I am not antiemetic, I have Jewish friends both on here and in my personal life. What you haven’t done is looked into the meddling that the U.S. military offices I quoted did post WW2, what they did was fact and widely reported. The people mentioned in the information were widely criticised for their actions but what they did happened. Is it uncomfortable, yes it is. Silence me if you want but I have only spoken the truth.
I DID look into it. Here's what I found.
1. Did William Paley run U.S. “book burning” operations in Germany?
No. This is an invented conspiracy theory.
William S. Paley, the head of CBS,
did serve in the U.S. Office of War Information (OWI) and later as a psychological operations officer during the Allied occupation.
But
he absolutely did not lead any mass book-destruction campaign, nor was he involved in anything resembling what the text claims.
There is
zero historical evidence — scholarly, governmental, or archival — supporting this idea.
2. Did Billy Wilder destroy books in Germany?
No.
Billy Wilder worked on
de-Nazification efforts in the film realm.
In 1945 he directed the documentary
"Death Mills" about the concentration camps. He was not involved in book destruction, and no reputable historian has ever described him as such.
3. Claim: “The Third Reich never officially ordered the destruction of any book.”
This is
flatly false.
Nazi book burnings (May–June 1933) were:
- organized by the German Student Union,
- encouraged and supported by Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda,
- targeting works by Jews, liberals, socialists, pacifists, and others.
Goebbels gave a
major celebratory speech at the Berlin book burning:
“The soul of the German people can again express itself. These flames do not only illuminate the final end of an old era; they also light up a new one.”
Nazi-supporting institutions also systematically removed banned authors from curriculum and libraries. This was
absolutely government-linked, not a “symbolic” independent action.
4. Claim: “No libraries were raided. No bookstores were sacked.”
Again false.
Historical documentation shows:
- Libraries and universities removed books by banned authors.
- Bookstores were compelled to cease selling them.
- Publishers of “un-German” works were shut down or coerced.
This was
state-directed cultural cleansing.
5. Claim: “Americans banned 34,615 books and destroyed them.”
The numbers are fabricated.
After WWII the Allied occupation did:
- Remove Nazi propaganda and militarist material from schools and libraries.
- Collect and sometimes destroy Nazi publications, such as “Mein Kampf,” militarist manuals, or racist textbooks.
This has been studied extensively. It was
not a general book-burning campaign, nor was it aimed at German literature or culture.
The claim that
"all textbooks from 1933–1945 were destroyed" is also untrue; many were archived, studied, or replaced.
The numbers like
“34,615 titles destroyed” appear
only in fringe, Holocaust-denial, antisemitic sources, not in historical scholarship.
6. Claim: “Jews ran the book-destruction operations.”
This is the central antisemitic trope of the piece.
There is
no evidence for this, and credible historians do not assert it.
It fits the long-running conspiracy narrative of “Jews controlling media,” which is a classic antisemitic fiction dating back to the early 20th century.
7. The final claim: U.S. actions were “a holocaust”
This is simply Holocaust denial rhetoric — an attempt to portray:
- Nazis as innocent
- Jews as villains
- Americans as secretly worse
- Nazi book burning as “fake”
It is
propaganda, not history.
What reputable historians actually say
OIC (Office of Information Control) was responsible for:
- media licensing,
- removing Nazi propaganda from public circulation,
- promoting democratic press reforms.
It
did not run a program of widescale cultural destruction.
Its staff included many backgrounds — Americans, Germans, émigrés, military officers — but
there is no historical basis for the idea that Jews “ran” the OIC or destroyed German literature.
The article you quoted distorts scholarly work, quoting selectively and adding fabricated “facts.”
Bottom line
Nothing in that text is historically accurate.
It’s part of a genre of antisemitic revisionism that attempts to minimize Nazi crimes and portray Jews as aggressors after WWII.