Carlos Porter on Nuremberg (PDF ONLY)
Ernst Zündel (extensive bio)
What is more important to a nation's survival than a true understanding by its citizens of what has happened in its past - including the recent past? What is more surely productive of disaster than a willfully distorted and false understanding of the factors that have produced the status quo?
While America girds itself for terrorist attacks from Mideast zealots, the same media and "experts" who warn most strongly about the possibility of such happenings do everything possible to hide, obscure and distort the facts relating to how we arrived at this parlous state in the first place.
In a few words, what else but disaster can a sane mind expect as the certain consequence of permitting foreign interests to direct "our" foreign policy?
We speak of course about the total control of American policy by one of the participants in that cockpit of endless contention. To fail to acknowledge this overriding fact of today is as cowardly and as stupid as it is to continue attempts to ignore the historical trail that led to this tragic condition.
The mission of THE BARNES REVIEW is to attempt to bring history into accord with the facts. Such a struggle is quite meaningless if one does not realize that the practical and vital purpose of historical fact is the prevention of repetition, that mistakes in the past may be overcome. To review our sordid record of Middle East bias and self-destructive conduct over the past 50 years is a necessity if we are to extricate ourselves from a costly nightmare not out of our own making. Although most Americans are free of direct complicity in spinning this deadly web, we are, however, guilty of complicity by way of our lack of interest and beguilement.
Unmasking the machinations of immensely influential Zionism isn't "anti-Semitism." M any thousands of Jewish Americans (and not a few in Israel itself) share both our disgust and our concern. This concern centers not only on the outrageous amounts of money and lethal technology bestowed on Israel by politicians who are that pseudo-nation's fawning and quaking servants.
Now there is great concern that Middle East violence, to date overwhelmingly confined to news photos and TV footage in the U.S. may be headed here; courtesy of the hatred generations of American "leaders' have burned into the Arab mind.
Last April 28 the Washington Times ran prominently (thereby gaining more neo-conservative points) an ominous story on terrorist potential within the United States. It reported that Islamic radicals "pose new terrorist dangers to Americans" and have "become the top priority of FBI counter-terrorism agents." FBI counter-terrorism section chief John P. O'Neill said Islamic radicals (who have poured across our porous borders in recent decades) form "the greatest threat coming to us domestically".
O'Neill said those involved in the bombing of New York's World Trade Center were from Egypt, Pakistan, Kuwait and Iraq as well as from Islamic elements in this country. These people are well "networked" and consider the United States one of their "theaters of war." O'Neill warns: "These people are characterized as free-moving (largely financed by rackets and scams they operate here). . . They can quickly assemble and quickly disperse, and they are extraordinarily hard to track."
Our mad and masochistic immigration policies are of course central to their presence. But let us stop and contemplate their motivationÑthe why of it all. Why do these Middle-East zealots (and millions of their more passive brethren) feel this deep and bitter hatred toward our nation? The reasons are clear to any who will acknowledge the inevitable consequences of "postwar" government policies relating to the Arab world and Israel.
In presidential election year 1948 the Palestine issue was tied to President Truman's political fortunes. His stunning upset victory would have been impossible without White House support of Zionism's desire to partition Palestine as a prelude to a full-fledged Jewish state. Navy Secretary James Forrestal, then one of the finest minds in public life, pleaded that the issue be "taken out of politics".
Forrestal and Loy Henderson, in charge of Middle East affairs at the State Department, thought partition (i.e. filling much of Palestine with "displaced persons" from Europe) prompted impossible conditionsÑthat it be just, workable and free of ongoing violence. Virtually every knowledgeable figure in America opposed the Palestine plan; some suggesting world sites far less inflammatory. To the credit of a figure who merits few of them, Secretary of State George C. Marshall said that the question of a Palestinian Jewish state should be approached from the standpoint of American foreign policy interests, not political ones.
But the Zionists wanted Palestine, and Palestine it was. In mid-May of 1948 the White House announced official US. recognition of the new state of Israel, following Secretary Marshall's having been persuaded to reconsider his position. The rest is a very sad tale centering on the historically unprecedented fact that a great nation's foreign policies and many of its domestic policies are determined by a camarilla centered on and in a small area of stolen land some 7,000 miles from our shores.
In 1973, the year of the "Yom Kippur War", Israel was at the outset almost overwhelmed by Egyptian forces. But the cavalry arrived in the form of the Nixon-Kissinger team, as it severely depleted our NATO force capacities in Europe by rushing huge amounts of military hardware to Israel, thus turning the tide against Egypt. The only retaliation card a justifiably resentful Arab world could play was a boycott by its oil-producing nations. However, US media coverage was such that Americans stalled in long gas lines muttering curses directed not at Israel but at the Arabs!
In March 1979 at Camp David, President Jimmy Carter utilized checkbook diplomacy by handing Egypt $2 billion and Israel $3 billion a year in perpetuity to seal a truce between them. And throughout Ronald Reagan's administrations, Ronnie's heart may have belonged to Maggie Thatcher, but his soul clearly belonged to Israel.
In April of this year, the world looked with loathing upon Israel's atrocity raids against Lebanon's civil populations. Yet on April 28 the Clinton administration announced a US vow to improve Israel's defenses against missile attacks!
Pray our nation does not experience retribution in the form of Islamic terror attacks. But should they be forthcoming, the historical responsibility before God and men rests with the regiments of craven and ambitious politicians who since 1948 have literally sold out America's future for votes and money. Let us hope that in the eternal scheme of things, nations do not reap what they sow.
Comments? E-Mail: email@example.com
The Barnes Review may be subcribed by writing to: Subscription Department, TBR, 130 - Third Street, Washington, D.C., 20003