The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Naujocks

Another Look at "the Good War"
Post Reply
P
PangaeaProxima
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2025 3:14 pm

The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Naujocks

Post by PangaeaProxima »

The Gleiwitz (alleged) "False Flag" operation on the eve of WW2 is a key piece of propaganda supposed to show German guilt for the start of WW2. In fact, however, there has never been any documentary evidence presented that would indicate that the attack in Gleiwitz - or any of the other border incidents in the weeks before the war, for that matter - was a German "False Flag". The only evidence has been the testimony of a certain Alfred Naujocks, a member of the SD secret service that defected to the Allies in October 1944 and who claimed to have directed the supposed "False Flag" action in Gleiwitz. His testimony however, contains quite a number of, ahem, pecularities:

Camp 020 Report on the Case of Alfred Naujocks 14.1.1945, p.11 (See Alfred Naujocks British Documents Vol.1.pdf, https://archive.org/details/alfred-nauj ... -documents)
THE POLISH FRONTIER INCIDENTS:
On the 10th August, 1939, NAUJOCK was summoned into HEYDRICH'S presence and told that, as the Fuehrer was determined to attack Poland within a month, it would be necessary to stage some "frontier incidents" which would lead the world to believe that the first aggressive move had been made by the Poles and not by the Germans.

For this purpose, it was proposed to take selected life-term prisoners from the concentration camps, kill them by means of hypodermic injections, dress them in Polish army uniforms and, having riddled the bodies with bullets, place them in carefully chosen positions in German frontier villages of Upper Silesia, so that it would appear, to the casual observer, that small parties of Polish troops had been carrying out abortive raids on Reich territory.

This plan was immediately put into effect, and NAUJOCKS states that the bodies were forwarded to the villages where they were required in packing cases labelled "preserves", Some of the victims arrived at their destinations only half-dead, having been given inadequate injections, and these had to be put out of their misery before they could be used. The part played by NAUJOOKS in the affair was as follows:

In order to lend colour to the "frontier incidents", HEYDRICH and his friends decided to publish a story to the effect that the Gleiwitz broadcasting station had been attacked by Polish insurgents, and he (NAUJOCKS) was accordingly sent to that town with five or six men to make the necessary arrangements. On his arrival there, he arranged for a Polish-speaking German to take possession of the microphone "by force" and to begin broadcasting an appeal to his "countrymen" urging them to rise against the Germans. The broadcast was then abruptly broken off, shots were fired in the studio, and finally a corpse, with which NAUJOCKS had previously been provided, was left lying on the floor close to the microphone, riddled with bullets.

NAUJOCKS had to remain for more than fortnight in Gleiwitz before he was ordered back to Berlin, and when he did eventually leave and passed all the German troops and army equipment en route for the Polish frontier, he realised for the first time that it was now merely a matter of days before war broke out.

In this way Germany prepared for her unprovoked attack on the Polish people, and NAUJOCKS says that when HITLER made his radio speech on 1st September, 1939, in which he expressed his anger at the "Polish frontier outrages" and assured his listeners that such insults could only be answered by the sword, he (NAUJOCKS) began for the first time to lose faith in the Fuehrer. He maintains that HITLER himself must have planned the frontier incident scheme and given ordere for the murder of the prisoners from the, concentration camps, since no other Nazi leader would have dared to take such a step on his own initiative. He points out, however, that even the Fuehrer himself could not have carried out such a dastardly plan without the assistance of utterly unscrupulous men such as HEYDRICH and Gruppenleiter MUELLER, who rivalled the former for his cruelty and callousness.

On his return to Berlin NAUJOCKS was, as usual, bitterly reprimanded by HEYDRICH, who had been unable to pick up the faked broadcast from Gleiwitz Radio Station and was inclined to suggest that it had never taken place at all because NAUJOCKS had, as usual, lost his nerve at the last moment.
Even though his description of the operation is extremely short, he nevertheless manages to insert several massive errors. Naujocks does not know that the Gleiwitz installation is not a radio station, but merely a transmitter that served to propagate the Breslau radio station. So there is, contrary to his description, no studio with microphones to take over (What in reality did happen, seems to be that the occupiers managed to find and connect an auxiliary microphone, that was used to announce when the Transmitter was turned off and the antenna grounded during thunderstorms).

But there is an even more egregious error - note the timeline: Naujocks receives instructions from Heydrich on 10. August, immediately goes to Gleiwitz and carries out the operation. Then he waits for more than two weeks before he leaves Gleiwitz for Berlin and it is still a few days before the war starts. That Naujocks made this whopper of an error and no one noticed it for many months, is really a testament of how little, contrary to the postwar depiction, the Gleiwitz incident was propagandized by the Germans.

In comparison to this the other oddities - like why would you first kill the victims with an injection and then shoot them? - seem hardly noteworthy anymore.

It is interesting to compare Naujocks interrogation statements to those he made later in his affidavit for the IMT in Nuremberg on 20.11.1945 (https://archivessearch.lib.uconn.edu/re ... cts/156820):
I, Alfred Helmut Naujocks, being first duly sworn, depose and state as follows:

1. I was a member of the SS from 1931 to 19 October 1944 and a member of the SD from its creation in 1934 to January 1941. I served as a member of the Waffen-SS from February 1941 until the middle of 1942. Thereafter, I served in the economic department of the military administration of Belgium from September 1942 to September 1944. I surrendered to the Allies on 19 October 1944.

2. On or about 10 August 1939, the chief of the Sipo and SD, Heydrich, personally ordered me to simulate an attack on the radio station near Gleiwitz near the Polish border and to make it appear that the attacking force consisted of Poles. Heydrich said, "Practical proof is needed for these attacks of the Poles for the foreign press as well as for German propaganda purposes." I was directed to go to Gleiwitz with five or six other SD-men and wait there until I received a code word from Heydrich indicating that the attack should take place. My instructions were to seize the radio station and to hold it long enough to permit a Polish speaking German who would be put at my disposal to broadcast a speech in Polish. Heydrich told me that this speech should state that the time had come for conflict between Germans and Poles and that Poles should get together and smash down any Germans from whom they met resistance. Heydrich also told me at this time that he expected an attack on Poland by Germany in a few days.

3. I went to Gleiwitz and waited there fourteen days. Then I requested permission of Heydrich to return to Berlin but was told to stay in Gleiwitz. Between the 25th and the 31st of August I went to see Heinrich Mueller, head of the Gestapo, who was then nearby at Oppeln. In my presence, Mueller discussed with a man named Mehlhorn plans for another border incident, in which it should be made to appear that Polish soldiers were at tacking German troops. Germans in the approximate strength of a company were to be used. Mueller stated that he had 12 or 13 condemned criminals who were to be dressed in Polish uniforms and left dead on the ground of the scene of the incident, to show that they had been killed while attacking. For this purpose they were to be given fatal injections by a doctor employed by Heydrich. Then they were also to be given gunshot wounds. After the incident members of the press and other persons were to be taken to the spot of the incident. A police report was subsequently to be prepared.

4. Mueller told me that he had an order from Heydrich to make one of those criminals available to me for the action at Gleiwitz. The code name by which he referred to these criminals was "Canned Goods."

5. The incident at Gleiwitz in which I participated was carried out on the evening preceding the German attack on Poland. As I recall, war broke out on the 1st of September 1939. At noon of the 31st August I received by telephone from Heydrich the code word for the attack which was to take place at 8 o'clock that evening. Heydrich said, "In order to carry out this attack report to Mueller for Canned Goods." I did this and gave Mueller instructions to deliver the man near the radio station. I received this man and had him laid down at the entrance to the station. He was alive but he was completely unconscious. I tried to open his eyes. I could not recognize by his eyes that he was alive, only by his breathing. I did not see the shot wounds but a lot of blood was smeared across his face. He was in civilian clothes.

6. We seized the radio station as ordered, broadcast a speech of three to four minutes over an emergency transmitter, fired some pistol shots and left.
Some differences with the earlier testimony:

1. The "False Flag" operations besides the one in Gleiwitz are reduced to a single one and it is no longer presented as something that definitely happened, but only something that Naujocks overheard being planned. The packing cases labeled "Canned Goods" for transporting bodies are removed, instead "Canned Goods" is now supposed to be a code word for the bodies.

2. There is no longer explicit mention of seizing a studio. There is nonsensical talk of using an "emergency transmitter" to make the broadcast, charitably we can assume that "emergency microphone" is meant

3. In the interrogation protocol, the victim is riddled with bullets and dead when he is placed, whereas in the IMT version he is only unconscious and no bullet wounds are visible. In addition, in the first version the victim is placed inside the building, in the second at the entrance.

4. It is interesting how the elements are swapped to "fix" the timeline: The "only days until war breaks out" is now put into the mouth of Heydrich right at the start on 10. August. The two weeks of waiting come next. To bridge the time gap until 31. August, another week long wait period is inserted, distinguished from the previous one by a visit to Heinrich Müller in Oppeln taking place.

These two documents not only prove that the statements of Naujocks were a lie, but that his captors could not help knowing that he was lying.
User avatar
HansHill
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2024 3:06 pm

Re: The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Jaunocks

Post by HansHill »

I did a deep dive on this incident some years back, and the entire thing was a huge mess from the orthodox side.

At that time, the wikipedia article for the incident, used as its primary citation, the works of "Weronika Kuzniar", her paper titled "Gleiwitz Casus Beli". The problem here, is that this citation contradicts the established story. "Weronika Kuzniar" is also known as "Veronica Clark", and she has written papers such as the below which argue against the narrative.

https://codoh.com/library/document/glei ... alse-flag/

Note, my research into this was some years ago, and the Wiki entry has been cleaned up since then, and is now slightly less shambolic. However there are still clumsy curiosities, for example the primary citation given that the Gleiwitz Incident was a false flag to enter Poland, is the radio address from Adolf Hitler on 1st September. The clumsy problem here is, this speech does not mention Gleiwitz at all, so the citation is bogus in this context.

So, it's still a huge mess, just slightly less so!
User avatar
Archie
Site Admin
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2024 6:54 am

Re: The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Jaunocks

Post by Archie »

Wikipedia has this interesting sentence: "Manufactured evidence for the Gleiwitz attack by the SS was provided by the undercover German SS officer Alfred Naujocks in 1945."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident

I haven't looked into this much myself, but I will mention that in in Hitler's War, David Irving says it was staged by the Germans.
https://www.unz.com/book/david_irving__ ... r/#p_19_30
Hitler needed reliable staged ‘incidents’ at a closely defined place, time, and date – he had a tight OKW schedule to meet. Two diabolical schemes had been drafted by SS Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich, ‘following long-standing patterns set by our western neighbours,’ as he explained to SS commanders on about the eleventh. In one, his agents would masquerade as Polish insurgents, seize the German transmitter station at Gleiwitz, broadcast a proclamation, and then escape. In the other, more complex, incident a company of Polish-speaking idealists would be recruited from the Upper Silesian work-force, dressed in Polish uniforms on the eve of ‘White,’ and ordered to ‘seize’ a German customs post near Hochlinden; a mock battle would be staged with SS troops, while real Polish troops would be lured into the fray from their garrison at nearby Rybnik by a Polish officer who had recently defected to Germany. The Gestapo chief, Heinrich Müller, also hit on the macabre idea of strewing fresh corpses – condemned convicts from Dachau – on the ‘battlefield,’ equipped with genuine Polish soldiers’ passbooks.
And then in his endnotes,
page 193 Heydrich first put the scheme to manufacture ‘border incidents’ to SS Colonel Trummler, SS Brigadier Otto Rasch and SS General Heinrich Müller – of the Gestapo – in a Berlin conference on Aug 8, 1939. The later police general Otto Hellwig was present and wrote a manuscript which is in my possession. The famous Gleiwitz operation was first adumbrated at the second conference, on or about Aug 11. See also the Hassell diary, Aug 15, and Dr. Jürgen Runzheimer’s study in VfZ, 1962, 408ff (he also supplied me with further unpublished material).
https://www.unz.com/book/david_irving__ ... /#p_66_178

But it seems he is relying on sources other than Naujocks.
P
PangaeaProxima
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2025 3:14 pm

Re: The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Naujocks

Post by PangaeaProxima »

"Weronika Kuzniar" is also known as "Veronica Clark", and she has written papers such as the below which argue against the narrative.

https://codoh.com/library/document/glei ... alse-flag/
There are a few correct arguments, even if presented in a rather confused and haphazard way. But also many wrong ones: For instance, it is claimed that Naujocks was in line to be prosecuted when he died in 1966. There is absolutely no indication of that - Jaunocks had always the option of withdrawing his story as a means of putting on pressure. The author says that Gleiwitz indeed was a false flag operation, she only differs somewhat in how it was carried out.It is even suggested that the Polish massacres of Germans were fake.
But it seems he is relying on sources other than Naujocks.
As long as he doesn't spill his sources, there is no need to take this in any way serious. Concerning the mentioned article by Runzheimer (https://www.ifz-muenchen.de/heftarchiv/ ... heimer.pdf), it very much bases its treatment of the Gleiwitz incident on Naujocks.

Runzheimer admits that there is no documentary evidence that the Gleiwitz attack was a ‘False Flag’ and that in view of the very sparse description in Naujock's affidavit, which only comprises a few sentences, it is therefore necessary to find independent evidence for its veracity.

On one hand, he attempts to do this by speculating that the station's guard had been deliberately weakened on higher up orders to facilitate the operation. It seems that in the period before the start of the war, several changes were made to the station's security, although this does not seem unusual given the critical situation. Runzheimer cannot provide any concrete evidence for his claims, not even what exactly the changes were (he has to admit that ‘The surviving witnesses are by no means in agreement about this new object protection’)

Equally unconvincing is his second hypothesis, namely that the arrival of Gestapo officers at the crime scene before the ‘regular’ police must have been motivated by a desire to prevent the latter from finding evidence of a ‘false flag’ operation. He does not name any evidence that would have been in need of hiding. In particular, under his assumption it would be incomprehensible why the dead body was left behind for examination - this should have been the very first thing to disappear. The fact that Runzheimer apparently had little confidence in his hypothesis is also shown by the fact that he made no attempt to question the former Gestapo officers.

In the end, surprise, surprise he declares Naujocks as vindicated, even though he admits that Naujocks was lying with his claim of the concentration camp supplied victim and that the dead man left behind was indeed one of the attackers that got shot during the operation.
P
PangaeaProxima
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2025 3:14 pm

Re: The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Naujocks

Post by PangaeaProxima »

The first document that I posted is of course entirely sufficient to show that Alfred Naujocks is a liar and the Gleiwitz "False Flag" described by him fiction. But if someone is inclined to get the full dose of errors and inconsistencies, here is a collection of links to documents about Naujocks and Gleiwitz:

1. Various British documents concerning Naujocks interrogation, mostly 1944-45:
https://archive.org/details/alfred-nauj ... -documents

2. Statements of Alfred Naujocks at Nuremberg as questioned by Col. Howard A. Brundage, 12.10.1945:
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 7#p1642317

3. Brief of Interrogation of Alfred Naujocks by Lt. Colonel S. W. Brookhart, 2.11.1945:
https://digital.library.cornell.edu/catalog/nur00673

4. Naujocks Gleiwitz Affidavit for the Nuremberg IMT, 20.11.1945
a. German original:
https://www.ns-archiv.de/krieg/1939/sen ... ujocks.php
b. English translation:
https://collections.ctdigitalarchive.org/node/508115

5. Various documents concerning Naujocks by Public Prosecution Office Berlin (Case number 1 AR(RSHA) 384/64):
https://iiif.deutsche-digitale-biblioth ... 51c1c3.pdf

6. Witness statements concerning the Gleiwitz incident (Also maps of the Gleiwitz area) by Public Prosecution Office Düsseldorf (Case number 8I Js 532/66), later transferred to Public Prosecution Office Berlin (New case number 1 Js 1/68 (RSHA)) :
https://api.deutsche-digitale-bibliothe ... 69589e.pdf
P
PangaeaProxima
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2025 3:14 pm

Re: The Gleiwitz "False Flag" myth and the testimony of Alfred Naujocks

Post by PangaeaProxima »

This is how the Gleiwitz attack happened according to Erich Nittritz, who was operation manager of the Gleiwitz facility until June 1939 when he was transferred to Oppeln. His wife still lived at the Gleiwitz facility at the time of the attack. He says that he was phoned both by his wife as well as his successor Klose in the same night after the attack happened. On the following weekend two days later he had another talk with Klose as well as two other employees at the Gleiwitz transmitter, Kotz and Foitzik. In 1949 he wrote down an account of what he had been told in an essay about the radio system of Upper Silesia that remained unpublished. He however provided it to Runzheimer.

Here a description based on the Runzheimer article (https://www.ifz-muenchen.de/heftarchiv/ ... heimer.pdf) as well as a protocol of an interrogation by a public prosecutor of Nittritz on 2.2.1968 (See PDF page 218 of 6 in the document list):

At around 7 p.m., the operations officer on duty, TWf (Telegrafenwerkführer) Nawroth, was in the station's operation room when the security guard supervisor came to him to find out about the local conditions. Later, the machine operator on duty, TLA (Telegrafenleitungsaufseher) Kotz, and the caretaker and antenna maintenance technician, Pfa (Postfacharbeiter) Foitzik, arrived in the operation room in anticipation of the news program.

Shortly before 8 p.m., five men in civilian clothes entered the machine room and came up the stairs to the operation room. Here they were noticed by Foitzik. He opened the door and asked the strangers what they wanted. The answer was: ‘Hands up!’ The intruders tied the hands of the entire staff and the security guard behind their backs with a thin cord; they then took their prisoners through the machine room into the cellar. One of the men acted as guard with his pistol drawn. Another man first brought Nawroth upstairs, but he (according to his own account) steadfastly refused to explain the technical equipment to them, even though they beat him and threatened him with their pistols. He claimed that the input to the transmitter could only be supplied via the external line. Next came Kotz and then Foitzik, who were also beaten. Both stated that as a machine operator and caretaker respectively, they knew nothing about operating the transmitter. When then Nawroth was brought back into the broadcasting room a second time, the intruders had just found the emergency microphone (Which was used when having to announce that the antenna had to be disconnected and grounded because of a thunderstorm), which was kept in the equipment cupboard. Nawroth still vigorously denied that he knew how to connect the microphone, and he was chased back into the cellar with punches and kicks. Nevertheless, the intruders managed to connect the microphone and made their statement.

The interruption when switching off the modulation line from the transmitter amplifier was noticed in the amplifier office, and in response to a phone call about this, one of the intruders briefly replied ‘interruption’ and put the phone down again. Mrs Klose, the wife of the operations manager, who was listening to the news, also noticed the same crackling noises. She told her husband that ‘nonsense was being made’ in the broadcasting room. Klose immediately went over to the transmitter building. He entered through the south entrance, but quickly ran back to his flat, slamming the door behind him, when he noticed the strange men, one of whom immediately threatened him with a gun. From here he alerted the police and informed the head of the telephone exchange. The intruders ended their speech, hurriedly left the station through the open entrance gate and drove off in a waiting car. It seems that in their haste they forgot about the guard who was watching over the staff in the basement.

A member of the SD, who was passing by on Tarnowitzer Straße, found the behaviour of the people storming out of the transmitter building conspicuous. He ran into the transmitter site, entered the transmitter building and came across the guard who had been left behind and had noticed that his comrades had disappeared. He was trying to get out through the machine room. The SD man asked him to put his hands up and when he didn't react, he shot him.

In the meantime, after the guard left when no more sounds from the operationg room could be heard and tried to escape through the machine room, Kotz broke away from the other prisoners and ran out of the building through the other exit and into the operations manager's flat. He told him that the intruders had disappeared. Klose immediately ran to the operations room and met the SD man, who threatened him with his pistol. The operations manager identified himself and the other prisoners were now freed from their shackles. The arriving police immediately carried out the interrogations, which took until after 11pm. The transmitter resumed operations at about 11pm. The day after, on 1.9.1939 there was another interrogation of the Gleiwitz transmitter workforce by the leader of the Postschutz, Heinrich Kersten, on behalf of the RPD (Reichspostdirektion) Oppeln.

Naujocks claims concerning the dead person left behind are rejected: Kotz and Foitzig unambiguously identify the dead man in the machine room as their guard and no one has seen another body at the entrance nor anywhere else.

Foitzik died in 1940 because of a Thrombose, Kotz because of Anemia in 1945 and Klose was killed by partisans in Italy, also in 1945. Nawroth was last seen in Neiße in February 1945. He might be still alive and living (as of 1968) in Kattowitz.

My opinion: After reading a lot of witness statements, I am inclined to say that this account seems to be, at least in its basic outlines, credible.
Post Reply