America at war! (1941–) – Part 4

Poll: Peace needs in Europe confuse public

Conflict in thinking on occupation, education
By George Gallup, Director, American Institute of Public Opinion

Boy, an ex-Marine at 15, to reenter high school

After going through rigorous boot training youth is ‘discovered’ and discharged

Millett: ‘Babysitters’ are needed

Help young folks have recreation
By Ruth Millett

Big weekend may complete Brown collapse

By Glen Perkins, United Press staff writer

Ernie Pyle V Norman

Roving Reporter

By Ernie Pyle

In France – (by wireless)
We left Paris after a few days and went again with the armies in the field. In Paris we had slept in beds and walked on carpeted floors for the first time in three months.

It was a beautiful experience, and yet for some perverse reason a great inner feeling of calm and relief came over us when we once again set up our cots in a tent, with apple trees for our draperies and only the green grass for a rug.

Hank Gorrell of the United Press was with me, and he said, “This is ironic, that we should have to go back with the armies to get some peace.”

The gaiety and charm and big-cityness of Paris somehow had got a little on our nerves after so much of the opposite. I guess it indicate that all of us will have to make our return to normal life gradually and in small doses.

Paris prices inflated

Paris unquestionably is a lovely city. It seems to me to have been but little hurt by the war. You can still buy almost anything imaginable if you have money. Everybody is well-dressed. But prices are terrific, and already they have started zooming higher.

Those of us who expect to be coming home before long have made shopping tours and stocked up with gifts. And with the exception of perfume, which is dirt cheap, we pay about three times what we would at home for the same thing.

I’m sorry the restaurants could not open before we left. For although I’m not much of a gourmet I do value the sense of taste, and we’ve eaten enough meals in private homes and small-town restaurants over here to realize that it’s all true about the French culinary genius.

They simply have a knack for making any old thing taste wonderful, just as the British have a knack for making everything taste horrible.

The other night we were talking about the beautiful women of Paris – as who doesn’t?

One fellow said the women here were the most beautiful in the world.

They have that knowhow

But I said no, that wasn’t true. You see women in America and England who are just as beautiful as any in Paris. But it seems that here the percentage of good-looking women is higher than in other countries.

And another fellow said no, that wasn’t it either. He thought the ratio was approximately the same in America and England and France. But in Paris a bigger percentage have the gift of getting themselves up to look devastating.

And I guess that’s it.

We thought there were a lot of people on the streets those first two days. But you should have seen Paris a few days later, when the whole populace began to come out. By midafternoon it is almost impossible to drive in the streets because of the bicycles. They take up the entire street, as far as you can see. The sidewalks are packed. It’s like Christmas shopping tithe at home.

Within three days, Paris was transformed from a city crackling and roaring with brief warfare into a city entirely at peace. With in three days Paris was open for business as usual, and its attitude toward the war reminded me of Cairo after it threat of danger had gone.

As usual, those Americans most deserving of seeing Paris will be the last ones to see it, if they ever do. By that 1 mean the fighting soldiers.

Rear echelons get the kisses

Only one infantry regiment and one reconnaissance outfit of Americans actually came into Paris, and they passed on through the city quickly and went on with their war.

The first ones in the city to stay were such nonfighters as the psychological-warfare and Civil Affairs people, public-relations men and correspondents.

I heard more than one rear-echelon soldier say he felt a little ashamed to be getting all the grateful cheers and kisses for the liberation of Paris when the guys who broke the German Army and opened the way for Paris to be free were still out there fighting without benefit of kisses or applause.

But that’s the way things are in this world.


Stokes: Ghostwriters

By Thomas L. Stokes

Washington –
Every now and then a frank sort of fellow turns up in politics who won’t play by the old rules and who shows up the pretenses and synthetic practices such as, for example, speeches prepared by ghostwriters.

It’s an old custom, this business of making speeches written by someone else, practices by men of both parties, even including Presidents. Many a contribution by those earnestly interested in the election this year will find its way into the pockets of men smart with words who sit in backrooms at campaign headquarters and pound out on loose-limbed phrases and bright quips.

This is not to say they get rich at it. Far from that. But there are so many of them in campaign years. Their reward is in thinking up the stuff, in imagining how they’ve caught the other side off-guard or on a vulnerable point. Their despair comes when they are sitting at the radio at night with the family and hear their product butchered, words mispronounced, emphasis in the wrong place, and they mutter: “Why, the so-and-so can’t even read!”

Governor Warren incident

The latest ghostwriting scandal is amusing. It was ferreted out by shrewd little Senator Joe O’Mahoney of Wyoming, who is in charge of the Democratic senatorial campaign.

He said flatly the three Republican governors who started off the gubernatorial phase of the campaign didn’t like the speeches written for them by National Chairman Brownell’s ghostwriting squad in New York headquarters and had changed them before delivery.

One of the three, Governor Earl Warren of California, spoke up promptly. Yes, he had changed his.

Californian is frank

Republicans probably learned another lesson, too, from this episode, which is to be careful with Governor Warren.

They got burned on him once before when he refused to accept the vice-presidential nomination at Chicago, a minor sensation. It is a sensation when a fellow turns down a vice-presidential nomination, for you always see so many hopefuls around national conventions.

Governor Warren is a frank gentleman, and it seems to take Republicans a long time to find that out. Long before the convention, he kept saying he couldn’t accept the nomination. But Republicans wouldn’t believe him. He was not sure the Republicans could win this year, nor that they could carry California.

The ghostwriting incident indicates he’s not so sure yet about California. He showed this in the changes in his speech. The original sent him from New York bore down heavy on the CIO and its PAC. He toned that down considerably.

The CIO is strong in California, and presumably has done a good job of registering its voters. Governor Warren is taking no chances.

Maj. de Seversky: Jap airpower

By Maj. Alexander P. de Seversky

Over 1,000 U.S. fliers rescued from Romania

Liberated Yanks kiss crews of Fortresses flying them back to Italian bases
By Sgt. L. E. Smith, written for the United Press

51 Guam natives beheaded by Japs

By Charles Arnot and Mac R. Johnson

French keep secret lists on Nazi terror

Stories verified by underground troops
By Carleton Kent, North American Newspaper Alliance

Nazis claim three secret weapons

One is described as ‘flaming cloud’

No draft changes this year foreseen

Reporter escapes from Germans


Browder-Hillman axis seeks more power, GOP governor says

New Deal welcomes ‘political thugs,’ he adds; Truman inconsistent, Governor Martin charges

New York (UP) –
Governor Andrew F. Schoeppel of Kansas charged last night that the “Browder-Hillman Communist axis,” attempting to “parade under the banner of labor,” was backing the Roosevelt administration for a fourth term because “they want a government in Washington that is indebted to them up to the ears.”

Mr. Schoeppel’s speech highlighted the second of a series of radio talks by Republican governors. Others on the program last night were Governor Edward Martin of Pennsylvania and Governor Edward J. Thye of Minnesota.

Mr. Schoeppel said:

For the past 12 years there has been allowed to grow up in this country small groups of ambitious men who have organized themselves into “pressure groups” as we have come to call them.

The New Deal administration has been attempting to curry favor with these groups. It has not mattered who they were or what they stood for.

The most despicable graft-ridden gang of political thugs is welcomed with wide open arms as they can deliver a block of votes. We now have a national administration which has aligned itself with every corrupt political machine in the country.

He charged that union leaders and members had disowned Sidney Hillman’s Political Action Committee which he said “takes its doctrines direct from Earl Browder.”

Mr. Martin, who spoke first, accused Democratic vice-presidential candidate Harry S. Truman of inconsistency and said the Missouri Senator himself previously had said the nation was “in danger of losing this war in Washington” because of red tape and bureaucratic waste, conflicts between military and civilian agencies and the failure to delegate authority.

‘Hungry for votes’

As a “candidate hungry for votes,” Mr. Truman is not willing to repeat the statements he made as a “United States Senators bent on winning the war,” Mr. Martin said in referring to the speech the Democratic vice-presidential candidate made Thursday night in officially accepting his nomination at Lamar, Missouri.

Mr. Martin quoted Mr. Truman as having said there was a “lack of courageous, unified leadership and centralized direction at the top,” and asserted the Senator no longer talks about such things as the “tragic collapse of the War Production Board.”

He said:

The New Deal in 12 long years has proved one thing – and one thing only.

That is its incapacity to go on for 16 years; its incapacity to make a peace that will stick; its incapacity to lead us into a post-war America in which there will be jobs enough to go around.

Mr. Thye presented Republican presidential nominee Thomas E. Dewey as a stateman with a sound, progressive, American doctrine who will give the nation the “house-cleaning” it needs.

Vigorous man urged

Mr. Thye said his state of Minnesota had been in the hands of a “radical political machine” until the people rose to “drive out the Communists and their allies” and elect Governor Harold Stassen. He predicted a similar uprising in the nation.

Quoting Mr. Dewey as having said, “America is young and does not know defeat,” Mr. Thye asserted:

In the years ahead, we want a man out in front who can take it, who has the vigor, the courage and the foresight to take it and yet keep on going.

Mr. Martin spoke from Harrisburg, Mr. Schoeppel from Kansas City and Mr. Thye from Minnesota.

U.S. State Department (September 2, 1944)

740.00116 E.W./9–144: Telegram

The Minister in Switzerland to the Secretary of State

Bern, September 1, 1944 — 11 p.m.
[Received September 2 — noon.]


I read all the pertinent portions of your 2905 August 23 to Mr. Pilet and inquired whether he was prepared to give assurances that Axis leaders and their criminal henchmen would be refused admittance to Switzerland. In reply Mr. Pilet assured me that the Federal Council would be most prudent (French “sage”). They had fully in mind the “exterior” as well as the “interior” repercussions that might arise should such persons be granted asylum. As examples he mentioned Hitler, Himmler, Mussolini, Laval, De Brinon and other members of Laval Cabinet. Mr. Pilet denied rumors that Laval had sought permission to come to Switzerland. Members of armed forces of Reich including SS seeking refuge would be interned. Members of Gestapo, a foreign police, would not be admitted. There might be difficulty in deciding cases of prominent German army officers. In principle refuge would be continued for women and children. Mr. Pilet also stated that each case would be carefully considered and decided on basis of its effect on security and in light of best interests of Switzerland.


Lot 60–D 224, Box 55: DO/PR/10

Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State to the Secretary of State

Washington, September 2, 1944


Meeting of the Formulation Group on Security
The group reconsidered the questions relating to the determination of threats to and breaches of the peace and action with regard thereto, and made a number of verbal changes in the points agreed to yesterday. The only changes of substance were the following:

  1. It was agreed that no reference should be made in the basic instrument of the organization to the interim provision by the states party to the Moscow Declaration, pending the conclusion of special agreements on this subject, of forces and facilities necessary for the maintenance of peace and security.

  2. It was agreed that there should be attached to the council a Military Committee composed of representatives of the Chiefs of Staff of the permanent members of the council, the functions of which would be to advise and assist the council on all questions relating to the employment of forces placed at the disposal of the council. Representatives of other states might be associated with this committee from time to time.

Meeting of the Formulation Group on General Organization
The Formulation Group of the Subcommittee on General Organization met this afternoon to reformulate certain provisions relating to the functions, procedures and voting methods of the council.

As regards functions, the Group agreed that:

  1. In order to insure prompt and effective action, member states should confer on the council primary responsibility to maintain peace and security.

  2. In order to carry out this responsibility the council should be empowered to encourage states to settle their disputes by peaceful means, to recommend appropriate procedures of adjustment and, in cases where failure to settle a dispute constitutes a threat to the peace, to take all necessary measures to maintain or restore peace; and to take effective collective measures to prevent and suppress threats to or breaches of the peace.

  3. In discharging these responsibilities, the council should act on behalf of all members of the organization. (There was a slight difference between the American and British members on the one hand, and the Soviet on the other, as to the wording of the obligatory character of the council’s decisions on member states.)

On procedure, the Group agreed:

  1. That a state not having a seat on the council should be invited to attend during the consideration of a dispute of which it is a party, but that the council should decide whether to invite a state not having a seat on the council to attend when its other interests are especially affected.

  2. To present for further consideration by the Steering Committee the wording of a paragraph relating to the continuous session of the council and the character of permanent representation on the council.

In regard to voting, the Group formulated four questions for further consideration:

  1. Whether the normal vote of the council should be by majority or two-thirds.

  2. Whether the provisions for unanimous vote of the permanent members should be enumerated or left in general terms.

  3. Whether provision should be made for voluntary abstention.

  4. Whether the vote of a party to a dispute should be counted.

740.00119 E.W./9–244: Circular telegram

The Secretary of State to Certain American Diplomatic and Consular Officers

Washington, September 2, 1944 — 11 p.m.

The Department considers that until the situation is clarified by Rumanian and Bulgarian acceptance of Allied armistice terms and until the status of the governments of these two countries is ascertained your attitude toward their diplomatic officials should remain unchanged.


Reading Eagle (September 2, 1944)


Pegler: Paid by Spelvin

By Westbrook Pegler

New York –
When Mrs. Roosevelt made her flight to the South Pacific last year, to visit and cheer the troops, it was announced that the Red Cross, whose uniform she wore for this occasion, bore no part of the expense. For some reason which never was made clear, it was stated further, Mrs. Roosevelt would donate to the Red Cross and the American Society of Friends each, one-half of the proceeds of her column for the period of her absence. The amount of that donation has never been revealed and the Red Cross in Washington, per James K. McClintock, vice chairman in charge of finance, now specifically refuses to give the information on the reasonable ground that the Red Cross never does reveal such data unless the contributor indicates a desire that this be done.

As a matter of more or less idle speculation, I might offer a guess that one-half of Mrs. Roosevelt’s syndicate royalties for a month would have been not more than $1,500. However, it is really none of our business how much she gave the Red Cross, even though she did invite our interest by this announcement which suggested that she was, in some sense, paying her way.

Inasmuch as the Red Cross did not pay the expenses, then who did?

The four-engine ship in which Mrs. Roosevelt flew was the property of the people of the United States and of a type which we have been told costs about $250,000. An executive of one of the large western companies which builds such planes says there are on hand a number of special jobs called super-dupers which are quite ornate and luxurious by comparison with the wagons which do the routine hauling. They are held in reserve for dignitaries of the government who have to keep up in their paperwork while in Right and are not physically hardened to withstand extreme and prolonged discomfort. I find no fault with that.

We were given many details of Mrs. Roosevelt’s journey, but this publicity was handled with more delicacy than we understood at the time. Although we did hear much about her progress, including the nose-rubbing incident, we never have been told whether the ship in which she flew was a super-duper or whether, at certain stages of the flight, she was accompanied by protecting fighter planes, which would have used a considerable amount of high-octane gasoline deducted from the supply available for civilian use here at home, and hauled to the Pacific islands and Australian bases, every drop of it, in tankers, at great peril and effort. There have been reports that Mrs. Roosevelt was so accompanied, but I think it would be useless to ask Gen. Arnold for information on this point, including details of gas consumption, because he could say this was military information and he would be right. Anyway, it would be unfair to put him on a spot that way.

The distance traveled by Mrs. Roosevelt, exclusive of any extra mileage of the escort fighters and mileage ashore in automobiles for Mrs. Roosevelt and the attending dignitaries (all using American motor fuel made available by the self-denial of the people at home) was about 26,000 miles.

President Roosevelt, exhorting the home front to be patient about the gasoline shortage, once told us that a four-engine bomber consumed 1,110 gallons of fuel on a certain mission, which on the map, appeared to be about 700 miles. At the same rate, Mrs. Roosevelt would have used up, in her own ship, alone, a little over 40,000 gallons and the cost to the people, through their taxes, at 15 cents a gallon, certainly a cheap estimate, would have been a little over $6,000. This is saying nothing about the salaries of the crew and other officers who flew Mrs. Roosevelt and accompanied her, of whom we were told when she got home that there were five.

I know of no way. in which a civilian ostensibly on Red Cross business could repay the army for such gas and the salaries of the soldiers detailed to this duty. If you are on legitimate Red Cross business there is no reason why the Red Cross should pay the Army. And if the civilian personally repays the expense, that immediately suggests that the mission was not legitimate.

The upshot of all this seems to be that George Spelvin, American, gave the party and picked up a tab for $6,000, plus, while Mrs. Roosevelt received public credit for a contribution to the Red Cross which probably did not exceed one-fourth of the minimum estimated cost.

Völkischer Beobachter (September 3, 1944)

Das war für Churchill zu viel –
Die Wahrheit über Indien

Der Wortlaut des Briefes von Philipps an Roosevelt

Das Bekenntnis der Front

Von Kriegsberichter Kurt Ziesel

Ein Stabsarzt rettet 60 Verwundete –
Ein Hauptverbandplatz kämpft sich frei