Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
German assination of one of their citizens to start wwii
Executive summary
The event most commonly invoked when people say “Germany staged an assassination to start WWII” is the Gleiwitz incident: a staged, false‑flag attack on the German radio station Sender Gleiwitz on the night of 31 August 1939, carried out by SS operatives in Polish uniforms and used as one element of Operation Himmler to justify the invasion of Poland [1] [2]. Alfred Naujocks later said he led the operation under orders from Reinhard Heydrich and Heinrich Müller; in the days that followed Germany launched Fall Weiss and invaded Poland on 1 September 1939 [1] [3].
1. The staged “attack” that became the most famous pretext
Histories and reference entries agree that Gleiwitz was not a spontaneous Polish assault but a deliberate false‑flag operation: a small German SS team seized the Gleiwitz radio station, broadcast an anti‑German message in Polish, and left dead bodies in Polish uniforms to make the scene appear like Polish sabotage [1] [3] [4]. Contemporary and later accounts call this the best‑known action of Operation Himmler, a broader program of provocations along the Polish–German border designed to manufacture a casus belli [1] [2].
2. Who planned and who testified about it
Much of what is known comes from Alfred Naujocks’s affidavit and testimony at the Nuremberg trials, where he stated he organized the Gleiwitz action under orders from senior SS and Gestapo figures, specifically Reinhard Heydrich and Heinrich Müller [1] [4]. Secondary accounts trace the planning to Heydrich’s initiative and to preparations involving Abwehr and SS units as part of Operation Himmler [3] [4].
3. Bodies, “Konserve,” and the moral calculus of deception
Multiple sources report that prisoners — likely from concentration camps — and at least one local detainee were killed or left at attack sites dressed as Polish attackers; Nazi bureaucrats used the chilling euphemism “Konserve” (canned goods) for such victims in some accounts of Operation Himmler [5] [3]. Facing History & Ourselves and other educators emphasize that the Gestapo kidnapped and killed at least one man, dressed him in a Polish uniform, and left him as evidence to support the narrative of Polish aggression [6].
4. Immediate impact: propaganda and invasion
Hitler and Nazi propaganda immediately cited border incidents — including Gleiwitz — to claim Poland had attacked Germany; within hours Germany was reporting the incidents and on 1 September launched Fall Weiss, the invasion of Poland that precipitated wider war [1] [7]. Historians note Hitler had told his generals days earlier he would “provide a propagandistic casus belli,” and Gleiwitz was part of that provisioning [1] [2].
5. Disagreement, gaps, and how historians reconstruct events
While general agreement exists that Gleiwitz was staged, details vary: sources differ on the exact content of the Polish broadcast, the number and identity of those killed, and the full chain of command for every participant [1] [3]. Much of the narrative relies on postwar testimony like Naujocks’s affidavit; therefore reconstructions weigh that testimony against documentary records and other witness accounts [1] [5].
6. Why the phrase “assassination to start WWII” needs clarification
The claim “German assassination of one of their citizens to start WWII” compresses several facts: Nazis did stage killings and planted bodies as part of false‑flag incidents (including at Gleiwitz) to fabricate Polish culpability, and these provocations were used to justify the invasion that began WWII in Europe [6] [2]. Sources do not present Gleiwitz as a single tidy “assassination” that alone started the war but as one staged atrocity within a coordinated campaign that supplied propaganda precedents for invasion [1] [3].
7. Competing emphases in reporting and public memory
Popular articles and tabloids dramatize the scene (e.g., detailed reconstructions of corpses dressed as Poles), while scholarly and reference sources emphasize operational context (Operation Himmler, Heydrich’s role, Naujocks’s testimony) [8] [4]. Both kinds of accounts agree on the essential point—Gleiwitz was a Nazi fabrication used as pretext—but differ in tone and in how they treat unresolved micro‑details [8] [5].
8. Bottom line for readers seeking accuracy
Available sources consistently identify the Gleiwitz incident and wider Operation Himmler as planned Nazi false‑flag actions that fabricated Polish aggression, involved killings or misuse of bodies to stage scenes, and were cited publicly to justify the 1 September 1939 invasion of Poland; historians rely heavily on Naujocks’s postwar testimony and on corroborating documentation to assemble the narrative [1] [5] [2]. If you seek primary documents or dissenting archival interpretations beyond these summaries, those are not supplied in the current set of sources and would require further archival research (not found in current reporting).