Information

Charles Lindbergh urges Congress to negotiate with Hitler


Charles A. Lindbergh, a national hero since his nonstop solo flight across the Atlantic, testifies before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the Lend-Lease policy-and suggests that the United States negotiate a neutrality pact with Hitler.

Lindbergh was born in 1902 in Detroit. His father was a member of the House of Representatives. Lindbergh’s interest in aviation led him to flying school in Lincoln, Nebraska, and later brought him work running stunt-flying tours and as an airmail pilot. While regularly flying a route from St. Louis to Chicago, he decided to try to become the first pilot to fly alone nonstop from New York to Paris. He obtained the necessary financial backing from a group of businessmen, and on May 21, 1927, after a flight that lasted slightly over 33 hours, Lindbergh landed his plane, the Spirit of St. Louis, in Paris. He won worldwide fame along with his $25,000 prize.

In March 1932, Lindbergh made headlines again, but this time because of the kidnapping of his two-year-old son. The baby was later found dead, and the man convicted of the crime, Bruno Hauptmann, was executed. To flee unwanted publicity, Lindbergh and his wife, Anne Morrow, daughter of U.S. ambassador Dwight Morrow, moved to Europe. During the mid-1930s, Lindbergh became familiar with German advances in aviation and warned his U.S. counterparts of Germany’s growing air superiority. But Lindbergh also became enamored of much of the German national “revitalization” he encountered, and allowed himself to be decorated by Hitler’s government, which drew tremendous criticism back home.

Upon Lindbergh’s return to the States, he agitated for neutrality with Germany, and testified before Congress in opposition to the Lend-Lease policy, which offered cash and military aid to countries friendly to the United States in their war effort against the Axis powers. His public denunciation of “the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt Administration” as instigators of American intervention in the war, as well as comments that smacked of anti-Semitism, lost him the support of other isolationists. When, in 1941, President Roosevelt denounced Lindbergh publicly, the aviator resigned from the Air Corps Reserve. He eventually contributed to the war effort, though, flying 50 combat missions over the Pacific. His participation in the war, along with his promotion to brigadier general of the Air Force Reserve in 1954 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a popular Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The Spirit of St. Louis,, and a movie based on his exploits all worked to redeem him in the public’s eyes.


Charles Lindbergh's Real Nazi Ties Are At the Heart of David Simon's The Plot Against America

The new HBO series based on Phillip Roth&rsquos 2004 novel takes place in an alternative history America, but the roots of the story are very real.

HBO&rsquos The Plot Against America, a miniseries from The Wirecreators David Simon and Ed Burns, adapts Phillip Roth&rsquos 2004 novel of the same name, telling the story of an alternative history United States in which Nazi-sympathizing aviator Charles Lindbergh defeats Franklin Roosevelt in the 1940 presidential election, fueling violent anti-Semitism that upends the lives of American Jews. Though the story is a clear departure from the facts of American history during World War II, much of it is based on real life. The family at the heart of the series, the Levins, are based upon Roth&rsquos own family and childhood in Newark, New Jersey. And though Lindbergh never became president, he remains infamous as one of America&rsquos most prominent Nazi sympathizers. Here&rsquos what you need to know.

Who was Charles Lindbergh?

Lindbergh was born in 1902, to the son of future Minnesota congressman Charles August Lindbergh. As a young man, he became interested in aviation, and trained with the US Army Air Service before becoming an air mail pilot.

In 1919, French-American hotel owner Raymond Orteig announced that he would award $25,000 to the first pilot to make a nonstop flight between New York and Paris. Eight years later, the 25-year-old Lindbergh claimed the prize, flying for 33-and-a-half hours from Long Island, New York, to Paris. British aviators John Alcock and Arthur Brown had become the first pilots to cross the Atlantic in a non-stop flight in 1919, when they flew from Newfoundland to Ireland, but Lindbergh was the first solo pilot to accomplish the feat.

When he landed in Paris, more than 100,000 people arrived to greet him, and the good-looking young pilot instantly became a global celebrity. American president Calvin Coolidge awarded him a Distinguished Flying Cross, while Congress gave him a Medal of Honor. Lindbergh was named Time&rsquos first-ever Person of the Year, and the 25-year-old remained the youngest honoree for more than 90 years, until 16-year-old Greta Thunberg snagged the title in 2019.

He married Anne Morrow, a future author and daughter of a successful businessman, in 1929, and the two eventually had six children. Their eldest, Charles Lindbergh Jr., was born in 1930, but was kidnapped from the family&rsquos New Jersey home in 1932. The toddler&rsquos body was later found in the woods near their home, and his abduction and murder was so widely covered that it became known as one of the crimes of the century. A German immigrant, Richard Hauptman, was eventually convicted of the crime and executed in 1936.

What was his involvement with the Nazis?

Lindbergh was a national hero who had suffered a great and very public tragedy&mdashhe&rsquod accumulated about as much goodwill as any celebrity could. But his actions in the years leading to World War II irreparably damaged his reputation.

With Germany building up its military might in the 1930s, the United States government asked Lindbergh, then living in Europe to escape the hounding of the American press, to tour the nation&rsquos flying fleet and report his findings. He was vocal about his admiration for German&rsquos aircraft technology, and, during a 1938 dinner at the home of the US ambassador to Germany, was awarded a medal from Luftwaffe commander Herman Göring on behalf of Adolf Hitler himself. Kristallnacht, which found 7,000 businesses owned by German Jews destroyed while tens of thousands of Jews were taken to concentration camps, was just a few weeks later. Facing pressure to return the medal, Lindbergh refused.

Lindbergh wasn&rsquot shy about his white supremacist and anti-Semitic beliefs. In 1939, he wrote for Reader&rsquos Digest that Americans &ldquocan have peace and security only so long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood, only so long as we guard ourselves against attack by foreign armies and dilution by foreign races.&rdquo According to him, Hitler &ldquoaccomplished results (good in addition to bad) which could hardly have been accomplished without some fanaticism.&rdquo

His wife was a fan of Hitler, too, writing in a letter home that the dictator was &ldquoa very great man, like an inspired religious leader&mdashand as such rather fanatical&mdashbut not scheming, not selfish, not greedy for power, but a mystic, a visionary who really wants the best for his country and on the whole has rather a broad view.&rdquo

&ldquoA few Jews add strength and character to a country, but too many create chaos,&rdquo Lindbergh wrote in a 1939 diary entry. &ldquoAnd we are getting too many.&rdquo

His father had opposed America&rsquos entry into World War I, and as German aggressions mounted, Lindbergh adopted a similar stance. He became a spokesman for the America First Committee (sound familiar?), which advocated for the US staying out of the European war, and counted among its 800,000 members future Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart and president Gerald Ford. It also included some of the nation&rsquos most prominent anti-Semites, like Lindbergh&rsquos close friend Henry Ford. (When asked what they talked about during Lindbergh&rsquos visits to Ford&rsquos plant, the automaker reportedly replied, &ldquoWhen Charles comes out here, we only discuss the Jews.&rdquo) And Lindbergh was one of the organization&rsquos spokesmen.

In early 1941, Lindbergh testified before Congress in opposition of the Lend-Lease Act, which eventually passed and allowed the US to offer aid to Allied nations. In September of that year, Lindbergh delivered an infamous speech in Des Moines, Iowa. In The Plot Against America, Herman Levin listens to the speech on the radio. In the deeply anti-Semitic speech, Lindbergh blamed American Jews for the tilt towards war. &ldquoTheir greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government,&rdquo he said. Even by the standards of the day, the remarks were considered outrageous. The Des Moines Register condemned it as being &ldquoso intemperate, so unfair, so dangerous in its implications that it cannot but turn many spadefuls in the digging of the grave of his influence in this country.&rdquo

The America First Committee disbanded on December 10th, 1941, three days after Pearl Harbor made war truly unavoidable. Lindbergh would fly combat missions as a consultant for Ford&rsquos B-24 manufacturing company, though his effort to rejoin the air force was shut down by FDR. Later, historian Arthur Schlesigner would write of an effort by isolationists to urge Lindbergh to run for president as a Republican opposing FDR in 1940, which inspired Roth to write The Plot Against America.

His reputation permanently tarnished by his Nazi sympathizes, Lindbergh died in Hawaii in 1974. But his affection for Germany survived the war: He fathered seven secret children in the nation during the 1950s and &lsquo60s by three women that included a pair of sisters.


AS SEEN ON TV: CHARLES LINDBERGH

CHARLES LINDBERGH

AS SEEN IN:
"The Lindbergh Kidnapping Case"

AS PLAYED BY:
Cliff De Young

From Wikipedia:
In his January 23, 1941, testimony in opposition to the Lend-Lease Bill before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Lindbergh proposed that the United States negotiate a neutrality pact with Germany. President Roosevelt publicly criticized Lindbergh's views on neutrality three months later during a White House press conference on April 25, 1941, as being those of a "defeatist and appeaser" and compared him to U.S. Rep. Clement L. Vallandigham (D-OH), the leader of the "Copperhead" movement that had opposed the American Civil War.

Three days later the famed aviator resigned his commission as a Colonel in the U.S. Army Air Corps in an April 28 letter to the President in which Lindbergh said that he could find "no honorable alternative" to his taking such an action after Roosevelt had publicly questioned his loyalty.

In a speech at an America First rally in Des Moines on September 11, 1941, "Who Are the War Agitators?" Lindbergh claimed the three groups, "pressing this country toward war [are] the British, the Jewish and the Roosevelt Administration" and said of Jewish groups:

"Instead of agitating for war, the Jewish groups in this country should be opposing it in every possible way for they will be among the first to feel its consequences. Tolerance is a virtue that depends upon peace and strength. History shows that it cannot survive war and devastation."

In the speech, he warned of the Jewish People's "large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government", and went on to say of Germany's antisemitism, "No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution of the Jewish race in Germany."

Lindbergh declared:

"I am not attacking either the Jewish or the British people. Both races, I admire. But I am saying that the leaders of both the British and the Jewish races, for reasons which are as understandable from their viewpoint as they are inadvisable from ours, for reasons which are not American, wish to involve us in the war. We cannot blame them for looking out for what they believe to be their own interests, but we also must look out for ours. We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples to lead our country to destruction."

BCnU!


Charles Lindbergh urges Congress to negotiate with Hitler - HISTORY

United States History at the high school level is to begin with the period known as Reconstruction of the late 1860s up to the present time.

Student grades will be based on a number of varied activities. Daily note taking and reading assignments are essential for success in this class. Students will be required to keep an assignment book in which all daily work will be kept until the appointed time at which it will be collected by the teacher for grading. Also, tests and quizzes will be administered on a regular basis. Additionally, group work and outside reading projects may be required throughout the semester.

Each day, students will begin class by copying three items from the board at the front of the classroom. An End of Course practice question, a Date in History and a Current Event will be taken down and a discussion of each will be led by the teacher with student participation encouraged and expected. The same paper used for these items will then be used for whatever other assignments are to be completed on that particular day. This procedure will be carried out EVERYDAY of the semester.

Parents are encouraged to ask their students about these items each day in order to reinforce classroom teaching.

U.S. History has an End of Course test administered by the state of Tennessee, which will be given near the end of the semester. The EoC serves as the semester exam and counts as 25% of the student's final grade.

While in class, students will be expected to conform to certain rules:

1. Be on time. Tardies will be accounted for and excuses such as "My locker is too far away", "I was talking to my friends" or "I was in the bathroom" will not be accepted unless the situation is deemed an emergency.

2. Bring book, paper and writing implement everyday.

3. No technology. Let this serve as the warning that cell phones and MP3 players will be confiscated upon sight.

4. No eating or drinking in the classroom with the lone exception of water in a clear container.

5. Be respectful of the classroom and those in it.

Student progress: Grades will be recorded via Engrade( https://www.engrade.com/ )as an easy way to track student progress. Each student will be issued an individual code to assure privacy.

Contact Information: I may be reached by e-mail at [email protected] or on the direct messaging service provided by Engrade. Also, the school phone number is (865) 577-7040. E-mail contact is preferred.

Following is the list of class assignments by date:

Which of the following terms is closely associated with the idea of manifest destiny?
A. isolationism
B. recession
C. expansionism
D. appeasement

1815- Andrew Jackson defeats the British at the Battle of New Orleans(War of 1812).
1918- President Woodrow Wilson announces his Fourteen Points Plan for peace after WWI.

-Students will be introduced to the the course and that which is expected of them.
-Also, a pre-test will be given to access student knowledge(This is not to be graded as a test but will be kept in daily folder).

The 1862 law giving people the right to claim 160 acres of public land for a small fee was the
A. Social Security Act
B. Sherman Antitrust Act
C. Wilmot Proviso
D. Homestead Act

1965- The United States pledges support to the government of South Vietnam.
2007- Steve Jobs debuts the first ever iPhone.

-Students will be made familiar with the material to be presented throughout the semester by looking at a newspaper that chronicles the biggest events of the 20th Century.
-Also, students will be introduced to the text book by selecting favorite photos then discussing those pictures and their relevance to the topic.

Immigration is the act of
A. becoming a U.S. citizen
B. moving into another country in order to become a permanent resident
C. leaving one's native country
D. moving from rural areas to urban areas

1901- Oil is tapped at the Spindle Top drilling site in Texas.
1941- President Franklin Roosevelt introduces the idea of Lend-Lease to congress.

-Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of the first ten Presidents of the United States.

Which state is most closely associated with the Gold Rush of 1849?
A. Nevada
B. Texas
C. California
D. Oregon

1908- President Theodore Roosevelt dedicates the Grand Canyon National Monument.

Students will continue to take notes from the teacher led discussion of the first ten Presidents of the United States.

Beginning in 1892, the chief reception center for immigrants t o the east coa st of the U. S . was ___

A. Washington, DC
B. Ellis Island in NYC
C. Brooklyn, NY
D. Boston, Mass.

Students will continue to take notes from the teacher led discussion of the first ten Presidents of the United States.

Which of the following accurately defines "cultural plu ralism"?

A. a nation in which newcomers are presume d to assimilate
B. a nation in which diverse traditions co-exist in harmony
C. a nation that unfairly discriminates agai nst immigrants
D. an is olationist nation

1961- President Eisenhower warns of the Military/Industrial Complex.

Students will be quizzed on presidents 1 -10.
Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of presidents 11-20.

The term 'Anti-Semitism' refers to ___.

A. hatred of immigrants
B. prejud ice against Jews
C. rundown ten e ments in urban are as

D. programs of social reform

-Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of presidents 11-20.

1-23-13

When did the first transcontinental railroad li nk the Atla ntic with the Pacific coasts?

A. 1830
B. 1860
C. 1869
D. 1890

1941- Charles Lindbergh addresses Congre s s and urges them to negotiate with Hitler.

-Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of presidents 11- 20.

Whi ch invention played a role in the conflict between ranchers and farmers in the West?

A. mechanical reaper
B. steel plow
C. refrigerated railroad car
D. barbed wire

1972- Japanese soldier found hiding on Guam.

-Students will be quizzed on Presidents 11-20
-Students will read Chapter 14 and answer questions from a worksheet.

Ninete enth century Irish immigrants to the U.S. settled primarily in the

A. Pacific Northwest
B. Great Plains
C. n ortheastern cities
D. the South

-Students will read and answer questions from Chapter 14 of the textbook.

Which of the following industries underwent tremendous expansion in the thirty ye ars after the Civil War?

A. textiles
B. plastics
C. iron and steel
D. computers

1861- Kansas enters the union as a free state.

-Stude nts will complete Chapter 14 worksheets.
- Students will gain an understanding of immigration, working condition s and land owning of the late 1 8 00s through the movie "Far and Away"

Read P. 482-48 3 and answer questions 1-3
Define Key Term s & People P.488
Answer questions with cartoon on P. 493
Define Key Terms & Peop le P. 495
Define Key Terms & People P. 499
Define Key Terms & P eople P. 507

2-4-13

Which of the following was responsible for the development of ti me zones?

A. weather fore casts
B. journalists
C. r ail roads
D. farmers

1789- Washington selected by Electoral College
1974- Patty Hearst kidnapped

-Students will discuss the harsh living and working condition s of the late 1800s in small groups.

The telephone was invented in 1876 by.

A. George Pullman
B. Thomas Edison
C. Alexander Graham Bell
D. John Rockefeller

1937- Pres. Franklin Roosevelt threatened to "pack" the Supreme Court.

-Students will be able to list the events that led to the Industrial Revolution by completing a worksheet in a group activity.

The term 'Robber Barrons ' was coined to describe

A. Mu ckraking writers
B. Prominent businessmen of the late 1800s
C. Privateers in the C iv il War
D. Imperialist invaders from Spanish A merican War

Date in History-

1952- Elizabeth II becomes Queen of England.

-Teacher led discussion of Chapter 14 worksheet questions on Industrial R evolution in America.

With which industry is Cornelius Vanderbilt associated

A. Oil
B. Railroads
C. Steel
D. Banking

- Teacher led discus sion of Chapter 14 worksheets on industrial revolution in America.

1943- Americans secure victory on Guadalcanal

-Chapter 14 Test
-Students will watch video on Andrew Carnegie

2-11-13

The discoverer of the vulcanization process for rubber was

A. Charles Goodyear
B. Henry Bessemer
C. Andrew Carne gi e
D. William Davis

1945- Yalta Conference ends.

-Teacher will lead a discussion of the important terms and people from Chapter 15.
-Students will answer questions from the Chapter 16 worksheets.

With which era of American history is the phrase "the Gilded Age" associated with?


Amelia Earhart - Makes you Wonder what else the Government has lied about

Notice that there are no guards or armed/unarmed soldiers/police for someone who was supposedly "were captured by the Japanese military". I don't see the Electra L-10E. It's a big plane. 149 of them were built.Lockheed Model 10 Electra - Wikipedia

Divine.Wind

Platinum Member

Divine.Wind

Platinum Member

Notice that there are no guards or armed/unarmed soldiers/police for someone who was supposedly "were captured by the Japanese military". I don't see the Electra L-10E. It's a big plane. 149 of them were built.Lockheed Model 10 Electra - Wikipedia

That picture was in a book published 2 years BEFORE she even made her last flight!

The picture has been proved to be 2 years prior to Amelia's disappearance:
History Channel investigating claims about Amelia Earhart photo and documentary timeline
In a July 9 blog post, Yamano explained that "the photograph was first published in Palau under Japanese rule in 1935, in a photo book Motoaki Nishino, 'Umi no seimeisen : Waga nannyou no sugata. So the photograph was taken at least two years before Amelia Earhart disappeared in 1937 and a person on the photo was not her."

According to NPR, the photobook was later digitized and published online by Japan's National Diet Library.

Yamano told The Guardian that he found the photo by searching “Jaluit atoll," with the time frame of the 1930s.

Rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster

wow a thread about Amelia Earhart. her name appears in all of my big collection of books from the 1920s and 1930s. she was hot property back then. very very famous back then


Divine.Wind

Platinum Member

wow a thread about Amelia Earhart. her name appears in all of my big collection of books from the 1920s and 1930s. she was hot property back then. very very famous back then


Not highly respected by some Liberal men, but well respected by many other people.

FWIW, Lindbergh was not only against the US going to war with Germany, but was a big fan of the Nazi government.

  • January 3, 1921 – Began flying lessons with Neta Snook
  • July 1921 – Bought first plane, the Kinner Airster (named “The Canary”)
  • October 22, 1922 – Broke women’s altitude record when she rose to 14,000 feet
  • June 17-18, 1928 – First woman to fly across the Atlantic 20hrs 40min (Fokker F7, Friendship)
  • Summer 1928 – Bought an Avro Avian, a small English plane famous because Lady Mary Heath, Britain’s foremost woman pilot, had flown it solo from Capetown, South Africa, to London
  • Fall 1928 – Published book, 20 Hours 40 Minutes, toured, and lectured became aviation editor of Cosmopolitan magazine
  • August 1929 – Placed third in the First Women’s Air Derby, also known as the Powder Puff Derby upgraded from her Avian to a Lockheed Vega
  • Fall 1929 – Elected as an official for National Aeronautic Association and encouraged the Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) to establish separate world altitude, speed, and endurance records for women
  • June 25, 1930 – Set women’s speed record for 100 kilometers with no load and with a load of 500 kilograms
  • July 5, 1930 – Set speed record for of 181.18mph over a 3K course
  • September 1930 – Helped to organize and became vice president of public relations for new airline, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington Airways
  • April 8, 1931 – Set woman’s autogiro altitude record with 18,415 feet (in a Pitcairn autogiro)
  • May 20-21, 1932 – First woman to fly solo across the Atlantic 14 hrs 56 min (it was also the 5th anniversary of Lindberg’s Atlantic flight awarded National Geographic Society’s gold medal from President Herbert Hoover Congress awarded her the Distinguished Flying Cross wrote The Fun of It about her journey
  • August 24-25, 1932 – First woman to fly solo nonstop coast to coast set women’s nonstop transcontinental speed record, flying 2,447.8 miles in 19hrs 5min
  • Fall 1932 – Elected president of the Ninety Nines, a new women’s aviation club which she helped to form
  • July 7-8, 1933 – Broke her previous transcontinental speed record by making the same flight in 17hrs 7min
  • January 11, 1935 – First person to solo the 2,408-mile distance across the Pacific between Honolulu and Oakland, California also first flight where a civilian aircraft carried a two-way radio
  • April l9 – 20, 1935 – First person to fly solo from Los Angeles to Mexico City 13hrs 23min
  • May 8, 1935 – First person to fly solo nonstop from Mexico City to Newark 14hrs 19min
  • March 17, 1937 – Amelia and her navigator, Fred Noonan, along with Captain Harry Manning and stunt pilot Paul Mantz, fly the first leg of the trip from Oakland, California, to Honolulu, Hawaii, in 15 hours and 47 minutes
  • June 1, 1937 – Began flight around the world June 1937 first person to fly from the Red Sea to India

.
During the mid-1930s, Lindbergh became familiar with German advances in aviation and warned his U.S. counterparts of Germany’s growing air superiority. But Lindbergh also became enamored of much of the German national “revitalization” he encountered, and allowed himself to be decorated by Hitler’s government, which drew tremendous criticism back home.

Upon Lindbergh’s return to the States, he agitated for neutrality with Germany, and testified before Congress in opposition to the Lend-Lease policy, which offered cash and military aid to countries friendly to the United States in their war effort against the Axis powers. His public denunciation of “the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt Administration” as instigators of American intervention in the war, as well as comments that smacked of anti-Semitism, lost him the support of other isolationists. When, in 1941, President Roosevelt denounced Lindbergh publicly, the aviator resigned from the Air Corps Reserve. He eventually contributed to the war effort, though, flying 50 combat missions over the Pacific. His participation in the war, along with his promotion to brigadier general of the Air Force Reserve in 1954 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a popular Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The Spirit of St. Louis,, and a movie based on his exploits all worked to redeem him in the public’s eyes.

Rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster

wow a thread about Amelia Earhart. her name appears in all of my big collection of books from the 1920s and 1930s. she was hot property back then. very very famous back then


Not highly respected by some Liberal men, but well respected by many other people.

FWIW, Lindbergh was not only against the US going to war with Germany, but was a big fan of the Nazi government.

  • January 3, 1921 – Began flying lessons with Neta Snook
  • July 1921 – Bought first plane, the Kinner Airster (named “The Canary”)
  • October 22, 1922 – Broke women’s altitude record when she rose to 14,000 feet
  • June 17-18, 1928 – First woman to fly across the Atlantic 20hrs 40min (Fokker F7, Friendship)
  • Summer 1928 – Bought an Avro Avian, a small English plane famous because Lady Mary Heath, Britain’s foremost woman pilot, had flown it solo from Capetown, South Africa, to London
  • Fall 1928 – Published book, 20 Hours 40 Minutes, toured, and lectured became aviation editor of Cosmopolitan magazine
  • August 1929 – Placed third in the First Women’s Air Derby, also known as the Powder Puff Derby upgraded from her Avian to a Lockheed Vega
  • Fall 1929 – Elected as an official for National Aeronautic Association and encouraged the Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) to establish separate world altitude, speed, and endurance records for women
  • June 25, 1930 – Set women’s speed record for 100 kilometers with no load and with a load of 500 kilograms
  • July 5, 1930 – Set speed record for of 181.18mph over a 3K course
  • September 1930 – Helped to organize and became vice president of public relations for new airline, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington Airways
  • April 8, 1931 – Set woman’s autogiro altitude record with 18,415 feet (in a Pitcairn autogiro)
  • May 20-21, 1932 – First woman to fly solo across the Atlantic 14 hrs 56 min (it was also the 5th anniversary of Lindberg’s Atlantic flight awarded National Geographic Society’s gold medal from President Herbert Hoover Congress awarded her the Distinguished Flying Cross wrote The Fun of It about her journey
  • August 24-25, 1932 – First woman to fly solo nonstop coast to coast set women’s nonstop transcontinental speed record, flying 2,447.8 miles in 19hrs 5min
  • Fall 1932 – Elected president of the Ninety Nines, a new women’s aviation club which she helped to form
  • July 7-8, 1933 – Broke her previous transcontinental speed record by making the same flight in 17hrs 7min
  • January 11, 1935 – First person to solo the 2,408-mile distance across the Pacific between Honolulu and Oakland, California also first flight where a civilian aircraft carried a two-way radio
  • April l9 – 20, 1935 – First person to fly solo from Los Angeles to Mexico City 13hrs 23min
  • May 8, 1935 – First person to fly solo nonstop from Mexico City to Newark 14hrs 19min
  • March 17, 1937 – Amelia and her navigator, Fred Noonan, along with Captain Harry Manning and stunt pilot Paul Mantz, fly the first leg of the trip from Oakland, California, to Honolulu, Hawaii, in 15 hours and 47 minutes
  • June 1, 1937 – Began flight around the world June 1937 first person to fly from the Red Sea to India

.
During the mid-1930s, Lindbergh became familiar with German advances in aviation and warned his U.S. counterparts of Germany’s growing air superiority. But Lindbergh also became enamored of much of the German national “revitalization” he encountered, and allowed himself to be decorated by Hitler’s government, which drew tremendous criticism back home.

Upon Lindbergh’s return to the States, he agitated for neutrality with Germany, and testified before Congress in opposition to the Lend-Lease policy, which offered cash and military aid to countries friendly to the United States in their war effort against the Axis powers. His public denunciation of “the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt Administration” as instigators of American intervention in the war, as well as comments that smacked of anti-Semitism, lost him the support of other isolationists. When, in 1941, President Roosevelt denounced Lindbergh publicly, the aviator resigned from the Air Corps Reserve. He eventually contributed to the war effort, though, flying 50 combat missions over the Pacific. His participation in the war, along with his promotion to brigadier general of the Air Force Reserve in 1954 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a popular Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The Spirit of St. Louis,, and a movie based on his exploits all worked to redeem him in the public’s eyes.

Amelia was a good pilot not a great pilot

She was famous because she got the rides to break aviation milestones. Doesn't mean other women could not have done the same if given the same chances Amelia was

Why did Amelia Earhart get the rides? Her husband was a renowned publicist George Eastman who was intent in making his wife famous. Amelia even got her hair cut so she would look more like Charles Lindbergh. The public ate it up

Her death seems more related to being in over her head to make an around the world flight and poor judgment


The Plot Against America imagines "an alternate American history told through the eyes of a working-class Jewish family in Newark, New Jersey, as they watch the political rise of Charles Lindbergh, an aviator-hero and xenophobic populist, who becomes president and turns the nation toward fascism." [2]

Main Edit

    as Herman Levin, an insurance agent with a promising career, and an opinionated New Deal socialist as Elizabeth "Bess" Levin, Herman's wife and stay-at-home mother as Evelyn Finkel, Bess's older, unmarried, independently-minded sister as Rabbi Lionel Bengelsdorf, a charismatic leader and supporter of Charles Lindbergh, and Evelyn's lover as Alvin Levin, Herman's orphaned, young-adult nephew, who lives with him as Shepsie Tirchwell, Herman's friend, who manages a newsreel theater and discusses politics with Herman as Monty Levin, Herman's older brother, a successful grocery supplier
  • Azhy Robertson as Philip Levin, the Levins' 10-year-old son
  • Caleb Malis as Sanford "Sandy" Levin, their rebellious teenage son, who is a talented artist
  • Jacob Laval as Seldon Wishnow, a shy and awkward boy who lives in the downstairs section of the house who is eventually fostered by the Levins.

Recurring Edit

  • Ben Cole as Brigadier GeneralCharles Lindbergh, a fictionalized portrayal of Lindbergh, as a xenophobic populist who runs for President on a ticket of opposition to US involvement in the war
  • Caroline Kaplan as Anne Morrow Lindbergh
  • Billy Carter as Walter Winchell
  • Ed Moran as Henry Ford
  • Daniel O'Shea as Burton K. Wheeler
  • Orest Ludwig as Joachim von Ribbentrop
  • Kristen Sieh as Selma Wishnow as Agent Don McCorkle
  • Graydon Yosowitz as Earl Axman, Philip's delinquent school friend
  • Steven Maier as Shushy Margulis
No. Title [3] Directed by [4] Teleplay by [5] Original air date [3] U.S. viewers
(millions)
1"Part 1"Minkie SpiroEd Burns & David SimonMarch 16, 2020 ( 2020-03-16 ) 0.407 [6]
June 1940. Herman is riled by the anti-war rhetoric of populist aviator hero Charles Lindbergh with its anti-Semitic overtones, but does not take the possibility of his running for the Presidency seriously. Herman is offered a promotion, but this would require them to live in Union where they would likely be the only Jews in the neighborhood. Disgusted by the patrons at a German-themed bar in Union, he decides to decline the offer. Alvin is fired from his job at a local Esso service station for stealing he tells Sandy he took the blame for a friend. He moves out of the house after an argument with Herman. Bess's older sister Evelyn, who looks after their mother, is having an affair with a married man in New York it soon becomes clear that he has no intention of divorcing his wife. Philip's friend Earl, whose mother has a scandalous reputation, is a corrupting influence on him. Evelyn and Bess meet Rabbi Bengelsdorf, who is sympathetic to Lindbergh's anti-war message Evelyn is charmed. Alvin secretly stays with a friend whose father runs a candy store. At night, he and two friends wait outside the German bar in Union and beat up two drunk patrons on their way home, calling them fascists.
2"Part 2"Minkie SpiroDavid Simon & Ed BurnsMarch 23, 2020 ( 2020-03-23 ) 0.395 [7]
October 1940. Sandy eagerly attends a speech by Lindbergh, with Evelyn and Bengelsdorf present. Evelyn and Bengelsdorf later enter into a relationship, and Evelyn introduces him to her mother. Bengelsdorf assures Evelyn he will attempt to sway her family to his side politically. With Herman's assistance, Alvin takes a job as a driver for a wealthy man named Abe Steinheim, but quickly grows to find him crass and corrupt. To aid her family financially, Bess takes a retail job at an upper-class store, though she soon becomes unnerved by Lindbergh-supporting customers. Philip continues to learn delinquent behavior from Earl, including theft and following strangers around the city. Speaking at a Lindbergh rally, Bengelsdorf lavishly endorses Lindbergh, with Evelyn by his side. Disgusted by Bengelsdorf and the direction of the country, Alvin quits his job and enlists in the Canadian Army. Lindbergh later wins the election and becomes President.
3"Part 3"Minkie SpiroEd BurnsMarch 30, 2020 ( 2020-03-30 ) 0.357 [8]
May 1941. A few months after Lindbergh's inauguration, anti-Semitic incidents have been rising in the United States. Lindbergh signs a neutrality agreement with Adolf Hitler. He also places Bengelsdorf in charge of a program called "Just Folks," as part of the Office of American Absorption, which temporarily places Jewish boys into rural families to make them "more American" Evelyn signs up Sandy to participate. Philip begins to have nightmares about Nazis. Meanwhile, Evelyn and Bess's mother's dementia has been worsening. As Bess's concern for her family's safety grows, she places them on a waiting list to potentially emigrate to Canada. The Levins take a trip to Washington, D.C., where they experience anti-Semitism among both citizens and the police. Herman ultimately gives his permission for Sandy to travel to Kentucky as part of Just Folks. Alvin flourishes in Canada's military program, and is recruited by British intelligence to help steal a German radar device. However, he loses his leg in combat.
4"Part 4"Thomas SchlammeDavid Simon & Reena RexrodeApril 6, 2020 ( 2020-04-06 ) 0.420 [9]
September 1941. Bess and Evelyn's mother dies. Herman visits Alvin in the hospital and offers his support, but Alvin has grown aloof and disillusioned. Alvin is questioned by the FBI, after which he is discharged and returns to New Jersey. In a synagogue, Sandy gives a presentation espousing Just Folks, after being designated a 'Recruitment Officer' by Evelyn. When Evelyn and Bengelsdorf join the Levins for Shabbat, Herman clashes with Bengelsdorf's views and upbringing, including his father fighting for the Confederacy. After Bengelsdorf proposes an expansion of Just Folks, Anne Morrow Lindbergh invites him and Evelyn to a state dinner with German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop (as all other Jewish representatives refused). Evelyn also secures an invitation for Sandy, which enrages Herman and Bess, who refuse to let Sandy attend. He responds by calling his parents "ghetto Jews" and "worse than Hitler". Evelyn dances with the German official at the dinner, which appears later on the newsreels. The FBI, meanwhile, has been tracking Alvin after marking him a potential Communist. Earl leaves town to live with his grandmother after his mother is committed to a psychiatric hospital. Seldon's father dies. Philip, overwhelmed by everything happening around him, happily watches a Lindbergh newsreel, much to Herman's exasperation.
5"Part 5"Thomas SchlammeEd BurnsApril 13, 2020 ( 2020-04-13 ) 0.433 [10]
April 1942. The Levins are forcibly signed up, by Evelyn, to participate in Homestead 42, Bengelsdorf's Just Folks expansion that relocates entire Jewish families. Bengelsdorf informs Bess that their participation will convince the FBI to take some heat off of Alvin. Philip expresses curiosity and concern about a Ku Klux Klan presence in Kentucky, and angrily asks Evelyn why his neighbor Seldon Wishnow, and Seldon's widowed mother Selma, weren't relocated instead. Misinterpreting this as a desire to be with his friend, Evelyn signs them up as well. Despite FBI threats, Herman intends to sue the OAA, but learns the legal process will take at least a year instead, he quits his job to avoid the Homestead 42 obligation. Philip is overwhelmed with guilt when he realizes that he was the cause of Seldon's relocation to Kentucky, where he will almost certainly be unhappy. The FBI resumes tailing Alvin. Evelyn and Bengelsdorf marry in an extravagant ceremony unattended by the Levins. Outspoken radio host Walter Winchell escalates his anti-Lindbergh rhetoric Bengelsdorf quickly gets him fired. Winchell announces a presidential run and Herman attends his rally, but violent Lindbergh supporters attack the attendees as the police stand aside. When Herman returns home bloodied, Bess threatens to leave him and take the children to Canada if he continues his resistance.
6"Part 6"Thomas SchlammeDavid SimonApril 20, 2020 ( 2020-04-20 ) 0.392 [11]
September 1942. Violent anti-Semitic incidents escalate and spread throughout the country. Winchell is assassinated in Louisville. At his funeral, New York Mayor Fiorello la Guardia eulogizes him and denounces Lindbergh. In response, Bengelsdorf urges the First Lady to convince Lindbergh to issue a statement, but Lindbergh's speech is short and lacking substance. Billy Murphy, a fellow veteran from the Canadian Army, visits Alvin and introduces him to a British agent who persuades Alvin to join a secretive anti-fascist group that wants to assassinate Lindbergh Alvin's radar expertise is needed to track Lindbergh's plane, which vanishes soon after. German radio spreads propaganda of a Jewish conspiracy, claims that are taken up by Acting President Wheeler who declares martial law and orders the arrests of prominent Jews including Bengelsdorf. Concerned by reports from Kentucky, Bess attempts to contact Selma but is only able to reach a distraught Seldon, whose mother hasn't returned home. Herman and Sandy drive to Kentucky to pick up Seldon, where they learn Selma has been murdered by the Ku Klux Klan. They encounter more Klan members on the way back to New Jersey. A terrified Evelyn asks Bess for sanctuary, but Bess tells her to leave and never return. The First Lady issues a statement calling for civic peace, the release of the Jewish detainees, and urges Congress to replace Wheeler and call an emergency Presidential election. Bengelsdorf returns to his synagogue, finding his congregation all but gone. His claims that Lindbergh's presidency and subsequent disappearance were the result of a German blackmail operation are met with skepticism from his colleagues. Alvin visits the Levins with his fiancee, but gets into a fistfight with Herman over Alvin's apparent indifference to national events. In November, the emergency election is marred by government disenfranchisement of Roosevelt voters, and the series ends without the results being revealed.

HBO announced on November 8, 2018, that it had ordered a six-episode miniseries based on Philip Roth's novel The Plot Against America to be written by David Simon and Ed Burns and executive produced by Simon, Burns, Roth, alongside Joe Roth, Jeffrey Kirschenbaum, Nina Noble, Megan Ellison, Sue Naegle, Susan Goldberg, and Dennis Stratton. Production companies involved with the series include Annapurna Pictures and Blown Deadline Productions. [2] [12] [13] In April 2019, Winona Ryder, Zoe Kazan, Morgan Spector, John Turturro, Anthony Boyle, Azhy Robertson, and Caleb Malis joined the cast of the series. [14]


Charles Lindbergh urges Congress to negotiate with Hitler - HISTORY

Jan 19 The British attack Italy's forces in Eritrea.

Jan 22 The British and Australians have driven Italian forces from Egypt, and across the Egypt-Libya border, on the coast, they win against the Italians at Tobruk.

Jan 22 &ndash 23 Anti-Jewish violence in Romania leaves 120 Jews dead in the streets. Jews are hunted by armed gangs. Some flee to Palestine.

Jan 23 Charles Lindbergh testifies before the US Congress and recommends that the US establish a neutrality pact with Hitler.

Jan 27 The US Ambassador to Japan, Joseph Grew, cables the US State Department that he has learned of a plan by the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor should Japan and the US go to war.

Jan 31 In Baghdad, in response to British victories against Italian forces, the nationalistic, anti-British and pro-German prime minister, Sayyad Rashid Ali al-Gillani, resigns under pressure from the regent to the five-year-old king, Faisal II.

Feb 10 Britain breaks relations with Romania.

Feb19-22 The British have been bombing Germany. The Germans bomb Britain. Reported British dead: 230.

Feb 25 Joseph Goebbels writes in his diary: "Cables from the USA to the short-wave service are generally very positive. My work is also greatly respected there. America does not consist entirely of Jews and plutocrats. It is just that they can shout the loudest."

Feb 26 Against the Italians, British troops take Somalia and invade Ethiopia.

Feb 27 The French regime at Vichy makes religious education in school mandatory.

Feb 27 Jewish musicians in Berlin perform Gustav Mahler's Second Symphony.

Mar 1 &ndash 5 Bulgaria joins the German-Italian-Hungarian-Romanian alliance and in return is promised most of Thrace and Macedonia as well as parts of eastern Serbia. German troops enter Bulgaria welcomed. The Soviet Union, despite its pact with Hitler, denounces Bulgaria's move. Britain severs relations with Bulgaria.

Mar 4 Hitler invites Yugoslavia's Prince Paul to take his share in the "New World Order." Prince Paul gathers from Hitler's comments that Germany will invade the Soviet Union. He will tell his brother-in-law, the king of Greece, who will tell the British.

Mar 7 Five thousand British soldiers land in Greece. Joseph Goebbels writes in his diary: "The Pope and his cardinals are praying for peace. Too late. The game must be played to its conclusion."

Mar 7 A leader of India's independence movement, Subhash Chandra Bose, a believer in socialist authoritarianism, has escaped British authority and fled to Germany. British authorities secretly order his assassination.

Mar 11 Roosevelt signs the Lend Lease Act, enabling him to send war materials, including ships, to those nations at war.

Mar 25 Yugoslavia joins the German-Italian-Hungarian-Romanian alliance.

Mar 26- 27 A coup in Belgrade, Yugoslavia brings to power a regime hostile to Germany and Italy. People in Belgrade celebrate with the slogan "Rather death than slavery."

Mar 30 Hitler tells his generals that Communism is criminal and requires extermination of Bolshevik commissars and the Communist intelligencia. The war against the Soviet Union, he says, will be different from what it was in the West, and it is no job for the military courts.

April 1 The Iraqi army surrounds the royal palace in Baghdad. Royalty escape toward Amman in Transjordan. At stake for the Germans is access to Iraqi oil, promised by the former prime minister, Gillani. The British still have a few hundred troops in Iraq.

Apr 3 In Baghdad, Gillani and four army generals take power. Demonstrators loot the property and beat Jews in the cities of Mosul, Kirkuk, Irbil, Basrah, Amara and Fallujah. In Baghdad the killing of Jews takes place.

Apr 3 Britain's Prime Minister Winston Churchill warns Stalin of German plans to invade.

Apr 4 President Roosevelt allows the British Navy to repair and refuel its ships in the United States, and he notifies the British that he is extending the US defense zone eastward as far as Iceland and to the western coast of Africa.

Apr 5 The Soviet Union signs a treaty of friendship with the new anti-fascist regime in Yugoslavia.

Apr 6 To secure his southern front, Hitler sends troops to Greece and Yugoslavia. Italian and Albanian forces join in the invasion of Yugoslavia. Bulgaria joins in the invasion of Greece, toward occupation of the Khalkidhiki Peninsula. German planes bomb Belgrade.

Apr 7 Hitler postpones his invasion of the Soviet Union five weeks, to June 22.

Apr 10 An independent Croatia is declared, led by Ante Pavelic and approved by Hitler. Serbs, gypsies and Communists in Croatia are threatened. The Catholic Church in Croatia begins to compel the country's Serbs of the Orthodox faith to convert to Catholicism.

Apr 10 Goebbels writes in his diary: "With the fall of Yugoslavia, we shall also take possession of enormous potential sources of raw materials. Particularly copper, which we could do with."

Apr 13 The peace agreement between Japan and the Soviet Union goes into effect.

Apr 14 German troops, led by Erwin Rommel, have been in North Africa for a month. They attack the British and Australians at Tobruk.

Apr 14 The British are still in Egypt, and they warn that if Cairo is bombed their air force will attack Rome.

Apr 20 Goebbels delivers an "Our Hitler" speech on Hitler's fifty-second birthday:

We Germans . have been formed by our age, and we in turn are forming it. It will be the task of later generations to evaluate it properly and to determine what is really admirable and what is simply normal. Future generations will surely envy the fact that we have lived a life of struggle, that we had the good fortune to have political passion . a new world is now being born. [Hitler has ] forged the path and showed the way, giving meaning, content, and direction to our age. We are experiencing the greatest miracle that history offers: a genius is building a new world.

Apr 21-28. Greece and its army surrenders to Germany. German tanks enter Athens. British troops evacuate and some are forced to surrender. Goebbels writes in his diary:

Hearst [William Randolph] has launched a swinging attack on Churchill as a warmonger. Things are still seesawing in the United States. But we are not inactive in this respect.

Apr 30 An Iraqi force moves to the edge of the British air base at Habbaniya and warns the British to keep their planes on the ground.

Apr 30 In Croatia, persons of Aryan descent are prohibited association with Jews.

May 2 &ndash 6 British planes take off from the Habbaniya air base and rout the Iraqi force. The British land a division of Indian troops at Basra, which heads toward Baghdad.

May 10 From Greece, German airplanes begin to strike against the British in Iraq, and German planes destroy the House of Commons in London.

May 14 In Paris, 3,600 Jews are arrested. In a radio broadcast the leader of Vichy France's armed forces claims that only within the confines of the German Third Reich can France thrive.

May 14 At Glina, in Croatia, hundreds of Serbs attend an obligatory service of thanksgiving for the fascist state of Croatia. The two who can present certificates of conversion are released. The rest are slaughtered.

May 20 Britain's war in East Africa ends with an Italian surrender.

Jun 1-2 British forces enter Baghdad and reinstate King Faisal's regent. Violence against Jews erupts in Iraq. Some Moslems open their homes, feed and protect Jews.

Jun 4 Germany bombs the port at Alexandria, Egypt. Egypt's cabinet resigns. The Republic of Croatia orders all Jews to wear a star.

Jun 8 The British and Free French attack French forces in Syria. Britain offers Syria independence.

Jun 12 In London a declaration of unity and sense of purpose is signed by Britain, Canada, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa. Also signing are governments-in-exile: Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland and Yugoslavia. Signing for a "Free France" is Charles de Gaulle. It is the beginning of what will become the United Nations.

Jun 14 The Soviet Union begins deportations to Siberia from Estonia (around 10,000 persons), Latvia (15,000) and Lithuania (18,000).

Jun 14 Joseph Goebbels writes in his diary that Hitler, looking forward to his invasion of the Soviet Union, says "And victory is right, moral and necessary. And once we have won, who is going to question our methods?"

Jun 18 Germany and Turkey sign a Treaty of Friendship.

Jun 22 Soviet intelligence has doubted that the Germans would soon invade. The German military facing east has not been equipped for the coming winter. But today a massive military operation against the Soviet Union begins. Hitler describes the invasion as preemptive, that he is invading the Soviet Union because it was planning to invade Germany. Stalin had amassed a military force facing Germany that did not appear defensive in character, and although Stalin was not planning to attack Germany both Hitler and Stalin have a kill-or-be-killed view of political survival. Stalin believes eventually will have to destroy capitalist-fascist Germany. Hitler's view includes struggle between races. Hitler sees his invasion as an expansion of Germanic superiority over the weak and inferior Slavs.

Jun 22 Germany occupies Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

Jun 24 President Roosevelt pledges support to the Soviet Union in what it will call the Great Patriotic War.

Jun 24 The entire Jewish male population of Gorzhdy, Lithuania is exterminated.

Jun 25 The uneasy peace between Finland and the Soviet Union since March 1940 has ended. Finland sends troops into the Karelia, an area with some Finnish population that has been disputed by Finland and Russia. Sweden's government is to allow German troops to cross Sweden into Finland.

Jun 27 Hungary declares war on the Soviet Union.

Jun 30 A shaken and depressed Stalin has withdrawn to his country dacha, expecting to be ousted from power because of his failures. A few Politburo members arrive. Stalin asks why they have come and they announce their proposal to set up a "Supreme Defense Council" with Stalin as chairman. Stalin agrees and pulls himself together.

Jul 2 Germany, Italy and their allies recognize Japan's puppet government of China. China breaks diplomatic relations with Germany and Italy.

Jul 5 Peru, with one of the strongest armies in South America, invades Ecuador.

Jul 14 Lithuanian Jews, said to number 6,000, are exterminated.

Jul 21 In Poland, the Majdanek concentration camp opens.

Jul 25 The US government freezes Japanese assets in the United States.

Jul 27 The German army enters Ukraine.

Jul 28 The Japanese extend their occupation across the whole of Indochina, as agreed to by the government in Vichy, France.

Jul 30 Fighting between Peru and Ecuador ends in an armistice. Peru holds Ecuador's El Oro province and eastern tropical forest territory held by Ecuador since the 1830s.

Aug 5- 7 Thousands of Jews in Romania are abducted or rounded up and killed.

Aug 14 Prime Minister Churchill and President Roosevelt meet at an anchorage in New Foundland and create the "Atlantic Charter." The Charter expresses "the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live."

Sep 1 In Germany the government's euthanasia program &ndash the killing of mentally handicapped adults and children &ndash is officially ended due to widespread protest, begun by a Catholic bishop.

Sep 3 At their Auschwitz One facility in Poland, Germany's SS conduct poison gas tests, killing 600 Soviet prisoners of war.

Sep 4 The Germans begin to bombard Leningrad with artillery shells.

Sep 6 Emperor Hirohito of Japan gives his approval "with misgivings" to simultaneous efforts to negotiate peace with the US and to prepare for an attack if the efforts failed.

Sep 7 The Finns, advancing southward toward Leningrad, stop at the old border between Finland and the Soviet Union, and they refuse a German request to bomb Leningrad. The Germans will be unable to approach Stalingrad from the north.

Sep 8 The Germans stop ten miles from Leningrad (St. Petersburg). They start to besiege the city, severing its last land connection. Shelling creates 178 fires in the city.

Sep 11 President Roosevelt, in response to submarine attacks on US ships, orders any German ship found in American waters to be sunk on sight.

Sep 11 Charles Lindbergh, speaking for the America First Committee, blames "the British, the Jewish [sic] and the Roosevelt administration" for trying to draw the United States into World War II.

Sep 19 In Germany, Jews are ordered to wear a yellow star describing them as "Jew." German troops enter Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, and they are welcomed by some who hope for independence from the Soviet Union.

Sep 24 In London, governments-in-exile &ndash Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia -- join with the Soviet Union and Charles de Gaulle of the Free French to proclaim adherence to principles of the Atlantic Charter. Hitler sees the alliance as an international Jewish conspiracy and looks forward to his Final Solution to the "Jewish problem."

Sep 28 In Kiev, Soviet agents (NKVD members) have been blowing up German targets. The Germans decide it is the work of the Jews. All Jews in the city of Kiev and its vicinity are ordered to report at 8 o'clock the following morning and to bring with them documents, money, valuables, warm clothes and underwear.

Sep 29 In Kiev tens of thousands of Jews arrive for what they expect is deportration &ndash some early to be sure for a seat on the train. They are herded into a nearby Jewish cemetery through a narrow corridor of enraged German soldiers, machine gunned, their bodies buried in a ravine known as Babi Yar.

Oct 3 Adolf Hitler declares that Russia is "broken" and will "never rise again." In Paris, six synagogues are blown up.

Oct 9 Roosevelt requests congressional approval for arming US merchant ships.

Oct 12 Moscow is partially evacuated.

Oct 16 France's head of state, Marshall Petain, orders the arrest of former prime ministers Daladier, Blum, and Reynaud. Jews in Germany are beginning to be deported to Jewish ghettos in Lodz, Riga and Minsk.

Oct 18 Emperor Hirohito elevates General Hideki Tojo, Japan's War Minister, to head Japan's government. Prime Minister Tojo represents the rightist true-believers in Japan's aggressive imperialism.

Oct 22- 23 Odessa, on the Black Sea in the south of Ukraine, has had a Jewish population of around 180,000. Invading Romanian troops target the Jews. Some Jews are shot. Many are burned to death in a public square or in warehouses that were locked shut. The dead will be described as between 25,000 and 34,000.

Oct 23 Germany's Jews are no longer allowed to emigrate.

Nov 7 Stalin appears in Red Square for the traditional commemoration of the Bolshevik Revolution. Parading troops head for the nearby front against the Germans. The British continue their year-long air raids against Germany. They bomb Berlin, Mannheim and Ruhrgebied.

Nov 28 A Japanese fleet of warships sails from Hiroshima Bay heading for the Hawaiian Islands.

Dec 1 Emperor Hirohito signs the decision by the Ruling Council of Japan to wage war against the United States, Britain and the Netherlands.

Dec 6 Germans near Moscow are exhausted and without proper winter clothing in unusually cold weather. Soviet forces attack. The German line in front of Moscow disintegrates. Thousands are taken prisoner.

Dec 6 Britain and Canada declare war on Finland.

Dec 6 Admiral Kimmel in Hawaii discusses with two operations officers whether they should recall liberty parties, put everyone on alert and send the entire fleet out to sea in silence after dark. The two operations officers object. They agree to follow the orders of Admiral Stark, Chief of Naval Operations, that nothing be done to alarm the people of Honolulu.

Dec 7 Airplanes from Japanese aircraft carriers strike at US military installations at Pearl Harbor and Kaneohe Bay on the island of Oahu. The Japanese bomb the US military at Clark Field in the Philippines. Most US aircraft are destroyed on the ground. General MacArthur is dismayed and wonders whether Germans were flying the Japanese planes.

Dec 8 The Japanese move against the British and Commonwealth force at Hong Kong.

Dec 11 Germany and Italy join their ally the Japanese and declare war against the United States. Hitler describes himself as having wanted peace with Britain, as defending European civilization and Roosevelt as aiming at "an unlimited world dictatorship."

Dec 12 Goebbels writes in his diary: "With respect of the Jewish Question, the Führer [Hitler] has decided to make a clean sweep. He prophesied to the Jews that if they again brought about a world war, they would live to see their annihilation in it. That wasn't just a catch-word. The world war is here, and the annihilation of the Jews must be the necessary consequence."

Dec 12 The British are defeated at the Battle of Jitra in Malaya and are retreating southward toward Singapore.

Dec 13 Bulgaria and Hungary join in declaring war against the United States.

Dec 20 Japanese troops land on Mindanao, in the Philippines.

Dec 25 At Hong Kong, the British surrender.

Dec 29 Soviet troops re-take Kerch and Feodosiya in the Crimea. The Japanese bomb Rangoon, Burma, knocking out the main railway station, wharfs, and warehouses with lend-lease supplies intended for China.

Dec 30 Gandhi resigns from India's Congress Party because of its support for the British and US war effort.

Dec 31 Leningrad enters its 112th day of being cut off by the Germans. It is extremely cold by Leningrad standards, with fuel for heating scarce. There is a bread ration of 110 grams (4 ounces) per day per person. Three to four thousand people are dying each day in Leningrad from starvation.


When Democratic Senators Collaborated With American Nazis to Stop Hollywood From Taking on Hitler

This exclusive excerpt from the new book “Hollywood Hates Hitler!” explores the time U.S. senators teamed with the fascist America First Committee to battle pro-war Hollywood.

Chris Yogerst

O n March 31, 1941, MPPDA president Will Hays released his annual report, titled Motion Pictures and National Defense. Although most of the 38-page document would be ignored by the Senate investigation of Hollywood, Hays outlined Hollywood’s response to the turmoil in Europe. Hays describes 1940 “as a period of supreme crisis in the history of the world.” Profits were the only true ideology in Hollywood, and the war was clearly affecting foreign sales. Hays listed fourteen countries that no longer bought Hollywood films and thirteen that were nearing the same position. The isolationist senators used this economic change as an explanation for why Hollywood made anti-Nazi films, but Hays also explained that the industry had simply shifted its export focus elsewhere.

The MPPDA president also gave an overview of the kinds of films released over the past year. Hays categorized them in terms of drama, comedy, and music and singled out films that portrayed the “somber and satirical aspects of the tragedy of Europe.” Several films that would be discussed during the Senate investigation were listed, such as The Mortal Storm, The Great Dictator, Night Train to Munich, Foreign Correspondent, The Man I Married, and Pastor Hall. For Hays, the war in Europe was a natural topic for movies, but the small number of such films “spoke most emphatically against any charge that the screen was a breeder of hate.” Only 5 percent of films released in 1940 dealt with the European conflict in any capacity.

While critics of Hollywood would soon refer to film primarily as a means of amusement, Hays defined film as “a medium of information, education, and entertainment.” Hays also stated that movies were an important force for national morale, which was proven by the Naval leaders who testified before the House Appropriations Committee two weeks prior to Hays’s report. After describing the industry’s growth in terms of exhibition policy and technology, Hays noted how Hollywood was leading the nation with its community service. The film industry raised millions of dollars for the Red Cross and donated thousands of films to health facilities, which was a testament to its civic responsibility.

PURCHASE ‘HOLLYWOOD HATES HITLER!’ HERE

University Press of Mississippi

Hays’ conclusion argued that “the screen is too prominent a medium for criticism, right or wrong, not to be constantly leveled at it. Wholesome criticism allows for constant self-examination and stimulates our progress baseless criticism gives us the opportunity to establish the facts about the industry.” The industry would certainly be providing facts countering ill-informed criticism, as the isolationist senators would grasp strongly to Hays’s final paragraph that describes cinema as “an instrument of universal entertainment,” but would ignore the rest of the sentence that describes film as an instrument of “wide-spread information and common inspiration.” Much of Hollywood’s defense would be based on the medium’s purpose of spreading information and, when necessary, inspiration.

The pamphlet that likely informed the Senate investigation on a more significant scale was G. Allison Phelps’ dossier An American’s History of Hollywood: The Tower of Babel. Phelps’ arguments and accusations throughout the 34-page document would regularly find their way into the comments made by the isolationist senators. An American’s History of Hollywood opens with the claim that Hollywood is largely informed by its many Russian immigrant employees, and therefore is an industry led by communists. Phelps’ evidence, without listing specific productions, was that “the Hollywood leaders, in selecting ‘literature’ from which to produce pictures, reached far back into Russia to bring forth the embryo of atheism, the oriental germ of eroticism, [and] the seeds of lust and hatred.” The films coming from Hollywood were described as “a constant stream of sexy, underworld pictures, propaganda pictures, European tales of hate, greed, and brutality, which do not furnish entertainment but which do serve to corrupt, warp, or to horrify the minds of not only America’s growing boys and girls, but the minds of America’s men and women, as well.” Phelps also pointed out Hollywood corruption in terms of its cavalier approach to marriage and divorce, noting that most industry couples do not make it past five years.

After arguing that Hollywood was abusing stockholders’ money, a point that would come up in the coming Senate hearings, Phelps included a xenophobic satire of Louella Parsons’ annual “All-American” Hollywood team. Phelps’ team was called the “Indispensables” and was coached by Nicholas Schenck, who Phelps argued was the one truly running Hollywood. It would be no surprise when Schenck got subpoenaed by the Senate subcommittee. Assistant coaches included Bob Rubin, Eddie Mannix, Darryl Zanuck, and Adolph Zukor. The team consisted of a majority of other Hollywood moguls, including Harry Warner, Harry Cohn, Samuel Goldwyn, and Louis B. Mayer. Each name included the foreign countries in which they were born and the lofty salaries each executive earned. In addition to a list of substitutes and cheerleaders, Jack Warner was humorously relegated to the status of water boy. Phelps referred to this team as “the shiftiest, fastest-blocking team of industrialists in America. Even the Government Team has not been able, yet, to make a clean tackle of this line-up.” Additional chapters focused on nepotism, monopoly, and blacklist. Phelps argued that “motion pictures are connected by a link of cousins, uncles, brothers, wives, in-laws and out-laws.” The monopoly charges, Phelps observed correctly, were regularly being fought by Hollywood. Phelps added that “the stockholders will pay the expenses of this fight of the Hollywood leaders of the industry to control picture production through a Hitler cartel system in defiance to all decent American business systems.” The blacklist concern was based on claims that isolationists had a difficult time getting work once their opinions were known. Phelps added that many players found periods of unemployment after pressuring studios about their contracts.

Phelps concluded, ignoring the Dies Committee reports that gave Hollywood a clean record on communist infiltration, that “the most prominent figures in the business have communistic leanings.” The end of the document referred to Hollywood as “an influence of evil” and demanded a congressional investigation into the American film industry. The last page of the pamphlet featured a headline that read, “Attention! Sam Goldwyn,” with an acronym of “what’s wrong with Hollywood” that included words like “Aliens,” “Warped Judgement,” “Refugees,” “Nepotism,” “Hate,” “Propaganda,” “Communist Ideology,” but also surprisingly featured “Geniuses.” Phelps’s isolationist and nationalistic ideology can also be seen in another pamphlet, “America for Americans.” The xenophobic agenda is clear from the title alone.

Ideological Competition at the Hollywood Bowl

The summer of 1941 saw two competing events in Los Angeles that would serve as a primer for coming debates. Two rallies were held at the Hollywood Bowl, the first on June 20, 1941, in support of the America First Committee. The featured speakers at this isolationist rally were famous aviator Charles Lindbergh and Senator D. Worth Clark (D-ID), who on June 19 told the press, “Our business is to make ourselves strong and our further business is to let them, the Germans, the English and all the rest, settle their own business.” Clark further warned that if the United States did go to war, “We are going to wind up with some sort of state control. Capitalism as we know it will be through.” Lindbergh would echo Clark’s fearmongering to a packed house of twenty thousand.

Receiving a wild ovation, Lindbergh shyly walked onto the stage to present his prepared speech. Lindbergh gained his composure while photographers’ flashbulbs illuminated the bowl. “We fight with the blade of truth as our greatest weapon,” the aviator proclaimed. “They use the bludgeon of propaganda.” Lindbergh’s concern was that the United States was not ready for war, and the only way to prepare would be to turn the country “into a military nation that exceeds Germany in regimentation.” Confident that no country could invade the United States, Lindbergh argued that the United States should keep out of the European conflict to ensure foreign trade relationships. If we refuse to negotiate peace, argued Lindbergh, the result will be “either a Hitler victory or a prostrate Europe, and possibly a prostrate America as well.” Lindbergh also showed his animosity towards Europe by saying, “The only way European civilization can be saved is by ending it quickly,” which sounds more like a talking point from Hitler than one from a patriotic American. Showing great concern for the lives of young men who would be shipped into deadly conflict if sent to war, Lindbergh displayed no sympathy for the genocidal conditions growing in Europe.

On July 23, the Hollywood Bowl saw an interventionist gathering, hosted by the immensely popular actor Bob Hope, with former presidential candi- date Wendell Willkie as the keynote speaker. Willkie was flanked by a list of Hollywood celebrities. Many of the industry’s top actors and actresses spoke at the event, including Clark Gable, Carole Lombard, Robert Taylor, Barbara Stanwyck, Robert Montgomery, Myrna Loy, Spencer Tracy, Douglas Fairbanks, Lew Ayres, Bette Davis, John Garfield, Edward G. Robinson, Fredric March, Walter Pidgeon, Marlene Dietrich, Madeleine Carroll, Hedy Lamarr, Charles Boyer, Joel McCrea, Tyrone Power, Don Ameche, Harold Lloyd, and Joan Bennett. The star-studded crowd filled the venue, with a crowd of 19,000, slightly less than the Lindbergh event.

Willkie spoke after receiving a three-minute ovation complete with chants of “we want Willkie!” Declaring the current interventionist-isolationist debate one of the greatest in history, Willkie argued that looking at the division as simply war versus peace was a misconception. The real debate was about peacekeeping and not warmongering. Willkie took aim at the argument that a European war was Europe’s problem alone. “It is sophistry to try to define this danger in purely territorial terms.” The future security of the United States was Willkie’s primary concern, which did not mean a declaration of war but instead an increase in defense awareness. “Hitler was able to attack the unprepared,” added Willkie. “We should have begun to prepare the moment the rise of Hitler revealed our danger.” Willkie’s speech made it clear that his intention was not for the country to jump into war, as his detractors had claimed, but instead to push for a more focused plan of defense that considered the growing threats posed by strong fascist power in Europe.

Because the film industry czar Will Hays would likely be too cordial and accommodating going up against the attack dogs in Washington, Hollywood made its interest in Willkie clear. As a political insider himself, Willkie was able to push the impending Senate investigation into September so he could meet [Senator Gerald] Nye and prepare a defense.

Congressional Opposition Grows

In a radio address delivered from St. Louis on Aug. 1, Senator Nye drew his line in the sand against the motion-picture industry. Nye opened with a plea to fight for America and specified “but for America only.” Arguing that America was wrongly lured into World War I thanks to effective propaganda, Nye asserted that the United States was being primed for another war. The cause, Nye argued, was the film companies that had “been operating as war propaganda machines almost as if they were being directed from a single central bureau.” Nye derided Hollywood for making films “designed to rouse us to a state of war hysteria.” Specific films named were Convoy (RKO 1941), Escape (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1940), Flight Command (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1940), That Hamilton Woman (United Artists 1941), Man Hunt (Twentieth Century Fox 1941), Sergeant York (Warner Bros. 1941), The Great Dictator (United Artists 1940), and I Married a Nazi (which was released by Twentieth Century Fox as The Man I Married). Ignorant of Hitler’s horrors, Nye scoffed that each of these films were “designed to drug the reason of the American people, set aflame their emotions, turn their hatred into a blaze, fill them with fear that Hitler will come over here and capture them, that he will steal their trade, that America must go into this war—to rouse them to a war hysteria.”

U.S. Colonel Charles Lindbergh gives a radio address in an unknown location on September 27, 1939, concerning the situation in Europe and the American attitude.

AFP/Getty

Sergeant York (1941) was particularly offensive to Nye because the film was praised by President Roosevelt, who invited the real Alvin York to the White House. Nye also called attention to Will Hays’s recent statement that movies were primarily entertainment. After a spineless qualifier along the lines of “with all due respect,” Nye argued that because Hollywood is made up largely of European immigrants, the industry’s concern is not that of the United States. Nye’s infamous line, that the film studios are “gigantic engines of propaganda,” was based on the assertion that Hollywood needs European markets to survive. Additional accusations were hurled at (Jewish) Leo Rosten and Major General Charles S. Richardson, who were working as liaisons between Hollywood and the US government.

Wondering if Hollywood had become something akin to Germany, Italy, or Russia’s propaganda wings, Nye argued that the US government was to blame for recruiting filmmakers. Nye called motion-picture propaganda in Hollywood “insidious” because it undermined moviegoers. “Eighty million people will go to the movies this week,” Nye claimed, using the inflated attendance number to his advantage. “Seventy-five percent of those people are against going into war. But those seventy-five percent will pay three-fourths of the bill for this propaganda designed to get them into a war they don’t want to go into.” After criticizing both newsreels and feature films, Nye stated that this “propaganda is moving us into a dance of death.” No in-depth analysis was made of Hollywood or its films and the speech remained a series of headline-grabbing quips followed by reminders that a large percentage of Americans are against intervention.

Senators Nye and Wheeler continued their attack on the March of Time newsreel series. Wheeler had complained to Will Hays years prior about unfair depiction of the Lend-Lease bill in the newsreels. Variety noted that “the Senate isolationist group is grasping at every available material to sustain charges . . . that the film industry is propagandizing for war.” Louis De Rochemont, March of Time representative, responded with a letter: “The Hitler peace offensive is on and lots of well-meaning people will be taken in by it. We at March of Time are not. We know the record of Nazi Germany and know that Hitler means war, not peace, and war against America at the end of it all.” March of Time was putting together a new short newsreel titled Peace—by Adolf Hitler, which was to outline Hitler’s history of deceit and make a case against believing any peace initiative from a totalitarian state. Larchmont’s letter encouraged viewers to spread the word and discuss the contents of the film, signing off with the question, “Can I count on you?” Variety concurred, stating that discussion of the film is “brutal to American thinking,” presumably to the isolationist wave in the United States Government. An op-ed in U.S. Week was even more blunt with Wheeler, claiming that the senator simply had accepted that “Hitler has won the battle for the world” and felt that the country needed to be friendly with him. The day after Nye took his on-air shots against the film industry, Walter Wanger, now president of the Motion Picture Academy of Arts & Sciences, read a letter to Franklin Roosevelt on the KFWB airwaves. Wanger endorsed the president’s leadership in the crisis period before America joined the war. As a supporter of war-conscious studio films and a producer of them himself, Wanger wrote Roosevelt, “When we hear some of these politicians talk and tell us [Hollywood] to play safe and try to get along with these world aggressors, we wonder if this is the same America in which we were born and brought up.” Wanger was referring to senators like Burton K. Wheeler and Gerald P. Nye, who were stirring up suspicion of Hollywood. “There are a few men in our Senate, Mr. President, who have been hypnotized by Mein Kampf and believe that they can imitate him successfully in this country.” Without naming names, Wanger argued that these senators “should join Hitler and leave those of us who cherish our liberties the right to fight for them, unhampered by their fears and un-American influences.”

Wanger was ready to not only help defend the United States, but had already established a record of defending Hollywood as isolationist voices grew. In May, Wanger addressed the Variety Clubs of America convention in Atlantic City, New Jersey, by focusing on the increased importance of films as part of our culture. “Our duty is to entertain,” Wanger emphasized, “but great entertainment can also be enlightening.” Wanger felt that movies should help Americans wake up to the happenings of the word, that movies can help people face reality. Part of his frustration was that less than ten out of 350 Hollywood films focused on something beyond variations of romance. “I say motion pictures can aid in National Defense by giving us many, many more that 10 out of 350 pictures which deal with democracy in the world crisis,” argued Wanger.

Even though anti-Nazi or interventionist filmmaking was a minority of Hollywood’s output, Wanger was well aware of the increased pushback. He lived it with Blockade and Foreign Correspondent. Wanger made the understandable argument that while critics may take shots at a film they see as propaganda, they say nothing about the best-selling book or popular play the film was based on. Wanger pointed out that the Saturday Evening Post, a publication that opposed the president’s Lend-Lease Bill, was the same magazine that published the serialized anti-Nazi story Escape. The book became a best-seller, but when the film was made, “It was barbarism. The cry went up [that] Hollywood is going in for propaganda,” explained Wanger. The producer went on to specify that the main problem was a group of United States senators pushing isolationism with false data in support. Wanger encouraged the Variety Clubs to use their local theaters as “lighthouses of the community” to centralize “strength in the interests of freedom.”


Talk:Charles Lindbergh/Archive 1

But the kidnapping itself made the son famous. There have been many books written theorizing what happened to the child. An article about the son would have to be almost all about the kidnapping, murder, and conspiracy theories people wrote about it, but I still believe that the article should splinter. Even if the father and son are related, per se, there should still be separate articles distinguishing them. WhisperToMe 03:51, 15 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The father is always referred to as Charles Lindbergh, and the kidnap victim is always referred to "the Lindbergh baby". The son is not famous, the kidnapping of the son is famous. An article about the Lindbergh baby kidnapping or Lindbergh kidnapping gives some clue as to content: an article about [[Charles Lindbergh, Jr.]] would only be mystifying. -- Someone else 03:58, 15 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Actually, the article is Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Jr., and the son WAS somewhat famous, since the newspapers called him "The Eaglet". His death made him more FAMOUS, but the people involved were even MORE Famous than he was. By the way, while "Lindbergh Baby" is a well known name for him, it is NOT a suitable name because it is not the formal, legal name given to the child. WhisperToMe 23:41, 15 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, sort of like Jimmy Carter. -- Someone else 23:52, 15 Sep 2003 (UTC)

My case in point is an airport. New Tokyo International Airport in Narita, Japan is commonly called by westerners as "Narita Airport", but that is NOT the airport's official designation. I'll see if anyone wants to keep the article at "Jimmy Carter". WhisperToMe 00:06, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

My point is that I think it would be wrong to make two seperate pages about the father and the child, with on both pages more or less the same info about the kidnapping. Perhaps a seperate, detailled page about the 1932 Lindbergh baby kidnapping, and two entries: Charles Augustus Lindbergh and Charles Augustus Lindbergh Jr.. Charles Augustus Lindbergh Sr. could redirect to Charles Augustus Lindbergh. Then in the articles about father and son, we can simply refer to the kidnapping article. I doubt if there is enough information to make a seperate (non-stub) page about the child (but that can be because I don't know very much about the subject), but if anyone wants to give it a shot, it's fine Pascal 12:40, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

This news item should be incorporated [1] into this article. Kingturtle 20:39, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)

broken link -- what was this news? DHR 23:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Within aviation circles records are held by aircraft category and class. Airplanes are in a different category than airships. This is not only the popular opinion of people in the community, but the official position of the FIA, the world's aviation record keeping organization. As such I am reverting the airships addition. PPGMD 18:56, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yes, aviation records are set strictly according to aircraft class, but you seem to miss the point entirely. This aside I inserted was not meant to indicate that the Orteig prize qualifications had already been met, but merely to correct a common public misperception that Lindbergh was the first to fly the Atlantic by noting that Alcock and Brown as well as airships had flown the Atlantic non stop before him. The fact that the aircraft categories are different is irrelevant. And anyways, airships were considered real rivals to airplanes for air travel before the Hindenburg. And remember, the fact that Lindbergh flew solo was irrelevant to the Orteig prize which did not require it, it was just his strategy to fly a small light plane rather that a multiengined one. Using the qualifier "solo" serves, in laudatory articles about Lindbergh, to obscure the fact I am pointing out. Therefore, I re insert the airship reference since your objection to it is not logical. (Petrol)

It already had that in it, mentioning other non-stop flights across the Atlantic. I am against the airships entry specfically because it compares apples to oranges. Adding a comment about airships crossing first, might be a good note on a page about the Orteig prize, and tranatlantic commerce in general, but it doesn't deserve an entry in a man's biography page. PPGMD

I'd suggest having details of flights before Lindbergh at the Transatlantic flight (which could use some expansion, I think). The Lindbergh article says he wasn't the first and links to the Transatlantic flight article people who want to more details about earlier and other important Transatlantic flights can see that page. A thought, -- Infrogmation 06:25, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That would work for me. PPGMD 16:20, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In St. Louis, Missouri, sections of U.S. Highway 67 are named Lindbergh Blvd. after the aviator Charles Lindbergh.

that CNN link is broken. What did it say? DHR 23:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Should this be included, or does the article already cover his views on this? In November 1939, Charles Lindbergh wrote the following for the Reader's Digest: "Our civilization depends on a united strength among ourselves on a strength too great for foreign armies to challenge on a Western wall of race and arms which can hold back either a Genghis Khan or the infiltration of inferior blood on an English fleet, a German airforce, a French army, an American nation, standing together as guardians of our common heritage, sharing strength, dividing influence. we can have peace and security only so long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood, only so long as we guard ourselves against attack by foreign armies and dilution by foreign races." --Fluxaviator 06:46, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

How could Lindbergh have been both admired by Nazi's and be a Freemason a group banned in Germany?

2 things. Given the article, why isn't Wallace cited in "Sources"? And Wallace is given too much attention he isn't the only one who believes, or has said, Lindbergh was used by Göring. Trekphiler 13:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

It is said "In 1924, he started training as a with the United States Army Air Corps." but United States Army Air Corps says "It was established under this name by an act of Congress on July 2, 1926." Was it really USAAC at that time, or, was that USAAS? --203.138.22.97 01:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

It was the Air Service in 1924. Your information about the USAAC is precisely correct. The Air Service ended July 2, 1926 with the creation of the AAC.--Buckboard 06:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

This is the most biased article I've come across in Wikipedia. It seems that the knives are out for Lindy here. Maybe it's the Roth novel, or maybe the other novels that portray him as a monster that have poisoned the well, but I think history got warped here for about 2/3 of this article. Problems:

  • One tiny mention of his heroic, death-defying wartime flights in the Pacific - as a CIVILIAN?
  • Little mention of his tireless environmental crusades in later life? He lived in a hut and was buried in the dirt (no coffin) so as not to harm Mother Earth, for crying out loud. Has ANYONE read his autobiography? I have, and will be adding.
  • "..well-documented fascist involvement"? Was he sabotaging ships? Nice insinuation here.
  • A lot of revisionism here re: his assessment of Nazi air power. He had stars in his eyes about the strength of the Germans, that's true, but he also reported every plane he saw to the War Dept, and as of 1940, he was right to be worried about the lazy war prep in the US.
  • A quibble: "In Europe during the rise of fascism, Lindbergh traveled to Germany.." Germans never had "fascism," that was Italy.
  • And this: "many believe that the tragic kidnapping and death of his son Charles Augustus influenced him to foster these children in secret SO AS TO COMPENSATE FOR HIS TERRIBLE LOSS"? Present documentation of that OPINION, please. A slight rephrasing, to cut that last bit would be appropriate.

You're absolutely right. I'm moving the text over here until somebody cares to explicitly annotate it with a specific reference instead of the unencyclopedic rhetoric intro: Indeed, many believe that the tragic kidnapping and death of his son Charles Augustus influenced him to foster these children in secret so as to compensate for his terrible loss. --BACbKA 20:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

This article is not NPOV. It's very slanted. The man was not perfect, and was controversial even in his time, but oddly, he represented 85% of the American public in the 1930s and early 40s on eugenics, isolationism and other controversial issues. My reading of NPOV policy is we can't use biased language to judge a subject, even if we accurately describe those controversies. That's been violated here. Nhprman 06:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Now, recent edits were made to downplay his first solo non-stop flight from NYC to Paris. Thanks for the bias! I hesitate to get into an edit war, but there's a limit to the slant one article can bear. Nhprman 18:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

You're right, but please keep back the bitter language and stay cool if you can. I agree with you, and have put back the piece of info that the anon editor has removed in a series of their edits. --BACbKA 20:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC) Thank you. I'll try to stay cool. Nhprman 23:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

While I understand what the previous edits were intended to do, I think Hitler "resurrecting" Germany is wording just too close to that of the Nazi propaganda machine. However, I get what the editor was trying to say. Lindbergh did indeed think Germany's economy was highly successful, as did many Americans at the time. (Germany, driven as it was, almost solely by a huge war machine, being artificially "resurected," as was America itself by War's end, by the same means.) Other minor edits include previously mentioned anachronism of "fascism" being in Germany. I changed that subhead, but added "Nazi" and "Naziism" in a couple of places, so hopefully, folks will see that as a "wash" but not an attempt to "whitewash," as it wre. The new subhead: "pre-war activities" is sufficiently nebulous, too (though more neutral than the previous subhead) so perhaps Lindy-haters will like it as much as I do. Nhprman 14:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. Lindbergh was in Germany BEFORE the war at the request of the US Military and US diplomats. He saw the German economy at strength while the USA was still in the Depression. Lindbergh attended the 1936 Olympics but did not meet Hitler at that time.GHgh 08:41, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

The previous revision, mentioning in the lead paragraph, "his sympathy with the Nazi German government" is sufficient to get the point across, and I've reverted to that excellent and brief intro sentence. The idea of "piling on" with personal attacks and unsubstantiated allegations such as his "personal ties" with Nazi leaders, and drawing it out just to make a political point is wholly unnecessary. Nhprman 02:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

And I'm sure most here think it's pretty pathetic for some anon user to delete Lindbergh' "early life" section as an act of vandalism, as just happened (I restored it). The depth of hatred apparently runs deep for some sad little minds. Nhprman 19:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay folks, I think someone's playing a very clever game here. I'm not playing along.

  1. Without discussion on the Talk page, someone (not signed in) is deleting the "early life" section of the article repeatedly
  2. Apparently, since I did reverts twice now, they think I will revert three times in a day to see if I will violate the three-revert rule, of which I am well aware. I will not.
  3. Will someone who knows how to do so please revert to the previous edit, so Mr. Lindbergh's article can have an early life?
  4. And yes, I will report this as vandalism if it doesn't end (and if no one reverts it), since there is no active debate over deleting this article's "early life" section, it is NOT a NPOV issue, and not a Bold edit. Nhprman 06:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It's been more than 24 hours since my first revert so I'm adding "early life" back in. The title of this article isn't "Lindbergh Controversies," is about his LIFE. If this disappears again, I will report the serial vandal. Nhprman 16:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

"Even after the Final Solution was exposed, Lindbergh refused to admit he had been wrong about the Nazis or about his eugenic beliefs."

Lines like this are strictly opinion and doesn't belong here. How did the final solution being exposed somehow "disprove" eugenics?

A History Channel documentary about him said he was a member of the American Eugenics Society even after World War 2. This article doesn't have that in it.

I apologize if this isn't the appropriate place to point this out, but the hyperlink for "Hugh Wilson" goes to the Wikipedia article on movie director Hugh Wison, not Ambassador Hugh Wilson.

I don't know if this is the right place to talk about this, but I have a question. My history teacher said in class that Hitler personaly recruited Lindbergh as a "spy" and promted him to speak against American intervention in the war. I know that Lindergh did vist Germany and Europe and spoke against going to war, but calling him a personal spy of Hitler sounded a litte extreame. Any info on this would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.133.125 (talk) 16:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your history teacher is wrong, and should keep that that sort of nonsense to themselves. Read Berg's excellent book "Lindbergh." MWShort (talk) 11:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

This section is worded in a POV manner. This sort of special pleading doesn't really convince anyone but the already converted, so why bother "preaching to the choir?" Why not just spell out the facts and let the chips fall where they may?

Adam Holland 01:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It's much like some other user (whom I won't name here) did to the Alexis Carrel article, by adding hundreds of words (tripling the existing text in just three days!) and nearly a dozen obscure Arab "sources" to imply Carrel was only a pro-death Nazi and a fomenter of modern Muslim extremism, when he was nothing of the sort. It's very painful to watch people slandered when one doesn't want to get into a 'revert war' with them over it. I say "Be Bold!" Cut out the bias. Nhprman UserLists 02:37, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

"The American Axis, written by Holocaust researcher and investigative journalist Max Wallace, takes a harsh view of Lindbergh's pre-war actions, essentially agreeing with FDR's assesment that Lindbergh was pro-Nazi. This book is considered controversial and of poor scholarship."

-- Considered so by whom? Where's the specifics/ evidence? Very weasly language.

--I removed that last sentence condemning Wallace's book until a reputable source can be provided for dismissing it. History is clear that Lindbergh 1) accepted a medal from the Nazis, 2) refused to return it for a specious reason (it's specious during a time of war to claim that insulting a govt is beyond the pale, and 3) was regarded by the American govt and the Commander-in-Chief to be an unacceptable security risk. Dismissing Wallace's claims, which are consistent with these facts, takes more than an unsourced opinion. I don't really want to get into a huge back and forth about Lindbergh, who I do think meant America Next when he said American First, but a minimum standard should be maintained even for people who want to defend one of their heroes.Ahpsp 19:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I decided to delete any reference to Wallace because simply mentioning him without qualification can be just as POV. And for the record, we were not yet at war when the medal controversy took place, and I hardly think we should take seriously what FDR called a security risk, considering among countless ludicrous others the entire Japanese population to be such, and all the while him having hundreds of Soviet spies in the government under his watch, including very likely his own chief-of-staff Harry Hopkins.--Jacrosse 21:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Somebody reverted back to the inclusion of the Wallace info, which is as it should be. Mentioning him is not POV, he wrote a book on Lindbergh, it's sourced information. If you want to exclude Wallace then Berg should be excluded as well. The attempt to exclude condemnatory information about CL should also lead to excluding exculpatory information. Leaving one and excluding the other is the true POV.--Ahpsp 18:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Why does this section now have a header suggesting that it's neutrality is in dispute? There really is no dispute. There are two different sides presented, one which would like to suggest that Lindy was innocent of bad intentions when he uttered his isolationist and anti-Semitic statements (which cites Berg), and one which cites Wallace to suggest that he was culpable of sympathy with the Nazis. There are citations for both views, and no POV in the article which is not cited. It doesn't make any sense to call this a lack of neutrality. Unless the lack of neutrality is simply the suggestion, confirmed everywhere in the historical record, that Lindbergh's behavior prior to WW2 needs some sort of explanation.--Ahpsp 15:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

After reading the section on NPOV, where I came across this protocol for handling disputes--"Then, on the article's talk page, make a new sectioned titled "NPOV dispute [- followed by a section's name if you're challenging just a particular section of the article and not the article as a whole]". Then, under this new section, clearly and exactly explain which part of the article does not seem to have a NPOV and why. Make some suggestions as to how one can improve the article. Be active and bold in improving the article." I'm going to remove the header soon unless the person who wants to iniate this as a dispute explains themselves on this page.

I removed the unsourced assertion that the Wallace book was mostly negatively reviewed. I've read both negative and positive reviews. I don't understand the cowardice of the people who claim that Lindbergh did not have Nazi sympathies. Just state the facts and let people make their own decisions. An inability to do that rather argues that Lindbergh and his views need special protection on consideration, not something consistent with the assertion that he was innocent of wrongdoing.Ahpsp 15:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

"He went on to assist with the war effort by serving as a civilian consultant to aviation companies and the government, as well as flying about 50 combat missions (again as a civilian) in 1944 in the Pacific War. His contributions include engine-leaning techniques that Lindbergh showed P-38 Lightning pilots. This improved fuel usage while cruising, enabling aircraft to fly longer-range missions such as the one that killed Admiral Yamamoto."

I have heard this before, I think on the History Channel, and it is a great story. However, the mission that killed Admiral Yamamoto occurred in April, 1943. Lindbergh was not in the Pacific Theatre until a year later, and did not fly P-38s until June, 1944. See, Berg, Lindbergh (Putnam, 1998), p. 450. Is there an explanation for this seeming chronologic contradiction?

  • Appears to be a misunderstanding. It could be due to the adjacency of http://p-38online.com/lindy.html and http://p-38online.com/yam.html -- a search for lindbergh yamamoto popped both up. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Why is the cover of the New York Times in this article twice? --Berserk798 18:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I have seen nothing on Lindbergh's activities in the Second World War. One source stipulates that he was attached to the 475th Squadron in the South Pacific as an observer. There he discovered a way to extend the range of the P38 Lightening from 900 to 1,800 miles by modifying flight procedure, namely reducing the revving of the engine. The extended range made the P38 a more devastating aircraft and led to its use in long range operations like the assassination of Admiral Yamamoto and the bombing of oil fields in the Dutch East Indies.

  • Well, that source is probably a mirror of this article. The information is still here. It doesn't make any sense, though see the discussion above: Lindbergh arrived in the South Pacific in 1944, and Yamamoto was killed in 1943. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Speculations about Mr. Lindbergh's double life have reappeared in a recently published book. Details pertaining to this matter should unquestionably be included in his article. [2] Jendeyoung 23:44, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

There are some rumors that Lindbergh led a double life and had a wife and three children in Germany (which is claimed by one of the three), but since I can't find comfirmation, I have not added it to the article.

Information about Lindbergh's alleged affair with a German woman has been included in this article, despite the original author's decision (listed at top of this page) not to include it. In fact, I think that was a wise decision because, as far as I know, there has been no real confirmation of the affair apart from the supposed daughter's display of letters between her mother and Lindbergh. I was going to change the wording of the affair in the article to "alleged," but it's a bit tough to do when the sentence following it talks about the "three children they had together" (paraphrase)! (Putting "alleged" in twice just makes it too awkward). I don't care one way or the other if Lindbergh did have the affair, but it seems to me that until it's been confirmed with DNA or something equally conclusive, that the information on the affair should either be removed or reworked to make it clear it's only an allegation. If someone wants to give such reworking a shot, go for it. Moncrief 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

  • According to a Biography Channel profile on Lindbergh, Anne Morrow Lindbergh, the daughter of diplomat Dwight Morrow, was the only woman he had ever asked out on a date.

I removed the sentence "But none can doubt the irony of an isolationist movement led by the man who, more than any other, proved that the great ocean between Europe and the United States was no longer a great buffer between the two continents." It is a rather nice turn of phrase, but it is also POV, lecturing about irony and making a proclamation about who is allowed to disagree with the assesment. That really isn't appropriate. -- Infrogmation 14:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

This headline is way too POV, even defamatory. Berg is probably the most balanced and politically nuetral, not to mention acclaimed, author to have written about Lindbergh and would disagree. That's not even to mention Cole, Buchanan, and other more partial authors who are really no less credible or more biased than someone like Wallace who is hostile to Lindbergh and partial to FDR. Also, "racist" suggests ill intent toward race as opposed to simply believing in the concept of race and being concerned about the fate of one's own . Lindbergh's next scheduled speech as well as his view of American brutality against the Japanese expressed in his Wartime Journals suggests his ideas would be more accurately described as "racialist." NewShield May 19 2006

  • He's generally described as "racist", not "racialist", so that's what Wikipedia calls him feel free to add verifiable material from reliable sources that make the racist/racialist distinction. He had Nazi sympathies. This isn't to say he embraced the most heinous parts of their program (other than eugenics, but he was hardly unusual in that), but he had Nazi sympathies. It's hard to describe it any other way. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 02:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

We don't give JPGordon absolute authority, but we don't give it to the NYT either.

  • After all, it was named for Lindy the hero, not Lindy the racist.[4]
  • In order to maintain their dominance over other races, Lindbergh believed that whites should join together to fend off the teeming legions of non-whites who were the real long-term threat.[5]
  • The question to ask about Lindbergh is not whether he was a crackpot and a racist. The above screed, and his infamous speech in Des Moines ("The greatest danger to this country lies in the large Jewish influence") make the exercise superfluous.[6]
  • The point to make about the problematic role of the two flawed heroes concerns the impact of their anti-Semitic, racist, pro-Nazi public activities, speeches or publications over the course of more than a decade on American public opinion. Between title and conclusion lies the substance of the book: characterized by the absence of an explicitly stated argument, a detailed, yet narrowly focused narrative suggests that their racist convictions led Ford and Lindbergh to take a benevolent and admiring view of the Third Reich, and partly knowingly, partly unwittingly served Nazi interests.[7]
  • . Anne emerges insteada woman of wealth and leisure, an arrogant, deeply self-centered woman, racist and anti-Semitic (like her husband).[8]
  • Lindbergh isn't accepted as an American hero for crossing the Atlantic - he is portrayed as a racist and Fascist.[9]
  • This same issue also details several anti-unionists, including Charles Lindbergh, who is regarded by the Teamsters as an anti-Semitic, racist and isolationist.[10]

Et cetera. There are more than sufficient sources that call Lindbergh a "racist" for us to usethe same term. -Will Beback 08:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

We don't give JPGordon absolute authority, but we don't give it to the NYT either.

  • In order to maintain their dominance over other races, Lindbergh believed that whites should join together to fend off the teeming legions of non-whites who were the real long-term threat.[12]

That is wrong how? How is that not an opinion? Do you think letting over immigration from the third world is a good thing? Do you think that having public schools being taught in spanish and whole cities and communities being spanish speeking only is good? Do you like having millions upon millions of people not assimilate? Do you think that protestors saying they are going to take over America and taking over state legislatures is not a threat to traditional American hegemony? Maybe you missed this from the commie media:

In a June 13, 2004, interview with Al-Majd television, Al-'Omar said "America is collapsing from within."

"We have 50 million Muslims in Europe," Gadhafi said. "There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe – without swords, without guns, without conquests. The 50 million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades."

This is no different from what Lindbergh was saying yet only lindbergh is the racist one. I agree with him 100 percent and you dont. Many people have opinions so you cant say he was racist based on this.

  • The question to ask about Lindbergh is not whether he was a crackpot and a racist. The above screed, and his infamous speech in Des Moines ("The greatest danger to this country lies in the large Jewish influence") make the exercise superfluous.[13]

The Jews do own the media and have much influence over it. This is dangerous and I dont disagree one bit. It's not because they are Jewish but because they happen to have a contrary interest to the United States constitution. (Communism) Again would I go and say that the media is pushing communism on people? No. For the most part this is my personal opinion. What I can do however is try to show people why I believe the media pushes communism in the body of the article. But if I were to do what you do I would just go ahead and say that the media is pushing communism because its public opinion of the right wing. Just because something is public opinion it doesnt make it write and this has been written by Jimmy Wales in the NPOV policy. Perhaps you should read it.

  • The point to make about the problematic role of the two flawed heroes concerns the impact of their anti-Semitic, racist, pro-Nazi public activities, speeches or publications over the course of more than a decade on American public opinion. Between title and conclusion lies the substance of the book: characterized by the absence of an explicitly stated argument, a detailed, yet narrowly focused narrative suggests that their racist convictions led Ford and Lindbergh to take a benevolent and admiring view of the Third Reich, and partly knowingly, partly unwittingly served Nazi interests.[14]

Who the hell are you to judge two people you never even knew 60 years later when the history books have been written? Who made you God?

  • . Anne emerges insteada woman of wealth and leisure, an arrogant, deeply self-centered woman, racist and anti-Semitic (like her husband).[15]

Again if you want to add that in the Anne article feel free. Just make a proper citation and deliver it correctly as a viewpoint and not a fact. Say "This book says that Anne was racist, arrogant, self centered etc and this is why. "

Anne Lindbergh was racist, self centered, arrogant etc. If you do not understand this you should be kicked off wikipedia.

  • Lindbergh isn't accepted as an American hero for crossing the Atlantic - he is portrayed as a racist and Fascist.[16]

He is portrayed as a racist and a fascist.

  • This same issue also details several anti-unionists, including Charles Lindbergh, who is regarded by the Teamsters as an anti-Semitic, racist and isolationist.[17]

Who was regarded. These are all opinions. You need to learn to think for yourself. People like you are sheep you just listen to what everything the SPLC or the mainstream media tell you. Its also interesting to note that even the same biographer Berg said that Lindbergh had a surprising view of blacks for the time and was courteous to everyone. Racist is an opinion and you have to let the reader make up their own mind by only presenting information. How can you prove that he "hated" people with a different skin color. You seem to not have any clue about what racist means. If you want to post Lindbergh wth Goerhing feel free to do it. Do whatever it takes to convince people that he was a racist by posting factual information I dont care. Just dont tell them he was racist. The best solution to this is problem is:

You people think he was racist We dont think he was racist

The best solution is not to have the word racist written and for you to feel free to add other information that indicates that he was. We wont stop you. Go ahead and add that Goehring picture.

Please don't edit or delete my comments. -Will Beback 19:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't need to add a citation that he considered Hitler a fanatic, because it's already in the link that explains that he believed that whites are usually intellectually superior to blacks but blacks generally have superior sensate abilities. This also sheds some light on why has planned to make that never-delivered speech interrupted by Pearl Harbor, and I don't think "racist" is the best word to describes these views especially for someone in those days. As for the Christopher Hitchens article, he is an avowed Communist sympathizer and Buchanan critic who disliked Reagan but supports the neoconservatives! Obviously he wouldn't like Lindbergh, although in accusing anyone of being a "crackpot" I'd say he shouldn't cast the first stone. Anyway, someone who contends that blacks have superior mental abilities to whites in someways and writes a speech advocating their rights shouldn't be described as "racist." Believing that their are fundemental differences between races is not racist per se.NewShield 21:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

It makes no more sense to omit that he was a racist then to omit that he was an aviator. I suppose we could just provide the information about his flights and let the reader decide whther he was a pilot or not. But doing so would make for an incomplete article. -Will Beback 21:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) We need to avoid the "No true Scotsman" error. We can't say that the subject isn't an "X" because "X"s never do "Y". Instead of making such logical (or illogical) deductions, at Wikipedia we verifiably summarize reliable sources using the neutral point of view. If there are sources who dispute that Lindbergh was a racist then we should include those too. -Will Beback 22:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Him being an avator is a fact. It can not be argued. Him being a racist can be argued and is an opinion. Racist definitely doesnt belong in the artcile considering its an opinion. I do not think he was racist but he just saw racial differences. That does not make someone racist. How can you substantiate that he "hated" people just because of their skin color? I agree with NewShield. You seem to connect anything related to race as being racist. You need to review the definition of racist. Plus NewShield can you provide the link where he thought Hitler was a fanatic? Jerry Jones 22:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Who disputes that he is a racist? Let's add their viewpoint too. -Will Beback 22:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

The link after where it says he had a surprisingly positive opinion of blacks for the time that explains why also says he thought Hitler was a fanatic. A. Scott Berg's book and the Wartime Journals both document that he felt this way as early as 1938NewShield 00:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the point of explaining information I already provided a link to, but whoever did it did not even write something that made sense. I corrected it and the link is still where it was. NewShield 01:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

  • a surprisingly positive attitude toward blacks for the time [2] (something that was scheduled to be fully revealed in an undelivered speech interrupted by Pearl Harbor [3]) were quite inconsistent with the racial and political beliefs of Hitler's Nazis.

You must not be looking hard enough because the claim is in page 18 of citation two and civil rights are mentioned in page 4 of citationion three as well as the Wartime Journals. As far as eliminating Berg, his book is generally considered the definitive one on Lindbergh although not perfect in my opinion. It is the most complete and the most politically neutral book about his life. Someone complained about an assertion falsely attributed to Berg, so I corrected it.NewShield 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Acerb's comments re: he was a racist

I'm sorting through these sources as well, but we do weight sources according to their reputability and topical expertise. Simply showing that several people on the Internet said "he was a racist" doesn't support a conclusion that he was a racist. We can discuss his views of race, as represented in reliable sources, without generalizing conclusions that aren't generalized in our sources. I'm not here to "banish" any source from the article, but I am aware that this encyclopedia promises readers content will not represent original synthesis by volunteer editors, but instead represents synthesis cited in properly weighted sources. A personal essay of a dance instructor (linked below) should not receive nearly the weight of the largest and most reputable newspaper in Lindbergh's native land.


Kevin MacDonald never uses the term "Racist" or "Xenophobe" in reference to Lindbergh available at the cited link [19] It would be originial synthesis to presume his analysis of Lindbergh can be characterized in those terms when he did not use those terms.

Sources cited in a university student newspaper might be considered reliable, but none of the sources cited in the Bruin use the term racist or xenophope. [20]That is the synthesis of the Daily Bruin staff writer. We can weight the quality of journalism at the NYT above the quality of journalism of the university student paper. Given a choice of the terminology synthesized by the NYT or the Daily Bruin, we would still defer to the language of the Times. [21]

A political opinion essay rebutting Pat Buchanan's book in a politically slanted online publication would not receive the same weight as a NYT book review. [22]

A citation to a dead link needs to be directed to a verifiable source before it can have weight at all. [23]

A citation characterizing the views of his wife does not inform a statement about how Lindbergh's views are "generally regarded" [24]

The views of Linbergh's wife about race[25] , the personal essay of a dance instructor[26], a political essay[27], and the conclusion of college newspaper staff writer[28] are not sufficient to establish that Lindbergh was "generally regarded" as a racist especially in the face of a citation from a publication with distribution more than all the other sources combined which uses the term "racialist." There is no citation to support the synthesized conclusion that he was a "virulant xenophobe." Because we had this content in without support, we need to step back and ask what motivated such deviation from publication guidelines, and ask how those motivations might influence arguments in defense of the substandard content.

Contrary to WillBeBack's claim that "There are more than sufficient sources that call Lindbergh a "racist" for us to usethe same term." there are not sufficient sources to say he was "generally regarded" as a racist. He was regarded by the New York Times as a "racialist." Any generalization would be hasty if it does not characterize who generalized the information. We can say the Teamsters of his time regarded him as a racist, because we have reliable citation to that effect in their Oct. 3, 1941 issue of "The Washington Teamster." [29]Apreca 05:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

This part is ridiculous. Anyone who has studied lindbergh knows damn well that he believed in everything that he said word for word. This biographer is portrayng him like a dumbass who didn't know what he was talking about and was easily manipulated and couldn't think for himself. This needs to be removed or the NPOV sign needs to stay up permanently.

I agree except for the fact that Berg protrays him that way. Many biographers portray him that way, but he doesn't. He portrays Lindbergh as exceedingy stubborn in his convictions and not politically saavy, but he definitely believed everything he said and was not stupid. NewShield 20:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Please note that referencing Pat Buchanan's views on isolationism are irrelevant to an article on someone who pre-dates him. Unless you can cite an article of Buchanan defending Lindbergh's pre-war positions, NAMING Lindbergh, this has no place in the article, and seems like an attempt to tie him to another controversial figure from our own times. That's POV-pushing. - Nhprman 03:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Dear Friends, for me Nazi Germany is a derogatory propaganda term used in WW2 that have no backup in reality. to be precise, the country is Germany, and it can be said, if you need “Germany under the Nazi regime.” or equivalent.

In fact also exists an article called “Nazi Germany” I suggest to change to Germany under the Nazi regime.

"Nazi Germany" is a common phrase to indicate the regime and nation. Can you offer any sources that call it a POV or derogatory term? -Will Beback 23:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

You could just say the "Third Reich," or Grossdeutsches(sp?) Reich if you're going to be picky. --Hexiva 21:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The Alcock and Brown article says 81 flew the Atlantic before him this article says 64.Pliny 17:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The man was a complete fake. A maniacal, propaganda-induced disgrace to the United States who would force his 7-month pregnant wife on unnecessary flights across the country.

Bruno Richard Hauptman was innocent, 100%. Lindbergh killed his own son. Unfortunately in light of his "pop culture" status, nobody would've even thought that could be remotely possible.

Lindbergh killed his own son, know the facts!


^^^^ This person did not even have the guts to post his name. This is a theory, by the way, put forward by a crackpot book called "Crime of the Century: The Lindbergh Kidnapping Hoax." Because of his controversial political positions, Lindbergh has fallen victim to left-wing muckrakers, some of whom launch disgraceful personal as well as political attacks that are unsubstantiated by any real evidence. The cowardly individual above also vandalized this page, deleting much of the middle of it. Shield2 23:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Wow. And I thought the George Reeves vandal was a lunatic! Hauptmann had the ransom money stashed in his garage, and one of his floorboards was used to make the ladder. Probably just a coincidence. Wahkeenah 00:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

For a thorough debunking of all the nonsense, go to this site I found: http://members.aol.com/LindyTruth/ Shield2 03:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, someone needs to restore or rewrite the stuff that was deleted and ban the vandal. This isn't even the first time this page has been vandalized. Lindbergh was a great man whose impact on both aviation and (far more controversially) foreign policy were influencial on what's known as a macro-historical scale, but he was eccentric, flawed, and divisive. All those things will attract plenty of petty hatred.Shield2 05:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

What's funny to me about this ridiculous theory, perhaps the dumbest Lindbergh kidnapping theory of all, is how obviously illogical and Communist-Trotskyite it is. Obviously not every likes the fact that he kept Hitler advancing into bloody showdown with Uncle Joe, least of all the ACLU. Shield2 01:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Can I just ask you if you have some kind of bee in your bonnet over this article? You keep using the phrase 'Communist-Trotskyite'. You also seem to have more respect for Lindbergh than I feel might be warranted. How did he keep old Schickelgruber involved in the East? Darkmind1970 08:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey everyone, this is a pretty good article. I went through and cut down some extra wordiness, also fixing up the section towards the end of the Lindbergh and Nazi Germany section where it seemed to get a little bogged down. One suggestion though, perhaps someone with time on their hands would like to turn the external links into endnote references in my opinion it helps keep the article from looking cluttered.--72.92.2.16 00:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and did this, since I was thinking the same thing and there didn't seem to have been any objections. I do think it's more readable. I preserved a couple of external links as-is because they made sense in context but the ones that were purely numbered references, I footnotified.

Bsktcase 01:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Will it never end? Someone needs to ban everyone who is known to have vandalized this page.Shield2 22:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Charles August Lindbergh was the father of the aviator. Charles Augustus Lindbergh was the aviator. He was not a junior. Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Jr. was the son of the aviator. He died as a child in the kidnapping case.

Im from Flemington, NJ, and our towns claim to fame is that the lindbergh trial was held here. The trial itself is mentioned, but the location of the trial is not Canada.

My thanks to Antandrus and Bzuk for reverting the massive deletion by vandals. sorry about that random picture i put in before you reverted it.--Peace237 02:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Lindberg is categorized as having received the Air Force Medal of Honor. However, the Air Force did not exist at the time he was awarded his medal, and the design is clearly that of the Army. Rklawton 15:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The writing style in at least one section (antisemitism) is particularly poor. I suggest that it be reviewed and cleaned up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MalakronikMausi (talk • contribs) 20:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

The part that compares Lindbergh's speech to Hitler's is one contributor's opinion. Lindbergh denied the speech was anti-Semitic, and there is no particular reason to believe he was threatening the Jews rather than warning them. Addressing the Jews as a worldwide entity and recommending that they stop being "war agitators" may not be the most culturally sensitive thing to do, but it does not amount to threatening genocide. In the same speech, he expresses he disgust with the Nazis' persecution of the Jews, though the wording of that part is not exactly that of a Mr. Sensitive either. Furthermore, I do not see a sriking resemblance between Lindbergh's wording and Hitler's. I'm removing this.Shield2 03:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The Most Vandalized Article Ever?

If there is any article that should be blocked from editing, it is this one. In simply trying to track down when and where the "Congressional Medal of Honor" hoax began, I've run across other silly additions (and some deletions, such as the time the entire text was replaced by "0"). Jpu1000 was one of several people to edit on 19 April 2007. Surprisingly his/her vandalism stayed up as the editing continued. For the record, Charles Lindbergh was never awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, which is bestowed upon persons for heroism in connection with military service. Perhaps it sounded as if it might be true, which may be why this nonsense stayed up for nearly four months. I'm editing the text, but I expect that there will be more idiocy added in this fun-to-edit article. Mandsford 22:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. It was one of the very few instances in which the Medal was awarded for something other than bravery in combat. Also, he was a reserve Captain in the Army Air Corps at the time. Look it up in any biography of Lindbergh.Shield2 18:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

There's a lot of competition for this honor -- not the Congression Medal of Honor, but the Most Vandalized Article. Llajwa 19:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'am sorry if I vandalized the article it was not my intention. I put in that he got the "Congressional Medal of Honor" because he actually got it. Secondly I am sorry that you didn't have the time to actually read the citation later below, which should have convinced even ignorant people. So Mandsford what about reading your homework next time before before accusing other people of vandalizem?--79.138.254.96 jpu1000 10:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Bellamy Salute

This is the WIlipedia definition "The Bellamy salute is the hand gesture described by Francis Bellamy to accompany his Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States. During the period when it was used with the Pledge of Allegiance, it was sometimes known as the "flag salute". " The "flag salute" is not the same as the "military salute", as I far as I can tell. Military salute implies that our troops saluted each other with this raised hand salute. As far as I know this is not so. And this is what the current text states. Does anyone have a different view? Steve Pastor 00:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

This is from admittedly only a cursory appraisal of sources: "It was also the historical civilian salute of the United States, from 1787-1934, known since 1892 as the Bellamy Salute. It was also the historical salute among armies of the Middle East and South America." and "As the nation's leading authority on the pledge of allegiance, RexCurry.net made the historic discovery that the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis) originated from the military salute in the USA, and from the original flag pledge (as written by a socialist), and not from ancient Rome." rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html FWIW Bzuk 20:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC). (I stripped the rexcurry.net link. It's on a spam blacklist. --Jorunn 22:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC))

I should add "the standard flag salute" instead of "the standard salute," since some might confuse the latter with a military salute.Shield2 05:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I changed "he preferred 'Nordics'" to "'Nordic' cultures" to correct the implication that Russians are not racially Nordic, because the descent of Russian people is a matter of controversy. They are most likely part Slavic and part Northern European, and sources claiming otherwise are often shaped by the propaganda of anti-Russian pan-German writers or anti-German "Eurasianist" Russian writers. Lindbergh himself liked Russians personally and hoped either war or containment would help them throw off the "semi-Asiatic" Soviet yoke.Shield2 00:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I changed it back to Nordics. It is irrelevant. It may be propaganda and incorrect but Lindbergh based his opinion on the belief they were/are not Nordic.

Do you have a source saying Russians are part Northern European? I am interested to read it. If you have any source saying Lindbergh liked Russians feel free to add it.

The entry includes this: "However, he clearly stated elsewhere that he believed the survival of the white race was more important than the survival of democracy in Europe: 'Our bond with Europe is one of race and not of political ideology,' he declared." Is that quote the clear statement that the survival of the white race was more important than the survival of democracy? If so I don't think it makes the grade. If he clearly said that about the "white race," then why isn't the accompanying quote to that effect? I don't know if Lindbergh felt that about the "white race," but I do know that the term "race" was used much more broadly then than now. The Irish were widely considered a race, as were the Jews. Its use was closer to how we now use the term "ethnicity." Nicmart (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

At different times, he used the word race in the sense you mention and the sense we think of today. More often in the ethnic sense you mention, but it was difficult for his critics to tell the difference.Shield2 (talk) 03:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

is Lindbergh a "living person"? Someone put a box at the top of this edit page stating that this was a BLP. I'm removing it. 74.132.62.250 (talk) 15:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC) (sorry, forgot to sign)

Charles Lindbergh is a very handsome man who is dead and had many wives. He had 11 children. His wives we from different countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.87.83.92 (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Should there maybe be a separate article that goes into more detail about the flight itself? With his experiences en route, his fuel difficulties, his problems finding the airport et al.? 162.27.9.20 (talk) 22:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Someone who refuses to identify him/herself keeps removing the word "anti-Semitic" from:

Lindbergh was ultimately critical of Nazi Germany's treatment of Jews. He said in his Des Moines speech that "No person with a sense of dignity of mankind can condone" such treatment. In the same speech, however, he engaged in the common anti-Semitic claim with regards to America's Jews that "Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government."

This passage is not identifying Lindbergh, the man himself, as an anti-Semite, which might well be a subjective opinion. But Lindbergh's claim that the Jews' "greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government" is a classically anti-Semitic belief. First of all, the assertion contains falsehoods, as Jews at the time, back in the 1930s, were not in any conceivable sense in control of the American government, although it is true that many Jewish people at the time were involved in the movie industry and the press. Secondly, it is a paranoid statement, as it suggests that merely by being involved in various industries and in the government the Jewish people represented a "threat to this country." No one would bat an eye at calling such a statement an example of bigotry if it were made about any other group---the Irish, Catholics, blacks, Italians, etc. The allegation that Jews, because of their control and influence over important institutions, represent a threat to our country (or to the world) is probably the single most famously and stereotypically anti-Semitic attitude in existence. If this kind of statement isn't anti-Semitic, then the term has no meaning at all. Technetium25 (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

See edit that I have made to this section which includes a link to a September 22, 1941, story in TIME Magazine regarding the Des Moines speech. I believe that this cures the issue. !Centpacrr (talk) 15:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)) Your edit is good. I am especially glad that you pulled up that contemporary article in Time. A key passage in that article, at the end, directly addresses the falsehood (and hence the fundamentally anti-Semitic nature) behind the claim that American Jews had undue influence or control of the press:

"As far as the press is concerned, this charge is easily disproved. The two big newspaper-chain owners are William Randolph Hearst and Roy Wilson Howard, gentiles both. Biggest newspaper in New York is rabid Isolationist Joseph M. Patterson's Daily News. Biggest newspaper outside of New York is the Chicago Tribune, owned by Colonel Robert R. McCormick. In New York City itself, where nearly one third of all U.S. Jews live, the three morning papers are controlled by gentiles one by Jews (the New York Times, world-famed for impartiality) and four evening papers are controlled by gentiles one by Jews (the New York Post). In the U.S. as a whole, Jews probably control less than their theoretically proportionate share (4%) of the daily press. In the vast field of magazines, they have practically no control or ownership outside of Esquire-Coronet, Inc."

The special mail carried between Santo Domingo, Port-au-Prince, and Havana was postally franked. The wikilink you found appears to refer to free franking and other franking not accomplished with postage stamps.

franked, frank·ing, franks

To put an official mark on (a piece of mail) so that it can be sent free of charge.

To send (mail) free of charge.

To place a stamp or mark on (a piece of mail) to show the payment of postage.

I don't understand your point here. A format for multiple dates of " (20 and February 21, 1928) " makes no sense to me. It should be either (February 20-21, 1928), (February 20 & 21), or (February 20 and 21). Please explain. Thanks (Centpacrr (talk) 05:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC))

See: [30]. Generally speaking, the WP:Aviation Project group recommends dates written out as 20 April 2008 or 20–21 April 2008. Note no use of commas or "&." Thanks for the note about franking. Is franking the marking of mail by a company or government that offers free or low cost postage privileges, or the convenience of sending bulk mail without using normal postage stamps? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 05:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC).

Re Dates: While Lindbergh was certainly famous as an aviator, this is not really exclusively an "Aviation" article but the biography of a complicated public figure who was also involved in many other areas such as politics, exploring, inventions, and other fields. I have used the format 20 April 1928, throughout which automatically inserts a comma after the day and the year. This confroms with the format used throughout the rest of the article most of which was written by others and that I have not worked on. Re Franking: Franking refers to any written or printed mark, or affixed postage stamp, to indicate that the item may be processed and delivered by the Post Office. This includes "free" franking such as the handwritten or printed facsimile signature of a Member of Congress, a written "free" such as for soldiers in war zones when authorized, or US Government or USPS "Official Business" "penalty" covers. "Postal" franking (or postally franked) means that there is an indication that actual postage has been paid. This includes affixed adhesive postage stamps, a "Postage Paid" Permit marking (such as on return business mail), PB meter postage, etc. (Centpacrr (talk) 06:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)) One of the issues that I have tried to address is that inconsistencies in writing/editing style tend to crop up when formatting an article. In date conventions, there is a tendency to use two or three formats concurrently which has been pointed out as a matter of style choices. When using the ISO format of 2008-04-12, foreign users had indicated that it was not a familiar format and a confusion was left, was it April 12, 2008 or December 4, 2008? In WP:Aviation Project Group, a decision to use the "formal" convention of d-m-y, as opposed to the "familiar" m-d-y style, "standardized the style usage. Another consideration is that editors and readers can also set the date preferences to the style they would like, however, the vast majority of Wikipedia users are "guests" or irregular users who will not have this preference set. The use of a common or consistent format is the simplest manner of dealing with the use of different date styles. If you check the style established in the article, new edits are usually conformed to match existing styles. Commas are also a bit complicated as Wiki usually eliminates the comma between the month and day in the date line when written in formal style: e.g. "20 April 2008," although in familiar style, it is still correct to write: "April 20, 2008." When you get a phrase such as "in April 20, 2008," the use of double commas is discouraged in most style guides. The use of a comma in a list, the so-called "Harvard comma" which adds a comma before an "and" is also now less common. In this example, "such as politics, exploring, inventions, and other fields" would be written as "such as politics, exploring, inventions and other fields." FWiW Bzuk (talk) 11:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC). Thanks for directing me to the Wiki Manual of Style re: date formatting which i have read carefully and come up with the following as a solution to the question of American vs International date formatting in the Lindbergh article: As this is on the en.wikipedia site, is primarily a biographical (as opposed to an "aviation") article about a controversial, multi-faceted historic American (as opposed to a Commonwealth or European) figure for which his association with aviation was important, but nonetheless represented only a part of his activities and fame, and contains within it many direct quotations and citations from US articles all of which use the "American" formatting of dates, I have reverted all the date citations back to the American format as specified in the Manual of Style so that they will display consistently throughout. (As you pointed out, the majority of these dates are also "bracketed" so that they can be displayed in several other formats for registered users who are logged in and have a different "autoformat" selected in preferences.) I have also removed bracket formatting from any multiple dates as using "piped links" (as the Manual of Style points out) breaks the date autoformating function. This seems to me fulfill the precepts of the three guidelines for resolving date formatting for this article, i.e., Consistency within articles, Strong national ties to a topic, and Retaining the existing format. (Centpacrr (talk) 01:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)) Regardless, your changes still required reformatting because you made mistakes in nearly every instance. The one aspect of your argument that you have neglected is that when a writing style or format is established, that is the prevailing style that is maintained. However (note, modern use of "however"), I have corrected the use of dates. Bruce, you certainly tax a fellow's patience, but I am willing to make the investment. Have a good day. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC). Thanks for your note. I had not included commas between day-date and year in the reformatted dates with bracketed month/days and years as when I checked the page in preview with preferences "off" they all still displayed correctly (i.e. "January 1, 1900") without a manually inserted comma so I figured adding such a comma would create an unwanted "double comma." It seems that Wikipedia must insert such a comma when missing by default in "bracket" coded dates so I guess it does not matter if it is inserted manually as well. I assume this is the formatting error you were referring to. I am still puzzled by, and do not see the point for using, a military (or "International") dating format in this biographical article, especially when that does not seem to be the norm in other such Wikipedia articles about similar figures with a connection to aviation, Lindbergh, or both. (See for instance Wiley Post, Charles August Lindbergh, Anne Morrow Lindbergh, Clarence Duncan Chamberlin, Richard Evelyn Byrd, Charles Nungesser, Hugo Eckener, Ernst A. Lehmann, all of which are bracket coded using "American" date formatting.) Please advise. Thanks. (Centpacrr (talk) 18:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)) One of the prime considerations in looking at the readership of the Wikipedia articles is to recognize that the vast majority of users are actually not editors nor will they have browser date preferences set. The easiest means of addressing a format issue to to provide a consistent and easily-usable format. This article and Amelia Earhart have been the constant target of vandals in the past. A means of addressing the vandal question is to have the article under the auspices of a project group so that the members of the group would be vigilant to the constant protection of a significant article. Since no other project group had "adopted" the article, the WP:Aviation Project Group undertook its "care" and tagged it as a significant aviation article. There has been a long-standing deliberation about the use of dates that affect aviation articles. The consideration was made to look at three different dating systems, the ISO date format, popular style (m-d-y) and the formal style (d-m-y). There is no "American" style although many people believe that the popular style is used primarily in the US, but it is actually a style used throughout the world, and is merely the "popular" style. The "formal" style is more often ascribed to the UK and Europe but it also is not linked to a particular nationality. It has some inherent advantages in editing as it eliminates the double comma in phrases and it is a clean and recognizable convention. After deliberations, the ISO style was considered difficult to read for foreign and new Wiki users. A toss-up occurred between the popular and formal styles resulting in a decision to adopt the formal style that is most often used in academic works and provides an unambiguous format that is acceptable worldwide. Simple as that, it isn't a question of US-bias, it is a question of accommodating the most users. FWiW, if you want more information about the reasoning, I would ask you to consider looking at the Aviation Project Group as a valuable resource aid. Bzuk (talk) 18:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC). Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I understand the issue of vandalism and the necessity for vigilance, and appreciate the "adoption" of this biographical article by the aviation group to that end even though it is not strictly an "aviation" article. My issue is opting to use such a stilted style for dates which seems to me to be inimical to Wiki's general stated format, ie: "Formal tone does not mean the article should be written using unintelligible argot, doublespeak, legalese, or jargon it means that the English language should be used in a businesslike manner." Usage of the so-called "International" style (as the Wiki Manual of Style calls it) in a non-technical biographical narrative seems pedantic and wooden in comparison to employing the so-called "American" style (as it is styled in the manual) which is how people actually would use in speech and also how it appears in virtually all publications and documents -- even legal ones -- with the exception of military writing and documents. Imposing an ultaformal style on an article just because it is being watched by the aviation group seems to me to be inappropriate. My view is that this date format should really be used very sparingly, and only when there is some compelling reason to do so. It's usage in written prose tends to be generally offputting for anything other than a formal, bureaucratic, or administrative purpose because it is not the way people talk in real life. not even in academic circles. (See the other examples of aviation & Lindbergh related Wikipedia articles that I directed you to above non of which employs this dating format.) I have been writing professionally for more than forty years and have never used the date-month-year format in anything other than formal military or bureaucratic writing -- nor really have I ever seen it used anywhere in narrative or encyclopedic writing. I urge the Aviation group to rethink this in the light of the above. Thanks (Centpacrr (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)) The decision was based on consensus and reflected issues and concerns by all members. The popular date convention and the formal or academic style is used in many publications. Many publishers style guides stipulate this form and if we are writing for a worldwide audience, it seems to be an accomodation for the editors who advocated for a style that all could accept. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC). As suggested, I have looked at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide, but the only reference I see there to date formatting is a link to the Wiki Manual of Style. I am unable, however, to find there where it says that the so-called "International" style is preferable for either aviation articles or narrative biographies. Can you direct me to where I can find this? Thanks (Centpacrr (talk) 22:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)) Bruce, you are right as I cannot find the talk page discussion that set out the project guideline for dates. I have asked for a revisit of the topic. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC). Thank you. Please let me know so that i can provide my input on this issue. On checking the history of the Lindbergh article I found that the dates were formatted in the customary "month-date-year" from the entry's creation on September 9, 2002, until you changed the formatting of the then fairly mature biography on May 10, 2007, with the brief notation "rationalize dating conventions." I could not find any section in the Talk page relating to this action or the reasons therefore. (Centpacrr (talk) 02:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC))

Editors should only use expert or substantive reference sources. The use of a student term paper does not qualify and recently the entries made using this source have been adjusted to require authoritative and reliable sources. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 05:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC).

There's evidently a monument at Le Bourget airport in Paris, honoring Lindbergh's flight, as well as the attempt by Nungesser & Coli in L'Oiseau Blanc. I've been looking around the internet for a free one but haven't had any luck. Does anyone have an image to donate to the cause, or know where we could find one? --Elonka 19:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Image size is a topic that has received considerable discussion in the past. The MoS has a specific note about this: [31] and reflects the current usage of images. FWiW, this is the pertinent information: "In articles, if you wish to have a photo beside the text, you should generally use the "thumbnail" option available in the "Image markup". This results in 180 pixels wide display in standard preferences default setting. Images should generally not be set to a fixed size (i.e. one that overrides the preferences settings of the individual users, see the Manual of Style). Where size forcing is appropriate, larger images should generally be a maximum of 550 pixels wide, so that they can comfortably be displayed on 800x600 monitors." Bzuk (talk) 13:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC).

Which begs the question: when is size forcing appropriate? Tall, skinny images appear relatively large when left to the default thumbnail width, while short, wide images become miniscule. Perhaps short, wide images can be given the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I keep mainly to the concept of having no image hardcoding at all. I expect the thumbnail default size to work for the greater majority of readers. Anybody who wants to really examine an image will click on it. I think there should be a percent-based coding that takes the reader's window width and sizes the images to a specified fraction of that. Binksternet (talk) 07:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The title of the 1927 Lindbergh book -- "WE" -- includes quotation marks as an integral part of its spelling. They are not meant to be a representation of a generic title, nor do they take the place of the current use of italics. The quotation marks instead indicated that "WE" is a nick name with a specific meaning, i.e. the "partnership" of Lindbergh and his airplane. As such, the quotation marks cannot be arbitrarily deleted as doing so changes the meaning of the title. (Centpacrr (talk) 17:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC))

In five different biographies, the title is merely italicized but in Lindbergh Autobiography of Values, his editor has used both italics and quotation marks, so I can see that its use is as an execeptional variant to a standard form. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC). The quotation marks are not actually a variant to a standard, but are instead an integral part of the title of the book because they serve to show that "WE" is not a "word" but has a very specific other meaning (i.e., one other than any found in a dictionary) in this context. Lindbergh meant the title to be understood as being his own nickname for himself and his airplane as inextricably connected equal partners. Without the quotation marks this would not be the case. (See title page below)(Centpacrr (talk) 04:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC))

The image Image:Chamberlin.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The Chamberlin image was accessed from the en.wikipedia library of existing images where it was posted by another user in October, 2006, and linked to the biographical article on C.D. Chamberlin. It has been linked to the Lindbergh article as Chamberlin is mentioned there as well. Please be more specific as to the issue you are raising regarding its use in the Lindbergh article, and why it is acceptable for use in one article but not another.(Centpacrr (talk) 05:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC))

Many carefully researched and sourced details, recently deleted for "brevity," have been restored because their removal introduced inaccuracies, vagueness, or caused sections to become misleading. (Centpacrr (talk) 03:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC))

I don't believe that is the case none of the edits recently made changed any factual aspects of the article. They appeared to be merely editorial changes to style not substance. Please consider the changes as benefits to the article. Reversion is only used in cases of vanadalism, which these edits do not represent. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC). I'm afraid I must disagree on that in this particular instance. As I am sure you are aware as a professional writer, often the change of even a single word (or even punctuation) can materially alter the meaning of a passage, especially if the editor is doing so only for "style" or "brevity" without sufficient regard to (or broad understanding of) the underlying content or context because he/she may not be sufficiently familiar with many aspects of the background, primary sources, and other materials on which the original text was based. While these edits may well have been made in good faith, many of them still make material (even if sometimes subtle) changes in meaning and/or context which tend to diminish the accuracy of the article and/or introduce misleading aspects. Lindbergh, as you are probably aware, is a subject which I have researched and studied closely for many years, and about which I have access to a great many materials, original documents, artifacts, etc, (many in my own collections) which are not widely available. (Centpacrr (talk) 04:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)) I'm trimming it myself, not for brevity but for clarity. The sentence explaining who Lindbergh's two parents were was far too long, with a seemingly interminable series of clauses explaining papa Lindbergh's origins and activities. Any of our marvelous readers who gives a damn about him can click on the link and instantly be at his article. "Slim"'s lovely mother isn't graced by an article of her own, so I left her personal information in plain view. Also, it appeared to me that Lindbergh's father and grandfather were being rolled into one in the way that the sentences progressed. Lastly, I don't remember voting in the election of The One Guy Who Gets To Decide The Tone. We are all editors here. Binksternet (talk) 04:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC) Nobody previously raised either the disparagement of readers or "tone" of the article as issues that I can see, only "accuracy" and completeness. (Centpacrr (talk) 05:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)) Regardless, wiki editors, being who they are, writers with a particular emphasis on encyclopedic writing, often look at a "piece" with a certain predisposition as to saliency, conciseness as well as comprehension by a reader. There is a certain style that many wiki editors adopt that would not be appropriate in another context, say, popular writing. You may find some of the strictures a bit onerous, but again, remember, it is part of the "house style." FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC). Am I to understand, then, that it is the consensus policy of the Wikipedia community that accuracy and completeness are subordinate to the adherence to an undefined "house style" and therefore information and context should be sacrificed in the name of the lowest common denominator? If so, than my issue is that I appear to have fundamentally misunderstood Wikipedia's mission. (Centpacrr (talk) 01:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)) I did not see any edits that changed facts in the latest edits but a number of editors did make revisions that "tightened" the story. The process of incorporating a Wikipedia Manual of Style is one that all editors grapple with. How much, how little, the depth, the range, and extent of a topic is substantially different when creating an encyclopedic work. Typically articles run to 2,000 words or less, so a concise style is often preferred. In the case of a substantial article, sometimes a sub-article or "daughter" article is adopted so that a subject can be further developed. One example of this is the Supermarine Spitfire article that has morphed into a number of complimentary side articles. FWiW, don't think your contributions are not valued your knowledge and background are an asset to the WikiProject aircraft group. Bzuk (talk) 03:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC). Thanks for the comments and kind words. I will try to do my best to fit in within my philosophy that detail illuminates and helps readers to better understand the overall context of articles, and hopefully also provides them with new gateways that might encourage them to do additional research on their own based on something they might have found in those details that unexpectedly piqued their curiosity. (Centpacrr (talk) 14:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC))

He was dubbed "America's most dangerous man" by the press in 2nd half of 1941, after expressing his view on the jews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.202.230.250 (talk) 20:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Issues resulting in quick failure:

1. The following images have issues:

  • Image:Charles Lindbergh flight to Brussels.ogg (no rationale)
  • Image:Hermann Goering gives Charles Lindbergh a Nazi medal.jpg (US government photographer? Really?)
  • Image:Fordslindbergh.jpg (duplicate. Find the alternative at Commons)
  • Image:WE cover.jpg, Image:Ted Scott Book cover 1927.jpg (lower DPI images would better support fair use.)
  • Image:SoSL Fabric 1927.jpg (erroneous watermark tag?)

2. An IP editor recently took out contested facts, which were reinserted with tags in violation of WP:BURDEN. Despite the fact that the IP editor did not edit war over the reinsertion, that is a mark against stability.

Other GA criteria were not examined. Jclemens (talk) 05:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

This sounds a very POV view. Please provide a reputable source for this label.Lumos3 (talk) 09:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Charles Lindbergh/Comments , and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I am shocked by the idiotic and damaging editing someone have done on the article. Could somebody please restore the original. I am not harking to honest disputes assessing Mr. Lindbergh attitudes and deeds, but to the malicious changes in data etc. Could the operators ban the source addresses of such spiritual vandalism? I occassionally add or mend some info I know well, and therefore feel even more annoyed by this awful behaviour. Martin Velek

Last edited at 07:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:24, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


Charles Lindbergh urges Congress to negotiate with Hitler - HISTORY

United States History at the high school level is to begin with the period known as Reconstruction of the late 1860s up to the present time.

Student grades will be based on a number of varied activities. Daily note taking and reading assignments are essential for success in this class. Students will be required to keep an assignment book in which all daily work will be kept until the appointed time at which it will be collected by the teacher for grading. Also, tests and quizzes will be administered on a regular basis. Additionally, group work and outside reading projects may be required throughout the semester.

The importance of regular attendance to this class cannot be overstated.

Honors students will also be expected to read two novels during the semester . A Farewell to Arms by Ernest Hemingway and The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald will be read and discussed as well as having additional question and answer assignments made pertaining to the reading.

Honors students will also be expected to complete two research projects. One of those projects will be do ne on famous Americans(with much emphasis on Tennessee residents) and one will be done on significant events(a gain with a Tennessee emphasis) to have occur red during the time period of our study.

On each test, honors students will have to complete essay questions as well as standard multiple choice, matching and other objective type questions.

Each day, students will begin class by copying three items from the board at the front of the classroom. An ' End of Course' practice question, a 'Date in History' and a 'Current Event' will be taken down and a discussion of each will be led by the teacher with student participation encouraged and expected. The same paper used for these items will then be used for whatever other assignments are to be completed on that particular day. This procedure will be carried out EVERYDAY of the semester.

Parents are encouraged to ask their students about these items each day in order to reinforce classroom teaching.

U.S. History has an End of Course test administered by the state of Tennessee which will be given near the end of the semester. The EoC serves as the semester exam and counts as 25% of the student's final grade.

While in class, students will be expected to conform to certain rules:

1. Be on time. Tardies will be accounted for and excuses such as "My locker is too far away", "I was talking with my friends" or "I was in the bathroom" will not be accepted unless the situation is deemed an emergency.

2. Bring book, paper and writing implement everyday.

3. No technology. Let this serve as the warning that cell phones and MP3 players will be confiscated upon sight.

4. No eating or drinking in the classroom with the lone exception of water in a clear container.

5. Be respectful of the classroom and those in it.

Student progress: Grades will be recorded via Engrade( https://www.engrade.com/ )as an easy way to track student progress. Each student will be issued an individual code to assure privacy.

Contact Information:
I may be reached by e-mail at [email protected] or on the direct messaging service provided by Engrade. Also, the school phone number is (865) 577-7040. E-mail contact is preferred.

Following is the list of class assignments by date:

E o C Practi c e Question-

Which of the following terms is closely associated with the idea of manifest destiny?
A. isolationism
B. recession
C. expansioni sm
D. appeasement

Date in History-

1815- Andrew Jackson defeats the Brit ish at the Battle of New Orleans(War of 1812).
1918- President Woodrow Wilson announces his Fourteen Points Plan for peace after WWI.

-Students will be introduced to the the course and that which is expected of them.
-Also, a pre-test will be given to ac cess student knowledge(This is not to be graded as a test bu t will be kept in daily folder).

The 1862 law giving people the right to claim 160 acres of public land for a small fee was the
A. Social S ecurity Act
B. Sherman Antitrust Act
C. Wilmot Provis o
D. Homestead Act

1965- The United States pledges support to the government of South Vietnam.
2007- Steve Jobs debuts the first ever iPhone.

-S tudents wil l be made familia r with the m aterial to be presented throughout the semester by looking at a newspaper that chronicles the biggest event s of the 20th Century.
-Also, students will be introduced to the text book by selecting favorite photos then discussing those pictures and their relevance to the topic.

Immigration is the act of
A. becoming a U.S. citizen
B. moving into another country in order to become a permanent resident
C. leaving one's nat ive country
D. moving from rural areas to urban areas

1901- Oil is tapped at the Spindle Top drilling si te in Texas.
1941- President Franklin Roosevelt introduces the idea of Lend-Lease to congre ss.

-Students will take note s from teacher led discussion of the first ten Presidents of the United States.

Which state is most closely associated with the Gold Rush of 1849?
A. Nevada
B. Texas
C. California
D. Oregon

1908- President Th eodore Roosevelt dedicates the Grand Canyon National Monument.

Students will continue to take notes from the teacher led discussion of the first ten Presidents of the United States.

Beginning in 1892, the chief reception center for immigrants t o the east coa st of the U. S . was ___

A. Washington, DC
B. Ellis Island in NYC
C. Brooklyn, NY
D. Boston, Mass.

Students will continue to take notes from the teacher led discussion of the first ten Presidents of the United States.

Which of the following accurately defines "cultural plu ralism"?

A. a nation in which newcomers are presume d to assimilate
B. a nation in which diverse traditions co-exist in harmony
C. a nation that unfairly discriminates agai nst immigrants
D. an is olationist nation

1961- President Eisenhower warns of the Military/Industrial Complex.

Students will be quizzed on presidents 1 -10.
Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of presidents 11-20.

-Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of presidents 11-20.

When did the first transcontinental railroad li nk the Atla ntic with the Pacific coasts?

A. 1830
B. 1860
C. 1869
D. 1890

1941- Charles Lindbergh addresses Congre s s and urges them to negotiate with Hitler.

-Students will take notes from teacher led discussion of presidents 11- 20.


1-24-13

Whi ch invention played a role in the conflict between ranchers and farmers in the West?

A. mechanical reaper
B. steel plow
C. refrigerated railroad car
D. barbed wire

1972- Japanese soldier found hiding on Guam.

-Students will be quizzed on Presidents 11-20
-Students will read Chapter 14 and answer questions from a worksheet.

EoC Practice Question-

Ninete enth century Irish immigrants to the U.S. settled primarily in the

A. Pacific Northwest
B. Great Plains
C. n ortheastern cities
D. the South

1986- The Space Shuttle Challenger explodes shortly after lift off.

-Students will read and answer questions from Chapter 14 of the textbook.

Which of the following industries underwent tremendous expansion in the thirty ye ars after the Civil War?

A. textiles
B. plastics
C. iron and steel
D. computers

1861- Kansas enters the union as a free state.

-Stude nts will complete Chapter 14 worksheets.
- Students will gain an understanding of immigration, working condition s and land owning of the late 1 8 00s through the movie "Far and Away"

Read P. 482-48 3 and answer questions 1-3
Define Key Term s & People P.488
Answer questions with cartoon on P. 493
Define Key Terms & Peop le P. 495
Define Key Terms & People P. 499
Define Key Terms & P eople P. 507

Which of the following was responsible for the development of ti me zones?

A. weather fore casts
B. journalists
C. r ail roads
D. farmers

1789- Washington selected by Electoral College
1974- Patty Hearst kidnapped

-Students will discuss the harsh living and working condition s of the late 1800s in small groups.

The telephone was invented in 1876 by.

A. George Pullman
B. Thomas Edison
C. Alexander Graham Bell
D. John Rockefeller

1937- Pres. Franklin Roosevelt threatened to "pack" the Supreme Court.

-Students will be able to list the events that led to the Industrial Revolution by completing a worksheet in a group activity.

The term 'Robber Barrons ' was coined to describe

A. Mu ckraking writers
B. Prominent businessmen of the late 1800s
C. Privateers in the C iv il War
D. Imperialist invaders from Spanish A merican War

Date in History-

1952- Elizabeth II becomes Queen of England.

-Teacher led discussion of Chapter 14 worksheet questions on Industrial R evolution in America.

With which industry is Cornelius Vanderbilt associated

A. Oil
B. Railroads
C. Steel
D. Banking

- Teacher led discus sion of Chapter 14 worksheets on industrial revolution in America.

1943- Americans secure victory on Guadalcanal

-Chapter 14 Test
-Students will watch video on Andrew Carnegie

The discoverer of the vulcanization process for rubber was

A. Charles Goodyear
B. Henry Bessemer
C. Andrew Carne gi e
D. William Davis

1945- Yalta Conference ends.

-Teacher will lead a discussion of the important terms and people from Chapter 15.
-Students will answer questions from the Chapter 16 worksheets.

With which era of American history is the phrase "the Gilded Age" associated with?