Horace Wheeljack
15th November 2007, 01:46 PM
Hi,
The Reichstag Fire is mentioned a lot on this forum but i cant find a thread specifically about it so i thought i would start one. Before i looked into it i was under the impression that the Nazi's were probably involved but on examing the evidence it seems unlikely that this is the case.
Historians are fairly split on whether Van der Lubbe acted alone or it was a Nazi plot. The evidence presented by supporters of the Nazi plot theory is based largely on the testimony of Karl von Ernst, Hans Bernd Gisevius, Franz Haider and a memo from the Prussian police 6 hours before the fire that discussed the rounding up of Communists.
The problem with the evidence is that Karl von Ernst's testimony turned up after he died so there is no way of verifying it. Gisevius' testimony at Nuremberg implicates Goebbels as the chief plotter but for someone who was gathering evidence of Nazi crimes he has nothing other than this claim which doesnt corroborate with Ernst's or Haider's. Franz Haider's testimony, also at Nuremberg, is an anecdote where he claims that Goring claimed at a luncheon in 1942 that "the only one who really knows about the Reichstag is I, because i set it on fire" with that Goring is said to slap his thigh, Goering may or may not have said this but the slap on the thigh may even suggest he was joking if he said it all. The memo from the Prussian police also proves nothing, it doesnt mention the Reichstag fire and it's very possible that Hitler was going to attack the communists with the election less than two weeks away.
On the other hand, the evidence for Van der Lubbe acting alone is very strong. He is caught red-handed and confesses to being solely responsible. He claims this throughout the trial. The four men tried with Van der Lubbe are acquitted but Van der Lubbe is guillotined. At the trial no witnesses report anyone other than Van der Lubbe at the scene. The Reichstag officials who apprehend him claim no one else was present. The postal worker who enters and exits the building just prior to the fire witnesses nothing. It begs the question, if it was a Nazi plot to frame the Communists why didnt they make it look like a communist plot?
Other evidence that suggests Van der Lubbe acted alone is the evidence from Martin Sommerfeldt, Goring's press officer, who reports on Gorings plans to frame the communists after the fire.
Goebbels diary reveals his reaction to news of the fire, he records how he thought it was a prank call from Ernst Hanfstaengl who had been playing tricks on him all week (those crazy Nazi's!).
Rudolph Diels was head of the Prussian political police and he argued with Hitler after reporting to him that he believed Van der Lubbe acted alone, Diels claims Hitler ridiculed him and insisted that it must have been a Communist plot.
It's also hard to believe that corroborating testimony wouldnt have become available from the significant amount of people involved in such a plot (planners, aides, operatives).
I think on the evidence available the case for a Nazi plot is extremely weak.
I would appreciate any comments, information, criticisms anyone has of my quick analysis.
The Reichstag Fire is mentioned a lot on this forum but i cant find a thread specifically about it so i thought i would start one. Before i looked into it i was under the impression that the Nazi's were probably involved but on examing the evidence it seems unlikely that this is the case.
Historians are fairly split on whether Van der Lubbe acted alone or it was a Nazi plot. The evidence presented by supporters of the Nazi plot theory is based largely on the testimony of Karl von Ernst, Hans Bernd Gisevius, Franz Haider and a memo from the Prussian police 6 hours before the fire that discussed the rounding up of Communists.
The problem with the evidence is that Karl von Ernst's testimony turned up after he died so there is no way of verifying it. Gisevius' testimony at Nuremberg implicates Goebbels as the chief plotter but for someone who was gathering evidence of Nazi crimes he has nothing other than this claim which doesnt corroborate with Ernst's or Haider's. Franz Haider's testimony, also at Nuremberg, is an anecdote where he claims that Goring claimed at a luncheon in 1942 that "the only one who really knows about the Reichstag is I, because i set it on fire" with that Goring is said to slap his thigh, Goering may or may not have said this but the slap on the thigh may even suggest he was joking if he said it all. The memo from the Prussian police also proves nothing, it doesnt mention the Reichstag fire and it's very possible that Hitler was going to attack the communists with the election less than two weeks away.
On the other hand, the evidence for Van der Lubbe acting alone is very strong. He is caught red-handed and confesses to being solely responsible. He claims this throughout the trial. The four men tried with Van der Lubbe are acquitted but Van der Lubbe is guillotined. At the trial no witnesses report anyone other than Van der Lubbe at the scene. The Reichstag officials who apprehend him claim no one else was present. The postal worker who enters and exits the building just prior to the fire witnesses nothing. It begs the question, if it was a Nazi plot to frame the Communists why didnt they make it look like a communist plot?
Other evidence that suggests Van der Lubbe acted alone is the evidence from Martin Sommerfeldt, Goring's press officer, who reports on Gorings plans to frame the communists after the fire.
Goebbels diary reveals his reaction to news of the fire, he records how he thought it was a prank call from Ernst Hanfstaengl who had been playing tricks on him all week (those crazy Nazi's!).
Rudolph Diels was head of the Prussian political police and he argued with Hitler after reporting to him that he believed Van der Lubbe acted alone, Diels claims Hitler ridiculed him and insisted that it must have been a Communist plot.
It's also hard to believe that corroborating testimony wouldnt have become available from the significant amount of people involved in such a plot (planners, aides, operatives).
I think on the evidence available the case for a Nazi plot is extremely weak.
I would appreciate any comments, information, criticisms anyone has of my quick analysis.