Rumors run rampant under critical battle conditions – when they are hardest to control and when they can sabotage on the greatest scale. Truths and half-truths are quickly distorted beyond recognition. A chance remark at breakfast about a battalion’s being in a tough spot has, by noon, grown to the point where that battalion is wiped out. A brief comment that a rifle company is running into stiff resistance will be magnified before sundown until a whole regiment has been forced to retreat ten miles.
A division commander offers this suggestion for controlling the rumor racket at the front line: ‘If men would put some stock in the old adage about believing half of what they see and none of what they hear, they’d save lives and get this war over sooner.’
When you’re at the front you can’t be too careful about reporting what you see. Adding two and two and getting five is bad arithmetic – it leads to dangerous reports.
This incident took place a few weeks ago on the M-bridgehead. When the 88s opened up some shots fell in the Bn CP area which was located in a direct line with the guns and the bridge site. They caused a few casualties. The officer in charge of the CP immediately ordered it moved to the right rear. As the movement began, an ammo carrier from an adjacent company passed by. He sized up the situation (he thought) and hurried back to report to his CO that the Bn CP was withdrawing. On the strength of this news the CO of G Company cleared up the mis
understanding in time to forestall a wholesale evacuation. Just an example of a rumor at work. The ammo carrier believed he was reporting only what he had seen with his own eyes. In the excitement he failed to distinguish between a movement and a withdrawal. There’s a big difference.
In other cases, men observing relieved units going back to the rear area have jumped to the conclusion that a retreat is in progress. Instead of getting the facts they start a hot rumor that takes a long time to cool off.
One of the most persistent of all front-line rumors deals with the dropping of German paratroopers. The report is turned in, units are alerted to round up the invaders – and more often than not, neither parachutists nor any evidence of their landing are discovered.
Usually the facts reveal an over-active imagination on the part of the observer. Here is the result of one investigation: ‘Reports of 15 parachutes falling during the afternoon were run down and found to be balls of anti-radar window. Rumors were started by AAA men who had seen shining objects falling through their field glasses. This may account for a large percentage of our recent parachute alerts. Our watchfulness should not be relaxed. The dropping of enemy agents is still considered a strong possibility. However, all observers should make efforts to distinguish parachutists from ‘window,’* which appear similar at high altitudes on clear, sunny days. Whenever there is any doubt, observer should include in his report altitude of drop and any other pertinent information that would aid in evaluation.’
Similarly, a sentinel in another sector reported that a hostile plane had dropped parachutes beyond a wooded area. No one else saw the chutes but the sentry stuck to his story. His report on the location, time and course of the plane checked exactly with the AAA records showing that an enemy plane had flown over at the specified hour. Rumors about German paratroopers in the woods spread quickly – until the official explanation was published: ‘Flak bursts following the plane in the moonlight gave the appearance of parachutes.’
Quite a different type of rumor recently flared up in an occupied town near the German border. It was sparked by enlisted drivers of a unit attached to an infantry regiment stationed nearby. They told a lurid tale of two men from another regiment of the same division who had been found murdered. According to their story, which had all the excitement of a yarn out of True Detective, the partially disrobed bodies had been discovered in the second-floor bedroom of a home. The drivers hadn’t actually seen the bodies but they had talked to a corporal who knew a man who had. Later in the week the total of Yanks murdered by civilians under mysterious circumstances had fattened to seventeen.
The Regimental Civil Affairs Officer began to probe for the facts. He questioned all units and attached units in the area. He made additional inquiries through civilian channels. The only basis for the grisly tale appeared to be that when a large neighbouring city had been taken, three or four French soldiers had been shot by civilian snipers during the clean-up fighting. Who was responsible for planting this rumor? It was probably the work of Nazi agents, plotting to foster bitter feeling between the American troops and French civilians. Nevertheless, the story demonstrates clearly one of the common earmarks of every successful rumor. The drivers who repeated the story originally hadn’t actually seen the evidence. They had only talked to someone who knew someone else who claimed to be an eyewitness. Any respectable rumor must have authority to give it credibility.
Usually the authority is two or three times removed – ‘someone who knows the buddy of a sergeant at Headquarters.’
Most of the rumors that have wide circulation in combat zones can be filed in three pigeonholes:
First – the deliberate falsehoods invented for the amusement of a small group – like the rumors spread by the first-mentioned sergeants.
Second – the rumors which result from an overheard remark and which are exaggerated and distorted and garbled in the retelling so that the final product bears no resemblance to the original.
Third – the rumors that come from an imperfect or too hasty estimate of the situation.
No matter what their source or how they start, rumors never accomplish any good. The more they are repeated, the more harm they do. Some rumors are bloodless. They simply deflate morale and cause needless disappointment. Some pack dynamite. They confuse and slow military operations, lead directly or indirectly to casualties. The only safe way to deal with front line rumors is to adopt an ‘I’m from Missouri’ attitude. Close your eyes to hearsay. Don’t pass information on to the next foxhole that you can’t personally vouch for. The CO will keep your unit posted on the battle picture. He’ll let you know when other outfits are withdrawing – when enemy parachutists are landing in your rear. By ignoring chance and spurious remarks you’ll save yourself a lot of worry. And by refusing to pass on ‘unofficial’ reports you can also make life a lot less rocky for the next fellow.
A sergeant in the field artillery recently made this excellent statement: ‘One of the best allies the Krauts have is the rumor-spreader. He’s the fellow who knows nothing and tells all. To troops fresh in combat, the rumor-spreader can lower efficiency and directly hamper military operations. To experienced troops the rumor-spreader is harmless because they’ve seen the result of his line. It’s to the new men that he does real damage.
Ninety-nine per cent of the rumors are unintentional but they’re just as harmful as the one per cent. Casual remarks and conversations overheard are the main sources of rumors. In combat the best thing to do is to ignore all you hear except from official sources. Report only what you see and when in doubt, state your doubt. I’m particularly interested in rumors because on about D plus 5 to D plus 10 they scared me more than anything before or since. They scared me to the point that I couldn’t concentrate on my job. Anyone going into combat should keep his mouth shut and his ears shut to everything but official statements – and above all, keep your eyes open. You’ll catch onto the game faster and live longer.’
Most experts admit that the world’s greatest rumor factories are Nazi-controlled. Right now much of their tremendous output is directed towards one objective: Divide the United Nations – make them suspicious of one another – get them to bickering among themselves. After they’ve quibbled about little matters they’ll split wide open on the major issues. The rift will undermine the efficient prosecution of the war. More important, it will make it impossible for them to enforce an effective peace.
Germany’s survival as a power depends in a large measure on the success of its propaganda program. Its rumor mills are operating around the clock. Their production
can’t be curtailed by Allied bombers over the Reich. The mills operate underground with branches everywhere. Munitions are powerless to cope with Nazi rumors. A 105 can’t explode an idea. A tank can’t crush a concept. Reasoned action by the individual can kill a rumor, and his only weapon is common sense.
The Germans use various techniques in spreading rumors. Whispering campaigns, phony radio broadcasts, puppet orators, cleverly planted news items are just a few. Vital cog in the mechanism, however, is the fellow in the foxhole, the riveter in the shipyard, the housewife in the crossroads village. These people must co-operate as rumor mongers. They must pass on the sugar-coated lies, the counterfeit facts, the distorted half-truths that the enemy thrusts their way. If they don’t fall into line, if they suppress the rumors they hear, the rumors will never achieve wide circulation, never become best-sellers, never gain wide acceptance. The whole Nazi program will bog down.
A story current not long ago had the USSR pulling out of the war as soon as the Red Army had pushed the Germans over the Soviet border. Do you remember? The wise guys had it all figured out. They shook their heads and warned: ‘Watch Russia drop the Allies like a hot potato.’ Did a German start it? That’s typical of the way the Nazi rumor specialists are working to drive a wedge of distrust into the solidarity of the United Nations. The headlines of any paper today show just how groundless the prediction was. The men who had it all doped out have dropped that rumor now. Now they’re mongering another lie – details different – objective the same.
Another typical tale spread by German propaganda agencies declared that almost no Britishers were engaged in front-line fighting and that they were pushing Dominion and Colonial soldiers and troops into all the hot spots. Thousands of Americans, Canadian and Australians were duped by the story until the facts were published. The figures on casualties and the actual disposition of British forces punctured the rumor flat.
Every whispering campaign against one of our Allies does serious damage – even though the falsity is eventually established. It seems to be a trait of human nature to believe the worst about the next fellow in the absence of black and white evidence to the contrary. When we hear that one of our Allies is a blackguard, we are, perversely, likely to be believe it on the flimsiest hearsay. When we are asked to believe that our Allies are fair and honest, we are unfortunately likely to insist on documentary proof. That sort of prejudice is particularly dangerous in times like these.
What happened to the rumor so prevalent a short time ago that Hitler was dead and buried? Wishful thinking gave that one wide acceptance. Legal minds assembled a lot of evidence that seemed to substantiate the Dictator’s demise. His absence from the German scene could be explained in no other way. It was welcome news. Unfortunately it wasn’t true.
Rumors about the sudden death of Churchill are beginning to appear with some consistency. The news is whispered about on a packed underground train or in a crowded pub – started by an unknown who has a friend who is very close to one of the under-secretaries in the War Office. Sometimes the dead man is Eisenhower. Sometimes Roosevelt. There are never any details – just the simple fact of death. Official denials can quickly squelch the lie. But meanwhile much worry and apprehension have been created. The day is coming when peace rumors will begin to flash around the world. Already a few premature reports have popped up in certain front line sectors. Fortunately not many men have been fooled.
The Germans capitalized on this type of demoraliser near the end of World War One. The Belgian radio announcement of victory early in September travelled with a speed no other news had been able to match during the war. The denial, half an hour later took a couple of days to catch up with the first report. Troops relaxed – and Germans who might have been captured were able to retreat out of reach. Similar below-the-belt tactics can be expected now that World War Two is nearing its climax. Be on your guard. Don’t swallow any tale about hostilities being over until you get it officially from your CO.
The Nazis pulled a neat trick out of their grab bag on 8 January of this year. It took many people by surprise and for a time threatened friendly relations between the American and British at a critical moment when the Germans were staging their Ardennes counter-offensive. A broadcast masquerading as the regular BBC news program praised the heroism of British troops in checking the Boche drive and accused the Yanks of falling down badly. Naturally this announcement made the Americans boil.
Although few of them actually heard the broadcast it didn’t take long for the story to make the rounds. Many papers in the States picked it up. Some large metropolitan dailies gave the story front page prominence. Anglo-American relations were getting it squarely on the chin.
The true facts of the deception came later. The broadcast was traced to a station known as ‘Arnhem Calling’ – a powerful station operated by the Nazis in Holland, using the same wavelength as BBC. ‘Arnhem Calling’ relays genuine BBC broadcasts to the Allied troops and even picks up some AEF programs. But there’s a catch. After the familiar chimes of Big Ben are heard, the Germans fade out the real program and substitute their own propaganda news bulletin – delivered in perfect English. Later they fade back to the original program. Subsequent broadcasts over this same bogus station were equally clever – and almost as disruptive. But troops at the front are learning to spot the voice of the announcer. They have nicknamed her ‘Mary of Arnhem’ and now when Mary begins to throw mud at the British or the Americans or the Russians, they have a good laugh and forget it.
The next rumor you hear may not be immediately recognisable for what it is. It won’t be spoken in a sinister tone of voice. You won’t be able to detect the chuckle of Goebbels in the background. The rumor may sound extremely reasonable. So have your guard up. All rumors have this in common: they pretend to convey facts – but the factual evidence is invariably flimsy. Usually the rumor is based on nothing more reliable than hearsay.
Many people repeat rumors because they like to be first with a new tidbit of information. It makes them feel important. There’s no law against spreading rumors – yet. But it’s a hobby that no-one can be very proud of these days. The time may come when rumor-mongers are classified as war criminals.
An organisation in Boston called the Rumor Clinic made a comprehensive collection of current rumors. Each week some of these tales were publicly debunked. Speaking from vast experience, the Rumor Clinic gave this advice. It was intended for civilians, but it’s just as sound for GIs: ‘The next time you hear some red-hot dope or some inside information, ask the fellow who tells it to put up or shut up. He may be a fifth columnist, he may be just another good fellow who has innocently fallen for the Axis line, but you put him straight. This is a total war; we’re all in it together. If you are a good American you will work for the USA, not for Hitler. And if you’re working for the USA you won’t peddle any Nazi rumors about your fellow Americans or your Allies, and you’ll squelch the fellow who does.’
Remember this classic advice about a rumor that runs down somebody else: ‘Who’s behind it, and how does it help me if I believe it?’
24 February 1945
Extracted from 20 Army Talks, published by the Information and Education Division of the US Army, dated 1 July 1945. In the same vein, readers may care to peruse pages 266–7 of The War As I Knew It by General George S. Patton, first published in 1947.
* Metallic strips, tissue paper thin, dropped from aircraft to interrupt radar detection.
Notes
INTRODUCTION
‘… corpse factory’ but see Fussell (1989), pp. 42–3
‘… by the Luftwaffe’ see Chapter One
‘… by the USAAF’ Nationaler Zeitung, 10 April 1944
‘… home made news’ Harrisson & Madge (1940), p. 57
‘…’ Driberg (1949), p. 175
‘… Donegal coast’ West (1998), p. 138–9
‘… severed limbs’ Fussell (1989), p. 272
‘… resistance movement’ see generally F
oot (1976); Keegan (1995), ch. 6; West (1998); Moore (2000)
‘… Pearl Harbor’ Keegan (1995), p. 17
‘… overripe corpse factory’ Nicholas (1996), pp. 159–60
‘… Allied bombing’ Rubinstein (1997), ch. 4; Keegan (1995), p. 25
‘… area bombing’ Neillands (2001); Keegan (1995), pp. 26–7
‘… James Bacque’ Bacque (1989). See also Crimes and Mercies by the same author (1997)
‘… has been challenged’ Keegan (1995), pp. 10–11
CHAPTER ONE
‘In the opening …’ Hayward (2002), pp. 1–30
‘… Führer had gone off’ Eastern Daily Press, 7 September 1939
‘… friendly enemy’ Bonaparte (1947), p. 88
‘… Prussian Guards’ Hayward (2002), p. 22
‘… brutal Prussian’ Turner (1961), p. 269
‘… Oreste Pinto’ Pinto (1953), pp. 99–116
‘… various towns …’ EDP, 7 September 1939
‘… each air raid’ EDP, 7 September 1939
‘German paratroops were reported …’ EDP, 6 September 1939
‘… ethnic Volksdeutsche’ De Jong (1956), p. 44
‘… general brutality of’ EDP, 5 September 1939
‘… to take prisoners’ EDP, 14 September 1939
‘… tobacco leaves’ Bonaparte (1947), p. 80
‘… scrap metal’ De Jong (1956), p. 42
‘… the Polish Ambassador’ EDP, 4 September 1939
‘German bombers have …’ EDP, 4 September 1939
‘… the Commons’ Hansard (Commons), 7 September 1939, p. 567
‘… mustard gas’ De Jong (1956), p. 47
‘… supplying gas shells’ Bonaparte (1947), p. 81
‘… Lord Halifax reminding’ Hansard (Lords), 14 September 1939, p. 1,058
‘… near Jaslo’ EDP, 18 September 1939
‘… claims of atrocities’ New York Times, 13 September 1939
Myths & Legends of the Second World War Page 28
