The preceding report appeared in the period after the dating of the Forward, after October, 1933 (as a Dutch translation of the English original) in the form of a ninety-nine page book published by an old, respected, still existent firm in Amsterdam. This book did not reach a wide public, however, since it disappeared after a short time forever from the book market, if it had ever been on sale publicly at all. Only isolated copies seem to have reached the hands of a third person. The existence of the book is not disputed. What is disputed is its authenticity. The firm explains that this book represents a huge falsification, or forgery:
The translator, Schoup, came to us with an original letter from Warburg, therefore we believed the book as well as its author to be genuine. After the book came out we learned from various sources that a Mr. Sidney Warburg, from the house Warburg in New York, did not exist and that the book was a massive deception. We immediately called back all copies from book dealers and destroyed the whole edition. We don't know if Schoup still lives: unfortunately he was never pursued.
The preceding German text is the exact word for word translation of the Dutch book edition.
Today, at the end of 1946, thirteen years after 1933, after the second World War and the downfall of the Third Reich, after the complete subjugation of the German people and after the Nuremberg trials against the highest ranking surviving Nazi leaders, and faced now by the threat of World War III, we feel obligated to publicize this text, unedited and uncut, in order to make way for an exact analysis of its contents and origin.
It is possible that this report is forged and that its contents are substantially untrue. It is possible that the report is forged, but that its contents are substantially true. It is possible that the report presents a mixture of fiction and truth. But it is equally possible that he report is genuine, or that it is substantially genuine, yet contains several deceptions that testify against its authenticity. Anything is possible. It is important to establish the truth about contents and origin.
We pose the question of the truthfulness of the report. What evidence is there that it is a forgery, i.e. that its contents are substantially false? If it is false, in whose interest and by whom was this forgery created? Can it be proven that the contents of the report are substantially authentic therefore true? Can it be ascertained what is true and what is false in it?
In any case it can be established that the report can be authentic and true, that its authenticity and accuracy cannot immediately be disputed. This proof will be demonstrated by the following facts available to us. The report names many concrete, commonly known occurrences and facts that are relatively easy to verify. It is supposed that Sidney Warburg is the New York banker and writer James Paul Warburg, son of Paul Warburg, who was Secretary of State under Wilson. Sidney can be a pseudonym. James P. Warburg was born in Hamburg in 1896. In 1902 he came to America with his father. As a young man he is said to have spent several years in his uncle's business in Hamburg, mentioned in the report on p. 6. At the time of his supposed trips to Germany he was 33 to 37 years old. James P. Warburg was an American delegate to the London World Economic Conference in 1933, mentioned on p. 4. James P. Warburg wrote a great deal about economics and politics. For example a book of his appeared in 1940, after many precedents, called Peace In Our Time?, one year later another, Our War and Our Peace, in 1944 another, Foreign Policy Begins at Home. In 1942 a book of his verse appeared entitled Man's Enemy and Man. Ferdinand Lundberg calls him "politically aggressive" in his well-known book America's Sixty Families. James P. should dispute the authorship of the report ascribed to him. The American Warburgs came from the old Hamburg banking family of Warburg. Felix Moritz Warburg, the promoter of Zionism, was born in 1871 in Hamburg, went to the U.S.A. in 1894 and married there in 1895 a daughter of Jacob Schiff from the banking house Kuhn, Loeb and Co. Felix had four sons who can eventually come into question as authors of the report, if the evidence of Warburg authorship is actually accurate. The case is improbable, however, because nothing seems to predestine them for this role. Paul Moria Warburg, father of James Paul, his only son, was born in 1868 in Hamburg, married a daughter of Salomon Loeb from the banking house Kuhn, Loeb & Co. in 1895 and settled, as mentioned above, in the U.S.A. in 1902. A relatively short time later he sat in Wilson's government. The oldest brother of Paul and Felix, Max M. Warburg, was born in Hamburg in 1867 and remained head of the Hamburg firm. With the marriage of the Warburgs into the New York bank Kuhn & Loeb, the Warburgs became the most important Jewish financial capitalist power.
The Warburg report contains several inaccuracies and errors that, at first glance, strengthen doubt in its authenticity. We would like to point out these places. On p. 2 the author wants to "describe briefly the state of American finance in 1929." But then he goes on to refer to incidents in the following years. The dissolution of the Darmstadt and National Bank, the Nordwolle crash, the crisis of the Austrian Kredit-Anstalt all took place in 1931, the payment of Young-Obligations in 1930. The amount of outstanding credits abroad the U.S.A. has, is given as 85 milliard dollars. This figure is much too high. American outstanding credits abroad were actually only 18 milliard dollars.
The title runs Three Conversations With Hitter. On p. 5 the author speaks of "four conversations." There were exactly three trips and five separate conversations with Hitler.
On p. 24 Carter's answering telegram reads: "Explain to man that such a transfer (of 200 to 500 million marks) to Europe will shatter financial market. Absolutely unknown on international territory." On p. 38 the author writes that "the transfer of such a large amount in a few days (one hundred million marks) from New York to Europe would certainly disturb the stockmarket." Without knowing too much about these financial transactions, this fear seems to us improbable.
On p. 30 the author mentions that the Nazis had received 107 delegates in the Reichstag on September 14, 1932. That is wrong. The Nazis received 107 delegates in the Reichstag on September 14, 1930, in 1932 they already had many more. On the same page the author writes: "My grandfather came to America ninety years ago, my father was born there." The father of the supposed author, Paul Warburg, was born in Hamburg and settled with his family in the U.S.A. in 1902.
The Nazi rally described on p. 32 applies to the Breslau election rally on March 1, 1933. Therefore it took place after the burning of the Reichstag and after Warburg's conversations with Hitler. The author must have read the report on his return trip from Berlin, not on the way there.
On p. 34 the author is reading in a German newspaper in February 1933 that "von Pfeffer had been dismissed by Hitler and that (Gregor) Strasser had been left cold because his brother (Otto) had incited mutiny among the Storm- Detachments." On p. 37 he has Hitler saying at the same time -- "von Pfeffer is no longer with us. The Strassers are laughable. A mutiny in the SA against me, a full meeting of all the Gauleiter, and the incident was over." The reader gets the impression that the cases of von Pfeffer and Otto Strasser had occurred very recently. Instead they happened in 1930. It is possible, however, that they took effect afterwards, and were mentioned again in conjunction with the Gregor Strasser crisis of early December 1932.
Perhaps the most obvious error is found on p. 34, where the author writes that Hitler has already been taken into the government, but is not yet Reichskanzler. The text on p. 35 also implies that in February 1933 according to the author von Papen, not yet Hitler, is chancellor. One can conclude from a sentence on p. 24 ("We should not forget that in 1931 Hitler was not yet Reichskanzler, just leader of a strong political party") that the author knows as he is writing the report in the summer of 1933 that Hitler is chancellor. The same can be taken from the phrase on p. 38 "after his final victory." Every school child in Europe knew in 1933 that Hitler became Reichskanzler immediately when he entered the government at the end of January, 1933 and he remained so until his death. Perhaps what helped create the error was the author's lively and accurate memory that Hitler was at first only nominally Reichskanzler, that von Papen & Co. did not want to give up actual power, and that the struggle for power within the government witnessed from up close by the author continued on until Hitler first seized total power in the summer of 1933. In general, the tension of the German struggle for power in February of 1933 is absolutely correctly described by the author.
It is possible that the report contains additional errors and inaccuracies like these. It is, however, doubtful that they speak for the forgery of the report as a whole. If we accept that the report is falsified then it originates from a very clever forger who has deep insight into actual facts. Such a clever forger would not allow clumsy mistakes like that of the Reichskanzler or the misdating of the number of delegates, all of which could make the reader mistrustful from the beginning. Perhaps some of these mistakes were made on purpose so the authorship could be denied if necessary, like, for example, the assumption that the author's family had been in the U.S.A. for 90 years. In fact these errors and superficialities speak more convincingly for authenticity than for forgery. An American banker, belonging to the circle of men of the world, who is at the same time not lost in inner European affairs, does not twist and turn every word seventeen times over before setting it down, as a German professor would. He writes off the top of his head, freely from memory, unhindered by larger or smaller exactitudes in side issues. As long as the main points emerge sharply and clearly, and it cannot be disputed that they do.
Finally the report contains not only these and perhaps other errors, but also a large number, a majority, of accurate and provable statements. In addition, it contains many profound and excellent observations that prove the author to be not an ordinary shoemaker but a well-read, experienced and knowledgeable mind with insight, explicable only by either high theoretical training or collected personal experiences from top levels. The report contains predictions that sounded improbable in 1933, but were confirmed by events since that time. Finally there is a marvelous admission from one who participated. Naturally Gobbels couldn't keep his big mouth shut. So he writes in his dairy "Von Kaiserhof zur Reichskanzlei" on February 20, 1933: "We are raising a huge sum for the election (Reichstag election of March 5, 1933) that disposes of all our financial problems at one blow." Even if we don't know, of course, if Gobbels' jubilant exclamation applies to the upposed American money to be sent by Warburg, the timely coincidence of both events is still remarkable.
The Warburg report as a whole gives an extremely serious impression, genuine, lively and believable. Descriptions of Hitler and the content of his conversations seem especially authentic and true, they agree with everything we know otherwise about the subject. After the errors have been pointed out, several especially relevant facts will be mentioned, along with comment.
From the beginning, the reference in the Forward to the conflict within the capitalist, the mixture of honesty, decency and corruption, proves great awareness. Marx, in Das Kapital spoke clearly of this economic role, the double role of the capitalist.
The great businessman, who won't let himself be deceived by any phrase, appears in short, brief sentences like:
Money is power. The banker knows how to concentrate and manage it. The international banker carries on international politics ... Whoever understands what was concealed behind the word "national" in the last few years and what is concealed there still also knows why the international banker cannot keep himself out of international politics. (p. 3)
The American banking world had never been enthusiastic about Wilson. Bankers and financiers viewed his idealism as good enough for the study, but unsuited to the practical, international world of business. (p. 4-5)
Look for the explanation in works on political economy, in examples of practical, international economy, in fat books on the subject containing much idiocy, all betray a complete lack of insight into reality. Political economists are, first of all, primarily academics. (p. 6-7)
Is he not right?
Carter and Rockefeller dominated the proceedings.
Carter is Morgan's representatives. Guaranty Trust belongs to the Morgan group. Morgan and Rockefeller, the uncrowned kings of the world, give the orders and hold the Hitlers like puppets on a string with their millions. Carter (father and son) are official figures in the leadership of the Morgan bank in Paris, which played a very large role in the financing of World War I and in the regulation of debts and reparations in the period between the wars. Is the man mentioned here perhaps identical with John Ridgley Carter, born in 1865, who married an Alice Morgan in 1887, was attached until 1911 to the American diplomatic service and since 1912 belongs to the leadership of the Morgan Bank in Paris? It fits rather well.
On p. 9 Hitler says: "We can't count on sympathy from the large capitalists yet, but they will have to support us when the movement has become powerful."
According to other widely held opinions that statement is completely accurate. Hitler received the first large sums of money from foreign capitalists like Ford, Deterding, etc. Wealthy German capitalists treated him with reserve for a long time. Only after he had already come to power did the majority follow him. But it was decisively foreign capital that made Hitler.
The views on foreign policy that Hitler held in 1931, according to the 1933 report, were substantiated by later events, as were, incidentally, his other predictions. His prediction of the Russian pact is the most amazing of all. On p. 20 Hitler says in 1931:
The German people must be totally self-sufficient, and if it doesn't work with France alone, then I will bring in Russia. The Soviets can't miss our industrial products yet. We will give credit, and if I am not able to deflate France myself, then the Soviets will help me.
This seemed completely crazy to Warburg at the time. That is why he added immediately:
I must make a small remark here. When I returned to my hotel I wrote this conversation down word for word. My notes are in front of me, and I am not responsible for their incoherence or incomprehensibility. If you think his views on foreign policy are illogical, it is his fault, not mine.
Hitler's evaluation of the German "Communists" on p. 22 is to the point:
The best people here in Berlin are Communists, their leaders complain to Moscow of their bad straits and demand help. But they don't realize that Moscow can't help. They have to help themselves, but are too cowardly for that.
The position of Jewish capitalists in relation to Hitler and his antisemitism, as it is described in the report, has also been proven by other sources.
I had a talk with a bank director in Hamburg whom I had known well in the past. (Very likely Warburg's uncle) He was quite taken in by Hitler ... It was hard for me to take his opinion seriously, because he was a Jew. I needed an explanation, so I asked him how it was possible for him, as a Jew, to be sympathetic to Hitler's party. He laughed. "Hitler is a strong man, and that is what Germany needs." (p. 18)
Again I posed my question of how my informant, as a Jew, could be a member of the Hitler party. He passed over the question with a sweep of his hand. "By Jews Hitler means Galician Jews, who polluted Germany after the war."
Warburg's comic dismay when Hitler rightfully compared the Jewish question in Germany with the Negro question in America is equally believable. (p. 38)
An important sphere of fact, that can strengthen adequately the real possibility of the Warburg report's authenticity by analogy concerns numerous, uncontested statements about moral, political and financial support and promotion of Hitler and German National Socialism by foreign and especially American capitalists, scattered about in the literature of these times.
First of all, the case of Henry Ford can be mentioned. The American automobile king was known in the twenties as the richest man in the world. At the beginning of the twenties he carried on an open, well-known alliance with the German anti-semites as their patron-saint, supported by the book The International Jew, illustrated by him and written by White Russian anti-semites. This book appeared in German published by the anti-semitic Hammer Verlag. In a publisher's announcement he writes:
This book has long since taken its place in the armoury of every mentally alert German person. No other publication of similar scope that treats the Jewish question with intellectual reasoning can claim a wider circulation.
On January 19, 1923, the Hasler Nachrichten reports:
On September 13, 1923 the Judische Pressenzentrale Zurich (Central Jewish Press, Zurich) writes:
The anti-semitic International is organizing itself. As the JOB representative discovered, this (anti- semitic) agitation (in Czechoslovakia) started about two years ago: immediately after the negotiations Henry Ford conducted with German politicians in Czechoslovakia. The kind of agitation going on in Czechoslovakia strengthens the suspicion that there is a central location for international anti-semitic propaganda, seeking to systematically, according todefinite plan, incite an anti-semitic world movement.
On November 9, 1923, shortly after Hitler's beer hall putsch, the Vienna Arbeiter-Zeitung (Workers Newspaper) wrote that "it was well known that Henry Ford was spending large sums to stir up the anti-semitic movement in Europe."
The Judische Pressenzentrale Zurich reported on March 24, 1924: -- "Attacks on Henry Ford in the American Congress."
In one of the last sessions of Congress, Congressman La Guardia delivered a sharp speech attacking Henry Ford, accusing him of spreading anti-semitism in Europe. La Guardia explained: "Henry Ford's wealth, along with his ignorance, have made it possible for malicious people to conduct a vile campaign against the Jews. This is not only true in America, but in the whole world. This inhuman, unchristian, and evil campaign has reached the other shores of the ocean and we see its consequences in the pogroms of innocent, helpless Jews in various parts of Europe. Refute this if you can!"
On April 25, 1924 Crispin wrote in the Berlin Vorwarts (Forward) under the title: "Ludendorf and the Jews" --
To complete Ludendorf's character profile, the source of his wisdom about the Jews will be revealed. The source of his wisdom is, according to his own testimony, the book circulated under Ford's name: The International Jew.
In 1927 an attack appeared against the anti-semites by C.A. Loosli: "The Evil Jews!" The author polemicizes mainly against the two literary leaders of anti-semitism, Ford and Rosenberg. He uses the expressions "Ford and his swastika- confederates" (p. 57), "the German anti-semites in alliance with Ford" (p. 60) , "Mr. Ford and Mr. Rosenberg" (p. 33).
The following appeared in Upton Sinclair's book about Ford, the automobile king, that came out in German in 1938 published by Malik Verlag, London:
The former editor of the Dearborn Independent (belonging to Ford) who had written the anti-semitic article, was now Ford's private secretary and press chief, controlling all his public relations. William J. Cameron had not changed his views one iota; on the contrary, he was in contact with numerous anti-semitic agents in the whole world and connected them with Henry Ford ... Ford's millions surrounded him like a prisoner with Nazi agents and fascist slanderers. They had already begun to work on him when the Hitler movement was still young, and had received $40,000 from him for a German edition of the anti-semitic brochure, the names of Hitler and Ford appearing together in the prospectus. Later on a grandson of the ex Kaiser joined up with Ford, and by his help $300,000 flowed into the Nazi party. Henry Ford had huge factories in Germany, and it was no utopian idealism that prompted him to fight the strikes in that country. -- Then Fritz Kuhn entered the picture, Hitler's primary agent in America, the uniformed head of the German-American Bund, a semi-military organization. He moved his headquarters to Detroit and received a post in the laboratories of the Ford works. A new anti-semitic campaign was begun and the Ford factory swarmed with Nazis. (p. 248-249)
The German Hitler movement grew and took strength from 1920 on under the direct, open and close participation of Ford. Only when Ford's public support was no longer necessary did he separate himself from anti-semitism. He continued to aid Hitler, however. The latter conferred an order on him after his takeover. The Volksrecht (People's Rights) reported on September 19, 1945:
The Ford works are accused of furnishing supplies regularly to the Nazis. The correspondent from TASS Agency in New York reports: "Documents discovered in Germany, as well as thorough investigation have proven that the American Ford Co. produced war materials for the Nazis and assisted German armaments before and during the war up to 1944. Before Pearl Harbor, Henry Ford himself approved the contracts between his factories and the Hitler government ... In 1939 a gift of 50,000 marks is said to have been turned over to Hitler from representatives of the Ford works."
The American origin of European fascism is also evident in a report from the Judische Pressezentrale Zurich of December 22, 1922:
One of the leaders of the Ku Klux Klan explained in a conversation with journalists that the KKK had made all the preparations to expand into a world organization ... in a very short time a branch organization would be founded in Canada, while trusted agents were being sent at the same time to Europe to create a KKK organization in various European countries. It would not last long and the movement would cover the whole world.
The European KKK did come to life in the form of fascism and National Socialism.
Occurrences in Bavaria in 1923 provide very interesting and significant information about foreign financial sources of the Nazis. Foreign impetus and interests behind the Nazis are easier to pinpoint in the beginnings of the movement because they were not as pronounced then, and methods of disguise were not yet well-developed. Events in Bavaria prove that foreign powers and interests were involved in the fascist movement from the very beginning, wishing to guide it according to their desires.
In March, 1923 a monarchist takeover in Bavaria was attempted by Fuchs, Machhaus & Co. The Vienna Arbeiter- Zeitung wrote on June 24, 1923:
The trial (against Machhaus & Co.) has, to begin with, established with completely unshakable evidence the French government's financing of the fascist movement. It was incontestably proven and confirmed by all witnesses that more than one hundred million marks were given by the French agent Richert to the fascist organizations in the second half of last year ... France has invested its money well in the German Nazis, Millerand and Hitler are playing conveniently into each other's hands!
On July 10, 1923 the same newspaper writes on the affair again:
In clarifying the verdict it was explained that ... the money at his (Richert's) disposal was intended to finance a takeover in Bavaria and the overthrow of the German Reich ... Richert was working under assignment to the French government, and if his power seizure had succeeded he would have had to appear in court as the primary defendant along with the French government ... The attempt to overthrow the German government by Richert-Fuchs-Machhaus was a highly official destructive undertaking by the French government against the political stability of the German nation and thereby against the national unity of the German people. The French government planned to carry out this overthrow in close coordination with the other French actions in the Ruhr. French armies on the Rhine and on the Ruhr had orders to begin marching from Frankfurt to Hof at the moment of the Bavarian putsch, thereby dividing the German north from the German south. The Bavarian overthrow would then be the pretext for the occupation of the Main river through France, and the French government would hope for further advantages from the success of separatist campaign efforts in Bavaria.
This is the plan of action of World War II in a nutshell. Only the real model for Fuchs-Machhaus is Hitler, for France is America and for Richert is Warburg.
Hitler also had French money in 1923. His leader of the Storm Troopers, Ludecke, had armed and invested one Storm-Detachment of the Munich Hitler-Guard with uniforms at French costs, but soon afterwards, to Hitler's sorrow, was discovered by the police with huge sums in franks and exposed. (See Vienna Arbeiter-Zeitung) of March 19, 1923). But Hitler not only had franks, he had surprising amounts of dollars in the inflationary times of 1923. Was his unusual strength perhaps the result of the possession of so many dollars? The Vienna Arbeiter-Zeitung asked on April 15, 1923: "Shouldn't names like Ford, the American patron of anti-semitism, be found under the gift-happy German Nazis living abroad?"
On February 17, 1923, the Vienna Arbeiter-Zeitung reported the following story under the title: "The Hitler with the Dollars" --
What a shame for the Nazis. First it was proven that they received money from the French. Then one of their leaders is unmasked as a French spy and arrested. Now the Munchner Post is in a position to prove that even Hitler, well-known Nazi general, is in possession of a surprisingly large number of dollars. Our Munich party newspaper writes: Shortly before the National Socialist Parteitag Hitler appeared at a Munich business office in the company of his 'bodyguard' to buy furniture for the editorial offices of the Volkischer Beobachter (People's Observer) a new Nazi sheet. After the Parteitag the business owner went personally to the offices of the Volkischer Beobachter to collect the amount. Hitler was in the process of opening the mail. He removed huge sums in dollars from several envelopes sent to him. He payed the amount of five million from a briefcase stuffed with dollar bills. The somewhat amazed face of the businessman obviously must have prompted him to give an explanation for this, after all, quite unusual situation. He said off the top of his head: "The old fuddy-duddies always want to know where we get our money. You see, Germans living abroad support our movement. If we had to rely just on contributions from industrial magnates, then we would have needed long ago to get help from Germans living abroad." Mr. Hitler, then, has as you can see large amounts of money in foreign values at his disposal. The twisted explanation he felt he owed to the businessman, that the money came from Germans living abroad, is just a way out of an embarrassing situation. The money comes from abroad, and the hardly contested fact that the National Socialist party is fed through foreign channels is thereby firmly established.
In the Munich Hitler trials of 1924 it was determined that Hitler received $20,000 from Nuremberg industrialists for his putsch. Nothing annoyed Hitler as much as the accusation that he was being financed by foreign capitalists. For that reason, during the course of his rise to power in 1933 he would bring libel actions against those who aired such opinions. Since the accused could naturally not produce receipts and written corroborations, and the courts protected Hitler, and since in addition former participants and witnesses who had turned against the Nazis were cruelly persecuted by their former friends, Hitler emerged regularly as the victor from these trials, if he didn't prefer just to let them run themselves out.
Such a trial took place in 1923 in Munich. The Vienna Arbeiter-Zeitungwrote on June 23, 1923:
Lantag delegate Auer declared as witness he had received the information that sums of money, one of them thirty million marks, had been transferred three times from the Saar territory to the Deutsche Bank, and had reached the possession of people who had otherwise not had any money to dispose of. There had been evidence proving that the money originated from Ford, the automobile factory owner, who played a large role in the National Socialist Workers Party, and was one of the authorities in the French iron syndicate. -- Shopkeeper Christian Weber, member of the National Socialist party leadership, declared that the party certainly did get money from abroad, largely from party members in Czechoslovakia and from friends in America.
A similar trial took place against the writer Abel in Munich in the summer of 1932, therefore shortly before Hitler's power takeover. The Imprekoor of June 14, 1932 reported the following:
Hitler and some of his people who entered the battle as witnesses, tried their best to be vague and reveal nothing. The courts even came to Hitler's assistance in these efforts. Yet the trial did, in certain ways, explain things ... The focal point of the trial was the interrogation of Hitler, which took place under sensational circumstances. The leader of the Brown House was obviously concerned with exploding the proceedings, to avoid embarrassing questions. He actually succeeded in slipping away at the right moment thanks to a true attack of delirium (even with foam on the mouth!) ... He escaped scot-free when the question of foreign financial sources came up. He did, though, condescend to the ambiguous admission that the NSDAT had always been supported by its members abroad; therefore Germans abroad and naturally also Nazi patrons in Germany could be the channels through which money from Deterding, Schneider-Creuzot and Skoda could have flowed. But when the lawyers asked Hitler completely straightforward questions, he began to scream like one possessed, to insult the lawyers and refuse testimony. Even the Munich court, normally so favorable to him, could not get away from fining him 1,000 marks for "abusive behavior" and refusal of testimony, which could hurt Hitler. -- Hitler's denials and raging are highly transparent. He has already been exposed on the one issue to which he responded, and he can even be suspected of perjury. He explained that he had never seen or spoken to the Italian Migliarati, who, according to Abel's assertion, is suspected of turning over sums of money to him. Meanwhile it was already proven in the Bayrischen Courier that Migliarati publicized an interview with Hitler at a critical point. It is now completely understandable why Hitler let it come to a denial of testimony and then left Munich in a hurry. Answers to numerous, very precise questions from the defense would have shed a great deal of light on Hitler's financial sources, on actions a leader can actually get away with, but which the rank and file will not tolerate.
The Neue Zurcher Zeitung also felt the same way, that Hitler verified Abel's accusations rather than disproved them by his unusual behavior in court.
The strong financial connections between Sir Henry Deterding, head of the Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., and Hitler are well known and still fresh in the memory so that it is enough just to mention the name here. Konrad Heiden writes on this matter in his Hitler biography: "Direct and indirect financial connections to Henry Deterding ... the great inspiration and donor to anti-bolshevist campaigns were not denied."
Hitler received many millions of dollars from Deterding, Deterding's last residence was an estate in Germany, and a representative of the Hitler government spoke at his graveside.
There are numerous allusions and evidence in contemporary literature concerning Hitler's foreign financial sources, from which those previously quoted are but a few examples, and the following additional ones will be mentioned:
The Neue Zurcher Zeitung wrote in their daily edition of October 18, 1929, as the Nazi movement was beginning to grow to huge proportions, under the title "Non olet!" (Money doesn't smell!):
The unusual amount of propaganda released today by the National Socialists all over Germany, their costumes and soldier-games, all items costing large sums of money, demand the question: where is the money coming from? It can't possibly originate just from the organization itself, considering how the whole structure is put together. Where is it coming from? The Badische Beobachter, leading organ of central Baden ... has very interesting information about financial sources flowing into the Hitler movement. They form a conclusion as to where the money for the extensive, costly apparatus of National Socialist agitation originates ... Noteworthy for these inheritors of patriotism, who make daily accusations of treason against their opponents, and who estimate themselves especially highly for their absolute German-ness, is that the money behind their movement is mainly procured from abroad. A Dr. Gausser dealt with Swiss donors, the Munich art dealer Hanffstangel with the Americans, an engineer Jung and Dr. Krebs with Czechoslovakians, the university Professor Freiherr von Bissing collected money for the Hitler movement in Holland. The correspondence was treated with great care and took place only under disguised addresses. The name Hitler was never mentioned. He was always called "Wolfi" in the letters ... money came also from Ford and large sums were given by big industrialists in Czechoslovakia ... Along with the foreign source of the money goes, according to this report, its capitalistic origin, a characteristic that still plays the most substantial role in the financing of the National Socialist Party today, in addition to everything else known or suspected of the movement.
Finally the fact must be mentioned that on February 11, 1932 the Socialist delegate Paul Faure proved in the French Chambers that the Czech Skoda Works together with the European Industry and Finance Union, which works in connection with Schneider-Creuzot, payed out huge sums to Hitler's German National Socialist Party.
At the end of 1931 Hitler gave an explanation of foreign policy to the English-American press that fits perfectly with his opinions in the Warburg report. The Imprekoor of December 8, 1931 remarked under the title: "Hitler on His Knees Before World Finance."
The Nazis believe in the old illusion that they can rely upon England and America for support when faced with French imperialism. That is why in this speech Hitler assumed the English-American thesis of the "priority" of private over political debts. That is why he spiced up his explanations of the tribute question with several attacks on Paris, by speculating on growing anti-French sentiment especially in England ... That is why he made an especially strong admission concerning the payment of English- American loans and credits.
The valuable testimony of Dodd will now be cited here. Dodd was the American ambassador in Berlin from 1933- 1938. In this position he met many highly-placed American and German personalities. His notes were published by his children in 1943 as a book which became famous. Hitler's support by American capital appears with unusual clarity in Dodd's diary. American bankers who were anxious about their investments in Germany supported Nazism without exception. After Hitler had come to power, American and English armament industries delivered war materials to him. Also rich Jews tolerated and assisted Hitler, among them the Warburgs. A few especially noteworthy remarks in Dodd's sketches are enough to illustrate the point.
Dodd writes of a rich New Yorker:
He was very strongly against the Russian Revolution and enthusiastic about Hitler's regime in Germany. He hates Jews and hopes to see them treated accordingly. Naturally he advised me to let Hitler go his own way. (p. 24)
Professor John Coar wished to speak with complete frankness, He told me that he had been a personal friend of Adolf Hitler's and in 1923 had advised him against his putsch in Bavaria. (So Hitler had American advisors among his circle already in 1923!) Hitler continued to give him interviews all the time and he was intending to go to Hitler's summer house in Bavaria in several days. He offered to bring me back an exact report of his conversation with Hitler, if I would give him a letter for President Roosevelt, to whom he wished to bring a final report. (p. 34)
Schacht is the real master here, and government officials don't dare order him to do anything. (Entry of January 3, 1934) (p. 82)
One evening my wife visited Baron Eberhard von Oppenheim, who lives splendidly and quietly near us. Many German Nazis were present. It is said that Oppenheim gave the Nazi party 200,000 marks, and that he had received a special party dispensation, declaring him to be an Aryan. (p. 86)
Ivy Lee and his son James came to lunch at 1:30. Ivy Lee proved to be both a capitalist and advocate of fascism at the same time. He told stories of his battle for the recognition of Russia, and was inclined to give credit for it. His sole endeavor was to raise American business profits. (p. 87)
Lazaron (an American rabbi) is here to gain information about possibilities for the Warburgs, who regret Rabbi Wise's extreme stand (against the Nazis). (p. 148)
The prominent Hamburg banker Max Warburg, brother of Felix Warburg in New York, came to the embassy to see me at the request of Rabbi Lazaron. The troubled life he had led in the last few years showed on him, and he was now in danger of losing his life if his views were ever made known to the government. He stayed one hour. He thinks Rabbi Wise and Samuel Untermyer in New York have severely jeopardized Jews living in the United States as well as in Germany with their public outcry. He said Felix Warburg was of the same opinion. These two men are in complete agreement with Colonel House, who tries to ease the Jewish boycott (against Nazi Germany) and to reduce the number of Jews in high places in the United States. (p. 155)
I visited Eric Phipps and repeated confidentially a report that Armstrong Vickers, the huge British armaments concern, had negotiated the sale of war materials here last week ... Last Friday I told Sir Eric that British armament people were selling massive amounts of war materials here. I was frank enough -- or indiscreet enough -- to add that I understood representatives of Curtiss-Wright, from the U.S. were here to negotiate similar sales. (p. 186)
I told Lewis that Hearst has supported and visited Mussolini for five or six years. I informed him of Hearst's visit to Berlin last September and his deal with Gobbels that the German Propaganda Ministry should have all European Hearst-newspapers at the same time as the United States. (p. 221)
Poor Lazaron was very upset because so many rich Jews have capitulated to the Nazi leadership and are influential financial aides to Dr. Schaft, who finds their support in the present situation very important. (p. 236)
Even the Nuremberg Trials could not suppress the evidence of the once close, friendly and good relations between English-American capital, its governments and Hitler, in spite of the efforts of the court to guard zealously that this side of the issue was never raised, by declaring statements about it "irrelevant and immaterial." Schacht in particular mentioned this critical subject.
When Schacht brought up again the relations of foreign powers to the National Socialist regime and the assistance they bestowed upon it, the court decided that this information had nothing to do with the issue, and was therefore inadmissible ... Schacht had let representatives of foreign powers convince him they should support the National Socialist government in its infancy. The court refused to admit all these statements. (NZZ no.758, May 2, 1946)
Funk wrote a report (on the financial aid Hitler received from capitalists) that shed light on the early history of the Third Reich in an interesting way. The role of the donors must be given great importance, because their gifts and the assistance they otherwise granted promoted Hitler's rise extraordinarily. For that reason a heavy historical burden rests on the bankers and industrialists concerned. Along with Schacht, von Papen and Hugenberg they belong to the "steps of the ladder," that group of influential men who made important contributions to the final success of National Socialism. (NZZ no. 805, May 8, 1946)
Baldur von Schitach spoke more than an hour long about his youth and said, among other things, that it had been Henry Ford's book The International Jew that had converted him to anti-semitism. (NZZ no. 916, May 24, 1946)
These are several illustrations of Hitler's support through foreign capitalists. This collection could go on forever. The examples mentioned are enough for our purposes.
Hitler was made not only by German capital, but primarily by international and especially America capital that intervened decisively from the beginning, from ca. 1920, in the battle for power in Germany. If this German battle for power had been decided within the Weimar Republic by German means only, then Hitler would never have won. Hitler became the strongest man in Germany because he had access to the strongest international assistance. His strength and success can only be understood at all when this fact is taken into account.
The Warburg report can be genuine. We do not assume that is genuine because we lack absolute proof (incidentally proof is also lacking to assume forgery). So the Warburg report remains a problem for the time being. One can certainly assume that the Warburg report is symbolically true, since it describes in a simple, generally understood and plain way the actual relations between Hitler and American and international capital, evidence which has been proven a thousand times over. Hitler used American and international capital to cause World War II, to destroy and finally occupy Germany and Europe.
Who is worse, the instruments or their instigators, who subsequently wash their hands in innocence, and damn their own instruments and creations, disposing of them as dangerous witnesses in the end? An "order" that needs such instruments and means must be condemned.
The Warburg report, should it be genuine, is one of the most interesting and important documents of our epoch as it illuminates that whole area of darkness in which Hitler and the second World War were made, and because it proves that the core of international capital, American capital, is war criminal number one.
It is over and above a sociological and political "textbook" of the first order, because it presents relations between economy and politics of our time concretely, as living testimony, giving the reader a look into the secret inner chambers of the capitalist empire. At the same time it is a shattering document, because it is made abundantly clear that the unbelievable suffering and sacrifice of humanity in the last fifteen years were brought about and suffered in the interests of international and especially American high finance. It is an obligation to general power and to humanity to discover the truth about this report and to publicize and circulate it to this purpose.