reading. Credit for this goes to Pensylvania's Villanova University and the 'digital library' project of its Falvey Memorial Library. Pennsylvania has thankfully not forgotten to recognize its large ethnic German population—the 2000 US Census reports it at over 3 million, the highest total number of any U.S. state outside of California. [The highest in percent of population is North Dakota. My home state of Illinois is way down in 17th place, yet because of greater overall population still numbered almost 2.5 million Germans in the 2000 census, higher than Wisconsin's 2.2 million, though Wisconsin stands in 2nd place on the list.]

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.

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

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.

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.

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...."

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.

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.

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...

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.

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:

vol. 3 no. 6   September 15, 1915   Page 3

WHY THE MONEY TRUST WANTS WAR

Part IV—WALL STREET'S BRITISH GOLD PLOT

by Charles A. Collman

I INTEND to tell an amazing story of a plot engineered by London bankrupts, with whom miserable men in Wall Street have combined to ruin us—their fellow countrymen. I shall describe how all the insidious weapons of the Money Trust are being used to further this traitorous design.

WITH THE PRO-WAR ELEMENT IN THE U.S. MADE UP ALMOST SOLELY OF ANGLOS, it can be no surprise that our establishment history holds  that the Great War (WWI) was necessary and right, or at least "inevitable". I cannot guarantee that the scenario in the following article happened exactly as the author states, but I am sure that even if some little fiction is involved to make the story more interesting, the main facts and ultimate outcome is exactly right. There is an American Pilgrims Society (which has nothing to do with the Pilgram Fathers of 1620) and these men were its members and did work surreptitiously, against the known wishes of the American people and the re-election promises of President Wilson, for the U.S. to help fund and then to enter the war. Their main reason was to save Britain from bankruptcy and future indebtedness to Germany … and of course, loss of power. And after WE Americans saved Britain's butt, it showed no mercy whatsoever to Germany when forcing her to pay all Britain's debts, nor ending its starvation policy on German people, children and infants with its naval blockade kept up after the armistice to force her to sign an unjust and punishing “peace treaty”. This is patriotism? The only patriotic people involved were Germans and Austrians. The rest were only loyal to money and their financial bottom line.

British Foreign Minister Edward Grey (left) and French Foreign Minister Théophile Delcassé (right) schemed to "inspire hostile feelings against Germany" from 1905 to 1914.

Two extraordinary articles from The Fatherland, by two extraordinary writers, make up this post, along with a shocking report on the US postal service further caving in to English demands.

First, we discover the World War I version of the famous “Potocki Papers” of WWII. Jerzy Potocki was the Polish ambassador to Washington from 1936 to 1940, whose dispatches to his government in Warsaw were discovered by the Wehrmacht after their victory in the 1939 German-Polish war. These documents proved the involvement of Franklin Roosevelt's "neutral" government with both Poland and England to incite war in Europe.

In likewise fashion, as Frederic Schrader informs us in the important article below, diplomatic documents were discovered in Brussels by the victorious German Army which revealed the machinations carried on by Great Britain beginning already in 1905 “to inspire hostile feelings against Germany.” Sir Edward Grey, Britain's foreign minister, and his French counterpart Théophile Delcassé schemed secretly to set the stage for a realignment of European powers. -cy

THE FOLLOWING SELECTIONS FROM THE FATHERLAND in Dec. 1915 through Feb. 1916 show the Wilson administration's commitment to neutrality was too weak to withstand the pressures and ambitions stirred up in an election year. The actions of the Wilson administration against the German “sympathizers” are the mirror image to what the radical democrats of today are doing to the current president—leveling charges and investigations in spite of no evidence ever showing up. Even the Lusitania “atrocity” is resurrected as the best pretext Wilson had, or may have, to enter the war in order to save England from financial collapse, as well as political humiliation. -cy

IN THE FIRST SELECTION, AUTO MAGNATE HENRY FORD goes to the White House to discuss his “Peace Ship” to Europe with Wilson, and is shocked by the President's fixed, pro-war attitude. For fans of Ford, this is a must-read.

The second selection brings us writer Fredrick Schrader once again,  brilliantly laying out what he calls “the great conspiracy” to make the United States an integral part of Great Britain … in war as well as in peace, of course. This is not at all far-fetched, as it is still being proposed in our current time. I note Peter Brimelow at VDARE coined the term “the historic American nation,” by which he means English-settled; while VDare's John Derbyshire looks favorably on the concept of a brexited Britain forming an economic and political union with the U.S.A., making for a greatly enlarged Commonwealth. Both men are naturalized U.S. citizens who immigrated from England. If such a union came to pass we would see the dream of Cecil Rhodes come true! -cy

IN MY PREVIOUS POST, I INCLUDED THE STUNNING ARTICLE by F. F. Schrader published in the March 22, 1916 issue of THE FATHERLAND, relating the facts about the Secret Will of Cecil Rhodes in its relation to the United States and the pro-England, pro-war element rising in that country: The Great Conspiracy Exposed. A month later there appeared in the April 26 issue an open letter from Mr. Sinclair Kennedy, author of the book “The Pan-Angles” that was quoted in Schrader's article. A Massachusetts native and graduate of Harvard Law School, Kennedy sought to give a different interpretation of his work than that thought to be given by Schrader. The letter from Kennedy is followed by a brilliant rebuttal by Frederick Schrader. I'm posting both so you, the reader, can judge for yourself what relevance, if any, might exist between Rhodes' plan and the ongoing war. -cy

vol. 4 no. 12    April 26, 1916   Page 5

ENGLISH PLUTOCRACY VS FREE AMERICANISM

An Open Letter from the Author of “The Pan-Angles” and reply from Frederic Schrader

THE FIRST THREE SELECTIONS BELOW FROM THE FATHERLAND of May 10, 1916 show the U.S. entry into the European war becoming increasingly inevitable, but slow in coming due to the Presidential election in November. The country was still not in favor; Wilson needed a good portion of the German vote, but his sympathies were entirely with the Allies. In the fourth and fifth longer articles, from the May 17th issue, we get insight about the very important German Note that came in reply to Secretary of State Lansing's note to Germany of April 19th. Fascinating. The censorship and political persecution back then was even worse than it is today. -cy

vol 4 no. 14     May 10, 1916     Page 6

WILSON PERMITS RED CROSS TO AID ENGLAND ONLY

By Professor Yandell Henderson, of Yale University

KNOWN TODAY AS THE Battle of Jutland, between Britain's Royal Navy Grand Fleet under Admiral Sir John Jellicoe, and the Imperial German High Seas Fleet under Vice-Admiral Reinhard Scheer, the Battle of Skagerrack was the largest naval battle and the only full-scale clash of battleships in WWI, plus the last major battle in world history fought primarily by battleships. It took place from May 31 to June 1, 1916 off the North Sea coast of Denmark's Jutland Penninsula, utilizing a total of 151 British combat ships to 99 for Germany. Both sides claimed victory even though the British lost more and larger ships (14 to 11) and more than twice as many sailors. The British press criticised the Grand Fleet's failure to force a decisive outcome. THE FATHERLAND celebrated the German showing and skill in several articles which I have reproduced below.

The Republican National Nominating Convention was underway in Chicago, but as news reporting was much slower in those days, and the outcome was not decided ahead of time, the choice was not yet known. Also note the return of my favorite writer, Edmund von Mach. -cy

THE VERY ASTUTE FREDERICK F. SCHRADER COVERS the June nominating conventions and subsequent presidential campaign in his weekly "Behind the Scenes" column for THE FATHERLAND. -cy

vol. 4 no. 20    June 21, 1916    Page 8

Behind the Scenes at the Capital

The crushing defeat of Roosevelt at the Chicago convention is here looked upon as the most significant incident of the gathering. Never in American history has there been such a tragedy of fate. Roosevelt's whirlwind campaign was a marvelous feat of endurance and self-confidence. Wherever he went he belched war like the demon of the fable. The earth trembled under his tread and the welkins rang with his speeches at Detroit and St. Louis. For weeks he monopolized public attention, usurping the space daily alloted to war news on the first pages of all the papers. The country heard nothing but Roosevelt. Wm. J. Bryan in his palmiest days of a campaigner was a mere sideshow compared with the only P. T. Barnum of our day. It is estimated that he drew a small fortune out of his bank, staked it all on one card—and lost.