June 21-22, 2011 -- America's neo-colonial potentate inspects one of his Caribbean colonies....
Part I of a two-part series on Obama's neo-colonialist policies toward America's colonies...
Like a pompous European monarch visiting one of his overseas territories in the "Third World," President Obama recently spent four hours in the U.S. colony of Puerto Rico. Billed as celebrating the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's visit in 1961 to Puerto Rico, as well as a chance to discuss the March report issued by the President's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status, the visit had little to with either. In fact, Obama's chief priority was to attend a Democratic National Committee fundraiser at San Juan's Caribe Hilton Hotel where Obama pocketed $1 million for his re-election campaign.
The Kennedy angle was a cheap political stunt by the Obama team to try to attach a war-mongering, Wall Street-controlled puppet to the legacy an actual progressive president. The JFK "anniversary" visit claim, itself, was a ruse, since Kennedy visited Puerto Rico in December 1961, not June. And Kennedy stopped off in Puerto Rico as part of an "Alliance for Progress" tour of Latin America that also took Kennedy to Venezuela and Colombia to champion America's new approach to Latin America after years of Washington treating Latin American nations as vassal states. Obama, on the other hand, does not have the "cojones" to visit Venezuela because of his applying old CIA policies toward Latin America. Obama's Latin American policy is a policy of sanctions on Cuba and Venezuela, coup-making in Honduras and Ecuador, and gross interference in the domestic affairs of every Latin American and Caribbean nation.
It is clear that Obama favors the continued status quo in Puerto Rico. His task force's report offers the island only two referendums on future status. The first is whether Puerto Rico wishes to continue its links with the United States. With two-thirds of Puerto Ricans favoring either continued commonwealth status or statehood, that would ensure the pro-independence forces would fail in round one to achieve an absolute majority. The second referendum would give Puerto Ricans the option of statehood or continued Commonwealth status. The ploy is clearly to remove independence as a serious option from the table. As Obama's motorcade drive through downtown San Juan, crowds yelled "Yanqui go home!" and "Independencia!"
Obama's policies toward Puerto Rico are no different than his polices toward other American colonies, including Obama's native Hawai'i, where Obama grew up as a "haole," a "foreigner," people who are generally despised by native Hawai'ians who see the haole as usurpers of Hawai'ian culture and lands. Obama's view of Hawai'i, Guahan (Guam), Eastern Samoa, Virgin Islands, Northern Marianas, as well as Puerto Rico, reflects a colonialist attitude that is no different from that of the "pieds-noirs" white French colonists of Algeria, the illegal Jewish settlers on the West Bank and in east Jerusalem, and the "Jonkheer" Dutch settlers of Indonesia.
Leaked State Department cables also point to the fact that the Obama administration wants to maintain the status quo regarding the political status of British colonies around the world. Priority number one is the continued presence of U.S. military and intelligence bases on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, Ascension Island in the south Atlantic, and on British Sovereign Bases on Cyprus.
Obama only favors decolonization and secession where U.S. strategic and economic interests, including oil, are at play. Therefore, while Obama will welcome South Sudan's independence on July 9, the neo-colonialist in the White House will not extend the same consideration to Puerto Rico, Guahan, Palestine, or British colonies like Bermuda or the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Part I of a two-part series on Obama's neo-colonialist policies toward America's colonies...
Like a pompous European monarch visiting one of his overseas territories in the "Third World," President Obama recently spent four hours in the U.S. colony of Puerto Rico. Billed as celebrating the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's visit in 1961 to Puerto Rico, as well as a chance to discuss the March report issued by the President's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status, the visit had little to with either. In fact, Obama's chief priority was to attend a Democratic National Committee fundraiser at San Juan's Caribe Hilton Hotel where Obama pocketed $1 million for his re-election campaign.
The Kennedy angle was a cheap political stunt by the Obama team to try to attach a war-mongering, Wall Street-controlled puppet to the legacy an actual progressive president. The JFK "anniversary" visit claim, itself, was a ruse, since Kennedy visited Puerto Rico in December 1961, not June. And Kennedy stopped off in Puerto Rico as part of an "Alliance for Progress" tour of Latin America that also took Kennedy to Venezuela and Colombia to champion America's new approach to Latin America after years of Washington treating Latin American nations as vassal states. Obama, on the other hand, does not have the "cojones" to visit Venezuela because of his applying old CIA policies toward Latin America. Obama's Latin American policy is a policy of sanctions on Cuba and Venezuela, coup-making in Honduras and Ecuador, and gross interference in the domestic affairs of every Latin American and Caribbean nation.
It is clear that Obama favors the continued status quo in Puerto Rico. His task force's report offers the island only two referendums on future status. The first is whether Puerto Rico wishes to continue its links with the United States. With two-thirds of Puerto Ricans favoring either continued commonwealth status or statehood, that would ensure the pro-independence forces would fail in round one to achieve an absolute majority. The second referendum would give Puerto Ricans the option of statehood or continued Commonwealth status. The ploy is clearly to remove independence as a serious option from the table. As Obama's motorcade drive through downtown San Juan, crowds yelled "Yanqui go home!" and "Independencia!"
Obama's policies toward Puerto Rico are no different than his polices toward other American colonies, including Obama's native Hawai'i, where Obama grew up as a "haole," a "foreigner," people who are generally despised by native Hawai'ians who see the haole as usurpers of Hawai'ian culture and lands. Obama's view of Hawai'i, Guahan (Guam), Eastern Samoa, Virgin Islands, Northern Marianas, as well as Puerto Rico, reflects a colonialist attitude that is no different from that of the "pieds-noirs" white French colonists of Algeria, the illegal Jewish settlers on the West Bank and in east Jerusalem, and the "Jonkheer" Dutch settlers of Indonesia.
Leaked State Department cables also point to the fact that the Obama administration wants to maintain the status quo regarding the political status of British colonies around the world. Priority number one is the continued presence of U.S. military and intelligence bases on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, Ascension Island in the south Atlantic, and on British Sovereign Bases on Cyprus.
Obama only favors decolonization and secession where U.S. strategic and economic interests, including oil, are at play. Therefore, while Obama will welcome South Sudan's independence on July 9, the neo-colonialist in the White House will not extend the same consideration to Puerto Rico, Guahan, Palestine, or British colonies like Bermuda or the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Obama's America: champion of colonialism.....
June 22-23, 2011 -- Obama: purveyor of Anglo-American neo-colonialism
Second in a two-part series on Obama and his neo-colonialist policies.
President Obama has been mistakenly referred to by his right-wing critics of being influenced by the anti-colonialist feelings of his Kenyan father, Barack Obama, Sr. However, Junior Obama, far from being anti-colonialist, champions neo-colonialism in his policies toward America's colonies and those that continue to be maintained by America's European NATO allies.
During his recent four-hour stop in Puerto Rico, Obama, who was in the U.S. colony long enough to bag $1 million in presidential campaign contributions from the Caribe Hilton Hotel in San Juan, made no mention of Puerto Rican governor Luis Fortuno's violent crackdown on protesting University of Puerto Rico students upset about the far right-wing governor's plans to privatize higher education in Puerto Rico. Police have beaten, maced, shot, and sexually assaulted student and worker protesters in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rican police are believed to have carried out extra-judicial killings of Afro-Puerto Ricans in racially-motivated attacks. Yet, Obama, America's first "African-American" president, failed to mention any of these atrocities to Fortuno during his four-hour stop in Puerto Rico.
Obama represents the global elites who will sell out the interests of African-American, Afro-Caribbean, and African people at the drop of a campaign donation collection plate.
Fortuno is allied with the mainland Republican Party and he favors fast-tracking Puerto Rico to statehood via a rigged referendum procedure. Obama has obliged Fortuno and those favoring continued commonwealth status by calling for a two-stage referendum, one that will certainly eliminate the proposal for full independence from the United States in the first vote on the future status of the island.
Obama, who has championed the roll-back of labor rights and civil liberties in the mainland United States, has also embarked on a policy of neo-colonialism in America's Caribbean and Pacific colonies. In addition, Obama has backed moves by America's European NATO allies, Britain, France, the Netherlands, and Denmark to re-assert colonial control over their overseas territories. The reasons are plain: oil and other natural resource reserves have been discovered near many of these territories and the U.S. wants to ensure that its military continues to have basing rights from islets in the Indian Ocean to the Caribbean and south Pacific.
While Guahan (Guam) and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas (Saipan, Rota, Tinian, and the Northern Islands) talk about re-unification and eventual independence from the United States in a Chamorro federation, Obama's Pentagon is expanding its military presence on Guam. Plans for the expansion of U.S. military installations in Guahan will destroy 10 percent of the current forest cover on the island. Also slated for destruction are over 1300 acres of habitat for recovering nearly-extinct species, including tropical birds.
Guahan's concerns never rise to the attention of the power elite in Washington. In April, the US Senate leadership of Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and 13 other senators secretly landed at Anderson Air Force Base on Guam on their way to a top-level meeting in Hong Kong. Neither Guahan Governor Eddie Calvo, a Republican, nor any member of his administration was informed of the Senate delegation visit to Guam and Calvo questioned why the 15 senators landed in secret at Anderson instead of publicly at Won Pat International Airport, near the capital of Hagatna. The snub was even more stinging just a few months after the House of Representatives delegates of Guahan and other U.S. colonies, including the District of Columbia, lost their voting rights in House committees.
The United States is also resisting efforts by Eastern Samoa, known officially by its colonial name of "American Samoa," to gain more control over its internal affairs. Washington will resist any attempt to unify Eastern Samoa with its independent neighbor, Samoa, formerly known as Western Samoa. "American Samoa" Governor Togiola Tulafono has decried the fact that the colony is subservient to the U.S. Department of the Interior and that the Secretary of the Interior appoints American Samoa's chief and associate justices. The Obama administration has decided to maintain the status quo and not allow Eastern Samoa to appoint its own top justices.
According to leaked State Department cables, the United States has also made it clear it will resist efforts by the Tokelau islands, now a dependency of New Zealand, to regain sovereignty of Swain's Island, now a dependency of "American Samoa." New Zealand told a visiting U.S. diplomat that New Zealand would not permit Tokelau's leader, Koluei O'Brien, to press for a return of Swain's Island to Tokelau. Obama, the neo-colonialist, does not seem to mind using America's might to threaten Tokelau, a small nation made up of three atolls.
Obama's Justice Department has opposed provisions in the US Senate Resolution calling for a Fifth Constitutional Convention of the US Virgin Islands. Eric Holder's Justice Department objects to provisions that call for more autonomy for the U.S. colony, once a territory of Denmark that was sold to the United States during World War I.
The Obama administration has also stood by Britain as it has imposed a neo-colonial regime in the Turks and Caicos Islands, in an area believed to hold marine oil deposits. The British government abrogated the 2006 Constitution for the islands and given the British Governor wide-reaching powers. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and Bermuda condemned the abrogation of the Turks and Caicos Constitution and re-imposition of colonialism. The Premier of Bermuda, Ewart Brown, who has challenged Britain's attempt to roll back the self-government of Bermuda, said that if what happened to the Turks and Caicos happened in Zimbabwe, "the world and the UK government in particular would refer to the move as barbaric and characterize its government as a cruel dictatorship."
Britain has downgraded the Bermuda passport by deciding that to travel through the Schengen area of the European Union, Bermudians must possess British passports. Bermuda has also seen the arrival of FBI and Miami-Dade police officials to supplement law enforcement on the island, a further erosion of sovereignty to the Anglo-American neo-colonialists.
Britain has decided to allow UK citizens to flood into the Turks and Caicos, as well as the British Virgin Islands, to vote in local elections to ensure that pro-independence forces are marginalized. With pro-independence talk increasing in Anguilla and the Cayman Islands, as well as Turks and Caicos, Bermuda, and British Virgin Islands, Britain's Royal Navy has announced plans to maintain a permanent naval presence in its Caribbean colonies. The U.S., through its own gunboat diplomacy in the region, sees the move as complementing its own neo-colonialist policies in the Caribbean area, from Puerto Rico and Haiti to Honduras and Colombia.
In the TCI (Turks and Caicos Islands), Britain has justified its re-colonization by calling officials of the former autonomist government corrupt and being involved with drug money laundering. However, the corruption comes from New York- and Miami-based resort developers who want to turn the TCI into a tourist colony, with the revenue going to the pockets of the wealthy land developers in the United States, many of whom are contributors to Obama, the "savior of Goldman Sachs" and the other big Wall Street firms.
According to a 2009 leaked State Department cable from the US Embassy in London, the Obama administration's first priority when it comes to Britain's dependent territories is military bases. The Obama administration wants to see nothing affect the status of three bases where the U.S. maintains strategic and intelligence assets: Diego Garcia in the British Indian Ocean Territory; Wideawake Airfield on Ascension Island, part of St. Helena; and the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia on Cyprus. The U.S. has backed the UK on the rights of the former residents of Diego Garcia, the Chagossians, to return to their homeland from exile in Mauritius. Mauritius also claims Diego Garcia.
The Netherlands has cleverly disestablished the self-governing Netherlands Antilles to replace it with three islands directly absorbed into the Netherlands, Saba, Bonaire, and St. Eustatius, while granting phony "autonomy" to Sint Maarten and Curacao. Sint Maarten's Deputy Prime Minister Theo Heyliger has called the situation "modern day slavery."
Another retrogressive NATO colonial power, Denmark, has followed the Obama's orders by refusing to give Greenland Prime Minister Kuupik Kleist any information on the CIA's use of Greenland airspace for its rendition and torture program. In fact, leaked State Department cables showed that Greenland and Faroes airspace were used by the CIA in its kidnapping program but the Danish government has steadfastly refused to provide details to the governments of its two colonies.
His far-right critics call Obama a "Marxist-oriented anti-colonialist." For those who groomed Obama for the presidency, he is anything but anti-colonialist. In fact, Obama shows all the enthusiasm for Anglo-American colonialism as displayed by its British patron saint, Cecil Rhodes.
Second in a two-part series on Obama and his neo-colonialist policies.
President Obama has been mistakenly referred to by his right-wing critics of being influenced by the anti-colonialist feelings of his Kenyan father, Barack Obama, Sr. However, Junior Obama, far from being anti-colonialist, champions neo-colonialism in his policies toward America's colonies and those that continue to be maintained by America's European NATO allies.
During his recent four-hour stop in Puerto Rico, Obama, who was in the U.S. colony long enough to bag $1 million in presidential campaign contributions from the Caribe Hilton Hotel in San Juan, made no mention of Puerto Rican governor Luis Fortuno's violent crackdown on protesting University of Puerto Rico students upset about the far right-wing governor's plans to privatize higher education in Puerto Rico. Police have beaten, maced, shot, and sexually assaulted student and worker protesters in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rican police are believed to have carried out extra-judicial killings of Afro-Puerto Ricans in racially-motivated attacks. Yet, Obama, America's first "African-American" president, failed to mention any of these atrocities to Fortuno during his four-hour stop in Puerto Rico.
Obama represents the global elites who will sell out the interests of African-American, Afro-Caribbean, and African people at the drop of a campaign donation collection plate.
Fortuno is allied with the mainland Republican Party and he favors fast-tracking Puerto Rico to statehood via a rigged referendum procedure. Obama has obliged Fortuno and those favoring continued commonwealth status by calling for a two-stage referendum, one that will certainly eliminate the proposal for full independence from the United States in the first vote on the future status of the island.
Obama, who has championed the roll-back of labor rights and civil liberties in the mainland United States, has also embarked on a policy of neo-colonialism in America's Caribbean and Pacific colonies. In addition, Obama has backed moves by America's European NATO allies, Britain, France, the Netherlands, and Denmark to re-assert colonial control over their overseas territories. The reasons are plain: oil and other natural resource reserves have been discovered near many of these territories and the U.S. wants to ensure that its military continues to have basing rights from islets in the Indian Ocean to the Caribbean and south Pacific.
While Guahan (Guam) and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas (Saipan, Rota, Tinian, and the Northern Islands) talk about re-unification and eventual independence from the United States in a Chamorro federation, Obama's Pentagon is expanding its military presence on Guam. Plans for the expansion of U.S. military installations in Guahan will destroy 10 percent of the current forest cover on the island. Also slated for destruction are over 1300 acres of habitat for recovering nearly-extinct species, including tropical birds.
Guahan's concerns never rise to the attention of the power elite in Washington. In April, the US Senate leadership of Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and 13 other senators secretly landed at Anderson Air Force Base on Guam on their way to a top-level meeting in Hong Kong. Neither Guahan Governor Eddie Calvo, a Republican, nor any member of his administration was informed of the Senate delegation visit to Guam and Calvo questioned why the 15 senators landed in secret at Anderson instead of publicly at Won Pat International Airport, near the capital of Hagatna. The snub was even more stinging just a few months after the House of Representatives delegates of Guahan and other U.S. colonies, including the District of Columbia, lost their voting rights in House committees.
The United States is also resisting efforts by Eastern Samoa, known officially by its colonial name of "American Samoa," to gain more control over its internal affairs. Washington will resist any attempt to unify Eastern Samoa with its independent neighbor, Samoa, formerly known as Western Samoa. "American Samoa" Governor Togiola Tulafono has decried the fact that the colony is subservient to the U.S. Department of the Interior and that the Secretary of the Interior appoints American Samoa's chief and associate justices. The Obama administration has decided to maintain the status quo and not allow Eastern Samoa to appoint its own top justices.
According to leaked State Department cables, the United States has also made it clear it will resist efforts by the Tokelau islands, now a dependency of New Zealand, to regain sovereignty of Swain's Island, now a dependency of "American Samoa." New Zealand told a visiting U.S. diplomat that New Zealand would not permit Tokelau's leader, Koluei O'Brien, to press for a return of Swain's Island to Tokelau. Obama, the neo-colonialist, does not seem to mind using America's might to threaten Tokelau, a small nation made up of three atolls.
Obama's Justice Department has opposed provisions in the US Senate Resolution calling for a Fifth Constitutional Convention of the US Virgin Islands. Eric Holder's Justice Department objects to provisions that call for more autonomy for the U.S. colony, once a territory of Denmark that was sold to the United States during World War I.
The Obama administration has also stood by Britain as it has imposed a neo-colonial regime in the Turks and Caicos Islands, in an area believed to hold marine oil deposits. The British government abrogated the 2006 Constitution for the islands and given the British Governor wide-reaching powers. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and Bermuda condemned the abrogation of the Turks and Caicos Constitution and re-imposition of colonialism. The Premier of Bermuda, Ewart Brown, who has challenged Britain's attempt to roll back the self-government of Bermuda, said that if what happened to the Turks and Caicos happened in Zimbabwe, "the world and the UK government in particular would refer to the move as barbaric and characterize its government as a cruel dictatorship."
Britain has downgraded the Bermuda passport by deciding that to travel through the Schengen area of the European Union, Bermudians must possess British passports. Bermuda has also seen the arrival of FBI and Miami-Dade police officials to supplement law enforcement on the island, a further erosion of sovereignty to the Anglo-American neo-colonialists.
Britain has decided to allow UK citizens to flood into the Turks and Caicos, as well as the British Virgin Islands, to vote in local elections to ensure that pro-independence forces are marginalized. With pro-independence talk increasing in Anguilla and the Cayman Islands, as well as Turks and Caicos, Bermuda, and British Virgin Islands, Britain's Royal Navy has announced plans to maintain a permanent naval presence in its Caribbean colonies. The U.S., through its own gunboat diplomacy in the region, sees the move as complementing its own neo-colonialist policies in the Caribbean area, from Puerto Rico and Haiti to Honduras and Colombia.
In the TCI (Turks and Caicos Islands), Britain has justified its re-colonization by calling officials of the former autonomist government corrupt and being involved with drug money laundering. However, the corruption comes from New York- and Miami-based resort developers who want to turn the TCI into a tourist colony, with the revenue going to the pockets of the wealthy land developers in the United States, many of whom are contributors to Obama, the "savior of Goldman Sachs" and the other big Wall Street firms.
According to a 2009 leaked State Department cable from the US Embassy in London, the Obama administration's first priority when it comes to Britain's dependent territories is military bases. The Obama administration wants to see nothing affect the status of three bases where the U.S. maintains strategic and intelligence assets: Diego Garcia in the British Indian Ocean Territory; Wideawake Airfield on Ascension Island, part of St. Helena; and the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia on Cyprus. The U.S. has backed the UK on the rights of the former residents of Diego Garcia, the Chagossians, to return to their homeland from exile in Mauritius. Mauritius also claims Diego Garcia.
The Netherlands has cleverly disestablished the self-governing Netherlands Antilles to replace it with three islands directly absorbed into the Netherlands, Saba, Bonaire, and St. Eustatius, while granting phony "autonomy" to Sint Maarten and Curacao. Sint Maarten's Deputy Prime Minister Theo Heyliger has called the situation "modern day slavery."
Another retrogressive NATO colonial power, Denmark, has followed the Obama's orders by refusing to give Greenland Prime Minister Kuupik Kleist any information on the CIA's use of Greenland airspace for its rendition and torture program. In fact, leaked State Department cables showed that Greenland and Faroes airspace were used by the CIA in its kidnapping program but the Danish government has steadfastly refused to provide details to the governments of its two colonies.
His far-right critics call Obama a "Marxist-oriented anti-colonialist." For those who groomed Obama for the presidency, he is anything but anti-colonialist. In fact, Obama shows all the enthusiasm for Anglo-American colonialism as displayed by its British patron saint, Cecil Rhodes.
The Ghost of Goebbels: Historical Revisionism and World War II
Wayne MADSEN (USA) | 21.06.2011 | 07:58
An expected outgrowth of the world's steady descent into total and extreme capitalist control is the increasing tendency by some historians and their accomplices in the media to re-invent certain aspects of history.
Although the history of the Middle East and colonialism have been favorite playgrounds for the historical revisionists, it is World War II and the role played by the Soviet Union in the war that has attracted the attention of most of the alterers of history, both professional and amateur.As we recall the Nazi attack on the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, the 70th anniversary of which we now remember, it is important to note that the "revisionism" of the events of that day began with chief Nazi German propagandist Joseph Goebbels and the disappearance of historical facts "down the memory hole," as George Orwell put it in 1984, is carried on to this day by Goebbels's ideological heirs who are mainly funded by the barons of Wall Street through various tax-free right-wing "think tanks" and research institutes in the West.
Although the revisionists claim that the 1939 Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and its secret protocol to divide eastern Europe into respective German and Soviet spheres of influence somehow made Soviet leader Joseph Stalin a "partner" of Hitler, little attention is paid to secret German-British talks in 1939 that would have divided the world into German and British spheres of influence while making common cause against the Soviet Union.
Goebbels's ideological heirs would have everyone believe that Stalin and German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler were on the same ideological plane and were conniving to jointly conquer the world. This revisionist account is meant to mask the goals of the Western industrialists at the time. Many of the world's wealthiest capitalists, including the German-descent British royal family, wanted Hitler to stamp out Soviet Communism and had no problem with the Nazis' "long march East."
The pandering of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to Hitler at the 1939 Munich Conference, which saw the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, was seen in the eyes of many British and American industrial barons as the remnants of Czechoslovakia being safe from Soviet Russia. That same mind-set would exist as Nazi troops invaded Poland, the Baltic states, Yugoslavia, and then, the USSR, itself. Not until December 7, 1941, and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, would the western industrial barons decide it was time to support the war effort against the Axix Powers, albeit reluctantly.
Certainly, Britain was not alone in its secret campaign to align with the Nazis against the Soviet Union. U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, who enraged many capitalists and Republicans by establishing diplomatic relations with the USSR after he took office in 1933, found himself almost ousted in a coup d'etat in 1933 arranged by Wall Street robber barons intent on declaring a state of national emergency and placing Roosevelt under virtual house arrest. The plot was discovered by retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler and communicated to the U.S. Congress where details of the plot remained secret until 1970. Among the chief coup plotters was Prescott Bush, the father and grandfather, respectively, of two later U.S. presidents. Prescott Bush was a chief Wall Street banker for German Nazi-owned businesses in the years leading up to and following the outbreak of World War II.
In 1936, U.S. ambassador to Berlin, William Dodd, wrote to Roosevelt to warn him that the threat posed to him in 1934 by the Wall Street-Nazi alliance remained as such two years later. Dodd wrote:
"A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime . . . A prominent executive of one of the largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt continued his progressive policies. Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there. Propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare."
The words of Dodd: "propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare" ring true today. Wall Street of the 1930s and 1940s owned the major media outlets, including the large publishing houses, that gave notoriety to the revisionist commentators and historians of their day. The situation remains much the same today.
There is the distinct danger that soon, the historical revionists will not be content in putting Stalin and Hitler on the same level. With global media in the hands of a select few capitalists, it is forseeable that Stalin will be re-assessed as the reason Hitler had to conquer most of Europe and Hitler will be painted favorably. There are already signs that this historical revisionism is taking place among the right-wing political parties of Europe that are adopting many of the planks of the neo-Nazi movement, including the meme that Hitler had no choice to invade eastern Europe and the Soviet Union to protect the world against Bolshevism. That argument of the capitalists is nothing new but it is one, 70 years after the invasion of the USSR by the Nazis, that should have long ago been discarded into the ash bin of fascist propaganda.
Final Statement
Adopted by the International History Conference Commemorating 70th Anniversary of the Outbreak of 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War (Sevastopol, June 15-17, 2011)
We, the assembled representatives of historical research communities and civil societies of Belarus, Latvia, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine participating in the Sevastopol International History Conference commemorating 70th Anniversary of the outbreak of 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War, regard the War and our Victory as one of the most tragic and at the same time heroic pages in the common history of our nations.
We are increasingly alarmed with the current rise of revisionism of the history of World War II in the West and in several post-Soviet republics where incendiary political considerations outweigh commitment to historical accuracy.
We consider it absolutely unacceptable to draw the Great Patriotic War against fascism as a ‘fight of two totalitarian regimes’, to deny the justified and liberating nature of that war for our nations, to depict the Red Army’s liberation mission in 11 European countries as ‘Soviet occupation’.
We state that the concept ascribing ‘mutual responsibility’ for unleashing the war to ‘the Nazi and Soviet regimes’ lacks any historical and moral foundations. As historians, we are aware that the responsibility for that devastating war rests fully with the Western powers. Until now the diplomatic archives in London keep guarding the secrets of the British-German talks held in June 1939 on the division of the world into Great Britain’s and Germany’s spheres of influence, aimed to deter Soviet Union from taking part in shaping the future of Europe.
While Hitler’s military machine was destined to exterminate Soviet Union as a ‘hotbed of Bolshevism’, today the Nazism is sometimes being portrayed as a ‘natural response to the red threat’. This is an utmost lie contradicting recognized historical facts.
We claim that all civilized nations should officially outlaw any endeavors to justify fascism, Nazi criminals or collaborationists. Any revisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal outright statements condemning fascism are totally inadmissible.
The present round of revisionism is supposed to provide an ideological backing for “anti-totalitarian” appeals like the notorious OSCE Parliamentary Assembly resolution adopted on July 3, 2009calling for a trial over the Soviet Union’s allegedly ‘criminal past’. Such campaigns, provoking territorial claims against Russia and compensation demands for ‘damages caused during Soviet occupation’ trigger imminent and far-reaching dangerous consequences for the European security, still not adequately assessed by the short-sighted instigators of these campaigns and their blind contractors.
A distorted view on the meaning and the results of World War II and Russia’s Great Patriotic War would pave the way for a new division of Europe and the world with catastrophic consequences. This is why we are calling upon the academic community for a fair and unbiased research of the period of 1941-1945 in the name of historical truth and our common future. The sacrifices of millions of Russians in the defeat of Fascism and the devastation wrought in the war must not be perverted for current political narratives. Such actions only serve to cause division within Europe, and prevent the advancement of peace and unity amongst peoples.
(end)
It's important to remember that ALL SIDES were controlled by the NWO globalists, who are the real enemy. Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, FDR, and other lesser leaders were all controlled by the international bankers/NWO globalists. They are the enemy, and the entire world is about to rise-up and shake-off (intifada) the parasites of humanity who are destroying our beautiful planet. Each and every one of us must be a warrior for peace - if we do nothing then we are siding with the NWO. The most important weapon we have, besides information, is food, so plant a 'victory garden'. We will literally overgrow the NWO!
Wayne MADSEN (USA) | 21.06.2011 | 07:58
An expected outgrowth of the world's steady descent into total and extreme capitalist control is the increasing tendency by some historians and their accomplices in the media to re-invent certain aspects of history.
Although the history of the Middle East and colonialism have been favorite playgrounds for the historical revisionists, it is World War II and the role played by the Soviet Union in the war that has attracted the attention of most of the alterers of history, both professional and amateur.As we recall the Nazi attack on the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, the 70th anniversary of which we now remember, it is important to note that the "revisionism" of the events of that day began with chief Nazi German propagandist Joseph Goebbels and the disappearance of historical facts "down the memory hole," as George Orwell put it in 1984, is carried on to this day by Goebbels's ideological heirs who are mainly funded by the barons of Wall Street through various tax-free right-wing "think tanks" and research institutes in the West.
Although the revisionists claim that the 1939 Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and its secret protocol to divide eastern Europe into respective German and Soviet spheres of influence somehow made Soviet leader Joseph Stalin a "partner" of Hitler, little attention is paid to secret German-British talks in 1939 that would have divided the world into German and British spheres of influence while making common cause against the Soviet Union.
Goebbels's ideological heirs would have everyone believe that Stalin and German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler were on the same ideological plane and were conniving to jointly conquer the world. This revisionist account is meant to mask the goals of the Western industrialists at the time. Many of the world's wealthiest capitalists, including the German-descent British royal family, wanted Hitler to stamp out Soviet Communism and had no problem with the Nazis' "long march East."
The pandering of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to Hitler at the 1939 Munich Conference, which saw the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, was seen in the eyes of many British and American industrial barons as the remnants of Czechoslovakia being safe from Soviet Russia. That same mind-set would exist as Nazi troops invaded Poland, the Baltic states, Yugoslavia, and then, the USSR, itself. Not until December 7, 1941, and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, would the western industrial barons decide it was time to support the war effort against the Axix Powers, albeit reluctantly.
Certainly, Britain was not alone in its secret campaign to align with the Nazis against the Soviet Union. U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, who enraged many capitalists and Republicans by establishing diplomatic relations with the USSR after he took office in 1933, found himself almost ousted in a coup d'etat in 1933 arranged by Wall Street robber barons intent on declaring a state of national emergency and placing Roosevelt under virtual house arrest. The plot was discovered by retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler and communicated to the U.S. Congress where details of the plot remained secret until 1970. Among the chief coup plotters was Prescott Bush, the father and grandfather, respectively, of two later U.S. presidents. Prescott Bush was a chief Wall Street banker for German Nazi-owned businesses in the years leading up to and following the outbreak of World War II.
In 1936, U.S. ambassador to Berlin, William Dodd, wrote to Roosevelt to warn him that the threat posed to him in 1934 by the Wall Street-Nazi alliance remained as such two years later. Dodd wrote:
"A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime . . . A prominent executive of one of the largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt continued his progressive policies. Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there. Propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare."
The words of Dodd: "propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare" ring true today. Wall Street of the 1930s and 1940s owned the major media outlets, including the large publishing houses, that gave notoriety to the revisionist commentators and historians of their day. The situation remains much the same today.
There is the distinct danger that soon, the historical revionists will not be content in putting Stalin and Hitler on the same level. With global media in the hands of a select few capitalists, it is forseeable that Stalin will be re-assessed as the reason Hitler had to conquer most of Europe and Hitler will be painted favorably. There are already signs that this historical revisionism is taking place among the right-wing political parties of Europe that are adopting many of the planks of the neo-Nazi movement, including the meme that Hitler had no choice to invade eastern Europe and the Soviet Union to protect the world against Bolshevism. That argument of the capitalists is nothing new but it is one, 70 years after the invasion of the USSR by the Nazis, that should have long ago been discarded into the ash bin of fascist propaganda.
Final Statement
Adopted by the International History Conference Commemorating 70th Anniversary of the Outbreak of 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War (Sevastopol, June 15-17, 2011)
We, the assembled representatives of historical research communities and civil societies of Belarus, Latvia, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine participating in the Sevastopol International History Conference commemorating 70th Anniversary of the outbreak of 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War, regard the War and our Victory as one of the most tragic and at the same time heroic pages in the common history of our nations.
We are increasingly alarmed with the current rise of revisionism of the history of World War II in the West and in several post-Soviet republics where incendiary political considerations outweigh commitment to historical accuracy.
We consider it absolutely unacceptable to draw the Great Patriotic War against fascism as a ‘fight of two totalitarian regimes’, to deny the justified and liberating nature of that war for our nations, to depict the Red Army’s liberation mission in 11 European countries as ‘Soviet occupation’.
We state that the concept ascribing ‘mutual responsibility’ for unleashing the war to ‘the Nazi and Soviet regimes’ lacks any historical and moral foundations. As historians, we are aware that the responsibility for that devastating war rests fully with the Western powers. Until now the diplomatic archives in London keep guarding the secrets of the British-German talks held in June 1939 on the division of the world into Great Britain’s and Germany’s spheres of influence, aimed to deter Soviet Union from taking part in shaping the future of Europe.
While Hitler’s military machine was destined to exterminate Soviet Union as a ‘hotbed of Bolshevism’, today the Nazism is sometimes being portrayed as a ‘natural response to the red threat’. This is an utmost lie contradicting recognized historical facts.
We claim that all civilized nations should officially outlaw any endeavors to justify fascism, Nazi criminals or collaborationists. Any revisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal outright statements condemning fascism are totally inadmissible.
The present round of revisionism is supposed to provide an ideological backing for “anti-totalitarian” appeals like the notorious OSCE Parliamentary Assembly resolution adopted on July 3, 2009calling for a trial over the Soviet Union’s allegedly ‘criminal past’. Such campaigns, provoking territorial claims against Russia and compensation demands for ‘damages caused during Soviet occupation’ trigger imminent and far-reaching dangerous consequences for the European security, still not adequately assessed by the short-sighted instigators of these campaigns and their blind contractors.
A distorted view on the meaning and the results of World War II and Russia’s Great Patriotic War would pave the way for a new division of Europe and the world with catastrophic consequences. This is why we are calling upon the academic community for a fair and unbiased research of the period of 1941-1945 in the name of historical truth and our common future. The sacrifices of millions of Russians in the defeat of Fascism and the devastation wrought in the war must not be perverted for current political narratives. Such actions only serve to cause division within Europe, and prevent the advancement of peace and unity amongst peoples.
(end)
It's important to remember that ALL SIDES were controlled by the NWO globalists, who are the real enemy. Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, FDR, and other lesser leaders were all controlled by the international bankers/NWO globalists. They are the enemy, and the entire world is about to rise-up and shake-off (intifada) the parasites of humanity who are destroying our beautiful planet. Each and every one of us must be a warrior for peace - if we do nothing then we are siding with the NWO. The most important weapon we have, besides information, is food, so plant a 'victory garden'. We will literally overgrow the NWO!
