59

Here is an anecdote that I recall reading as a child:

During World War II, the English found a way to smuggle microfilm past the German authorities. They sewed a hollow button to their jackets that could be unscrewed to reveal a tiny, secret compartment. Eventually, the Germans found out about this hiding spot, so the English came up with a new trick. They reversed the thread, so the Germans couldn't work out how to open the buttons.

Now, even as a child, I found this startling. Imagine risking your freedom based on whether a German guard slavishly followed "Lefty Loosy, Righty Tighty". As an adult, colour me skeptical.

So, my question is: Did this really happen?

But wait, where's the notability reference? Well, I am moderately sure I read this in "Great Imposters" (sic) by George Sullivan, but I no longer have access to the book. (Anyone?)

A more modern example of the claim comes from a 2013 Car Talk episode:

RAY: There were a lot of things they could have done. They could have applied some adhesive making them difficult to turn or they could have put some kind of a locking pin. But what they thought of was even better. They made the threads.

TOM: Left hand thread.

RAY: Exactly. So when the Germans twisted the buttons, they in fact didn't come off, they got tighter. And after they failed in a few attempts, they gave up on it because they just figured out, they're not using that trick anymore.

Their version says "Allies", rather than English, and I am nervous about relying on my memory on this point.

Community
  • 1
Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
  • 2
    Conversation about which way threads go turn has been [moved to chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/100064/discussion-on-question-by-oddthinking-did-the-allies-reverse-the-threads-on-secr). – Oddthinking Oct 19 '19 at 05:04

2 Answers2

92

This claim appears to have been distorted from an original about hidden compasses, not microfilm. The compass version has been confirmed by the British Military intelligence officer responsible, Christopher "Clutty" Hutton.

According to Secret Britain: The Hidden Bits of Our History (2009):

When the Germans cottoned onto this, Clutty simply reversed the screw thread so that guards trying to unscrew buttons actually tightened them instead.

See also Official Secret: The Remarkable Story Of Escape Aids (1960) which is written in first person by Hutton himself:

In case I have inadvertently left the reader with the impression that our enemies were either stupid or blind, I should like to state quite categorically that those Germans who were responsible for running the prisoner-of-war camps were intelligent, shrewd and painstaking men, and that in time they intercepted nearly all of my various gadgets. The point was that each new device served its turn for a while and was of considerable benefit to escapers, but once it was 'blown', we either modified it or abandoned it altogether. When the camp searchers hit on the secret of our button compass, for example, we fooled them for an additional period by manufacturing it with a left-hand thread.

DavePhD
  • 103,432
  • 24
  • 436
  • 464
  • 25
    I note that the context neatly addresses my concern. These compasses aren't for Allied spies worried about blowing their cover. These are for Allied Prisoners of War to help them with escape attempts. They have already lost their freedom. – Oddthinking Oct 16 '19 at 13:03
  • 1
    Yep, I read a story about the buttons (and other "tricks") about 50 years ago, probably in Reader's Digest. – Daniel R Hicks Oct 16 '19 at 16:35
  • 2
    Seems a lot of trouble to go to just to hide a compass, something you could easily make yourself from a couple nails, a leaf, and a pool of water with proper training. Also, you'd think the German jailers would simply confiscate *all* of their prisoners' clothing (and provide their own if they're being nice) so as to avoid any such shenanigans. We do that to prisoners even today - you don't get to go to prison wearing what you had on when you were arrested... – Darrel Hoffman Oct 16 '19 at 21:01
  • 25
    @DarrelHoffman the point of a POW having a hidden compass was to enable them to navigate inconspicuously through enemy territory if they managed to escape: tricks with puddles would only work if the Germans mistook it for a science fair project. – Tom Goodfellow Oct 16 '19 at 21:15
  • 27
    @DarrelHoffman The rules at the time though were that they stayed in uniform. And if you're in the middle of a war and having problems equipping your own troops in Russia, you don't want to waste valuable resources providing extra clothes for PoWs. – Graham Oct 16 '19 at 23:40
  • 2
    Still, if I want to unscrew something, rotate it in one direction and it doesn't work, I'll just try the other direction. It's pretty unbelievable that a prison guard detects that a button has a screw on it, tries one direction, and then just gives up without trying the other. – vsz Oct 17 '19 at 04:15
  • 17
    @vsz - Wouldn't the point be that the screws are hidden and you don't know if it's a regular button or not without twisting? In that case I can see this working, because you're not going to waste time trying to tug every button in every way possible. – Vilx- Oct 17 '19 at 07:54
  • 3
    @vsz the only point of taking PoWs is that you need less troops of your own than the enemy troops you're holding. Much less. You say "if I want to unscrew something", but imagine you have a line of, like, fifty o them to inspect, a dozen buttons each. And you don't even know *if* there is something to unscrew, but you do have all the pockets to check, et cetera... How long would it take? – Mołot Oct 17 '19 at 08:17
  • 2
    @Vilx- : I assumed that if they suspected someone, they did tug every button on his clothes. Twisting it in the other direction too doesn't take much more than an extra second. – vsz Oct 17 '19 at 08:20
  • 1
    @vsz - True, but check Mołot's comment. Those seconds add up. In addition, these were PoWs, not spies. True, you want to remove their escape aids, but even if you miss some, that's not a huge loss anyway. – Vilx- Oct 17 '19 at 08:37
  • 2
    Note that the quote doesn't claim this was a permanent solution, it just says "for an additional period". Which sounds plausible to me. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Oct 17 '19 at 11:38
  • 7
    @vsz not to mention, by twisting the "intuitive" direction first, they've just tightened it, so that "extra second" trying to twist the other way might not be enough to torque it loose from its extra-tightened position. – Doktor J Oct 17 '19 at 15:07
  • 3
    I'd point out that there are cast metal puzzles which depend on a reverse threaded screw as part of the solution, so the counterintuitiveness should not be underestimated. Also, anecdotally, the reverse threads on my propane tanks STILL infuriate me. Now if the Allies had figured out how to make a button compass protected by a [USB connector](https://imgur.com/gallery/kYGTLjc), they'd never have lost any compasses! – Cort Ammon Oct 18 '19 at 04:54
  • 2
    @DarrelHoffman POWs have to be allowed to keep their uniform as per the Geneva Convention. German soldiers may have done many horrible things under the leadership of the nazis, but a common POW camp holding prisoners from the western allies would be quite keen on upholding the Geneva Convention. If nothing else, they would at least do it for the sake of their own brothers in allied captivity. – Kapten-N Oct 18 '19 at 13:48
  • @Kapten-N Geneva Conventions were the result of the WW2. I'm not 100% sure, but i don't think there were any such provisions w.r.t uniform in any such earlier treaties. – Dan M. Oct 21 '19 at 12:45
  • @DanM. There was a 1929 Geneva convention https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/INTRO/305 , but I don't see anything about being permitted to wear uniforms. Haven't read the whole thing though. – DavePhD Oct 21 '19 at 13:15
  • @DavePhD yes, I was referring to it as part of the "earlier treaties". Art. 12. says that detaining power should provided PoW with clothing, but no mention of keeping the uniforms. – Dan M. Oct 21 '19 at 13:35
  • Hmm... My source is the Swedish soldier instruction book. I'm pretty sure it says so. But you're right that more has been added to the Geneva convention with time so maybe that particular thing wasn't there from before WW2. – Kapten-N Oct 22 '19 at 13:54
28

I also read almost exactly this as a child, circa 50 years ago, in Of Spies and Stratagems (1963) by Stanley P Lovell, who was the head of the US's Office of Strategic Services R&D division:

CAMOUFLAGE

As the number of secret agents sent into enemy lands by the O.S.S. increased, the invention and production of camouflaged items became an important activity. Disguised articles and concealed receptacles to keep messages secure from enemy inspectors, [...]

Buttons on clothing were a favorite camouflage container. The top and base of the button were separated and a surprisingly commodious space was hollowed out. At first the top of the button was made to unscrew by turning to the left that is, counterclockwise. But the Germans soon found out about it, and all buttons on a suspected person's clothing were stoutly tested by turning them that way. If any one opened up, the Gestapo needed no further evidence to convict the spy.

We were about to abandon the item when one of my group suggested reversing the thread, so that twisting or turning to the left only served to tighten the assembly. Right up to Germany's surrender we never learned of one instance of this simplest of deceptions being discovered by enemy inspectors or police.

This mentions spies, messages (though not microfilm ) & Americans (though not the Allies specifically).

You can find this quote in Google Books. (I also just found a pdf online.)

CGCampbell
  • 117
  • 7
philipxy
  • 380
  • 2
  • 7