This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

(: </3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.111.35 ( talk) 22:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC) I have always read that it was Goebbles that took charge and that Himmler was out of the picture for a few crucial hours. Goebbles is apprently on record as expressing distrust of the Reichsfuhrer that night and was the one that was able to convince Major Remer who had been sent to arrest him that Hitler was alive, with Hitler's help. Goebbles had a direct line to Hitler and was able to get him on the phone. Hitler promoted Remer to Colonel on the spot, commanded him to crush the uprising and only to obey the orders of Goebbles, Himmler and General Reinecke. Also read that although the conspirators thought Hitler was dead before Stauffenberg left East Prussia (he phoned Berlin before he left Hitler's HQ) they delayed doing anything till he was back in Berlin and finally that Fromm didn't go to Goebbles right away, it was Speer and Major Remer that came to the Bendlerblock and learned that Fromm had shot the ringleaders. Only after that did Fromm ask to be taken to Goebbles so he could call Hitler and clear his name. Goebbles had him placed undr arrest and it was at that time Himmler finally arrived on the scene and in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the Reserve Army gave the order to stop any further summary executions. It's total speculation but I feel Himmler held back to make sure which way the wind was going to blow. It does make sense. Two books that i can recall off the top of my head with detailed accounts are Inside the Third Reich by Speer and The Devil's Disciples by Anthony Read.

One last point..Kinneyboy90 is right. It was just shy of 5000 who perished in the aftermath of the plot and the executions continued right to the end of the war --Jringer 1:34 am EST

I don't know if there's any reliable information available on why Stauffenberg did not deliver the bomb in a reliable fashion, eg. by activating it manually. I think that is a very critical point here and I'm missing it.

Should he had unpack it with only his 3 remaining fingers of his one hand? In front of hitler and his associates? LOL

Actually the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William Shirer has this incident in detail: how he activated the bomb and why it failed to kill Hitler at the critical moment and why the whole plot failed due to lack of co-ordination among the chief conspirators -- Harishan

I was wondering if anyone has any information on moles within the plots to kill Hitler. An earlier attempt to kill him failed because the bomb didn't go off

Little or no evidence of informers. AH was rather shocked that such a wide swath of people had come so close to getting rid of him, which is one reason he had 5000 people killed, including a huge proportion of the German aristocracy. Wyss 15:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

What, if any, information exists concerning the motives of the conspirators. Was this a power grab, or was it truly a the culmination of a resistance movement? Was it a reaction to a particular act or policy, or a more general protest against Hitler's policy? Did the conspirators only hope to topple Hitler, or did they mean to remove the Nazis from power entirely? -- djrobgordon 11:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Given the fact that there were conspiracies stretching back into the 1930s, and that dozens of conspirators worked in different groupings over the years, I think there isn't one simple answer. My impression (based on more than the article) is that for some, honor was all, for others there was a virulent distaste for Nazism, and for still others they simply feared the cliff that Germany was driving toward. It's probably correct to imagine that had they been united ideologically, they would have made more effective attempts much earlier than they did. -- Dhartung | Talk 01:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The old officer class of the the Wehrmacht had never been wholly in favour of Hitler, but sometime in the 1930s Hitler had changed the oath of allegiance from being pledged to the German state, to being given to him, personally. That meant that many German officers felt bound by the oath, against many of their better judgments, and so many, albeit unwillingly, went along with the orders given them.

When things had started to seem bad for Germany, after D-Day, and with the setbacks in the East, many of the officer class thought it was time to get rid of Hitler and his regime, as it had by then become obvious that he was dragging Germany into an abyss. Thus the 20 July plot.

The Soviet Union launched Operation Bagration (q.v.) on 22 June, '44, which resulted in the collapse and destruction of Army Group Center over the next 2–3 months, and by mid-July it was apparant to all that the Soviet onslaught couldn't be stopped. At about the same time the allies in the west were winning the battle of Normandy and would not be contained. Germany's and the Nazi's goose was cooked, and the smart money was all on the other side. The Germans desperately needed to get rid of Hitler.

However, there were earlier assassination plots including one in, I think, 1938, prior to the outbreak of war, and there was also an attempt in the same year by the German High Command to get Britain to make a firm stand at Munich, which, if that had occurred, the High Command would then have used to take steps to depose Hitler and remove the Nazis from power, however, as history knows, this didn't happen.

There was also an attempt on 13 March 1943 using a bomb disguised as two bottles of brandy taken by Colonel Heinz Brandt onto Hitler's personal Focke Wulf Condor aircraft that was to be flying Hitler from Smolensk to the Wolf's Lair, but the cold temperature at the altitude the aircraft was flying at the time stopped the bomb from exploding - after thirty minutes, roughly when it should have been over Minsk. This bomb was also of British manufacture, having been taken from captured SOE stocks, like the 20 July 1944 one. A British bomb was used as, unlike German time fuzes, which made a loud hissing sound after being activated and which would have been noticed before the bomb reached the aircraft, the British fuzes were silent in operation. The unexploded bomb was recovered after the flight without anyone noticing, and discovered to have failed because the detonator itself had not functioned in the low temperatures of the aircraft's hold.

BTW, the German 'resistance movement' was unable to get any assistance from Britain and the SOE as earlier in the war the British Government and Intelligence community had decided to have no dealings with any such movement or political party in Germany. Hence the need to use captured SOE explosives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.55.155 ( talk) 18:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

200 executed? Come on, Hitler had over 4,900 executed, so reports Shirer and several other sources. I think Kershaw was either incorrect, or I'm missing something. Could someone please clear this up. Aaрон Кинни ( t) 05:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the numbers according to List_of_members_of_the_20_July_plot which holds sourced information. Maybe someone can verify this? -- Kotu Kubin ( talk) 21:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

There is still a discrepancy between the opening paragraph (4980 executed) and the aftermath section (about 200 executed). Ketone16 ( talk) 20:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The inconsistency is still there and detracts from authority of the article. 78.86.170.44 ( talk) 01:08, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

In this section, both "Goerdeler" and "Canaris" are referenced without any prior mention of who or what they are. Statalyzer ( talk) 07:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

"It is possible that Himmler, who by late 1943 knew that the war was unwinnable..." I'd like to see a source for that statement. 80.169.138.156 09:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Why does Operation Walküre redirect *back* to the July 20 Plot page?? From what I can tell, it was a separate contingency plan that had nothing to do with the July 20 Plot.-- Davidwiz 20:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes that's true. It should have its own article. Adam 10:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Noting that Operation Walküre still redirects back to here. Mathmo ^Talk 00:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Now its a stub. --  Matthead  ^discuß!      O       00:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

"In retrospect, it is surprising that these months of plotting by the resistance groups in the Army and the state apparatus, in which dozens of people were involved and of which many more, including very senior Army officers, were aware, apparently totally escaped the attention of the Gestapo. In fact the Gestapo had known since February 1943 of both the Abwehr resistance group under the patronage of Admiral Wilhelm Canaris and of the civilian resistance circle around former Leipzig mayor Carl Goerdeler. If all these people had been arrested and interrogated, the Gestapo might well have uncovered the group based in Army Group Centre as well and the July 20 assassination attempt would never have happened. This raises the possibility that Himmler knew about the plot and, for reasons of his own, allowed it to go ahead. Himmler had at least one conversation with a known oppositionist when, in August 1943, the Prussian Finance Minister Johannes Popitz, who was involved in Goerdeler's network, came to see him and offered him the support of the opposition if he would make a move to displace Hitler and secure a negotiated end to the war.[2] Nothing came of this meeting, but Popitz was not arrested and Himmler apparently did nothing to track down the resistance network which he knew was operating within the state bureaucracy. It is possible that Himmler, who by late 1943 knew that the war was unwinnable, allowed the July 20 plot to go ahead in the knowledge that if it succeeded he would be Hitler's successor, and could then bring about a peace settlement. Popitz was not alone in seeing in Himmler a potential ally. General von Bock advised Tresckow to seek his support, but there is no evidence that he did so. Goerdeler was apparently also in indirect contact with Himmler via a mutual acquaintance Carl Langbehn. Canaris's biographer Heinz Höhne suggests that Canaris and Himmler were working together to bring about a change of regime. All of this remains speculation.[3]"

All of this is pure conjecture. Let's stick to what we know is true, OK?

In the July 20 Plot article, these two lines are unsourced, and pure speculation.

"Conspirators who had long resisted the idea of killing Hitler on moral grounds now changed their minds—partly because they were hearing reports of the mass murder at Auschwitz of up to 250,000 Hungarian Jews, the culmination of the Nazi Holocaust."

This is unsourced, because it can't be sourced. Since the end of the war not a single Third Reich document has ever actually been discovered mentioning the supposed events known as the Holocaust. It doesn't even provide names, simply "conspirators", there are no dates and/or links to any proof of these "reports" even if they are true or exist.

The above is not a strong objection. The holocaust is not "supposed," it is a fact. Millions of people were killed and we all know that. There are films. mass graves, and other direct pieces of evidence. Further, the Germans knew about the holocaust for the simple reason that the germans committed the holocaust. You can't run that many trains and have that level of operation without it being known by thousands of people. The above unsigned comment smells of holocaust denial. Of course this was part of the reason some Germans wanted to kill Hitler. You don't need to cite that the sky is blue. (Dustin) 97.99.105.137 18:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You are gaping over a subject too big to be discussed here and stating too many claims that are completely unsupported. For example, multiple documents and interviews exists from holocaust survivors (e.g. the 9 hour Claude Lanzmann documentary) claiming that the majority of Germans was completely unaware of what was going on in the camps. I think that both your comment and the above unsigned comment is borderlining, unsubstantiated flamebait. -- Kotu Kubin ( talk) 16:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

What was the program of the group? Borders (1914 ones in Poland), punishment of Nazi criminals, reparations? Xx236 12:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

They were hanged using thin, possibly hemp, nooses tied in slip knots, from iron hooks attached to an overhead steel beam. The beam and some hooks are still in place today. The "piano wire noose" is a myth. Piano wire would cut the neck. 90.241.129.175 21:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

It's possible you're right, but I doubt the rope hung there today was left from the actual execution. It's not as thought he Nazis would make a memorial out of a military building to honor those trying to stop Nazism. Piano Wire makes for a poor display. It's hard to see and it probably moves around. Rope gets the point across at the memorial. And yeah, piano wire cuts the neck - that was the point. The piano wire claim is cited to research and witness statements in the wiki. Unless you have more, I think it should stay in place. 97.99.105.137 18:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Is there any real evidence substantiating details of this entire thing? In particular, is it really known that Hitler watched it over and over? I am not saying he didn't, but is just the sort of thing propagandists would come up with.-- Jrm2007 09:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

According to Gitta Sereny's book "Albert Speer- his battle with truth", the story about Hitler watching the filmed executions over and over again is a myth. Speer says in Sereny's book that this myth comes from an missunderstanding in a interview with Speer in Playboy Magazine from 1971. To Sereny Speer claims that: "As far as I know, Hitler never watched the film, and that's something I always said. It wasn't in his nature to do something like that. And I doubt he watched the photographs more than I did." Speer's view is later verified by von Below: "He [Hitler] closed his eyes when forced to see the consequences of his orders." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.231.203.141 ( talk) 14:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

A paragraph on goals and vision of Germany post-Hitler would be welcomed as well as historical assesment of political ideology the plotters subscribed to.-- Molobo 15:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

To anyone who might write this: Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt pretty much said that the conspirators were still Nazi's at heart but could see that Germany was losing the war.

So they pretty much wanted to topple the present dictator and replace him with a more amicable Nazi. The new government then would look to the US and the UK to draw up the terms for surrender, that is without having to deal with Russia. -- 24.2.158.114 10:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

It can't just be grabbed from Arendt at face value, she had her own axes to grind here and had reasons to want to dismiss the plot; it was central to her to infer that everyone who stayed in Germany at the height of the Reich and supported the regime by practical effort, even if they might not be in full sympathy with the Nazis, were also part of the regime and couldn't have been of the resistance. The July 20 group (in a side sense) were conservative, but that doesn't mean they were going to keep up dictatorship.

In fact, up until 1990, when a unified Germany was in place again, the plot was distinctly avoided both by historians, by writers and in the public memory. That a group of military officers and conservative noblemen had pitched the single most dedicated and well-planned attempt on Hitler from within Germany during all of his reign didn't fit the prevalent post-WW2 world view, There was really no powerful nation or group around that wished to invoke this as a legacy.. West Germany saw itself as a non-military state and as the heir of the German emigration to the West and of allied victory, while the GDR drew its credentials from the Communist party, persecuted by the Nazis, and the assistance of the Red Army. Neither of the two states felt really at home with a right-wing, but generally democratic, plot to bring down Hitler and end the war, nor did the Allies, and it didn't fit in the accepted picture of the war. It's only after 1990 that Stauffenberg and the others have come into their own as national heroes. Strausszek ( talk) 03:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

In the Alternative possibilities section there is mention of 'the second bomb', however multiple explosive devices aren't mentioned anywhere else. What's the story behind this, assuming of course it's a sourced fact in the first place? -- MiG ( talk) 14:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there as a second bomb which could not be armed in time. If the article doesn't explain this fully, it probably needs to be updated. Unfortunately, I'm too busy working on other articles to give this one much attention. But yes, it is a fact that there was a second bomb. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 15:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Stauffenberg failed to arm the second bomb, which therefore did not detonate with the first. Had both bombs done so without dysfunction then everyone in the room would have been killed outright, possibly with one or two fatally or seriously injured exceptions. History hangs on such minor oversights. Aforandy ( talk) 17:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

This article should probably be at 20 July plot rather than using an American-style date. -- John ( talk) 13:15, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I moved the article in accordance with WP:MOSDATE. -- John ( talk) 23:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:MOSDATE also allows American-style dates. Just FYI. ...Ω... ^..¿TooT?.. _..¡StatS!.. 02:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

For sure, but this seems more naturally to use a German-style date, as a German subject. -- John ( talk) 02:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it matters too much as long as its internally consistent. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 16:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The German version of this article is "Attentat vom 20. Juli 1944". The period after 20 (20.) makes the 20 an ordinal number, and therefore "20th". Shouldn't it be 20th of July plot? 94.222.76.169 ( talk) 10:08, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I do not have the book in front of me, but almost the entire page appears to be copied nearly word-for-word out of Wibke Bruhns' book My Father's Land, if someone has a copy and can verify, this article needs to be rewritten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.244.205.105 ( talk) 20:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the following paragraph for discussion here:

"Also, researchers say that the two people inbetween the bomb and Hitler actually saved his life. Contrary also to the first paragraph, the bomb might have been placed away from the very thick leg of the oak table since the blast did not create such a drastic impact. The bomb positioned at the said spot would do more damage since the leg of the table would multiply the blast because of the so-called shock-wave bounced. A bomb placed at a closed space does more damage than a bomb placed in an open space, that is why the bomb might have been placed some where but not beside the leg of the table."

Although it might be accurate, it doesn't seem to be sourced and it refers to the article itself "Contrary also to the first paragraph..." which seems a bit unencyclopedic. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 13:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I always think it.

D-Day made Hitler should and want know who betrayed him inner Nazi, right? in fact, this trick look like Hitler want to suicide--if it failure..... ( talk) 8:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Eventually some 5,000 people were arrested[21] and about 200 were executed. Not all of them were connected with the 20 July plot, since the Gestapo used the occasion to settle scores with many other people suspected of opposition sympathies. [b]The British radio also named possible suspects who had not yet been implicated but then were arrested.[/b] I know this is citated, but its got to be worth explaining the intent behind this? 80.44.169.0 ( talk) 22:33, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

What is meant by "the British radio?" This sentence is very jarring to have standing alone because it raises so many questions. 0¹⁸ ( talk) 15:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Heard that even after the war. Military oficers involved in this plot.The widows and families were denied military pensions.Is this so? SESUTOYOU ( talk) 22:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Both claims are made in the article today. Twang ( talk) 01:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Six months have passed; the lead still states that 7000 were arrested, 4980 were executed; Aftermath says that 5000 were arrested, 200 executed. In six months there've been well over 100 edits to the article - but this glaring difference remains.Is Shirer to be trusted... or Kershaw?? Twang ( talk) 18:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

"The trials and executions were reportedly filmed and later reviewed by Hitler and his entourage. These films were later edited by Goebbels into a 30-minute movie and shown to cadets at the Lichterfelde cadet school, but viewers supposedly walked out of the screening in disgust.[35]"

The citation for these two sentences appear to be a mere "anecdote" quote by Shirer. Is this enough to establish something as fact? According to David Irving, he was told by Otto Guensche that Hitler refused to watch a film of the perpetrators being executed and supposedly became visibly angry upon seeing pictures of the corpses. So basically this comes down to Irving's word versus the guy whose "anecdote" Shirer was quoting. Until undeniable proof can be obtained one way or the other, I think it's best to remove these sentences from the article. -- 71.8.192.89 ( talk) 12:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The film "Valkyrie" shows a film camera in the scene where conspirators are executed by hanging. Not to cite a film as an acceptable source, but that detail would likely not have been included without some fact-checking. Consequently, there is probably a good historical source for the claim. And again, citing the film, Hitler might have been angered because he ordered that the coup plotters be taken alive. 71.191.247.254 ( talk) 22:44, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I was always under the impression the films still exist in the German archives - under embargo and allowed to be seen by very few people, though shown to the relatives if requested. They may be openly catalogued, or be part of some 'Private Press' designation as at the British Library (yes they do have stuff that isn't publicly catalogued - you have to know). Perhaps a dip in the Bundersarchive catalogue (is it on-line?) by a German speaker might be fruitful? 109.144.208.66 ( talk) 19:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The "1–6 July" section mentions that a pistol was also contemplated as the weapon with which to kill Hitler, but then a pistol is never mentioned again. Could a knowledgeable editor add some material in that section (or the next, or the next section) explaining why a bomb was chosen? As a reader, I wondered why the plan hadn't been simply to attempt to shoot Hitler. Comet Tuttle ( talk) 22:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Presumably the conspirators thought bomb(s) were a safer bet as it could be concealed in the briefcase and thus go without detection, whereas those attending the conferences were not permitted to bring in firearms. Also, a pistol is not always reliable, relying as it would on close proximity, a true aim, and the most likely intervention of Hitler's bodyguard(s). Just as much therefore could have gone wrong using a pistol. I think the bomb idea was sound, but the crucial error of judgement was the failure to bring in a second bomb.

The recent move from 20 July plot to 1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt was certainly bold. Perhaps this is a hammer looking for a nail, but does anybody have an issue with it? I am ambivalent. Granted the moving editor has a point that 20 July plot was a bit vague, but so too is the current title, as there were multiple assassination attempts in 1944. Would 20 July 1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt be excessive? Are there any other suggestions? – CWenger ( ^ • @) 21:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Were there multiple attempts on Hitler? I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 22:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I probably said that a little too cavalierly. I assumed there were multiple attempts in 1944 since I have heard they were near constant. German resistance#The suicide bombing attempts describes a few, but I guess it depends on how stringently you describe an assassination attempt. – CWenger ( ^ • @) 22:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Correction: "Were there multiple attempts on Hitler in 1944?" ← That's what I originally meant to say. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

The article itself makes mentions to the other failed ones... I'm not sure, I think that the more specific title may work, but I think we need more voices in this. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 23:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Then again, as I read through all of the articles, this one appears to be the most notable. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 02:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

It is unquestionably the most notable assassination attempt of Hitler (in 1944 or any year). Anyway, the new title seems alright, but as you said, we'll see what other people think. – CWenger ( ^ • @) 03:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I oppose the move - at least the move to the current title. In short I will say that the title "1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt" is not accurate, in my viewpoint, because the article is not about the attempt per se; The 20th July plot was not the attempt alone: there was the build-up of the Widerstand dating a decade or so ago, the organization of the "coup", the conpirators' plans for seizing power, Operation Valkyrie etc etc. The title "1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt" should focus on the events in the Wolfsschanze in 20 July 1944. Furthermore I would say that the 20th July Plot was not one of the many assasination attempts that took part the previous years and just wanted to "get rid" of Hitler; This was a unique attempt, with considerable organization and had a huge impact - one can say that it is a landmark in modern German history: certainly, the plot was not the assassination attempt alone. Besides, the Gunpowder Plot could also be interpeted as a vague title for the story (I surmise that in the 1600's there had been a lot of plotting as well as gunpowder). However as far as I know the abovementioned attempt on Hitler's life is usually referred to as the "20th July Plot" in English-language historiography. Best regards -- Jake V ( talk) 12:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The 20 July plot is worldwide known as "20 July plot". Mainly because this wasnt just a "assassination attempt", it was a complete military coup, which tried to wrestle away the power from the NSDAP, its governmental structures and the SS. I moved it back, "1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt" is a bad title, does not cover the whole topic, and is simply not the recognized name for the coup . StoneProphet ( talk) 09:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://ondemand-mp3.dradio.de/file/dradio/2010/07/20/dlf_20100720_1423_950da222.mp3
  • In 1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt on 2011-05-25 03:18:06, 404 Not Found
  • In 1944 Adolf Hitler assassination attempt on 2011-06-04 16:26:02, 404 Not Found

-- JeffGBot ( talk) 16:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hasn't anyone noticed that there is no Infobox for this article? I don't know which one would be the best to fit this article but there certainly be one of someone is willing to do an infobox. Which would probably get it to B class. Adamdaley ( talk) 09:54, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Goals and objectives of the July 20th plotters as well as their demands to the Allies are missing in the article. It would be beneficial to add them. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 11:38, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The link to Albrecht von Bernstorff in the info box links to someone who would have died before the Second World War would have even begun. That article does actually link to the proper Albrecht von Bernstorff but that link directs you to something even more obscure. What is the suggested course of action? I vote to just remove the link. -- Sabre ball ^{t c} 03:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)