Category: A. Dulles

About A. Dulles

Subscribe Feeds

VS propaganda door de CIA geënt op de leest van nazi-Duitsland en daarmee van oorlogsmisdadiger Goebbels

Posted on by Telmo Claro

The Splendid Blond Beast (Money, Law and Genocide in the Twentieth Century) is een boek van Christopher Simpson. Onderwerp de verplaatsing van hooggeplaatste nazi oorlogsmisdadigers, die na WOII werden beschermd door de VS en daar aan het werk werden gezet….. De VS liet dossiers van deze oorlogsmisdadigers verdwijnen, zodat ze niet konden worden berecht en daarna werden gecontracteerd door de VS…. Eén van de hoofdverantwoordelijken was Allen Dulles*, in eerste instantie ‘Director of the Central Intelligence’ (DCI) van de Office of Strategic Services (OSS) en daarna van de opvolger van die geheime dienst, de Central Intelligence Agency (CIA**) die in 1947 werd opgericht.

bol.com | The Splendid Blond Beast (ebook), Christopher Simpson | 9781504043496 | Boeken

Hier een samenvatting van het boek The Splendid Blond Beast:

From a National Jewish Book Award–winning author: The “revelatory and shocking” investigation into the CIA’s liberation of Nazi war criminals (Kirkus Reviews)

How did Gen, Karl Wolff, one of the highest-ranking members of the Nazi Party’s Waffen-SS, who personally oversaw the deportation of three hundred thousand Jews to the Treblinka extermination camps, escape prosecution at the Nuremberg trials? As revealed in this groundbreaking investigation—culled from recently uncovered archival documents—the answer lies within the US government, which buried reports on the Final Solution and was complicit in the recruitment of Nazi war criminals, all to protect the world economy. Among the key players was CIA director Allen Dulles, who was not only instrumental in Wolff’s exoneration but also responsible for installing former slave-labor specialists into positions of power in postwar Germany.

In this damning exposé of American government malfeasance, author Christopher Simpson traces the roots of mass murder as an instrument of financial gain and state power, from the Armenian genocide during World War I to Hitler’s Holocaust through the practice of genocide today. Detailing how the existing structures of international law and commerce have encouraged mass killings, corporate looting, and profiteering at the expense of innocent victims, The Splendid Blond Beast is a disturbing and profound book about the success of evil in our time.

The award-winning author of Blowback and Science of Coercion, Simpson also served as research director for Marcel Ophüls’s Oscar-winning documentary, Hôtel Terminus: The Life and Times of Klaus Barbie.

Ja ongelofelijk als je leest dat een oorlogsmisdadiger als SS generaal Karl Wolff, die verantwoordelijk was voor de deportatie van minstens 300.000 Joden naar Treblinka, zo berechting en straf kon ontlopen…… Alles ‘voor het hogere doel de wereldeconomie te redden’, waar massamoord een instrument werd voor financieel gewin en het bestendigen van de staatsmacht, dit van de Armeense genocide, de Holocaust tot de hedendaagse genocides (zoals die in Jemen, Ap), aldus Simpson….. Simpson legt in zijn boek gedetailleerd uit hoe de structuren van internationale wetgeving en commercie (in het westen): massamoorden, zakelijke plundering en het profiteren over de rug van slachtoffers hebben aangemoedigd……

Eén en ander werd (en wordt nog steeds) gebruikt: -voor illegale oorlogsvoering en -eerder ook voor propaganda tegen de Sovjet-Unie, -voor de strijd tegen anti-koloniale activisten en tegen -progressieve groeperingen die zogenaamd Sovjet pionnen waren….. (allen vormen van propaganda) Uiteraard gaat het om groeperingen die zich hebben verzet tegen het inhumane en bloeddorstige kapitalisme en tegen de ongelijke behandeling van niet alleen arme (t.o.v. rijke) landen, maar ook tegen het allesoverheersende racisme in de VS…… (vergeet daarbij niet dat kapitalisme en fascisme elkaar deels overlappen…..) Moet nog gemeld worden dat men nu i.p.v. de Sovjet-Unie, Rusland misbruikt om mensen te demoniseren als Russische trollen wanneer zij niet welgevallig commentaar leveren op de huidige inhumane status quo en de illegale oorlogsvoering door het westen (onder aanvoering van de VS) in landen waar dit westen niets te zoeken heeft…… (zoals de illegale oorlogen van de VS tegen Afghanistan, Irak, Libië, Syrië en waar de VS in feite de oorlog in Oost-Oekraïne heeft veroorzaakt met de door haar georganiseerde en met 4 miljard dollar betaalde ‘opstand’ en coup tegen de democratisch gekozen president Janoekovytsj….)

Propaganda USA

An interview with Christopher Simpson

Filmed in the 1980s

Books by Christopher Simpson

The Splendid Blond Beast: This groundbreaking investigation into the CIA’s post – world War II liberation and recruitment of Nazi war criminals – including the pivotal role played by CIA director Allen Dulles – races the roots not only of US government malfeasance, but of mass murder as an instrument of financial gain and state power, from the Armenian genocide during World War I to Hitler’s Holocaust through the practice of genocide today.

Blowback: The true story of how US intelligence organizations employed Nazi war criminals in clandestine warfare and propaganda against the USSR, anticolonial revolutionaries, and progressive movements worldwide that were claimed to be Soviet pawns.

Science of Coercion: Drawing on long-classified documents from the Pentagon, the CIA, and other national security agencies, Simpson exposes secret government-funded research into psychological warfare and reveals that many of the most respected pioneers in the field of communication science were knowingly complicit as their findings were employed for the purposes of propaganda, subversion, intimidation, and counterinsurgency during the Cold
War era.

Click here to support Brasscheck

==================================

* Allen Dulles was o.a. verantwoordelijk voor de coup van 1953 in Iran (in feite de oorzaak voor de opkomst van de moellahs in Iran en de staatsgreep tegen de Sjah-dictator in 1978), de staatsgreep in Guatemala in 1954 en de mislukte Bay of Pigs invasie in Cuba, de mislukking waarvoor president John F. Kennedy hem ontsloeg als directeur van de CIA. Vreemd genoeg mocht deze psychopathische schoft deelnemen aan de Warren Commissie die de moord op John F. Kennedy onderzocht….. Hoe meer dan doortrapt kan je een zo belangrijke moord onderzoeken en het dan gek vinden dat zovelen hierin een bevestiging zagen en zien dat de CIA betrokken was bij de moord op Kennedy en dat dit in feite het ware complot was, niet voor niets was de CIA de eerste die de term ‘complottheorie’ in de wereld bracht en dat was juist daar zoveel mensen in de VS en daarbuiten volkomen terecht het officiële verhaal van de moord op Kennedy niet geloofden……. Overigens was Dulles ook verantwoordelijk voor het aanstellen van nazi-tuig in het naoorlogse Duitsland…… Juist dat, het verzadigd zijn van nazi’s in het lokale, regionale en landelijk bestuurde Duitsland, was één van de hoofdredenen voor de Baader Meinhof Gruppe om tekeer te gaan tegen de Duitse leiding van de samenleving.


 Voorbeelden van VS (en CIA) terreur:

‘VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII……..‘ Tot het jaar 2000, deze eeuw zijn er intussen ruim meer dan 2,5 miljoen moorden aan toe te voegen, moorden begaan door de VS en de NAVO (waar deze terreurorganisatie altijd onder militair opperbevel stond en staat van de VS…)….

‘VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen……….‘

‘List of wars involving the United States‘

JFK de moord: de macht van de geheime diensten gecombineerd met die van het militair-industrieel complex

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Het volgende artikel geschreven door Ray McGovern was nog niet gepubliceerd of Trump beloofde ook de rest van de JFK documenten vrij te geven, terwijl hij eerder onder druk van de CIA en NSA 300 pagina’s achterhield.

Daarmee was de kop van het McGovern artikel achterhaald, al moeten we eerst nog zien, of Trump kan leveren, immers de geheime diensten hebben hem bijna volledig in hun macht gekregen met de Russia-gate leugens*.

Verder een artikel met alweer toch een aantal nieuwe feiten, waaruit de conclusie bijna niet is te vermijden dat de CIA heeft meegewerkt aan de moord op J.F. Kennedy, uiteraard in opdracht en samenwerking met het militair-industrieel complex. Kennedy was van plan de aanwezige troepen uit Zuid-Vietnam terug te trekken, dat zou deze industrie een paar miljard dollar aan winst kosten…… Uiteraard was de mislukte invasie op Cuba een stevige plank aan de doodskist van Kennedy, men heeft hem nooit vergeven dat hij geen troepen stuurde naar Cuba om de gevangen genomen militairen te bevrijden, sterker nog: Kennedy ontsloeg de verantwoordelijken voor het Bay of Pigs incident…..

Truman, de ex-president plaatste een maand na de moord op Kennedy een artikel in de Washington Post, waarin hij pleitte de macht van de CIA aan banden te leggen, dit werd niet herhaald in de late editie van deze krant en werd gemeden door de rest van de reguliere media in de VS, terwijl Truman NB de CIA had opgezet in 1947……….

Lees het volgende (verder) prima artikel:

The Deep State’s JFK Triumph Over Trump

October 30, 2017 at 9:27 am
Written by Ray McGovern

 Fifty-four years after President Kennedy’s assassination, the CIA and FBI demanded more time to decide what secrets to keep hiding – and a chastened President Trump bowed to their power, observes ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.
(CN) — It was summer 1963 when a senior official of CIA’s operations directorate treated our Junior Officer Trainee (JOT) class to an unbridled rant against President John F. Kennedy. He accused JFK, among other things, of rank cowardice in refusing to send U.S. armed forces to bail out Cuban rebels pinned down during the CIA-launched invasion at the Bay of Pigs, blowing the chance to drive Cuba’s Communist leader Fidel Castro from power.
It seemed beyond odd that a CIA official would voice such scathing criticism of a sitting President at a training course for those selected to be CIA’s future leaders. I remember thinking to myself, “This guy is unhinged; he would kill Kennedy, given the chance.”
Our special guest lecturer looked a lot like E. Howard Hunt, but more than a half-century later, I cannot be sure it was he. Our notes from such training/indoctrination were classified and kept under lock and key.
At the end of our JOT orientation, we budding Agency leaders had to make a basic choice between joining the directorate for substantive analysis or the operations directorate where case officers run spies and organize regime changes (in those days, we just called the process overthrowing governments).
I chose the analysis directorate and, once ensconced in the brand new headquarters building in Langley, Virginia, I found it strange that subway-style turnstiles prevented analysts from going to the “operations side of the house,” and vice versa. Truth be told, we were never one happy family.
I cannot speak for my fellow analysts in the early 1960s, but it never entered my mind that operatives on the other side of the turnstiles might be capable of assassinating a President – the very President whose challenge to do something for our country had brought many of us to Washington in the first place. But, barring the emergence of a courageous whistleblower-patriot like Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden, I do not expect to live long enough to learn precisely who orchestrated and carried out the assassination of JFK.
And yet, in a sense, those particulars seem less important than two main lessons learned: (1) If a President can face down intense domestic pressure from the power elite and turn toward peace with perceived foreign enemies, then anything is possible. The darkness of Kennedy’s murder should not obscure the light of that basic truth; and (2) There is ample evidence pointing to a state execution of a President willing to take huge risks for peace. While no post-Kennedy president can ignore that harsh reality, it remains possible that a future President with the vision and courage of JFK might beat the odds – particularly as the American Empire disintegrates and domestic discontent grows.
I do hope to be around next April after the 180-day extension for release of the remaining JFK documents. But – absent a gutsy whistleblower – I wouldn’t be surprised to see in April, a Washington Post banner headline much like the one that appeared Saturday: “JFK files: The promise of revelations derailed by CIA, FBI.”
The New Delay Is the Story
You might have thought that almost 54 years after Kennedy was murdered in the streets of Dallas – and after knowing for a quarter century the supposedly final deadline for releasing the JFK files – the CIA and FBI would not have needed a six-month extension to decide what secrets that they still must hide.
Journalist Caitlin Johnstone hits the nail on the head in pointing out that the biggest revelation from last week’s limited release of the JFK files is “the fact that the FBI and CIA still desperately need to keep secrets about something that happened 54 years ago.”
What was released on Oct. 26, was a tiny fraction of what had remained undisclosed in the National Archives. To find out why, one needs to have some appreciation of a 70-year-old American political tradition that might be called “fear of the spooks.”
That the CIA and FBI are still choosing what we should be allowed to see concerning who murdered John Kennedy may seem unusual, but there is hoary precedent for it. After JFK’s assassination on Nov. 22, 1963, the well-connected Allen Dulles, whom Kennedy had fired as CIA director after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, got himself appointed to the Warren Commission and took the lead in shaping the investigation of JFK’s murder.
By becoming de facto head of the Commission, Dulles was perfectly placed to protect himself and his associates, if any commissioners or investigators were tempted to question whether Dulles and the CIA played any role in killing Kennedy. When a few independent-minded journalists did succumb to that temptation, they were immediately branded – you guessed it – “conspiracy theorists.”
And so, the big question remains: Did Allen Dulles and other “cloak-and-dagger” CIA operatives have a hand in John Kennedy’s assassination and subsequent cover-up? In my view and the view of many more knowledgeable investigators, the best dissection of the evidence on the murder appears in James Douglass’s 2008 book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.
After updating and arraying the abundant evidence, and conducting still more interviews, Douglass concludes that the answer to the big question is Yes. Reading Douglass’s book today may help explain why so many records are still withheld from release, even in redacted form, and why, indeed, we may never see them in their entirety.
Truman: CIA a Frankenstein?
When Kennedy was assassinated, it must have occurred to former President Harry Truman, as it did to many others, that the disgraced Allen Dulles and his associates might have conspired to get rid of a President they felt was soft on Communism – and dismissive of the Deep State of that time. Not to mention their vengeful desire to retaliate for Kennedy’s response to the Bay of Pigs fiasco. (Firing Allen Dulles and other CIA paragons of the Deep State for that fiasco simply was not done.)
Exactly one month after John Kennedy was killed, the Washington Post published an op-ed by Harry Truman titled “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence.” The first sentence read, “I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency.”
Strangely, the op-ed appeared only in the Post’s early edition on Dec. 22, 1963. It was excised from that day’s later editions and, despite being authored by the President who was responsible for setting up the CIA in 1947, the all-too-relevant op-ed was ignored in all other major media.
Truman clearly believed that the spy agency had lurched off in what Truman thought were troubling directions. He began his op-ed by underscoring “the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency … and what I expected it to do.” It would be “charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source, and to have those reports reach me as President without Department ‘treatment’ or interpretations.”
Truman then moved quickly to one of the main things clearly bothering him. He wrote “the most important thing was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions.”
It was not difficult to see this as a reference to how one of the agency’s early directors, Allen Dulles, tried to trick President Kennedy into sending U.S. forces to rescue the group of invaders who had landed on the beach at the Bay of Pigs in April 1961 with no chance of success, absent the speedy commitment of U.S. air and ground support. The planned mouse-trapping of the then-novice President Kennedy had been underpinned by a rosy “analysis” showing how this pin-prick on the beach would lead to a popular uprising against Fidel Castro.
Wallowing in the Bay of Pigs
Arch-Establishment figure Allen Dulles was offended when young President Kennedy, on entering office, had the temerity to question the CIA’s Bay of Pigs plans, which had been set in motion under President Dwight Eisenhower. When Kennedy made it clear he would not approve the use of U.S. combat forces, Dulles set out, with supreme confidence, to give the President no choice except to send U.S. troops to the rescue.
Coffee-stained notes handwritten by Allen Dulles were discovered after his death and reported by historian Lucien S. Vandenbroucke. In his notes, Dulles explained that, “when the chips were down,” Kennedy would be forced by “the realities of the situation” to give whatever military support was necessary “rather than permit the enterprise to fail.”
The “enterprise” which Dulles said could not fail was, of course, the overthrow of Fidel Castro. After mounting several failed operations to assassinate Castro, this time Dulles meant to get his man, with little or no attention to how Castro’s patrons in Moscow might react eventually. (The next year, the Soviets agreed to install nuclear missiles in Cuba as a deterrent to future U.S. aggression, leading to the Cuban Missile Crisis).
In 1961, the reckless Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom then-Deputy Secretary of State George Ball later described as a “sewer of deceit,” relished any chance to confront the Soviet Union and give it, at least, a black eye. (One can still smell the odor from that sewer in many of the documents released last week.)
But Kennedy stuck to his guns, so to speak. A few months after the abortive invasion of Cuba — and his refusal to send the U.S. military to the rescue — Kennedy fired Dulles and his co-conspirators and told a friend that he wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.” Clearly, the outrage was mutual.
When JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters came out, the mainstream media had an allergic reaction and gave it almost no reviews. It is a safe bet, though, that Barack Obama was given a copy and that this might account in some degree for his continual deference – timorousness even – toward the CIA.
Could fear of the Deep State be largely why President Obama felt he had to leave the Cheney/Bush-anointed CIA torturers, kidnappers and black-prison wardens in place, instructing his first CIA chief, Leon Panetta, to become, in effect, the agency’s lawyer rather than take charge? Is this why Obama felt he could not fire his clumsily devious Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who had to apologize to Congress for giving “clearly erroneous” testimony under oath in March 2013? Does Obama’s fear account for his allowing then-National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander and counterparts in the FBI to continue to mislead the American people, even though the documents released by Edward Snowden showed them – as well as Clapper – to be lying about the government’s surveillance activities?
Is this why Obama fought tooth and nail to protect CIA Director John Brennan by trying to thwart publication of the comprehensive Senate Intelligence Committee investigation of CIA torture, which was
based on original Agency cables, emails, and headquarters memos? [See here and here.]
The Deep State Today
Many Americans cling to a comforting conviction that the Deep State is a fiction, at least in a “democracy” like the United States. References to the enduring powers of the security agencies and other key bureaucracies have been essentially banned by the mainstream media, which many other suspicious Americans have come to see as just one more appendage of the Deep State.
But occasionally the reality of how power works pokes through in some unguarded remark by a Washington insider, someone like Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, the Senate Minority Leader with 36 years of experience in Congress. As Senate Minority Leader, he also is an ex officio member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is supposed to oversee the intelligence agencies.
During a Jan. 3, 2017 interview with MSNBC’S Rachel Maddow, Schumer told Maddow nonchalantly about the dangers awaiting President-elect Donald Trump if he kept on “taking on the intelligence community.” She and Schumer were discussing Trump’s sharp tweeting regarding U.S. intelligence and evidence of “Russian hacking” (which both Schumer and Maddow treat as flat fact).
Schumer said: “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you. So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this.”
Three days after that interview, President Obama’s intelligence chiefs released a nearly evidence-free “assessment” claiming that the Kremlin engaged in a covert operation to put Trump into office, fueling a “scandal” that has hobbled Trump’s presidency. On Monday, Russia-gate special prosecutor Robert Mueller indicted Trump’s one-time campaign manager Paul Manafort on unrelated money laundering, tax and foreign lobbying charges, apparently in the hope that Manafort will provide incriminating evidence against Trump.
So, President Trump has been in office long enough to have learned how the game is played and the “six ways from Sunday” that the intelligence community has for “getting back at you.” He appears to be as intimidated as was President Obama.
Trump’s awkward acquiescence in the Deep State’s last-minute foot-dragging regarding release of the JFK files is simply the most recent sign that he, too, is under the thumb of what the Soviets used to call “the organs of state security.”
Ray McGovern works with the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. During his 27-year career at CIA, he prepared the President’s Daily Brief for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and conducted the one-on-one morning briefings from 1981 to 1985. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

By Ray McGovern / Republished with permission / Consortium News / Report a typo

===============================================

* Zie o.a.: ‘Walls Closing in on Russiagate Conspiracy Theorists: Evidence Mounts That DNC Emails Provided to WikiLeaks By Inside Source‘ en: ‘WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Drops Russiagate Shell!!!‘ (video).

Zie ook: ‘Martin Luther King jr. vermoord door de overheid, aldus rechter……..‘

en: ‘J.F. Kennedy vermoord door Lyndon Johnson en z’n maten in misdaad, geheime diensten en politiek…..‘

en: ‘Georganiseerde misdaad en overheid, wat is het verschil tussen die twee? Een uiterst hilarische lezing van Michael Parenti over de moord op JFK!‘

en: ‘Newsweek erkent ‘false flag’ operatie van de VS tegen de Sovjet Unie……‘

en: ‘Kabinet ‘wil kunnen hacken’, zonder daar melding van te maken………. Hoe bedoelt u, ‘politiestaat??’‘

Zie ook de volgende links, die weliswaar niets met Kennedy te maken hebben maar die wel aangeven hoe groot de macht de reguliere VS media en vooral de geheime diensten hebben, iets dat weer eens goed duidelijk werd door de leugens over ‘Russiagate’ (alleen dat woord is al een leugen op zich en werd voor het eerst gebruikt voor de Russische oligarchen die eind 90er jaren hun geld witwasten in het westen):
‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..‘ (een vervolg op het bovenstaande bericht)

en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election‘

en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information‘

en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election‘

en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media‘

en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence‘

en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..‘

en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump‘

en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media‘

en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence‘

en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’‘

en: ‘New York Times met schaamteloze anti-Russische propaganda en ‘fake news….’‘

en: ‘BBC World Service: Rusland heeft VS verkiezingen gemanipuleerd……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

en: ‘Hoe Clinton en haar team de wereld op scherp hebben gezet >> Did Hillary Scapegoat Russia to Save Her Campaign?‘

en: ‘Brekend nieuws: door Rusland betaalde reclames van Shell, Calvé pindakaas, AH boerenkool en Hema worst >> doel Rutte 3 ten val te brengen!!!‘

PS: Kennedy en dan met name zijn broer Robert gingen ook behoorlijk tekeer tegen de maffia en volgens een aantal deskundigen zou de maffia hebben samengewerkt met de geheime dienst. Lee Harvey Oswald, die Kennedy als zou hebben vermoord, werd door Jack Ruby doodgeschoten, deze zou lid van de maffia zijn geweest of daar hechte banden mee hebben gehad………

WOII >> geallieerden waren wel op de hoogte van de nazi-Duitse doodskampen!!! Collaboratie van de VS en GB met de nazi’s…….

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Op 5 mei ontving ik een artikel van Information Clearing House (ICH) over de rol van de VS en GB tijdens WOII en dan m.n. de wetenschap bij de geallieerden over de doodskampen van nazi-Duitsland……

Na decennialange weigering, heeft de VN eindelijk het archief vrijgegeven van een oorlogsmisdaden commissie die de Europese archieven over de holocaust door de nazi’s tijdens WOII onderzocht. Londen en Washington hebben het vrijgeven van dit archief jarenlang proberen tegen te houden.

Niet zo vreemd als je bedenkt dat uit de vrijgegeven documenten blijkt dat er een geheime band bestond tussen de regeringen van de VS en Groot-Brittannië met de leiders van nazi-Duitsland……..

Uit de documenten blijkt verder dat de geallieerden al ver voor het eind van WOII op de hoogte waren van de nazi-vernietigingskampen, iets dat men na die oorlog altijd ontkende……

Voorts werpen de documenten meer licht op de weigering van de geallieerden een front in het westen te openen, zodat de Russen enigszins konden worden ontzet. Niet zo vreemd, daar men de ‘communisten’ weliswaar zag als partner in de strijd tegen de nazi’s, maar men een bijna even grondige afkeer had van de zogenaamd communistische Sovjet Unie…….

Ook nog eens aandacht voor de goede banden van VS multinationals met nazi-Duitsland, waar deze bedrijven fiks hadden geïnvesteerd in o.a. IG Farben, de fabrikant van Zyklon B, het gas waarmee de joden werden vermoord. Firma’s als Ford, IBM (niet genoemd in het artikel), ITT (speelde later een rol in de smerige CIA staatsgreep tegen het Chileense bewind van Allende op 11 september 1973), GM en Du Pont investeerden zwaar in Duitse bedrijven als het hiervoor genoemde IG Farben (waar ook nazi-prins Bernhard, voor werkte, Bernhard, de zelf gedroomde Nederlandse stadhouder van Hitler…), Krupp Stahl en Daimler……..

Verder kan u lezen over de inspanningen van de geallieerden na WOII, om nazi’s Duitsland uit te smokkelen.

De schrijver ziet terecht een overeenkomst met de huidige tijd, waarin Rusland wordt gedemoniseerd, terwijl de NAVO agressief aan haar grens staat…..

Lezen mensen! U kunt desgewenst onder het ICH artikel klikken voor een ‘Dutch vertaling’:

The Deep History of US, Britain’s Never-Ending Cold War On Russia
By Finian Cunningham

May 04, 2017 “Information Clearing House” – After decades of delaying, the United Nations finally released archives from the Second World War-era war crimes commission investigating the Nazi Holocaust. The source of those archives on Nazi war crimes were Western governments, including those in exile at the time of the war, such as the Belgian, Polish and Czechoslovakian. The time period covered is 1943-1949. Washington and London had long sought to halt the release. Why?

Notably, the landmark publication of the files last month was given scant Western media coverage. Surprisingly, perhaps, because the story that can be gleaned from the documents tells of a hidden history of the Second World War, namely the systematic collusion between the American and British governments and the Nazi Third Reich.

As a report in Deutsche Welle remarked on the released archives: «The files make clear that [Western] Allied forces knew more about the Nazi concentration camp system before the end of the war than has generally been thought».

This revelation points to more than just «knowledge» among the Western allies of Nazi-era crimes; it points more damningly to state collusion. This would also explain why Washington and London have been reluctant to make the UN war crimes files publicly available.

There has long been a controversial debate among Western nations about why the US and Britain in particular did not do more to bomb the Nazi infrastructure of death camps and railroads. Washington and London have often made the claim that they did know the full extent of the horror being perpetrated by the Nazis until the very end of the war when extermination centers such as at Auschwitz and Treblinka were liberated – by the Soviet Red Army, it should be noted too.

However, what the latest release of UN Holocaust files shows is that Washington and London were indeed well aware of the Nazi Final Solution in which millions of European Jews and Slavic people were being systematically worked to death or exterminated in gas chambers. So the question again is: why did the US and Britain not direct more of their aerial bombing campaign to destroy the Nazi infrastructure?

One possible answer is that these Western allies had a callous disregard for the Nazi victims. Washington and London establishments were themselves accused of harboring antisemitic prejudices, as can be seen from the scandals when both these governments spurned thousands of European Jewish refugees during the Second World War, in effect sending many of them to their deaths under the Nazi regime.

Not excluding the above factor of Western racist insouciance, there is a second more disturbing factor. That the Western governments, or at least powerful sections, were loath to hamper the Nazi war effort against the Soviet Union. Notwithstanding that the Soviet Union was a nominal «ally» of the West for the defeat of Nazi Germany.

This perspective harks to a radically different conception of the Second World War in contrast to that narrated in official Western versions. In this alternative historical account, the rise of the Nazi Third Reich was deliberately fomented by American and British rulers as a bulwark in Europe against the spread of communism. Adolf Hitler’s rabid anti-Semitism was matched only by his detest of Marxism and the Slavic people of the Soviet Union. In the Nazi ideology, they were all «Untermenschen» (subhumans) to be exterminated in a «Final Solution».

So, when Nazi Germany was attacking the Soviet Union and carrying out its Final Solution from June 1941 until late 1944, little wonder then that the US and Britain showed a curious reluctance to commit their military forces fully to open up a Western Front. The Western allies were evidently content to see the Nazi war machine doing what it was originally intended to do: to destroy the primary enemy to Western capitalism as represented by the Soviet Union. This is not to say that all American and British political leaders shared or were even aware of this tacit strategic vision. Leaders like President Franklin Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill appeared to be genuinely committed to defeating Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, their individual views must be set against a background of systematic collusion between powerful Western corporate interests and Nazi Germany.

As American author David Talbot documented in his book, The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America’s Secret Government (2015), there were massive financial links between Wall Street and the Third Reich, going back several years before the outbreak of the Second World War.

Allen Dulles, who worked for the Wall Street law firm Sullivan and Cromwell and who later headed up the American Central Intelligence Agency, was a key player in the linkage between US capital and German industry. American industrial giants, such as Ford, GM, ITT and Du Pont were invested heavily in German industrial counterparts like IG Farben (manufacturer of Zyklon B, the poisonous gas used in the Holocaust), Krupp Steel and Daimler. American capital, as well as British, was thus integrated into the Nazi war machine and the latter’s dependence on the system of slave labor as provided by the Final Solution.

This would explain why the Western allies did so little to disrupt the Nazi infrastructure with their undoubted formidable aerial bombing capacity. Far more damning than mere inertia or indifference owing to racist prejudice towards the Nazi victims, what emerges is that the Americans and British capitalist elite were invested in the Third Reich. Mainly for the purpose of eliminating the Soviet Union and any kind of genuinely socialist global movement. Bombing Nazi infrastructure would have been tantamount to deleting Western assets.

To this end, as the war was drawing to a close and the Soviet Union looked poised to roll up the Third Reich singlehandedly, the Americans and British belatedly stepped up their war efforts from western and southern Europe. The goal was one of salvaging Western assets remaining in the Nazi regime. Allen Dulles, the director of the-soon-to-be-formed American Central Intelligence Agency, extricated top Nazis and their gold looted from Europe in secret surrender deals known as Operation Sunrise. Britain’s military intelligence MI6 was also involved in the clandestine American effort to salvage Nazi assets via ratlines. The bad faith on display to the Soviet «allies» heralded the chill of the ensuing Cold War that immediately followed the Second World War.

Significant and damning testimony of what was going down was given recently in a BBC interview by Ben Ferencz, the most senior surviving US prosecutor from the Nuremberg trials. At age 98, Ferencz was still able to lucidly recall how scores of Nazi war criminals were let off the hook by the American and British authorities. Ferencz cited US General George Patton who remarked just before the final surrender of the Third Reich in early May 1945, as saying: «We’re fighting the wrong enemy». Patton’s candid expression of deeper animosity towards the Soviet Union than towards Nazi Germany was consistent with how the US and British ruling class had been colluding with Hitler’s Third Reich in a geo-strategic war against the Soviet Union and worker-led socialist movements arising across Europe and America.

In other words, the Cold War which the US and Britain embarked on after 1945 was but a continuation of hostile policy towards Moscow that was already underway well before the Second World War erupted in 1939 in the form of a build up of Nazi Germany. For various reasons, it became expedient for the Western powers to liquidate the Nazi war machine, along with the Soviet Union. But as can be seen, the Western assets residing in the Nazi machine were recycled into American and British Cold War posture against the Soviet Union. It is a truly damning legacy that American and British military intelligence agencies were consolidated and financed by Nazi crimes.

The recent release of UN Holocaust files – in spite of American and British prevarication over many years – add more evidence to the historical analysis that these Western powers were deeply complicit in the monumental crimes of the Nazi Third Reich. They knew about these crimes because they had helped facilitate them. And the complicity stemmed from Western hostility towards Russia as a perceived geopolitical rival.

This is not a mere historical academic exercise. Western complicity with Nazi Germany also finds a corollary in the present-day ongoing hostility from Washington, Britain and their NATO allies towards Moscow. The relentless build up of NATO offensive forces around Russia’s borders, the endless Russophobia in Western propagandistic news media, the economic blockade in the form of sanctions based on tenuous claims, are all deeply rooted in history.

The West’s Cold War towards Moscow preceded the Second World War, continued after the defeat of Nazi Germany and persists to this day regardless of the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists. Why? Because Russia is a perceived rival to Anglo-American capitalist hegemony, as is China or any other emerging power that undermines that desired unipolar hegemony.

American-British collusion with Nazi Germany finds its modern-day manifestation in NATO collusion with the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine and jihadist terror groups dispatched in proxy wars against Russian interests in Syria and elsewhere. The players may change over time, but the root pathology is American-British capitalism and its hegemonic addiction.

The never-ending Cold War will only end when Anglo-American capitalism is finally defeated and replaced by a genuinely more democratic system.

This article was first published by SCF –

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

==================

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: Ferencz en D. Talbot. Heb ook het label ‘Bayer’ toegevoegd, de gentech gifmenger maakte tijdens WOII gebruik van concentratiekampgevangenen voor medicijnproeven. Gegarandeerd dat ook in dat bedrijf ‘westers kapitaal’ werd geïnvesteerd……

EU van meet af aan een VS product, reden te meer de EU vaarwel te zeggen!

Posted on by Telmo Claro

In tegenstelling tot wat algemeen wordt aangenomen, was de VS vanaf het begin een groot voorstander van een verenigd Europa.

Obama mengde zich bij zijn bezoek aan Groot-Brittannië totaal onterecht in binnenlandse aangelegenheden, hij had zelfs het gore lef, de Britten voor te houden, dat zij tegen een ‘Brexit’ moesten stemmen. Journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard schreef daarop in The Telegraph een artikel over de bemoeienis van de VS met de EU en met de vorming van dit bondgenootschap.

Jean Monnet, een Frans econoom zou één van de stichters zijn van de EU, echter hij kreeg veel van zijn plannen al mee, toen hij tijdens de oorlog werkte voor president Roosevelt. Ook Robert Schuman, een Franse minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, wordt door velen als één van de EU stichters gezien. Echter ‘De Schumanverklaring‘ van 9 mei 1950 werd opgetuigd in Washington, m.n. door minister van BuZA Dean Achesan. Het begon allemaal (de EU, Ap) in Washington, zo verklaarde de secretaris van Schuman later.

Overigens heeft de VS al vlak na de oorlog Frankrijk op het hart gebonden overeenstemming te bereiken met Duitsland, dit resulteerde uiteindelijk zelfs in de dreiging van de VS, dat de Marshallhulp aan Frankrijk zou worden stopgezet, als de Fransen niet snel zouden aanschuiven……..

Zoals bekend: de verhoudingen van Frankrijk met de VS waren onder de Gaulle (destijds de Franse president), op z’n zachtst gezegd niet best. De Gaulle verdacht Monnet er zelfs van een VS spion te zijn, wat hij volgens Evans-Pritchard eigenlijk ook was…….

De CIA steunde in het geheim een aantal decennia financieel de vorming en bestendiging van de EU….. Dit gebeurde onder meer via de ‘American Committee for a United Europe’ (ACUE), o.l.v. generaal William J. Donovan, stroomde er geld naar de EU, in 1958 was 53,5% van de EU fondsen afkomstig van ACUE. In de top van ACUE hadden o.a. CIA directeuren W.B. Smith en A. Dulles zitting, verder waren een aantal oude OSS (voorloper CIA) agenten werkzaam binnen ACUE, agenten die dan weer wel, dan weer niet voor de CIA werkten.

Zoals we weten wordt de VS heden ten dage geregeerd door de grote bedrijven, waarvan het militair-industrieel complex wel de machtigste is. Met de TTIP kunnen deze bedrijven ook hier de macht overnemen, hoewel grote bedrijven nu al veel invloed hebben, zowel binnen de afzonderlijke EU landen, als binnen het EU parlement……….. Lullig genoeg worden we zowel op landelijk, als op EU niveau geregeerd door politici die voor een fiks deel zelf lobbyen voor bedrijven, waarbij een aantal van deze politici daar bijna openlijk blijk van geven………

Evans-Pritchard citeert o.a. uit een lijvig onderzoek en uit vrijgekomen geheime stukken van het VS ministerie van BuZa.

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het voorgaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, alleen de labels: CIA, Frankrijk, lobbyisten, militair-industrieel complex, Roosevelt, TTIP en VS buitenlands beleid, geven extra berichten.

Bron o.a. Information Clearing House.