Pro-Zionism: Defending the Indefensible

This article responds to a March 15 Los Angeles Times Judea Pearl one headlined: "Is anti-Zionism hate?" Pearl teaches computer science at UCLA, is the father of slain journalist Daniel Pearl, and president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation. It was "formed....to continue Danny's mission and to address the root causes of this tragedy in the spirit" of the man it represents, including "uncompromised objectivity and integrity....and respect for people of all cultures...."

Some of its honorary board member belie this purpose:

• former president Bill Clinton, an unindicted war criminal and backer of neoliberal plunder;
• Elie Wiesel, a shameless self-promoter, "Holocaust" exploiter, and apologist for the most outrageous Israeli crimes;
• Jordan's Queen Noor, wife of King Abdullah II, who, like his father Hussein, rules with dictatorial police state powers; and
• Christiane Amanpour and Ted Koppel, two notables in the corporate media who never let facts conflict with their views and support for the powerful.

Pearl calls anti-Zionism "hate more dangerous than anti-Semitism, threatening lives and peace in the Middle East." Zionism is precisely the opposite as numerous Jewish writers, including this one, have addressed.

In his book "Overcoming Zionism," Joel Kovel explained how it fosters "imperialist expansion and militarism (with) signs of the fascist malignancy;" that it turned Israel "into a machine for the manufacture of human rights abuses" led by terrorists posing as democrats. Kovel's book and his work got him fired from the Bard College faculty effective July 1 when his current contract expires - for daring to criticize Israel, its Zionist ideology, state-sponsored terror, and decades of lawlessness and egregious behavior.

Kovel expressed outrage that institutions like Bard aren't bothered; that they grant Israel impunity, suppress dissent, then marginalize, punish, and remove the "heretics," ones like Kovel who honorably and courageously write truths.

Pearl railed about a UCLA Center for Near East Studies symposium invitation to "four longtime Israel bashers" so they could attack Zionism's legitimacy and "its vision of a two-state solution...." - a scheme to consign Palestinians to isolated cantons and steal their most valuable land.

He equates legitimate Israeli criticism and anti-Zionism with "criminaliz(ing) Israel's existence, distort(ing) its motives and malign(ing) its character, its birth, even its conception." He cites "Jewish leaders (condemning) this hate-fest as a dangerous invitation to anti-Semitic hysteria" even though one has nothing to do with the other and conflating them masks the real issue - Zionism's corrosive effects and the myths on which it's based.

Ones Pearl ignores in stating "Anti-Zionism rejects the very notion that Jews are a nation - a collective bonded by a common history - and, accordingly denies Jews the right to self-determination in their historical birthplace. It seeks the dismantling of the Jewish nation-state: Israel, (what it) 'grants' to other historically bonded collectives (e.g. French, Spanish, Palestinians), the right to nationhood...."

Pearl can't accept the hard facts that Tel Aviv University Professor Shlomo Zand documented in his important 2008 book: "When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?" It exposes biblical nonsense comprising core Zionist beliefs about Jews:

• that ancient Romans expelled them;
• their exodus from Egypt, then left to wander the earth rootless;
• enslaved, oppressed, and tormented for centuries; and
• the myth that God bestowed a "Greater Israel" for Jews alone - "A land without people for a people without land."

According to Israeli journalist Tom Segev and others:

• there never was a Jewish people, just a Jewish religion;
• there was no exile, therefore no return, and much of the Jewish Diaspora was voluntary; and
• the story was a Zionist invention, a conspiracy to justify a future Jewish state, and now vilify Palestinian self-determination as a plot to destroy it.

With regard to other "bonded collectives," France, Spain, America and other states are nationalities, not religions. Israel is a Jewish state with rights for Jews alone. They matter. Others don't, and therein lies the difference. Palestinians, in contrast, are occupied, impoverished, oppressed, driven from their land, vilified for being Muslims, and victimized by slow-motion genocide to destroy them and any hope for self-determination.

"Are Jews a nation," asks Pearl? "Some philosophers would argue Jews are a nation first and religion second." He cites the usual mythology:

• the Exodus and return to the "promised land before they received the Torah at Mt. Sinai;"
• "the unshaken conviction in their eventual repatriation to (their) birthplace (since) the Roman expulsion;" and
• their "shared history, not religion (as) the primary uniting force behind the secular, multiethnic society of Israel" - favoring Jews alone in a quasi secular/religious state where practicing another one is dangerous.

The "Jewish identity today feed(s) on Jewish history (more precisely folklore and myths) and its natural derivatives -

• the state of Israel" despite its illegitimate birth and mythological roots;
• "its struggle for survival" in spite of being the world's fourth most powerful military, nuclear-armed; with no enemies except the ones it makes; and having a history of aggressive wars; violence over conciliation; confrontation, not diplomacy; and claiming self-defense as justification when there is none;
• "its cultural and scientific achievements," much of the latter involving militarism and hard line security; and
• "its relentless drive for peace."

Pearl like most others can't accept the fact that Israel disdains peace, thrives on violence, and needs it as justification. The very notion of peace and conflict resolution terrifies it. What prime minister Yitzhak Shamir once admitted about Israel's 1982 Lebanon war - that there was "terrible danger....not so much a military one as a political one" so a pretext was invented to attack when no threat or justification existed.

It took 18,000 lives and left South Lebanon occupied until Israel Defense Forces withdrew in May 2000, except for the 25 square km Shebaa Farms area illegally retained to this day.

Yet Pearl insists that "anti-Zionism targets the most vulnerable part of the Jewish people, namely, the Jewish population of Israel, whose physical safety and personal dignity depend crucially on maintaining Israel's sovereignty. Put bluntly, the anti-Zionist 'plan' to do away with Israel condemns 5.5 million human beings, mostly refugees or children of refugees, to eternal defenselessness in a region where genocidal designs are not uncommon."

He adds that "anti-Zionist rhetoric (shows) academic sophistication and social acceptance in certain extreme yet vocal circles. (It's also) a stab in the back to the Israeli peace camp (and) gives credence (to) the hidden agenda of every Palestinian (for) the eventual elimination of Israel."

Now some facts misrepresented, distorted, or unstated by Pearl and other like-minded apologists:

• There never was nor is there now an "Israeli peace camp," as explained above.
• Israel's sovereignty isn't the issue. It exists, is accepted, and anti-Zionists don't dispute it. Further, since at least the late 1980s, Palestinian leaders (including Arafat and Hamas) have been willing to extend recognition. But Israel rejects all peace and reconciliation overtures, yet the dominant media and Zionists won't mention it.
• Palestinians and other Arabs don't target Israel and haven't since the 1973 war. However, they justifiably defend themselves when attacked as international law allows.
• Anti-Zionists, like this writer, have no plan or desire to destroy Israel, harm its people, or render them defenseless. Demanded, however, is that Israel behave, act civilized, practice the democracy it preaches, observe international and its own laws, and be held fully accountable when it doesn't, including its leaders for their crimes of war and against humanity to deter future ones from committing similar violations.
• Israel alone menaces Palestinians and other regional states, including Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. Those nations, nor any others, threaten Israel, yet again media and Zionist propaganda say otherwise.
• Zionist ideology is extremist, undemocratic, and hateful. It claims Jewish supremacy, specialness, and uniqueness - God's "chosen people." It harms Jews and non-Jews alike. Former Israeli scholar, critic, and life-long human rights activist, Israel Shahak (1933 - 2001), explained the dangers of Jewish chauvinism, religious fanaticism, and its influence on America's polity.

He called the notion of self-hating Jews "nonsensical" and explained the definition of a Jew:

...."if either their mother, grandmother, great-grandmother (or) great-great-grandmother were Jewesses by religion; or if the person (converted) to Judaism in a way satisfactory to the Israeli authorities, and on condition that the person has not converted from Judaism to another religion." According to the Talmud and post-Talmudic rabbinic law, "conversion (must be) performed by authorized rabbis in a proper manner." For females, it entails an outlandish ritual - "their inspection by three rabbis while naked in a 'bath of purification' " to confirm it.

Shahak wrote extensively on how Israel discriminates in favor of Jews in most every aspect of life, including the three he called most important - "residency rights, the right to work (and to have) equality before the law."

Zionist ideology demeans non-Jews and denies them equal rights in Israel. A body of law enforces it - to legally discriminate against non-Jewish Israeli citizens (for their religion) and Palestinians in the Territories, something unimaginable in all developed states and most others on every continent.

Shahak stated: "The obvious intention of such discriminatory measures is to decrease the number of non-Jewish citizens of Israel (to affirm its existence as a) 'Jewish' state" quite hostile to and demeaning of other religious faiths.

This is the Zionist message and why growing numbers of Jews and many others oppose it. Supporting Zionism is repugnant, indefensible, and equivalent to defending cancer, a malignancy relentlessly destroying its host. It must be exposed, denounced, and once and for all expunged from the body politic. A CIA study suggested the alternative - that beyond 20 years, Israel won't survive in its present form.

The Agency predicts "an inexorable movement away from a two-state to a one-state solution, as the most viable model based on democratic principles of full equality that sheds the looming specter of colonial Apartheid while allowing for the return of the 1947/1948 and 1967 (Palestinian) refugees. The latter (is) the precondition for sustainable peace in the region."

According to international lawyer Franklin Lamb, "the handwriting....is on the wall....history will reject the colonial enterprise sooner or later."

The report also predicts the return of all Palestinian refugees to their homeland and the exodus of two million Israeli Jews to America in the next 15 years. They're fed up and want to leave. Omitted from the report, or at least unrevealed, is that short of an equitable resolution to the long-standing Palestinian conflict, Israel eventually will destroy itself. Nations that live by the sword, die by it, and Israel is no exception.

The alternative is peace and reconciliation, something Israel flatly rejects. Unless that changes, its very existence is at stake, what history teaches but Israel has yet to learn.

###

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

Military Escalation and Obama's "War on Terrorism"

Long considered the realm of "conspiracy buffs" The New York Times, citing anonymous "American government officials," have belatedly "discovered" that Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence agency (ISI) is aiding the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

That ISI operatives were reportedly involved in planning the 9/11 attacks, the ostensible reason for the 2001 U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan remains as they say, "off the table." Yet, as The History Commons reports, Operation Diamondback uncovered a 2001 plot jointly-run by ISI operatives and organized crime figures to illegally purchase weapons, including Stinger missiles and nuclear components, for the Taliban and al-Qaeda. According to The History Commons, citing The Washington Post and MSNBC:

Informant Randy Glass plays a key role in the sting, and has thirteen felony fraud charges against him reduced as a result, serving only seven months in prison. Federal agents involved in the case later express puzzlement that Washington higher-ups did not make the case a higher priority, pointing out that bin Laden could have gotten a nuclear bomb if the deal was for real. Agents on the case complain that the FBI did not make the case a counterterrorism matter, which would have improved bureaucratic backing and opened access to FBI information and US intelligence from around the world. ("Sting Operation Exposes Al-Qaeda, ISI, and Drug Connections: Investigators Face Obstacles to Learn More," The History Commons, no date)

In 1999, ISI operative Rajaa Gulum Abbas is recorded telling Glass as he gestures towards the World Trade Center in New York during an earlier phase of Operation Diamondback, "those towers are coming down." Yet authorities fail to stop the plot and two years later, 3,000 people are murdered by terrorists in New York and Washington.

The appearance of these reports in the corporate media arrive as the United States prepares a "surge" of some 17,000 American troops into Afghanistan and as the Obama administration escalates CIA drone attacks inside Pakistan. On March 18, The New York Times reported that the Pentagon is contemplating "broadening the target area" to include "a major insurgent sanctuary in and around the city of Quetta."

Extending military operations into the Pakistani province of Baluchistan, with the potential for "surging" CIA paramilitary officers and Special Operations troops to "kill or capture" senior Taliban and al-Qaeda operatives represents a significant escalation of the conflict.

In a March 27 announcement outlining America's new regional strategy in the "Afpak theatre," President Obama vowed to send an additional 4,000 troops under cover of "training" recruits for the Afghan National Army. The Pentagon plans to raise the total strength of the Afghan army to 134,000 by 2011.

Echoing Bush administration pronouncements, Obama told diplomats and soldiers headed to Afghanistan, "I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan." Employing rhetoric designed to sell the war to a sceptical public, Obama went on to say: "Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al-Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the US homeland from its safe havens in Pakistan."

As I reported March 7, with a recently concluded agreement amongst Pakistani Taliban fighters and their Afghan counterparts, the prospects for a bloody spring offensive are a nettlesome reminder that U.S. regional plans are so many illusions soon to be cast to the four winds.

Orchestrated by Afghan Taliban chieftain Mullah Mohammed Omar in coordination with Baitullah Mehsud's Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), North Waziristan commander Hafiz Gul Bahadur and South Waziristan "emir" Maulvi Nazeer--grouped under the banner of the Shura Ittihad-ul-Mujahideen (Council of United Holy Warriors, SIM)--the United States and their NATO allies face the prospect of ferocious multi-front attacks.

According to the Times, ISI support "consists of money, military supplies and strategic planning guidance to Taliban commanders." Despite billions of dollars in military assistance to the corrupt Musharraf regime and the equally venal Zardari administration, Pakistan's search for "strategic depth" against their geopolitical rival India has only resulted in a furtherance of ISI/Army connivance with the Islamist far-right. The Times avers:

"Support for the Taliban, as well as other militant groups, is coordinated by operatives inside the shadowy S Wing of Pakistan's spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the officials said. There is even evidence that ISI operatives meet regularly with Taliban commanders to discuss whether to intensify or scale back violence before the Afghan elections. (Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt, "Afghan Strikes by Taliban Get Pakistan Help, U.S. Aides Say," The New York Times, March 26, 2009)

Citing "electronic surveillance and trusted informants," anonymous Pakistani officials have denied these ties "were strengthening the insurgency." While publicly denying state links to Islamist insurgents, the Army and ISI have historical ties--as does the CIA--to organizations such as the Taliban and the Afghan-Arab database of disposable Western intelligence assets known as al-Qaeda.

As readers of Antifascist Calling and websites such as Global Research and the World Socialist Web Site are well aware, for three decades the United States has pursued a ruthless policy in pursuit of its own narrow interests. Far from being concerned with the economic and social well-being of the people of Central- and South Asia, America's imperialist project is designed solely for regional military domination and resource extraction vis-à-vis their geopolitical rivals Russia and China.

Indeed, since the fall of Kabul's socialist government, the United States has singlemindedly pursued policies to control the vast petrochemical resources of Eurasia.

As researcher and analyst Michel Chossudovsky pointed out, anticipating the current political demonization of the Pakistani people as a selling-point to secure the giant oil and natural gas reserves of Central Asia for American corporations,

"Demonization serves geopolitical and economic objectives. Likewise, the campaign against "Islamic terrorism" (which is supported covertly by US intelligence) supports the conquest of oil wealth. The term "Islamo-fascism," serves to degrade the policies, institutions, values and social fabric of Muslim countries, while also upholding the tenets of "Western democracy" and the "free market" as the only alternative for these countries.

The US led war in the broader Middle East-Central Asian region consists in gaining control over more than sixty percent of the world's reserves of oil and natural gas. The Anglo-American oil giants also seek to gain control over oil and gas pipeline routes out of the region. ...

The ultimate objective, combining military action, covert intelligence operations and war propaganda, is to break down the national fabric and transform sovereign countries into open economic territories, where natural resources can be plundered and confiscated under "free market" supervision. This control also extends to strategic oil and gas pipeline corridors (e.g. Afghanistan)." ("The 'Demonization' of Muslims and the Battle for Oil," Global Research, January 4, 2007)

All of the features described above are in play today. That media outlets such as The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal have discovered ISI-Taliban-al-Qaeda "connections"--while glossing over and suppressing--America's operational links to these same terrorist and narcotrafficking networks, is indicative of the dire straits faced by an economically depleted and politically bankrupt empire.

Drawing (false) distinctions amongst the welter of jihadist groups that American and Pakistan have cultivated since the 1980s, Obama's Director of National Intelligence, retired admiral Dennis Blair, told Congress that the CIA's counterparts in crime, the ISI, believe there are some that "have to be hit and that we should cooperate on hitting, and there are others they think don't constitute as much of a threat to them and that they think are best left alone."

While pursuing Mehsud and others who threaten the state's writ, the Army has been loathe to run to ground proxies such as Jalaluddin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, veteran narcotrafficking jihadists' who were key Pakistani-linked commanders during the anti-Soviet jihad. Considered "strategic assets" by ISI, Haqqani and Hekmatyar's networks direct fire inside Afghanistan and are therefore considered candidates "best left alone" in Blair's laconic phrase.

However, according to anonymous officials it was none other than the Haqqani network, in collusion with ISI operatives who helped plan last summer's Indian Embassy bombing in Kabul that killed 54 and wounded dozens of others.

While American and European officials are hell-bent on finding (or manufacturing) "good Taliban" with whom they can negotiate a climb down, Pentagon analysts are far-less sanguine of the prospects.

A March 1, 2009 presentation for deploying troops prepared by the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) G-2 and the TRADOC Intelligence Support Activity (TRISA), posted by the intelligence and security website Cryptome, lays out the formidable problems posed by the insurgency--and the extent of Pakistani involvement. Under the heading, "Insurgent Syndicate Characteristics," TRISA analysts aver:

The nature of the enemy in AF HAS NOT CHANGED:

* This enemy is primarily Pashtun in nature and Sunni Muslim (Wahhabi and Deobandi).

* This enemy is funded by the drug economy and Gulf Arab money (for religious reasons).

* This enemy is trained and assisted by ISID or ISID affiliated elements (Kashmiris/HuJI/LeT/HuM, with some Uzbeks.

* They are assisted by AQ [al-Qaeda] in terms of funding, foreign fighters, and other assistance.

* Logistics is the Achilles heel of ISAF operations in AF. Pak control of FATA and the Torkhum Gate. ("HB 9 Paramilitary Terrorist Insurgent Groups: Afghanistan," U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, March 1, 2009, p. 5)

As if to drive home the point that "logistics is the Achilles heel" of U.S. and NATO operations in Afghanistan, Dawn reported March 29 that "hundreds of suspected Taliban armed with rockets and Kalashnikovs entered the Farhad terminal at about 2am and set on fire four vehicles, three cranes, a mini-truck and six power generators." The Al-Faisal terminal near Peshawar is a major jump-off point supplying NATO troops in Afghanistan.

TRISA's "Threat Lay Down" (p. 7) estimates that some 60,000 insurgent fighters are currently arrayed against U.S. and NATO forces. Estimating Afghan Taliban strength at 30,000 fighters, fully half of the estimated number of insurgents are Pakistani. These include: TTP, 15,000; TNSM, 5,000; Lashkar-e-Toiba, 3,000; Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, 2,000.

With 2,000 Al-Qaeda commandos (Brigade 055) and smaller contingents drawn from the former Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and other Central Asian and Middle Eastern factions, it becomes clear that Pakistan's intelligence services, given continued support to "moderates" such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar as well as to terrorist outfits such as LET and LEJ are a major source of support behind the insurgency.

This is all the more remarkable considering that LET commandos, operating in close coordination with ISI and Dawood Ibrahim's organized crime-linked D Company carried out last November's attacks in Mumbai, whilst LEJ was reportedly behind the assault on Sri Lanka's national cricket team in Lahore earlier this month.

Significantly, TRISA analysts claim that amongst the "Warlord Militias" (p. 10) currently backing Hamid Karzai's government, their operations unsurprisingly, are also financed through "crime, narco-trafficking, smuggling, illegal taxation, including illegal road checkpoints for taxation." One might reasonably infer that U.S. operations amount to little more, despite the role of the narcotics trade on both sides of the "Afpak" divide, than a battle for control over lucrative drug manufacturing and smuggling routes.

Ironically enough, despite the grave threat to Pakistani citizens in Swat Valley, indeed throughout the entire country, the Zardari administration cut a deal last month with local TTP commander Maulana Fazlullah.

The sociopathic son-in-law of Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-i-Muhammadi (Movement for the Enforcement of Islamic Law, TNSM) leader Maulana Sufi Mohammed, a close ally of Mullah Omar, Fazlullah's criminal network has instituted a reign of terror in Swat under the banner of "Sharia law." Despite the truce, TTP militants continue to murder Swat residents and enhance the reach of various criminal enterprises, ranging from extortion, kidnapping and illegal logging through heroin processing for export.

Pakistani workers and farmers continue to pay a heavy price for the state's move to mollify the jihadist Frankenstein. For decades, having proven themselves politically useful when it comes to murdering leftists, trade union activists or uppity women and cultural workers, reactionary forces such as the TTP or the ever-pliant Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are a shadowy "third force" that can be counted on by "Military Inc." to "keep the rabble in line."

In this context, "holy warriors" linked to the TTP carried out a horrific suicide bombing inside a mosque packed with worshipers in the Khyber region on Friday, killing 50 people and wounding 158 others.

Dawn reported that the two-storey structure collapsed onto the heads of worshipers after a suicide bomber "jumped into the Friday congregation and blew himself up just when the prayers were about to begin."

Eyewitnesses told Dawn they believe the casualty figures are being under-reported by authorities and that upwards of 70 people may have been killed by the blast and the subsequent collapse of the mosque's ceiling.

The News reported Saturday that upwards of 76 people had been killed in the vicious blast, including the prayer leader, his brother, as well as truck drivers carrying goods to neighboring Afghanistan.

There were tragic scenes at the site of the explosion. Many of the dead were mutilated beyond recognition. Rescuers and grief-stricken relatives of the missing and the dead were collecting pieces of bodies in the hope of locating their near and dear ones. A goat killed by the blast was also lying near the destroyed mosque. ...

Meanwhile, some residents and injured belonging to the villages of Rekalay and Kufar Tangi said they saw aircraft flying above the area since Friday morning. They feared the blast at the mosque could have been caused by a missile fired by a US drone. (Daud Khattak & Nasrullah Afridi, "76 killed in Jamrud mosque bombing," The News, March 28, 2009)

While eyewitness accounts describe a suicide bomber as the party responsible for the horrendous attack, part and parcel of SIM's campaign to cut NATO supply lines into Afghanistan, America's escalating robot drone wars are a reminder of growing anti-American sentiment amongst Pakistanis who are the overwhelming victims of the CIA's death-from-above air campaign.

If the Swat truce is an indication of what Pakistani citizens will now face at the hands of Mehsud's TTP and their minions, the prospects for a "normal" life--short of smashing the medievalists' and their ISI handlers--are grim.

Even as CIA and Pakistani intelligence officials "are drawing up a fresh list of terrorist targets for Predator drone strikes along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border," The Wall Street Journal reports that ISI officials are "directly supporting the Taliban and other militants in Afghanistan, even as the U.S. targets those groups."

Indeed, as the Times avers, "when the Haqqani fighters need to stay a step ahead of American forces stalking them on the ground and in the air, they rely on moles within the spy agency to tip them off to allied missions planned against them."

An unspoken subtext to the Times and Journal reportage is the continued utilization of these terrorist networks--by the CIA and U.S. Special Operations Command--for covert war against Iran--even as the Obama administration seeks Tehran's assistance in battling the Taliban and al-Qaeda. As investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported last July in The New Yorker the Pentagon funded the narcotrafficker Baluchi-based Jundullah organization to attack security personnel inside Iran.

While an open secret in Washington, Obama's new product roll-out in the form of an ill-conceived plan to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat" al-Qaeda and the Taliban has everything to do with the construction of the $7.6 billion dollar "Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline that would cross western Afghanistan east of Herat and advance south through Taliban-controlled territory towards Pakistani Balochistan province," according to Asia Times. As the World Socialist Web Site points out,

Afghanistan and Pakistan stand at a nexus of pipeline and trade routes between the Middle East, Russia, China and the Indian subcontinent, and US domination of the countries would give it decisive influence over developments in trade and strategic relations between many of Eurasia's largest and fastest-growing economies. In particular, it would cement the US' ability to mount a blockade of oil supplies for China and India in the Indian Ocean. (Alex Lantier, "Obama announces escalation of war in Afghanistan, Pakistan," World Socialist Web Site, March 28, 2009)

And with the imperialist military project going off the rails in Afghanistan as the Taliban's spring offensive looms ever-larger on the horizon, the prospects for a deadly confrontation between nuclear-armed world powers over control of oil and gas will inevitably increase.

Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly and Global Research, an independent research and media group of writers, scholars, journalists and activists based in Montreal, his articles can be read on Dissident Voice, The Intelligence Daily, Pacific Free Press and the whistleblowing website Wikileaks. He is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military "Civil Disturbance" Planning, distributed by AK Press.

Tom Burghardt is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Tom Burghardt

From BCCI to ISI
The Saga of Entrapment Continues


.

Will U.S. financial woes lead to new world order?

By Adam Abrams

Is the U.S. about to lose its status as the dominant global superpower? Will the dollar collapse? If so, what would become the new global reserve currency and what would replace U.S. hegemony in a new world order?

American troops are currently stationed in over 150 countries around the world and have been actively engaged in combat since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan in 2001. The pretext for the invasion of Afghanistan was provided by the 9/11 attacks.

A second front in the U.S. “war on terror” was opened in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq. As well these military expenditures, the U.S. has an outstanding national debt of $10.8 trillion and rising.

Although U.S. President Barack Obama has outlined a timetable for complete U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq by 2011, he has ordered an increase of 17,000 more U.S. troops in Afghanistan. With no clear end in sight to U.S. military engagement and with the U.S. national debt growing at an accelerating rate, it seems reasonable to ask whether or not the U.S. might be irreversibly overextending itself.

What does “new world order” mean? There are two distinct variations. Both expressions - a new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power and the advent of a cryptocratic or totalitarian world government - have relevance.

The global geopolitical climate is changing rapidly and appears to be on the verge of a realignment. This has become more apparent since the start of the world financial crisis, which finds its roots in the U.S. economic downturn.

So how would a new world order emerge? It seems that the global population would only be willing to accept the implementation of a new world order, in either form, in the event of a major global crisis, such as the complete economic collapse of the United States of America.

The U.S. is at the heart of the global economy because the U.S. dollar is currently the reserve currency of the world. Oil, gold and all major commodities are measured in U.S. dollars. If the U.S. were to collapse in the same way that Iceland and Latvia already have, the whole world would be affected. A new world order would need to be formed that no longer relied on U.S. global hegemony.

Many experts believe that this is not only possible, but likely. According to Professor Willem Buiter, a former member of the Monetary Policy Committee who is now at the London School of Economics, "There will, before long ... be a global dumping of U.S. dollar assets, including U.S. government assets... The past eight years of imperial overstretch, hubris and domestic and international abuse of power on the part of the Bush administration has left the U.S. materially weakened financially, economically, politically and morally."

Other economic gurus agree. Peter Schiff, an American economic commentator and president of the stock brokerage firm Euro Pacific Capital Inc. was mocked by economist Art Laffer, when he accurately predicted, in 2006, that the U.S. housing market "bubble" would burst. Schiff now predicts that gold will climb to $2,000 per ounce in response to the U.S. dollar dropping "like a stone" and losing its status as the global reserve currency.

Schiff was also an economic adviser to Ron Paul during his 2008 presidential campaign. Paul has been articulating similar concerns regarding the U.S. financial system for over 30 years, and advocates the legitimization of gold and silver as currency, as well as the elimination of the U.S. Federal Reserve System. This he says, "will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy."

Paul sees the Federal Reserve as the main culprit in perpetuating and exacerbating the current U.S. financial crisis: "Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people." He has repeatedly introduced a bill to the U.S. Congress that would allow for the auditing of the Federal Reserve Board and provide transparency into its dealings, to no avail.

Meanwhile, the man who accurately predicted the stock market crash of 1987 and the collapse of the Soviet Union has an intriguing prediction that goes even further. Gerald Celente, the CEO of Trends Research Institute, has forecast that by 2012 there will be a revolution in the U.S., accompanied by food riots and tax rebellions.

Gerald Celente Predicts Economic Armageddon by 2012

Shocking that Fox would air this segment:
Fox Business: Gerald Celente Predicts Revolution 11/10/08

So, with this in mind, who or what could replace the United States as the world's dominant player?

One possibility is that the United Nations will take on the role of a global government. This theory seems to be supported in a speech by then-president George H. W. Bush before Congress on March 6, 1991, following the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

"...We can see a new world coming into view," said Bush. "A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a 'world order' in which 'the principles of justice and fair play ... protect the weak against the strong ...' A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations."

New World Order planned long ago



Until recently, the advent of a global government seemed unrealistic, and reserved for conspiracy theorists. But since the acknowledgement by then-president George W. Bush in September 2008 that the United States is indeed "in the midst of a serious financial crisis", there have been numerous calls for a "new world order" by global leaders and prominent intellectuals.

In January, Henry Kissinger told CNBC reporters that the current world economic crisis is a "great opportunity" for President Barack Obama to help form a "new world order."
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown actually began the call for a new world order before the acknowledgement of the current financial downturn.

Kissinger calls on Obama to create a New World Order



Speaking in June 2007, Brown said: "I believe it will be said of this age, the first decades of the 21st century, that out of the greatest restructuring of the global economy, perhaps even greater than the industrial revolution, a new world order was created."

The British leader has continued to press for a new world order since that speech. Even a few weeks ago he declared the need for a "global new deal."

"Britain and America may be separated by the thousands of miles of the Atlantic, but we are united by shared values that can never be broken. And as America stands at its own dawn of hope, I want that hope to be fulfilled through us all coming together to shape the 21st century as the first century of a truly global society."

Gordon Brown New World Order Speech




Could this "truly global society" be the same society that Bush Sr. spoke of, with the UN fulfilling "the historic vision of its founders"?

Truly global society:


It is certainly possible, but would be rather difficult to implement. The government of every nation in the world would either have to willingly surrender sovereignty to the United Nations or be forced into doing so by the use of military force. Both options are utterly improbable -unless an unpheaval on a massive scale resulted in a new-found willingness by the big players in the global arena to submit to an international body.

The only such event that seems even remotely likely is the end of Western global dominance and the transfer of global hegemony to the Eurasian powers. Perhaps it would not be a "global government", but a "new world order", with the central power of the world residing in Asia.

This seems to be the most realistic scenario, particularly as China is the largest creditor to the U.S. If the Chinese government decided to dump all of its U.S. dollars, the entire U.S. economy would collapse overnight.

But would China do that? The motivation would be two-fold; firstly, the U.S. Federal Reserve's "inflationary policies" (as described by Ron Paul) devalue the U.S. currency to the point that China no longer has an incentive to hold U.S. dollars, and secondly, China sees an opportunity to become the dominant player in the new world order.

Perhaps this is the scenario that Buiter envisions when he describes a "global dumping of U.S. dollar assets." If the Chinese government were to abandon the U.S. dollar it would certainly trigger such a "dumping" of U.S. assets.

In fact, just last week China's premier hinted that Beijing is concerned about its creditor-debtor relationship with the U.S.:

"We have lent a huge amount of money to the United States. I request the U.S. to maintain its good credit, to honor its promises and to guarantee the safety of China's assets."

In addition, the Kremlin last week called for the creation of a "supranational reserve currency" to be on the agenda at the upcoming G20 meeting in London. Zhou Xiaochuan, the governor of China's central bank, has expressed a similar desire for a new global reserve currency "that is disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run, thus removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies."

China and Russia have both experienced severe economic downturns since September 2008, but both blame the U.S. for initiating the global crisis.

If such a currency were to be formed, one that was "disconnected from individual nations," it is possible that some form of global bank would be the creditor. According to Zhou Xiaochuan, the International Monetary Fund is one potential candidate for this role. The U.S. president, meanwhile, has said that he does not support a global currency.

Looking at history, there is only one circumstance under which a very large and diverse population would be willing to accept such a massive override and restructuring of the global order. That circumstance is chaos.

The collapse of the United States of America would certainly create the chaos necessary to justify the formation of a new global reserve currency and ultimately a new world order, with its central power residing in Eurasia.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1074110.html


New World Order Monetary System

Sorry about the sudden unexpected ending, the video was obviously cut short. But the info is so real and powerful that it needs to be heard by as many people as possible. Only then can we hope to make the world a better place.

Lost in all the Obama furor, the world's leading economic powers — the so-called G-20 nations — are quietly laying plans for a November 15th summit in Washington, D.C., that may effect a revolution in world finance and global governance, a revolution with potentially much greater long-term impact on America than anything on President-elect Obama's agenda.

According to an AP report, "EU leaders are set to call on the Nov. 15 summit to agree immediately on five principles: submit ratings agencies to more surveillance; align accounting standards; close loopholes; set banking codes of conduct to reduce excessive risk-taking; and ask the International Monetary Fund to suggest ways of calming the turmoil."

Even discounting the deliberate vagueness of the phrase "closing loopholes," such an agenda obviously contemplates a significant increase in the level of international regulation, presumably to be implemented and enforced by an international regulatory body or bodies. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), created at the Bretton Woods economic summit near the end of World War II, is being touted as the obvious candidate for a global financial regulatory organization. Historically, the IMF's mandate has been far more limited than many of its creators, including British economist John Maynard Keynes (one of the organizers of the Bretton Woods conference), originally envisioned. Keynes and the rest of the British and American delegations to Bretton Woods wanted the agreement to create a global reserve currency (which Keynes wanted to call the bancor), but ended up establishing the dollar as the world's fallback currency instead. They also created the SDR (Special Drawing Right), a quasi-currency in which all acounts at the IMF were and are reckoned.

Now, it appears, the IMF is being primed for a much larger role, to be remade into a bona fide instrument of global governance — just as the original General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), also created at Bretton Woods, was later transformed into the World Trade Organization (WTO). The latter is a de facto global trade ministry with supranational authority, and it has already wielded over the United States and many other nations.

The IMF, in other words, is apparently being prepared to become for global finance what the WTO has become for international trade. At a recent planning session for the upcoming summit, "[EU leaders] discussed making the International Monetary Fund the world's financial watchdog, suggesting it be given more power to curb financial crises and give more money to aid countries in trouble," the AP reported.

EU leaders like France's President Nicholas Sarkozy and Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown have seized the initiative in setting the agenda for the November 15 summit, which some are informally referring to as "Bretton Woods II." The EU will be calling for an agreement to overhaul the global financial system within 100 days, with a second international summit to be held in March.

Additional proposals that may be implied by the aformentioned five agenda items might include: creating a world central bank; creating an international reserve currency to replace the ailing U.S. dollar; and levying fees or taxes on international financial transactions. Any of these would be potentially devastating blows to American sovereignty, and would immeasurably strengthen the UN-centered embryonic world government.

A global central bank with the power to create a truly international currency would give the international system the same power globally that the Federal Reserve enjoys domestically — the power to create money at will. In other words, the UN system would acquire at a stroke the power to fund itself by printing money, emancipating it from reliance on the contributions of member states. An international tax or fee assessed on financial activity would be the realization of another long-cherished but still-unfulfilled dream of globalists: a truly global tax.

Make no mistake about it: the upcoming series of global summits will be about creating and empowering new organs of world government. It will be about curtailing international economic and financial freedom, not enhancing it.

Emergency Broadcast: New World Order Ahead

Rothschild's Banking at Core of Financial Crisis

The global JEW conspiracy

Building WTC to Detonate it

The Shadow Government

.

Warning — the DOJ IS Dangerous to Americans

By Eustace Mullins


Although the Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., is not yet a serious challenge to the old Mack Sennatt comedies, or the leers and sneers of the "funnyman", Charlie Chaplin, its antics concern many Americans, who do not know whether to laugh or cry, as each new revelation of the department's ventures into insanity are laid before the American public.

We have recently witnessed the spectacle of a "Special Prosecutor" from the Justice Dept., Lawrence Walsh, spending forty million dollars of taxpayers money to find out whether Col. Oliver North paid for two tires. This is more money than the Credit Bureau has spent in its entire existence ! We also witnessed the ludicrous spectacle of a black man, William Lucas, who was appointed by President Bush to the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, being harried and torn by the most fanatical leftwing Senators from the Democratic Parry. They turned him down flat, sending a clear message that the black man had better stay in his place.

Lucas' offense was not that he was black, but that he had strayed off the plantation, until he was picked up by the "patterole", as the old slave chasers were known. There is a clear understanding in Washington that the "civil tights" movement not only is limited to blacks, (no whites need apply for relief under its stringent protection but it is also the private preserve of the old hard line Stalinist-Communist wing of the national Democratic Party. It maintains its private army of Stepin Fetchits, who cringe and laugh whenever the Democratic leaders, such as Senator Edward (Chappaquiddick) Kennedy, bark, and no "civil rights" effort is allowed unless it is authorized by the party of Bella Moscovitz and the secret Harold Ware cell of Communist government officials in Washington. Lucas not only ran away from the plantation, he actually joined the Republican Party, and attempted to take office in Washington under its auspices. This was not to be.

Amazingly enough, Bush refused to appoint Lucas to the civil rights post anyway, giving it to him as an "interim" appointment until 1990, on the cowardly excuse that to make such an appointment might "offend" the Democratic leaders in Congress. They had already trashed Lucas in public, for the entire nation to see, and Bush dared not rob them of their Muscovite victory by going over their heads.

As King George IV, representing the Bank of England, Bush has served notice that he will observe all the bylaws of "bipartisanship", meaning that whenever the interests of Republican voters, who elected him President, conflict with the wishes of the old Stalinist leaders of the Democratic Party, he will ignore the people who elected him, and will vote for the Democratic program. No doubt he has good reason for doing so; there is not only the central bank policy of "bipartisanship", which has been imposed by force upon the American people; there are also the unpleasant reminders of what happens to Presidents who refuse to go along with the Moscow line. Nixon was hounded from office, directly negating the Presidential election which had put him in the White House; there was an attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan shortly after he took office, to remind him that certain people were still extremely displeased that he had defeated the Democratic candidate, What's His Name, for the Presidency. Reagan got the message, and never again challenged the Stalinist Communists of the Democratic Party during his two terms in office.

Some of his followers, who had failed to be baptized in the new religion of bipartisanship, sought to bypass Congress by funding the Nicaraguan rebels, the Contras, against the Nicaraguan Communists by private fund-raising. It was not to be. Israel got the funds, and North got the blame. The fact that he and his associates were merely faceless stooges for Henry Kissinger did not save them from the stake; it meant only that the fire was lower and burned much longer during their ordeal. The Department of Justice, as we have mentioned, functioned as the Inquisition which made the ritual executions possible.

In the light of its persistent efforts to function as a super KGB in the United States, it is difficult to recall that we have not always had a "Department of Justice". Such an operation was never envisioned by the Founding Fathers, who believed that they had made adequate provision for judicial and police departments in the Constitution, and in the Judiciary Act of 1789. Almost a hundred years later, subterranean influences in Washington, working upon the sensibilities of Congress, claimed that there was now a public demand (inaudible to all but the conspirators) for a Department of Justice. By means as yet undisclosed, Congress was persuaded to create a "Department of Justice" in 1870. The first century of this nation's existence had seen unparalleled growth and prosperity for all Americans. This began to change, and not subtly, soon after the department began to operate. The century since its creation has been one of steadily accelerating decline for our people. How did this happen ? America had begun its existence as something for which the entire world longed, a nation of freedom, a nation of opportunity, a nation which had not been stifled by the stealthy machinations of the Canaanites and the Black Nobility. America was also intended to be a land where justice would prevail. In fact, it did prevail, until the Department of Justice was established. After 1870, the new department, as the ultimate tool of the monopolists and their spoils system, served to remove the possibility of obtaining justice in the courts beyond the reach of Americans who were not in on the scam. Justice since that time has been only for the fortunate few, for those who conspired to create the Department of Justice, and who have since been the sole beneficiaries of that creation.

Because of these sinister origins, the Department of Justice exists solely to serve the directors of the PIP, the Party in Power, which is known more accurately as "the Perverts in Power", because of their strange desires, and also for their compulsion to pervert every aspect of American existence. Although all government departments in Washington are permanently tainted by political opportunism, the Department of Justice remains the most reprehensible, because it advertises itself as the final arbiter of justice. Thus it is the most flagrant prostitute of our national government, boldly flaunting its commitment to do anything for its pimps.

The present writer has routinely advised the Department of Justice, over the past forty years of grievous criminal acts which have been committed, and whose prosecution falls within the purlieu of this department. These letters have been sent Certified, and with Return Receipt Requested; therefore the department has regularly answered these letters, and has as regularly refused to take any action. Reported violations of civil rights are met with the Department of Justice response, usually in an ill-concealed sneer, that if I really think my civil rights have been violated, I should hire a private attorney ! Notifications of interstate theft, using the mails to defraud, and conspiracy to defraud, all amply documented, have met with the identical response, that I should hire a private lawyer. This is the same Department of Justice which will spend millions of dollars to prosecute a political dissident.

On one complaint of copyright violation, Oliver (Buck) Revell, acting director of the FBI wrote to me on May 28, 1986 that "the FBI pursues criminal investigations and prosecution of copyright matters generally in the areas of sound recordings, motion pictures, and audiovisual works .... the FBI will not institute a criminal investigation in this matter."

Few Americans are aware that for years the vast resources of the FBI have been diverted to protect the profits of a few Hollywood film moguls, who are also the largest donors of funds to political campaigns. The resources of the FBI are dedicated to protecting the profits of these film moguls, and to conducting black bag criminal break-ins for the ADL. The five thousand lawyers employed at the Department of Justice carry out the most humiliating errands for the party bosses; when they arc not conspiring with the dread KGB to commit atrocities against American citizens, they indulge in their most consuming passion, volunteering to carry out hatchet jobs against any critic of the State of Israel.

Since the advent of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933, and a staff of government officials personally selected by Bella Moscovitz, the secret boss of the top secret Harold Ware cell in Washington, the Department of Justice has been unrelentingly pro-Communist in its bias. When Bella Moswvitz fell, or was pushed, down the stairs a few days before Roosevelt's inauguration, the leadership of the Harold Ware cell was taken over by none other than Roosevelt's other mentor, the sinister Felix Frankfurter, who had been denounced by Roosevelt's own cousin, former President Theodore Roosevelt.

The long parade of Republican White House staff members convicted and sent to prison reflects not only the powers delegated to the Department of Justice attorneys, but also the political clout of the Democratic Congress. Like the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice can be said to have read the election returns, but its actions occur on a much lower and more petty level. The dedication of the Justice attorneys to the aggrandizement of statism, more properly known as Marxism, has never been a secret in Washington. However, in recent years, two conflicting philosophies have clashed in the department, as the adherents o[ fanatical sects sought to attain absolute control of the department for their own sinister ends. In 1933, with the advent of the Roosevelt regime, the Stalinist wing of the world Communist party, through Bella Moscovitz, and later through Felix Frankfurter, seized total control of the Democratic Party.

Our government officials now vied with each other in demonstrating their newfound loyalty. Large posters of Lincoln and Stalin suddenly appeared in the homes of leading government officials; the Internationale was now routinely and prayerfully sung at exclusive weekend parties hosted by their friends, and earnest clerks could be seen poring over the latest edition of Stalin's speeches from International Publishers. However, these were only token gestures. These officials were not token Communists; they were actively engaged in espionage activities in every department of the government. Frankfurter placed his ubiquitous proteges, who were nicknamed "the happy hot dogs," in obeisance to their mentor, in key positions. At the War Department, he sent over to Secretary Henry Stimson two of his most eager followers, Harvey Bundy and John J. McCloy. McCloy later became the Gauleiter of a defeated Germany, and the personal lawyer of the Rockefeller fortune. Native born government employees, who had served ably and well at very low salaries, were quickly shunted to the background, irreversibly tainted as "good Americans". They could not ever boast a foreign accent.

Meanwhile, the Republican Party was taken over by the descendants of Trotsky's revolutionaries, who had nested in the Rockefeller-financed League for Industrial Democracy. Now calling themselves "neo-conservatives", and boasted of their absolute loyalty to the State of Israel.

As the "neo-cons" took over the various government departments, during the "Reagan Revolution", loyalty to Stalin was met by equal loyalty to Trotsky. The Department of Justice was taken over by a small group of activists, a coalition of bankers, radicals, and Zionist fanatics who became known to each other as members of "Nesher", the Hebrew word for "eagle".

The origins of Nesher are to be found in "Chekisty: A History of the KGB", by John J. Dziak, the official historian of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Dziak exposed the world-wide espionage and assassination bureau run by the KGB through Dr. Max Eitington, a close associate of Sigmund Freud. It was Eitington who introduced psychiatry and drugs as principal tools of the espionage trade. Eitington also prepared the documents for the 1937 show trials, which resulted in the nine top generals of Stalin's army being executed. These documents were later found to have been prepared by the Gestapo, with which Eitington worked closely. He had long been an intimate of Reinhard Heydrich.

The Eitington technique of preparing forged documents for use in political show trials have recently been employed with great success in the Office of Special Investigations of the Department of Justice, persecuting American citizens, and having them deported and executed by the KGB on "war criminal" charges. The evidence in these cases was prepared by the KGB, special "witnesses" were dredged up from Soviet concentration camps, their testimony purchased by offers of release from life imprisonment, and our citizens were convicted on accusations prepared jointly by the KGB and Mossad. The "trials" took place almost a half century after the alleged "crimes" outside American jurisdiction. Its equivalent would be the prosecution of Soviet leaders today for mass murders committed during the 1930s in the Stalin purges.

Among the many assassinations arranged by Max Eitington were the murder of Trotsky's son, Leon Sedov, in a Paris hospital; Rudolf Kleist, a German Trotskyite whose decapitated body was found in the Seine; and Walter Krivitsky, a KGB defector who was found shot in a Washington hotel room, only a few feet from the halls of Congress. Eitington's brother ran foreign espionage operations of the KGB, expenses being paid by the income from the Soviet Fur Trust. Max Eitington set up the Berlin Psychiatric Institute whose graduates later were sent to the United States to establish cells of the Tavistock Institute (the British Army Dept. of Psychological Warfare operation), which now systematically sets up brainwashing curricula at which the leading officials of the major U.S. foundations, government departments, and educational institutions are forced to attend.

The Eitington group, known by the nickname, "the killerati", because they were self-styled intellectuals and doctors dedicated to secret conspiracies, became the nucleus of the British Secret Intelligence Service, and its more recent subsidiary, the Central Intelligence Agency. The Department of Justice takeover by Nesher created a mutually satisfactory meeting ground for the ostensibly hostile forces of Mossad and the KGB. Provided with unlimited funds by the American taxpayer, they were enabled to carry out their sinister worldwide campaigns of murder and sabotage.

Nesher is known to have financed hit teams to assassinate Palestinians who were cooperating with the United States government, and thereby assured the continuing chaos in Palestine, the basis of Israeli policy. In retaliation for Nesher operations, which were known to be financed by the American government the Arabian forces began to take American hostages, creating an even more fortuitous situation for the Israelis, who could now demand further appropriations from Congress to fight the "terrorists". Nesher then ousted Duvalier in Haiti, creating chaos in that suffering nation. Meanwhile, Nesher's principal operative mole in government offices, Jonathan Pollard, was daily removing thousands of pages of crucial U.S. documents from secret files for his Israeli employers, assuring more economic chaos and future diplomatic catastrophes for our nation.

Pollard operated under the aegis of Under Secretary of Defense Fred Ikle, whose Swiss connection is now involved in another international financial scandal. Ikle's two principal aides were also prominent in Nesher, Richard Perle and Stephen Bryen They set up yet another front group, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, as the cover for their furtive operations, working closely with Moscow Procurator Natalya Koleznikova, and the mastermind of the Irangate imbroglio, David Kimche, who was director of Mossad.

When Pollard was exposed, a massive coverup was initiated by Nesher conspirators, Dep. Atty Gen Arnold Burns and Nate Lewin of Nesher initiated desperate "damage control" techniques to cover up for Pollard and prevent his prosecution. Burns' law firm had handled the books for the Lansky Syndicate financial operations through the Sterling National Bank. Burns also set up fifteen illegal tax shelters through Israeli connections, which resulted in the criminal evasion of some forty million dollars in taxes. Investigation into Burns' operations was stopped by William Weld, head of Justice's Criminal Division. Weld is a member of the prominent Wall Street investment family whose control of the Bank of Boston funnelled the payments to Pollard for his Israeli espionage operations.

The Nesher group continues to work closely with Swiss espionage and conspiracy operators, one of whose proctors, Tibor Rosenbaum, had financed the Israeli takeover of Palestine. Swiss law enforcement was headed by Elizabeth Ikle Kopp, cousin of the aforementioned Fred Ikle at Defense. Her husband, Hans Kopp, headed a billion dollar holding company, Shakarchi Trading Co., which handled the funds for worldwide espionage groups, principally, the CIA and Mossad. Ten million dollars of the Iran-Contra proceeds from illegal sale of arms to Iran was first deposited in the Chase Manhattan Bank (read Kissinger) by Arab wheeler-dealer, Adna Kashoggi; the money was then transferred to Credit Swisse, and later was laundered by Shakarchi executives. This ten million dollars paid for the purchase and delivery of one thousand TOW missiles by the CIA for clandestine transfer to Iranian terrorists. As a result of information revealed during the Iran-Contra investigation, both Kopp and his wife are now under investigation, while Kashoggi was arrested and thrown into a Swiss prison. He was recently transferred to the United States, but a trial is unlikely, because it would directly involve too many highly placed Defense and Department of Justice officials.

During the Reagan Revolution, the Department of Justice was headed by Edwin Meese III, who publicly denounced the American Civil Liberties Union. He was then hounded from office, and forced to hire Nate Lewin, of Nesher, to defend him against a host of charges, none of which were ever proved. Meese was replaced by a longtime pillar of the Eastern Establishment, Dick Thornburgh, the former Governor of Pennsylvania. Thornburgh is a former director of the ACLU ! As head of some 77,000 employees at Justice, Thornburgh has announced his intention of dismantling fourteen regional strike forces which had been set up to fight organized crime. He had previously begun the same process of dismantling while working in the Gerald Ford administration. Thornburgh developed a cozy relationship with the firm of Merrill Lynch while serving as Governor of Pennsylvania. His largest expenditure during his term of office was the authorization of an $807 million bond issue to patch up the decaying Pennsylvania Turnpike. The issue was handled by Merrill Lynch. He then became a director of Merrill Lynch, for $35,000 a year. He also became the political protégé of Donald Regan, former head of Merrill Lynch, who was now Reagan's chief of staff.

Although Thurnburgh's predecessor, Edwin Meese III, left office under a cloud, having been drawn into the notorious Wedtech scandal with the State of Israel, his record may be surpassed by Thornburgh. A Yale graduate! and longtime personal friend of President Bush, Thornburgh not only has a long association with the firm of Merrill Lynch; he is also a director of the scandal ridden Rite Aid Co., the nation's largest retail drug firm. Rite Aid's president, Marty Grass, was recently arrested in Room 158 of Cleveland's Sheraton Airport Hotel. Detectives seized him as he was handing a $33,000 check to Melvin Wilcynski, a voting member of the state pharmacy board. According to the Wall Street Journal, Grass was trying to remedy problems caused when Rite Aid bought out Gray Drug Fair, acquiring 162 stores in Ohio. The stores had been fined for allowing non-pharmacy employees access to prescription drugs, failing to install proper security alarm systems, and other violations. Marty's father had married Lois Lehrman, whose family owns 100 million of Rite Aid stock. Her brother, Lewis Lehrman, is the well known "conservative" who funds Buckley's CIA agitprop organ, the National Review, the Lehrman Institute, and Jack Kemp's abortive Presidential bids.

As a front for the Nesher operation, Thornburgh can be trusted to continue the role of the Department of Justice as the enforcement arm of Mossad operations in the United States. The identification of this department as an Israeli operation reinforces a long felt conviction among Washington insiders that the time is ripe to abolish the Department of Justice and the FBI. As the 1988 Libertarian candidate for President, Ron Paul had called for closing the FBI, but he neglected to focus on the festering sore at Justice which produced such FBI outrages as the notorious Cointelpro operation. It is time to clean house in Washington.

Insider Report
World Intelligence Review
P.O. Box 507
Chalmette, LA 70044
Issue 81
September 5, 1989

Eustace Mullins Page:

21st Century Neo-Fascism is here

State of the Nation: "Lawful Rebellion" Conference

http://bbc5.tv/eyeplayer/articles/brian-gerrish-state-nation

No Time?

Trotsky Leaves New York to Complete the Revolution

Jewish Bolshevik beast Leon Trotsky
- aka Lev Davidovich Bronstein -

By Antony C. Sutton

You will have a revolution, a terrible revolution. What course it takes will depend much on what Mr. Rockefeller tells Mr. Hague to do. Mr. Rockefeller is a symbol of the American ruling class and Mr. Hague is a symbol of its political tools.

Leon Trotsky, in New York Times, December 13, 1938. (Hague was a New Jersey politician)

In 1916, the year preceding the Russian Revolution, internationalist Leon Trotsky was expelled from France, officially because of his participation in the Zimmerwald conference but also no doubt because of inflammatory articles written for Nashe Slovo, a Russian-language newspaper printed in Paris. In September 1916 Trotsky was politely escorted across the Spanish border by French police. A few days later Madrid police arrested the internationalist and lodged him in a "first-class cell" at a charge of one-and-one-haft pesetas per day. Subsequently Trotsky was taken to Cadiz, then to Barcelona finally to be placed on board the Spanish Transatlantic Company steamer Monserrat. Trotsky and family crossed the Atlantic Ocean and landed in New York on January 13, 1917.

Other Trotskyites also made their way westward across the Atlantic. Indeed, one Trotskyite group acquired sufficient immediate influence in Mexico to write the Constitution of Queretaro for the revolutionary 1917 Carranza government, giving Mexico the dubious distinction of being the first government in the world to adopt a Soviet-type constitution.

How did Trotsky, who knew only German and Russian, survive in capitalist America? According to his autobiography, My Life, "My only profession in New York was that of a revolutionary socialist." In other words, Trotsky wrote occasional articles for Novy Mir, the New York Russian socialist journal. Yet we know that the Trotsky family apartment in New York had a refrigerator and a telephone, and, according to Trotsky, that the family occasionally traveled in a chauffeured limousine. This mode of living puzzled the two young Trotsky boys. When they went into a tearoom, the boys would anxiously demand of their mother, "Why doesn't the chauffeur come in?"1 The stylish living standard is also at odds with Trotsky's reported income. The only funds that Trotsky admits receiving in 1916 and 1917 are $310, and, said Trotsky, "I distributed the $310 among five emigrants who were returning to Russia." Yet Trotsky had paid for a first-class cell in Spain, the Trotsky family had traveled across Europe to the United States, they had acquired an excellent apartment in New York ? paying rent three months in advance ? and they had use of a chauffeured limousine. All this on the earnings of an impoverished revolutionary for a few articles for the low-circulation Russian-language newspaper Nashe Slovo in Paris and Novy Mir in New York!

Joseph Nedava estimates Trotsky's 1917 income at $12.00 per week, "supplemented by some lecture fees."2 Trotsky was in New York in 1917 for three months, from January to March, so that makes $144.00 in income from Novy Mir and, say, another $100.00 in lecture fees, for a total of $244.00. Of this $244.00 Trotsky was able to give away $310.00 to his friends, pay for the New York apartment, provide for his family ? and find the $10,000 that was taken from him in April 1917 by Canadian authorities in Halifax. Trotsky claims that those who said he had other sources of income are "slanderers" spreading "stupid calumnies" and "lies," but unless Trotsky was playing the horses at the Jamaica racetrack, it can't be done. Obviously Trotsky had an unreported source of income.

What was that source? In The Road to Safety, author Arthur Willert says Trotsky earned a living by working as an electrician for Fox Film Studios. Other writers have cited other occupations, but there is no evidence that Trotsky occupied himself for remuneration otherwise than by writing and speaking.

Most investigation has centered on the verifiable fact that when Trotsky left New York in 1917 for Petrograd, to organize the Bolshevik phase of the revolution, he left with $10,000. In 1919 the U.S. Senate Overman Committee investigated Bolshevik propaganda and German money in the United States and incidentally touched on the source of Trotsky's $10,000. Examination of Colonel Hurban, Washington attache to the Czech legation, by the Overman Committee yielded the following:

COL. HURBAN: Trotsky, perhaps, took money from Germany, but Trotsky will deny it. Lenin would not deny it. Miliukov proved that he got $10,000 from some Germans while he was in America. Miliukov had the proof, but he denied it. Trotsky did, although Miliukov had the proof.

SENATOR OVERMAN: It was charged that Trotsky got $10,000 here.

COL. HURBAN: I do not remember how much it was, but I know it was a question between him and Miliukov.

SENATOR OVERMAN: Miliukov proved it, did he?

COL. HURBAN: Yes, sir.

SENATOR OVERMAN: Do you know where he got it from?

COL. HURBAN: I remember it was $10,000; but it is no matter. I will speak about their propaganda. The German Government knew Russia better than anybody, and they knew that with the help of those people they could destroy the Russian army.

(At 5:45 o'clock p.m. the subcommittee adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, February 19, at 10:30 o'clock a.m.)3

It is quite remarkable that the committee adjourned abruptly before the source of Trotsky's funds could be placed into the Senate record. When questioning resumed the next day, Trotsky and his $10,000 were no longer of interest to the Overman Committee. We shall later develop evidence concerning the financing of German and revolutionary activities in the United States by New York financial houses; the origins of Trotsky's $10,000 will then come into focus.

An amount of $10,000 of German origin is also mentioned in the official British telegram to Canadian naval authorities in Halifax, who requested that Trotsky and party en route to the revolution be taken off the S.S. Kristianiafjord (see page 28). We also learn from a British Directorate of Intelligence report4 that Gregory Weinstein, who in 1919 was to become a prominent member of the Soviet Bureau in New York, collected funds for Trotsky in New York. These funds originated in Germany and were channeled through the Volks-zeitung, a German daily newspaper in New York and subsidized by the German government.

While Trotsky's funds are officially reported as German, Trotsky was actively engaged in American politics immediately prior to leaving New York for Russia and the revolution. On March 5, 1917, American newspapers headlined the increasing possibility of war with Germany; the same evening Trotsky proposed a resolution at the meeting of the New York County Socialist Party "pledging Socialists to encourage strikes and resist recruiting in the event of war with Germany."5 Leon Trotsky was called by the New York Times "an exiled Russian revolutionist." Louis C. Fraina, who cosponsored the Trotsky resolution, later ? under an alias ? wrote an uncritical book on the Morgan financial empire entitled House of Morgan.6 The Trotsky-Fraina proposal was opposed by the Morris Hillquit faction, and the Socialist Party subsequently voted opposition to the resolution.7

More than a week later, on March 16, at the time of the deposition of the tsar, Leon Trotsky was interviewed in the offices of Novy Mir.. The interview contained a prophetic statement on the Russian revolution:

"... the committee which has taken the place of the deposed Ministry in Russia did not represent the interests or the aims of the revolutionists, that it would probably be shortlived and step down in favor of men who would be more sure to carry forward the democratization of Russia."8

The "men who would be more sure to carry forward the democratization of Russia," that is, the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks, were then in exile abroad and needed first to return to Russia. The temporary "committee" was therefore dubbed the Provisional Government, a title, it should be noted, that was used from the start of the revolution in March and not applied ex post facto by historians.

WOODROW WILSON AND A PASSPORT FOR TROTSKY

President Woodrow Wilson was the fairy godmother who provided Trotsky with a passport to return to Russia to "carry forward" the revolution. This American passport was accompanied by a Russian entry permit and a British transit visa. Jennings C. Wise, in Woodrow Wilson: Disciple of Revolution, makes the pertinent comment, "Historians must never forget that Woodrow Wilson, despite the efforts of the British police, made it possible for Leon Trotsky to enter Russia with an American passport."

The Involvement of the Rockefellers The Rockefeller Oil Monopoly is now 127 years old, yet in 1911, the Supreme Court, bowing to public outrage, had ruled that it had to be broken up. The resulting companies proved to be no problem for the Rockefeller interests. The family retained a two per cent holding in each of the "new" companies, while the Rockefeller foundations took a three per cent holding in each company. This gave them a five per cent stock interest in each company; a one per cent holding in a corporation is usually sufficient to maintain working control. The involvement of the Rockefellers in promoting the World Communist Revolution also developed from their business interests. There was never any commitment to the Marxist ideology; like anything else, it was there to be used. At the turn of the century, Standard Oil was competing fiercely with Royal Dutch Shell for control of the lucrative European market. Congressional testimony revealed that Rockefeller had sent large sums of money to Lenin and Trotsky to instigate the Communist Revolution in 1905. His banker, Jacob Schiff had previously financed the Japanese in their war against Russia and had sent a personal emissary, George Kennan to Russia to spend some twenty years in promoting revolutionary activity against the Czar. When the 1905 revolution failed, Lenin was placed "in storage" in Switzerland until 1907. Trotsky was brought to the U.S., where he lived rent free on the Standard Oil property at Bayonne, New Jersey, its tank field. When the Czar abdicated, Trotsky was placed on a ship with three hundred Communist revolutionaries from the Lower East Side of New York. Rockefeller obtained a special passport for Trotsky from Woodrow Wilson and sent Lincoln Steffens with him to make sure he was returned safely to Russia. For traveling expenses, Rockefeller placed a purse containing $10,000 in Trotsky's pocket. On April 13, 1917, when the ship stopped in Halifax, Canadian Secret Service officers immediately arrested Trotsky and interred him in Nova Scotia. The case became an international cause celebre, as leading government officials from several nations frantically demanded Trotsky's release. The Secret Service had been tipped off that Trotsky was on his way to take Russia out of the war, freeing more German armies to attack Canadian troups on the Western Front. Prime Minister Lloyd George hurriedly cabled orders from London to the Canadian Secret Service to free Trotsky at once - they ignored him. Trotsky was finally freed by the intervention of one of Rockefeller's most faithful stooges, Canadian Minister Mackenzie King, who had long been a "labor specialist" for the Rockefellers. King personally obtained Trotsky's release and sent him on his way as the emissary of the Rockefellers, commissioned to win the Bolshevik Revolution. Thus, Dr. Armand Hammer, who loudly proclaimed his influence in Russia as the friend of Lenin, has an insignificant claim compared to the role of the Rockefellers in backing world Communism. Excerpted from the book, "Rape of The Constitution; Death of Freedom" by Gyeorgos C. Hatonn

President Wilson facilitated Trotsky's passage to Russia at the same time careful State Department bureaucrats, concerned about such revolutionaries entering Russia, were unilaterally attempting to tighten up passport procedures. The Stockholm legation cabled the State Department on June 13, 1917, just after Trotsky crossed the Finnish-Russian border, "Legation confidentially informed Russian, English and French passport offices at Russian frontier, Tornea, considerably worried by passage of suspicious persons bearing American passports."9

To this cable the State Department replied, on the same day, "Department is exercising special care in issuance of passports for Russia"; the department also authorized expenditures by the legation to establish a passport-control office in Stockholm and to hire an "absolutely dependable American citizen" for employment on control work.10 But the bird had flown the coop. Menshevik Trotsky with Lenin's Bolsheviks were already in Russia preparing to "carry forward" the revolution. The passport net erected caught only more legitimate birds. For example, on June 26, 1917, Herman Bernstein, a reputable New York newspaperman on his way to Petrograd to represent the New York Herald, was held at the border and refused entry to Russia. Somewhat tardily, in mid-August 1917 the Russian embassy in Washington requested the State Department (and State agreed) to "prevent the entry into Russia of criminals and anarchists... numbers of whom have already gone to Russia."11

Consequently, by virtue of preferential treatment for Trotsky, when the S.S. Kristianiafjord left New York on March 26, 1917, Trotsky was aboard and holding a U.S. passport ? and in company with other Trotskyire revolutionaries, Wall Street financiers, American Communists, and other interesting persons, few of whom had embarked for legitimate business. This mixed bag of passengers has been described by Lincoln Steffens, the American Communist:

The passenger list was long and mysterious. Trotsky was in the steerage with a group of revolutionaries; there was a Japanese revolutionist in my cabin. There were a lot of Dutch hurrying home from Java, the only innocent people aboard. The rest were war messengers, two from Wall Street to Germany....12

Notably, Lincoln Steffens was on board en route to Russia at the specific invitation of Charles Richard Crane, a backer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party's finance committee. Charles Crane, vice president of the Crane Company, had organized the Westinghouse Company in Russia, was a member of the Root mission to Russia, and had made no fewer than twenty-three visits to Russia between 1890 and 1930. Richard Crane, his son, was confidential assistant to then Secretary of State Robert Lansing. According to the former ambassador to Germany William Dodd, Crane "did much to bring on the Kerensky revolution which gave way to Communism."13 And so Steffens' comments in his diary about conversations aboard the S.S. Kristianiafjord are highly pertinent:" . . . all agree that the revolution is in its first phase only, that it must grow. Crane and Russian radicals on the ship think we shall be in Petrograd for the re-revolution.14

Crane returned to the United States when the Bolshevik Revolution (that is, "the re-revolution") had been completed and, although a private citizen, was given firsthand reports of the progress of the Bolshevik Revolution as cables were received at the State Department. For example, one memorandum, dated December 11, 1917, is entitled "Copy of report on Maximalist uprising for Mr Crane." It originated with Maddin Summers, U.S. consul general in Moscow, and the covering letter from Summers reads in part:

I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of same [above report] with the request that it be sent for the confidential information of Mr. Charles R. Crane. It is assumed that the Department will have no objection to Mr. Crane seeing the report ....15

In brief, the unlikely and puzzling picture that emerges is that Charles Crane, a friend and backer of Woodrow Wilson and a prominent financier and politician, had a known role in the "first" revolution and traveled to Russia in mid-1917 in company with the American Communist Lincoln Steffens, who was in touch with both Woodrow Wilson and Trotsky. The latter in turn was carrying a passport issued at the orders of Wilson and $10,000 from supposed German sources. On his return to the U.S. after the "re-revolution," Crane was granted access to official documents concerning consolidation of the Bolshevik regime: This is a pattern of interlocking ? if puzzling ? events that warrants further investigation and suggests, though without at this point providing evidence, some link between the financier Crane and the revolutionary Trotsky.

CANADIAN GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS ON TROTSKY'S RELEASE16

Documents on Trotsky's brief stay in Canadian custody are now de-classified and available from the Canadian government archives. According to these archives, Trotsky was removed by Canadian and British naval personnel from the S.S. Kristianiafjord at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on April 3, 1917, listed as a German prisoner of war, and interned at the Amherst, Nova Scotia, internment station for German prisoners. Mrs. Trotsky, the two Trotsky boys, and five other men described as "Russian Socialists" were also taken off and interned. Their names are recorded by the Canadian files as: Nickita Muchin, Leiba Fisheleff, Konstantin Romanchanco, Gregor Teheodnovski, Gerchon Melintchansky and Leon Bronstein Trotsky (all spellings from original Canadian documents).

Canadian Army form LB-l, under serial number 1098 (including thumb prints), was completed for Trotsky, with a description as follows: "37 years old, a political exile, occupation journalist, born in Gromskty, Chuson, Russia, Russian citizen." The form was signed by Leon Trotsky and his full name given as Leon Bromstein (sic) Trotsky.

The Trotsky party was removed from the S.S. Kristianiafjord under official instructions received by cablegram of March 29, 1917, London, presumably originating in the Admiralty with the naval control officer, Halifax. The cablegram reported that the Trotsky party was on the "Christianiafjord" (sic) and should be "taken off and retained pending instructions." The reason given to the naval control officer at Halifax was that "these are Russian Socialists leaving for purposes of starting revolution against present Russian government for which Trotsky is reported to have 10,000 dollars subscribed by Socialists and Germans."

On April 1, 1917, the naval control officer, Captain O. M. Makins, sent a confidential memorandum to the general officer commanding at Halifax, to the effect that he had "examined all Russian passengers" aboard the S.S. Kristianiafjord and found six men in the second-class section: "They are all avowed Socialists, and though professing a desire to help the new Russian Govt., might well be in league with German Socialists in America, and quite likely to be a great hindrance to the Govt. in Russia just at present." Captain Makins added that he was going to remove the group, as well as Trotsky's wife and two sons, in order to intern them at Halifax. A copy of this report was forwarded from Halifax to the chief of the General Staff in Ottawa on April 2, 1917.

The next document in the Canadian files is dated April 7, from the chief of the General Staff, Ottawa, to the director of internment operations, and acknowledges a previous letter (not in the files) about the internment of Russian socialists at Amherst, Nova Scotia: ". . . in this connection, have to inform you of the receipt of a long telegram yesterday from the Russian Consul General, MONTREAL, protesting against the arrest of these men as they were in possession of passports issued by the Russian Consul General, NEW YORK, U.S.A."

The reply to this Montreal telegram was to the effect that the men were interned "on suspicion of being German," and would be released only upon definite proof of their nationality and loyalty to the Allies. No telegrams from the Russian consul general in New York are in the Canadian files, and it is known that this office was reluctant to issue Russian passports to Russian political exiles. However, there is a telegram in the files from a New York attorney, N. Aleinikoff, to R. M. Coulter, then deputy postmaster general of Canada. The postmaster general's office in Canada had no connection with either internment of prisoners of war or military activities. Accordingly, this telegram was in the nature of a personal, nonofficial intervention. It reads:

DR. R. M. COULTER, Postmaster Genl. OTTAWA Russian political exiles returning to Russia detained Halifax interned Amherst camp. Kindly investigate and advise cause of the detention and names of all detained. Trust as champion of freedom you will intercede on their behalf. Please wire collect. NICHOLAS ALEINIKOFF

On April 11, Coulter wired Aleinikoff, "Telegram received. Writing you this afternoon. You should receive it tomorrow evening. R. M. Coulter." This telegram was sent by the Canadian Pacific Railway Telegraph but charged to the Canadian Post Office Department. Normally a private business telegram would be charged to the recipient and this was not official business. The follow-up Coulter letter to Aleinikoff is interesting because, after confirming that the Trotsky party was held at Amherst, it states that they were suspected of propaganda against the present Russian government and "are supposed to be agents of Germany." Coulter then adds," . . . they are not what they represent themselves to be"; the Trotsky group is "...not detained by Canada, but by the Imperial authorities." After assuring Aleinikoff that the detainees would be made comfortable, Coulter adds that any information "in their favour" would be transmitted to the military authorities. The general impression of the letter is that while Coulter is sympathetic and fully aware of Trotsky's pro-German links, he is unwilling to get involved. On April 11 Arthur Wolf of 134 East Broadway, New York, sent a telegram to Coulter. Though sent from New York, this telegram, after being acknowledged, was also charged to the Canadian Post Office Department.

Coulter's reactions, however, reflect more than the detached sympathy evident in his letter to Aleinikoff. They must be considered in the light of the fact that these letters in behalf of Trotsky came from two American residents of New York City and involved a Canadian or Imperial military matter of international importance. Further, Coulter, as deputy postmaster general, was a Canadian government official of some standing. Ponder, for a moment, what would happen to someone who similarly intervened in United States affairs! In the Trotsky affair we have two American residents corresponding with a Canadian deputy postmaster general in order to intervene in behalf of an interned Russian revolutionary.

Coulter's subsequent action also suggests something more than casual intervention. After Coulter acknowledged the Aleinikoff and Wolf telegrams, he wrote to Major General Willoughby Gwatkin of the Department of Militia and Defense in Ottawa ? a man of significant influence in the Canadian military ? and attached copies of the Aleinikoff and Wolf telegrams:

These men have been hostile to Russia because of the way the Jews have been treated, and are now strongly in favor of the present Administration, so far as I know. Both are responsible men. Both are reputable men, and I am sending their telegrams to you for what they may be worth, and so that you may represent them to the English authorities if you deem it wise.

Obviously Coulter knows ? or intimates that he knows ? a great deal about Aleinikoff and Wolf. His letter was in effect a character reference, and aimed at the root of the internment problem ? London. Gwatkin was well known in London, and in fact was on loan to Canada from the War Office in London.17

Aleinikoff then sent a letter to Coulter to thank him most heartily for the interest you have taken in the fate of the Russian Political Exiles .... You know me, esteemed Dr. Coulter, and you also know my devotion to the cause of Russian freedom .... Happily I know Mr. Trotsky, Mr. Melnichahnsky, and Mr. Chudnowsky . . . intimately.

It might be noted as an aside that if Aleinikoff knew Trotsky "intimately," then he would also probably be aware that Trotsky had declared his intention to return to Russia to overthrow the Provisional Government and institute the "re-revolution." On receipt of Aleinikoff's letter, Coulter immediately (April 16) forwarded it to Major General Gwatkin, adding that he became acquainted with Aleinikoff "in connection with Departmental action on United States papers in the Russian language" and that Aleinikoff was working "on the same lines as Mr. Wolf . . . who was an escaped prisoner from Siberia."

Previously, on April 14, Gwatkin sent a memorandum to his naval counterpart on the Canadian Military Interdepartmental Committee repeating that the internees were Russian socialists with "10,000 dollars subscribed by socialists and Germans." The concluding paragraph stated: "On the other hand there are those who declare that an act of high-handed injustice has been done." Then on April 16, Vice Admiral C. E. Kingsmill, director of the Naval Service, took Gwatkin's intervention at face value. In a letter to Captain Makins, the naval control officer at Halifax, he stated, "The Militia authorities request that a decision as to their (that is, the six Russians) disposal may be hastened." A copy of this instruction was relayed to Gwatkin who in turn informed Deputy Postmaster General Coulter. Three days later Gwatkin applied pressure. In a memorandum of April 20 to the naval secretary, he wrote, "Can you say, please, whether or not the Naval Control Office has given a decision?"

On the same day (April 20) Captain Makins wrote Admiral Kingsmill explaining his reasons for removing Trotsky; he refused to be pressured into making a decision, stating, "I will cable to the Admiralty informing them that the Militia authorities are requesting an early decision as to their disposal." However, the next day, April 21, Gwatkin wrote Coulter: "Our friends the Russian socialists are to be released; and arrangements are being made for their passage to Europe." The order to Makins for Trotsky's release originated in the Admiralty, London. Coulter acknowledged the information, "which will please our New York correspondents immensely."

While we can, on the one hand, conclude that Coulter and Gwatkin were intensely interested in the release of Trotsky, we do not, on the other hand, know why. There was little in the career of either Deputy Postmaster General Coulter or Major General Gwatkin that would explain an urge to release the Menshevik Leon Trotsky.

Partisans of Evil By, Bro. Charles Madden O.F.M. Conv. In Chapter One we quoted extensively from Pope Leo XIII's encyclical Humanum Genus (1884) in order to lay the groundwork for considering modern-day Freemasonry. We return to that encyclical in order to highlight in this chapter one of the important aspects of Freemasonry Pope Leo XIII pointed out over a century ago. Equating Freemasonry with the domain of Satan, using St. Augustine's image of the two cities, the City of man and the City of God, the Pope warned that there was a coming together of the "partisans of evil", led on in particular by Freemasonry. Now let us look at that phrase of Pope Leo XIII regarding the "partisans of evil" coming together and being led by Freemasonry. Pope Leo had warned that the Masons would abet socialist and Communist revolutions everywhere. Let us examine some history of this century. By World War I, many European governments were dominated or heavily influenced by Freemasons. Catholic schools were closed and outlawed in some nations. In the aftermath of World War I, Communism seized control of Russia; a few years later Mussolini's black-shirted socialists, called Fascists, took over Italy; and in 1933 the Nazi's, though receiving less than 50% of the vote, formed a government in Germany and quickly suppressed all opposition. All of these were supported by Freemasons at the time. Nazism (like Freemasonry and the New Age movement today) was riddled with occultism (the swastika is from ancient pagan religions). Among Nazi's there was a fascination for ancient pagan religions of the East. Nazism also sought to revive interest in the ancient pagan religions of pre-Christian Germany, coupled with theories of racial purity and the superiority of Germans. Communism also has occultic roots. If some of Karl Marx's writings - including his poetry - are a barometer, he was a Satanist, not an atheist. So we can see that all these "isms" have a certain commonality. Fascism in Italy, used the pagan symbols of ancient Rome. Of late, there seems to be an increasing awareness of a coming together of Communism and Freemasonry. In fact, the co-operation between communism in the East and Freemasonry in the increasingly pagan West - with its secular humanist allies of the New Age movement - is becoming unashamedly open. A number of instances can be sited in support of this view. In July, 1990 Fr. Robert Bradley, S.J., at a Blue Army symposium in Washington, D.C., spoke of the connection between Our Lady's message at Fatima and Freemasonry. Though her message is known chiefly for its warning on Communism, Father Bradly makes the case that Mary was clearly advising us about Freemasonry, although neither evil is mentioned specifically by name. The welcome temporary temporary respite from five decades of totalitarian rule now being experienced in some parts of Eastern Europe has also been accompanied by an influx of Western materialism and the reconsitution of Lodges of Freemasonry throughout that region. In 30 Days magazine (July-August 1990 issue), in a piece accompanying an article on the statement of the Bishops of the Indian Ocean Episcopal Conference on the dangers of Freemasonry, we find a short review of the attempts to reactivate Masonic Lodges thoughout Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. This was prior to the dramatic events of 1991. In its September-October 1990 issue, 30 Days ran a five page article, "From Communism to Masonry", giving extensive treatment to the resurgence of Freemasonry in Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R., as well as historical background on Freemasonry's past in each country. Indeed a resurgent Evil Empire is in the making! Even though the source is a private revelation - which we are not required to accept - it may be worth noting that the 1990 edition of To The Priests, by Don Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests, contains several reported locutions from Our Lady explaining some aspects of the Book of Revelation (the Appocalypse concerning the Red Dragon (athiestic Communism) and the black beast arising from the sea (Freemasonry) and the work of both in promoting apostasy and idolotry. It is said that the two will reach their zenith by 1998. A book published in 1990 by A. Ralph Epperson, The New World Order, drawing extensively on Masonic and New Age movement sources, shows the similarities and interplay between these two movements in this country and their efforts to replace America's Judaeo-Christian heritage with a brutal form of paganism, leading ultimately to the worship of Lucifer and the elimination of every vestiage of Christianity. Freemasonry - Mankinds Hidden Enemy Chapter 4 (partial) Charles Madden 1995 Tan Books & Publishers Rockford, Illinois

Dr. Robert Miller Coulter was a medical doctor of Scottish and Irish parents, a liberal, a Freemason, and an Odd Fellow. He was appointed deputy postmaster general of Canada in 1897. His sole claim to fame derived from being a delegate to the Universal Postal Union Convention in 1906 and a delegate to New Zealand and Australia in 1908 for the "All Red" project. All Red had nothing to do with Red revolutionaries; it was only a plan for all-red or all-British fast steamships between Great Britain, Canada, and Australia.

Major General Willoughby Gwatkin stemmed from a long British military tradition (Cambridge and then Staff College). A specialist in mobilization, he served in Canada from 1905 to 1918. Given only the documents in the Canadian files, we can but conclude that their intervention in behalf of Trotsky is a mystery.

CANADIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE VIEWS TROTSKY

We can approach the Trotsky release case from another angle: Canadian intelligence. Lieutenant Colonel John Bayne MacLean, a prominent Canadian publisher and businessman, founder and president of MacLean Publishing Company, Toronto, operated numerous Canadian trade journals, including the Financial Post. MacLean also had a long-time association with Canadian Army Intelligence.18

In 1918 Colonel MacLean wrote for his own MacLean's magazine an article entitled "Why Did We Let Trotsky Go? How Canada Lost an Opportunity to Shorten the War."19 The article contained detailed and unusual information about Leon Trotsky, although the last half of the piece wanders off into space remarking about barely related matters. We have two clues to the authenticity of the information. First, Colonel MacLean was a man of integrity with excellent connections in Canadian government intelligence. Second, government records since released by Canada, Great Britain, and the United States confirm MacLean's statement to a significant degree. Some MacLean statements remain to be confirmed, but information available in the early 1970s is not necessarily inconsistent with Colonel MacLean's article.

MacLean's opening argument is that "some Canadian politicians or officials were chiefly responsible for the prolongation of the war [World War I], for the great loss of life, the wounds and sufferings of the winter of 1917 and the great drives of 1918."

Further, states MacLean, these persons were (in 1919)doing everything possible to prevent Parliament and the Canadian people from getting the related facts. Official reports, including those of Sir Douglas Haig, demonstrate that but for the Russian break in 1917 the war would have been over a year earlier, and that "the man chiefly responsible for the defection of Russia was Trotsky... acting under German instructions."

Who was Trotsky? According to MacLean, Trotsky was not Russian, but German. Odd as this assertion may appear it does coincide with other scraps of intelligence information: to wit, that Trotsky spoke better German than Russian, and that he was the Russian executive of the German "Black Bond." According to MacLean, Trotsky in August 1914 had been "ostentatiously" expelled from Berlin;20 he finally arrived in the United States where he organized Russian revolutionaries, as well as revolutionaries in Western Canada, who "were largely Germans and Austrians traveling as Russians." MacLean continues:

Originally the British found through Russian associates that Kerensky,21 Lenin and some lesser leaders were practically in German pay as early as 1915 and they uncovered in 1916 the connections with Trotsky then living in New York. From that time he was closely watched by... the Bomb Squad. In the early part of 1916 a German official sailed for New York. British Intelligence officials accompanied him. He was held up at Halifax; but on their instruction he was passed on with profuse apologies for the necessary delay. After much manoeuvering he arrived in a dirty little newspaper office in the slums and there found Trotsky, to whom he bore important instructions. From June 1916, until they passed him on [to] the British, the N.Y. Bomb Squad never lost touch with Trotsky. They discovered that his real name was Braunstein and that he was a German, not a Russian.22

Such German activity in neutral countries is confirmed in a State Department report (316-9-764-9) describing organization of Russian refugees for revolutionary purposes.

Continuing, MacLean states that Trotsky and four associates sailed on the "S.S. Christiania" (sic), and on April 3 reported to "Captain Making" (sic) and were taken off the ship at Halifax under the direction of Lieutenant Jones. (Actually a party of nine, including six men, were taken off the S.S. Kristianiafjord. The name of the naval control officer at Halifax was Captain O. M. Makins, R.N. The name of the officer who removed the Trotsky party from the ship is not in the Canadian government documents; Trotsky said it was "Machen.") Again, according to MacLean, Trotsky's money came "from German sources in New York." Also:

generally the explanation given is that the release was done at the request of Kerensky but months before this British officers and one Canadian serving in Russia, who could speak the Russian language, reported to London and Washington that Kerensky was in German service.23

Trotsky was released "at the request of the British Embassy at Washington . . . [which] acted on the request of the U.S. State Department, who were acting for someone else." Canadian officials "were instructed to inform the press that Trotsky was an American citizen travelling on an American passport; that his release was specially demanded by the Washington State Department." Moreover, writes MacLean, in Ottawa "Trotsky had, and continues to have, strong underground influence. There his power was so great that orders were issued that he must be given every consideration."

The theme of MacLean's reporting is, quite evidently, that Trotsky had intimate relations with, and probably worked for, the German General Staff. While such relations have been established regarding Lenin ? to the extent that Lenin was subsidized and his return to Russia facilitated by the Germans ? it appears certain that Trotsky was similarly aided. The $10,000 Trotsky fund in New York was from German sources, and a recently declassified document in the U.S. State Department files reads as follows:

March 9, 1918 to: American Consul, Vladivostok from Polk, Acting Secretary of State, Washington D.C.

For your confidential information and prompt attention: Following is substance of message of January twelfth from Von Schanz of German Imperial Bank to Trotsky, quote Consent imperial bank to appropriation from credit general staff of five million roubles for sending assistant chief naval commissioner Kudrisheff to Far East.

This message suggests some liaison between Trotsky and the Germans in January 1918, a time when Trotsky was proposing an alliance with the West. The State Department does not give the provenance of the telegram, only that it originated with the War College Staff. The State Department did treat the message as authentic and acted on the basis of assumed authenticity. It is consistent with the general theme of Colonel MacLean's article.

TROTSKY'S INTENTIONS AND OBJECTIVES

Consequently, we can derive the following sequence of events: Trotsky traveled from New York to Petrograd on a passport supplied by the intervention of Woodrow Wilson, and with the declared intention to "carry forward" the revolution. The British government was the immediate source of Trotsky's release from Canadian custody in April 1917, but there may well have been "pressures." Lincoln Steffens, an American Communist, acted as a link between Wilson and Charles R. Crane and between Crane and Trotsky. Further, while Crane had no official position, his son Richard was confidential assistant to Secretary of State Robert Lansing, and Crane senior was provided with prompt and detailed reports on the progress of the Bolshevik Revolution. Moreover, Ambassador William Dodd (U.S. ambassador to Germany in the Hitler era) said that Crane had an active role in the Kerensky phase of the revolution; the Steffens letters confirm that Crane saw the Kerensky phase as only one step in a continuing revolution.

The interesting point, however, is not so much the communication among dissimilar persons like Crane, Steffens, Trotsky, and Woodrow Wilson as the existence of at least a measure of agreement on the procedure to be followed ? that is, the Provisional Government was seen as "provisional," and the "re-revolution" was to follow.

On the other side of the coin, interpretation of Trotsky's intentions should be cautious: he was adept at double games. Official documentation clearly demonstrates contradictory actions. For example, the Division of Far Eastern Affairs in the U.S. State Department received on March 23, 1918, two reports stemming from Trotsky; one is inconsistent with the other. One report, dated March 20 and from Moscow, originated in the Russian newspaper Russkoe Slovo. The report cited an interview with Trotsky in which he stated that any alliance with the United States was impossible:

The Russia of the Soviet cannot align itself... with capitalistic America for this would be a betrayal It is possible that Americans seek such an rapprochement with us, driven by its antagonism towards Japan, but in any case there can be no question of an alliance by us of any nature with a bourgeoisie nation.24

The other report, also originating in Moscow, is a message dated March 17, 1918, three days earlier, and from Ambassador Francis: "Trotsky requests five American officers as inspectors of army being organized for defense also requests railroad operating men and equipment."25

This request to the U.S. is of course inconsistent with rejection of an "alliance."

Before we leave Trotsky some mention should be made of the Stalinist show trials of the 1930s and, in particular, the 1938 accusations and trial of the "Anti-Soviet bloc of rightists and Trotskyites." These forced parodies of the judicial process, almost unanimously rejected in the West, may throw light on Trotsky's intentions.

The crux of the Stalinist accusation was that Trotskyites were paid agents of international capitalism. K. G. Rakovsky, one of the 1938 defendants, said, or was induced to say, "We were the vanguard of foreign aggression, of international fascism, and not only in the USSR but also in Spain, China, throughout the world." The summation of the "court" contains the statement, "There is not a single man in the world who brought so much sorrow and misfortune to people as Trotsky. He is the vilest agent of fascism .... "26

Now while this may be no more than verbal insults routinely traded among the international Communists of the 1930s and 40s, it is also notable that the threads behind the self-accusation are consistent with the evidence in this chapter. And further, as we shall see later, Trotsky was able to generate support among international capitalists, who, incidentally, were also supporters of Mussolini and Hitler.27

So long as we see all international revolutionaries and all international capitalists as implacable enemies of one another, then we miss a crucial point ? that there has indeed been some operational cooperation between international capitalists, including fascists. And there is no a priori reason why we should reject Trotsky as a part of this alliance.

This tentative, limited reassessment will be brought into sharp focus when we review the story o￡ Michael Gruzenberg, the chief Bolshevik agent in Scandinavia who under the alias of Alexander Gumberg was also a confidential adviser to the Chase National Bank in New York and later to Floyd Odium of Atlas Corporation. This dual role was known to and accepted by both the Soviets and his American employers. The Gruzenberg story is a case history of international revolution allied with international capitalism.

Colonel MacLean's observations that Trotsky had "strong underground influence" and that his "power was so great that orders were issued that he must be given every consideration" are not at all inconsistent with the Coulter-Gwatkin intervention in Trotsky's behalf; or, for that matter, with those later occurrences, the Stalinist accusations in the Trotskyite show trials of the 1930s. Nor are they inconsistent with the Gruzenberg case. On the other hand, the only known direct link between Trotsky and international banking is through his cousin Abram Givatovzo, who was a private banker in Kiev before the Russian Revolution and in Stockholm after the revolution. While Givatovzo professed antibolshevism, he was in fact acting in behalf of the Soviets in 1918 in currency transactions.28

Is it possible an international web (:an be spun from these events? First there's Trotsky, a Russian internationalist revolutionary with German connections who sparks assistance from two supposed supporters of Prince Lvov's government in Russia (Aleinikoff and Wolf, Russians resident in New York). These two ignite the action of a liberal Canadian deputy postmaster general, who in turn intercedes with a prominent British Army major general on the Canadian military staff. These are all verifiable links.

In brief, allegiances may not always be what they are called, or appear. We can, however, surmise that Trotsky, Aleinikoff, Wolf, Coulter, and Gwatkin in acting for a common limited objective also had some common higher goal than national allegiance or political label. To emphasize, there is no absolute proof that this is so. It is, at the moment, only a logical supposition from the facts. A loyalty higher than that forged by a common immediate goal need have been no more than that of friendship, although that strains the imagination when we ponder such a polyglot combination. It may also have been promoted by other motives. The picture is yet incomplete.

Footnotes:

1 Leon Trotsky, My Life (New York: Scribner's, 1930), chap. 22.

2 Joseph Nedava, Trotsky and the Jews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1972), p. 163.

3 United States, Senate, Brewing and Liquor Interests and German and Bolshevik Propaganda (Subcommittee on the Judiciary), 65th Cong., 1919.

4 Special Report No. 5, The Russian Soviet Bureau in the United States, July 14, 1919, Scotland House, London S.W.I. Copy in U.S. State Dept. Decimal File, 316-23-1145.

5 New York Times, March 5, 1917.

6 Lewis Corey, House of Morgan: A Social Biography of the Masters of Money (New York: G. W. Watt, 1930).

7 Morris Hillquit. (formerly Hillkowitz) had been defense attorney for Johann Most, alter the assassination of President McKinley, and in 1917 was a leader of the New York Socialist Party. In the 1920s Hillquit established himself in the New York banking world by becoming a director of, and attorney for, the International Union Bank. Under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Hillquit helped draw up the NRA codes for the garment industry.

8 New York Times, March 16, 1917.

9 U.S. State Dept. Decimal File, 316-85-1002.

10Ibid.

11Ibid., 861.111/315.

12Lincoln Steffens, Autobiography (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1931), p. 764. Steffens was the "go-between" for Crane and Woodrow Wilson.

13William Edward Dodd, Ambassador Dodd's Diary, 1933-1938 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1941), pp. 42-43.

14Lincoln Steffens, The Letters of Lincoln Steffens (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1941), p. 396.

15U.S. State Dept. Decimal File, 861.00/1026.

16This section is based on Canadian government records.

17Gwatkin's memoramada in the Canadian government files are not signed, but initialed with a cryptic mark or symbol. The mark has been identified as Gwatkin's because one Gwatkin letter (that o[ April 21) with that cryptic mark was acknowledged.

18H.J. Morgan, Canadian Men and Women of the Times, 1912, 2 vols. (Toronto: W. Briggs, 1898-1912).

19June 1919, pp. 66a-666. Toronto Public Library has a copy; the issue of MacLean's in which Colonel MacLean's article appeared is not easy to find and a frill summary is provided below.

20See also Trotsky, My Life, p. 236.

21See Appendix 3.

22According to his own account, Trotsky did not arrive in the U.S. until January 1917. Trotsky's real name was Bronstein; he invented the name "Trotsky." "Bronstein" is German and "Trotsky" is Polish rather than Russian. His first name is usually given as "Leon"; however, Trotsky's first book, which was published in Geneva, has the initial "N," not "L."

23See Appendix 3; this document was obtained in 1971 from the British Foreign Office but apparently was known to MacLean.

24U.S. State Dept. Decimal File, 861.00/1351.

25U.S. State Dept. Decimal File, 861.00/1341.

26Report of Court Proceedings in the Case of the Anti-Soviet "Bloc of Rightists and Trotskyites" Heard Before the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR (Moscow: People's Commissariat of Justice of the USSR, 1938), p. 293.

27See p. 174. Thomas Lamont of the Morgans was an early supporter of Mussolini.

28See p. 122.

Read Antony C. Sutton's book: