Translate

Jan 18, 2011

Le Pen leaves party leadership with anti-Semitic slur

 





Le Pen leaves party leadership with anti-Semitic slur
January 17, 2011

PARIS (JTA) -- Jean-Marie Le Pen, exiting leader of France's far-right National Front party, made a public anti-Semitic slur while handing over the party leadership to his daughter.

Le Pen suggested in a weekend farewell speech that Jews cry wolf, unduly claiming to be victims of anti-Semitism, during his comments on the case of a Jewish French journalist who filed an official complaint against the National Front last weekend.

Mickael Szames, a journalist for the French media station France 24, said over the weekend that he was violently pushed out of a private National Front gala and injured by a group of security guards, reportedly because he was Jewish. He filed an official complaint over the attack.

In response, Le Pen, 82, jokingly told journalists that "the person in question thought he could say that he was kicked out because he is Jewish. It didn't show, either on his (press) card, or on his nose, if I dare say."

The National Front denied that Szames was beaten and said it would file a complaint against him for slander.

Le Pen's comments in the incident come as no surprise. In his farewell speech Saturday, Le Pen said he had no regrets for calling the Holocaust a "detail" in the history of World War II, nor for other comments that repeatedly cost him fines in court and a reputation as France's leading political xenophobe.

France's largest Jewish umbrella group, the CRIF, said in a statement Monday in response to Le Pen's outburst that "we understand that Jean-Marie Le Pen feels the need to show that he still exists to a small extent, and that he is not foregoing any of his obsessions."

The American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants also said in a statement issued Monday that Holocaust survivors "are shocked but not surprised that Le Pen would once again revert to foul and offensive Jew-baiting in remarks at the close of his notorious political career."

"Until it distances itself from such comments, the National Front party will live in the shadow of these words of hate," the statement said.

New party president Marine Le Pen, 42, refrains from the kind of advertised disdain her father showed for the role of the Jewish community in French society. But like her father, she has taken a firm stance against the spread of Islam in France. 

The newly elected leader of the National Front recently compared Muslim prayers in the streets around certain Parisian neighborhoods to the Nazi occupation. She was overwhelmingly elected president of the party over the weekend and is expected to modernize the group into a more powerful political force.





--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Introduction: DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST

 

Introduction

 

 

This is a book about the Holocaust, and about two competing views of that event.  On the one hand we have the traditional, orthodox view:  the six million Jewish casualties, the gas chambers, the cremation ovens and mass graves.  Traditional historians have thousands of surviving witnesses and the weight of history on their side.  On the other hand there is a small, renegade band of writers and researchers who refuse to accept large parts of this story.  These "revisionists," as they call themselves, present counter-evidence and ask tough questions.  They are beginning to outline a new and different narrative.

 

Thus there has emerged something of a debate—a debate of historic significance.  This is no peripheral clash between two arcane schools of thought, regarding some minutiae of World War II.  It is about history, of course, but it also speaks to fundamental issues of our time:  freedom of speech and press, the operation of mass media, manipulation of public opinion, political and economic power structures, and the coercive abilities of the State.  It is an astonishingly rancorous and controversial debate, with far-reaching implications.

 

Most of the reading public is only dimly aware of this debate, if at all.  Everyone knows that "six million Jews were killed by the Nazis," and that gas chambers were used in the killing.  But few have any idea about the origins of this story, its rationale, and its justification.  Fewer still know that serious questions have been raised against the traditional view; if they have heard of such questions, it is in the context of "a few right-wing neo-Nazi anti-Semites" who are trying to attack the Jews by questioning the Holocaust.  And not more than a handful of people know about the serious issues raised by the revisionists, and the attempts by certain traditionalists to respond.

 

The fact that so few are aware of what may be called the "Great Holocaust Debate" is perhaps not surprising.  Much has been invested in the conventional story.  Textbooks and encyclopedias have been written about it.  Historians have staked their personal reputations on it.  Politicians have passed laws defending it.  And wealthy and powerful interests have good reason to sustain it.  In short, very few of those in positions of influence want to acknowledge any kind of legitimate debate.  There is no incentive to publicize it, and strong disincentive.  Those in the public eye know that, should they broach this subject, they will suffer the consequences.  Advertisers will drop out.  Financial backers will disappear.  They may be sued.  They will lose access.  They will be shunned.  And it will all be legal.

 

Only a dramatic turn of events can force this debate into the public realm.  Such a turn occurred in early 2006, when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that there would be a Holocaust conference in Teheran.  The purpose would be to examine its scientific and technical basis with an eye to reinterpreting the facts.  Reaction was rapid and fierce.  Most called it a "Holocaust denial" conference, dismissing it as so much anti-Semitic raving.  But Ahmadinejad followed through, and the conference was held in December of that year.  The sky did not fall, and hoards of crazed lunatics did not rise up and slaughter Jews around the world.  But the topic broke through the wall of silence; and more people now than ever suspect that all is not well with the traditional story—hence the need for a book such as this.

 

* * * * *

 

The Great Debate is marked by a striking partisanship.  The traditional story is defended primarily by survivors, Jewish writers and researchers, and those who suffered at the hands of Nazi Germany—in other words, by people with a self-interest in sustaining the dominant view of a genocidal Nazi regime and an innocent and victimized Jewish people.  Of the thousands of books on the subject, the vast majority are by Jewish authors.  The revisionist perspective is promoted by a very small number of people, primarily Germans, people of German origins, and those who are ideologically inclined to be pro-German or anti-Jewish—again, not an unbiased group.1  Charges of "lies," "conspiracy," and "hoax" are frequently launched by both sides.  This leaves the vast majority of the public in a quandary: the average person is faced with partisan advocates on both sides, and rarely, if ever, gets a complete and balanced picture.

 

My goal is to remedy this shortcoming.  I intend to present an objective, impartial look at this debate.  I will discuss the latest and strongest arguments on both sides, examine the replies, and offer an unbiased assessment.  This is a challenging task, to say the least, but I believe that I am reasonably well suited for it.  Unlike the vast majority of writers on the Holocaust, I am not Jewish—either by religion or ethnicity; nor are any of my family members.  I am not of German descent.  No one in my immediate family suffered or died in World War II.  I am neither Muslim nor fundamentalist Christian, so I have no religious bias.  My background is as a scholar and academic, having taught humanities at a prominent American university for several years now.  I have a long-standing interest in World War II, and in the present conflict in the Middle East.  In the end, whether I have succeeded in offering an objective analysis of this debate will be for the reader to judge.

 

This book is targeted at the general educated reader, but holds to a high standard of scholarship.  Hence it is as suited for university use as for general readership.  In examining the writings of the two opponents, I have taken nothing for granted.  To the extent possible, I have verified all quotations, checked all calculations, and noted errors—though I must say that the level of scholarship on both sides has been laudably high.  I have attempted to use commonly available sources, should the reader wish to confirm any statements or quotations I offer here.2  I have concentrated on English language sources; this has its drawbacks, but fortunately most of the important sources are in English, so the problem is not too great.  Where relevant, I have cited essential non-English writings as well.

 

I have also shown a preference for hard-copy publications—books and journal articles—over Internet publications.  Web-based material is always questionable.  It can change from one day to another, and disappear the next.  Such sources are typically less well researched, and often rely on other, equally unreliable, Web-based sources for their arguments.  On the other hand, there are certain obvious advantages.  Much controversial material can be publishedonly on the Web, and this point must be noted.  Also, it is very convenient, for example, that several complete revisionist texts are available free online.  (This very fact should mitigate the notion of a profit motive of the revisionists.)  And the rise of YouTube and online video services allows access to audio-visual material that can have a greater impact than printed works.  Thus, as appropriate, I have included relevant Web page information.

 

Finally, I use terminology indicating the provisional nature of claims about the Holocaust.  My use of "alleged," "so-called," scare quotes, and similar devices simply is meant to indicate that I am withholding assent until the case is fully examined.  I tend to be skeptical of most things told to me by those in positions of power and influence, and this subject is no different.  I recommend that the reader do the same.  As for my occasional quips, jabs, and weak attempts at humor, I can only say that this is not intended as insult or dismissal.  I aim to take a sometimes plodding and tedious debate and make it interesting and readable.  But when one makes outrageous claims, or puts forth obvious nonsense, and then expects to be taken seriously…then a sarcastic jab may be entirely appropriate. 

 

* * * * *

 

Some might question the relevance of this whole topic.  They might point out that the event under discussion happened over sixty years ago, that most who experienced it are dead, and that the enmities of the war are long gone. America and the European nations are friends, and at peace (with each other, at least!).  Japan is an important trading partner, and poses no military threat.  So why bother with the Holocaust?  What's the big deal?  "Yes, the Jews suffered," some may say.  "So just leave them alone.  Let them have their ol' Holocaust." 

 

I think it does matter, and not only to those who have a vested interest.  First, there is the straightforward question of history.  Regardless of what one may think, the Holocaust was an event of major historical importance.  As with any historical event, it is important to get the facts straight, and to develop consistent and coherent views about what happened.  To understand what did, or did not, happen is important for understanding the world of the twentieth century, and by extension, the world of today.

 

Second, we are not allowed to forget about it, even if we wanted to.  Coverage of the Holocaust is standard fare in every school curriculum.3  Children the world over read The Diary of Anne FrankNumber the StarsWaiting for Anya, and Butterfly.  Students learn about the gas chambers and the six million, about the Nazi atrocities.4  We watch Holocaust miniseries on television,Schindler's List, and documentaries like Night and Fog.  We celebrate "Holocaust Education Week," and we acknowledge January 27 each year as the "International Day of Commemoration" of Holocaust victims, as declared by the UN in 2005.  School children collect six million pencils, or six million paperclips.5  We visit Holocaust museums.  We take college courses from endowed chairs in Holocaust studies.  This is not by accident.  It is a deliberate plan, to make sure we "never forget."  And if we can never forget, then we should at least get the story straight.

 

Third, there is the drama of the debate itself.  It is unlike anything else—the name-calling, the suppression of ideas, the jailing of dissenters, the burning of books.  It is a debate that can scarcely be mentioned in polite company.  It is, in a real sense, one of the last taboos in Western civilization.  But as we know, taboos never last.  They are the product of a given era, of specific social and political forces.  When those forces shift, as they inevitably do, the taboo is lifted.  Now is perhaps such a time.

 

Fourth, we have the underlying issue of free speech.  I take a position in support of radical free speech.  Speech is an (almost) absolute right.  There is virtually no topic that should be out of bounds.  Barring only such obscure cases as an immediate threat to human life (one thinks of the contrived example of "crying fire in a crowded theater"), no words or ideas should be beyond discussion.  I support vigorous and open debate on every conceivable topic, the Holocaust included.  Suppressing speech only drives it underground, and can only lead to unethical and reprehensible manipulation of the public's ability tothink for itself.  Those in power always have reason to fear free speech—all the more reason to defend it.

 

Fifth is the monetary angle.  Billions of dollars have been given as restitution, to Israel, to individual survivors, and to Jewish organizations.  These are tax dollars, provided by the workers of the affected nations—primarily Germanyand Switzerland (to date).  Restitution claims have not ended, and will likely not end in the foreseeable future; as recently as March 2008, the Belgian government agreed to pay $170 million to survivors, their families, and the "Jewish community."  This is rather astonishing, given that Belgium was avictim of the war, not an aggressor!  (The official reason: Belgium "failed to resist hard enough" against Nazi deportation of Jews.)  Compensation money, arising directly from the conventional Holocaust story, in turn flows back to sustain it.  Restitution money buys political clout, where—in the U.S. at least—it ends up as campaign contributions and issue ads.  It encourages lawmakers to legislate in support of Israel and against revisionism—and they do.

 

Sixth, there are the far-reaching conflicts in the Middle East that stem, in large part, from the Holocaust—in a number of important ways.  First, the state of Israel itself is due largely to the persecution of Jews in the war (Israel was created in 1948).6  Its creation sparked the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs, which led to several wars and ultimately to the present Israeli occupation of the West Bank and other Palestinian lands.  This occupation in turn is a crucial factor in the global "war on terror," and in the present bloody conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Second, it is a crucial factor in the United States' giving $6 billion per year, every year, to Israel in the form of military, economic, and indirect aid.  Third, if there is a future conflict with Iran, it too will stem in part from conflicting views of the Holocaust;7 Ahmadinejad knows this, hence his willingness to challenge the traditional account.  And finally, the influential group of people who promote and defend the Holocaust are by and large the same people who supported the wars in the Middle East.  The same ideology—militant right-wing Zionism—is a major factor in both.  Thus by better understanding their thinking and actions we may perhaps head off future wars.

 

Seventh:  If we can be misled—or fooled, or deceived, or lied to—about the Holocaust, what other events might we be misled about?  The same social forces that could give rise to, and sustain, a deficient Holocaust story could produce countless other stories that might be exaggerated, embellished, distorted, or falsified.

 

Finally, the Great Debate tells us something important about the power structure of Western nations.  Revisionists challenge not only orthodoxy; they challenge the power of the State.  Advocates for the conventional view are in positions of great influence.  They are wealthy.  They have many supporters, and virtually unlimited resources.  They are able to turn the power of the State, and public opinion, against revisionism.  The revisionists, few in number and poor in means, have only ideas.  But, as the masked man once said, ideas are bulletproof.  They have a power of their own, unmatched by money, military, or government.  Ideas can penetrate to the heart of truth.  This is the promise of revisionism.  Whether it succeeds, time shall tell.

 

* * * * *

 

To repeat, I attempt here to take an impartial look at this clash of views.  Arguably this is doomed to failure.  I can be sure that both sides will accuse me of biased thinking, of disregarding important points, of undervaluing critical issues.  Trying to remain neutral in this cantankerous debate is rather like taking a stroll through no-man's-land amidst trench warfare.  I am guaranteed to be shot at by both sides.

 

Nevertheless, I am not concerned with befriending either camp.  The hardcore partisans of both sides are few in number, even if one side wields disproportionate power.  My concern is the vast middle ground of people, neither Jew nor Muslim nor German, who are directly and indirectly affected by the Holocaust, and who deserve to hear all perspectives on the matter.  I stand with that group.

 

I am not a revisionist, and I do not endorse their claims.  I am a bystander in this debate, observing and commenting on a collision of ideas.  This book is not a book of revisionism.  It is a book about revisionism, and about two competing views of the truth.  It addresses the ability of each side to marshal evidence, and to create a clear and consistent picture of the past. 

 

The revisionist view of events is so shocking, so far from what we have been told, that we have a hard time comprehending its possibility.  A colleague once told me that he would be no more shocked to find no Eiffel Tower in Paris than he would to learn that the revisionists were right.  Yet we can scarcely avoid asking ourselves this question:  Is it really possible that the traditional Holocaust story is wrong?  And not merely a little wrong, but significantly and fundamentally flawed?  This is for each reader to decide.  My objective is not to impose an overall conclusion, but rather to illuminate and articulate the main points, and to comment on their validity.  The reader must decide.

 

I sense a turning point in the debate.  It seems to be moving out of the shadows and into the realm of serious and legitimate discourse.  Revisionists have strong arguments in their favor, and, despite book burnings and jail terms, they are not going away.  Traditionalists seem of late to have lost their momentum.  Perhaps they have no more counterarguments.  Perhaps they have tired of defending the conflicting stories of survivors and witnesses.  Perhaps they have reached the limit of their ability to fashion a comprehensible picture of those tragic events of sixty years ago.  The debate will reach a new resolution, and I suspect that the result will be something different than we presume today. 

 

NOTES

 

1.  Of course there are other revisionists not among these groups.  Prominent revisionist Germar Rudolf has argued that, proportionately, the French are the most represented group.

 

2.  Wherever possible, quotations include in-text citations.  For example, (Hilberg 2003: 29) refers to page 29 of Hilberg's 2003 publication (The Destruction of the European Jews), which can be found in the bibliography at the rear.  Such citations both let the reader know the time frame of the quotation, and avoid an excessive multiplication of footnotes.  (Recent scholarship, especially by the revisionists, is footnote-crazy.  This is useful from a scholarly perspective, but can make for awkward reading.)  The end objective, after all, is to clearly cite reliable and verifiable sources, and I think I have achieved this goal.  And, unlike most books on the subject (of either side), I have included a full and complete index and bibliography.

 

3.  One example:  On November 7, 2008, the British Times Online reported that "every secondary school [in the UK] is to get a Holocaust specialist to ensure that the subject is taught comprehensively and sensitively."  Ten percent of these specialists will receive a master's degree in "Holocaust education."  "The scheme is part of a wider Holocaust education project funded by the Government" and a national charity.  The project will also "send two sixth-formers [ages 16 and 17] from every school to Auschwitz" each year.

 

4.  In February 2008, French President Nicolas Sarkozy proposed strengthening an existing mandate to teach the Holocaust; his idea was that "every fifth grader will have to learn the life story of one of the 11,000 [Jewish] French children killed by the Nazis in the Holocaust." (New York Times, February 16)  The proposal was rejected by the Education Ministry five months later.  Yet we should ask what might have compelled Sarkozy to attempt this.  One factor could be his family background; his grandfather was Jewish, and he clearly views himself as a "friend of Israel."  Another might be the strong Jewish minority in France; the country has the third-highest percentage of Jews outside Israel (though small—just under one percent—it is nonetheless very influential; see Chapter 12). 

 

Furthermore, we should consider the numbers involved.  The standard definition of a "child victim" is anyone under age sixteen.  Most traditionalists claim that children represented about one third of all victims.  So 11,000 child deaths implies about 30,000 French Jews in total.  (Of course, we don't know if Sarkozy is using a different definition of "child"—perhaps only those of middle-school age.)  But a figure of 30,000 is far less than that mentioned by, for example, Gilbert (1988: 244), who claims 83,000 French Jewish deaths.  As so often happens in the Debate, ill-defined numbers are thrown around that are rife with contradiction. 

 

If the total was 30,000, French Jews accounted for just 0.5 percent of the six million victims—virtually insignificant in the overall picture.  (If 83,000, then 1.4 percent.)  And they would represent only 6 percent of all 500,000 French war casualties.

 

5.  On September 20, 2004, the AP reported on a middle school in Tennessee, where, back in 1998, "students hoped to collect 6 million paper clips—one to remember each person killed in the Holocaust."  Thanks to global publicity, they had collected 30 million clips by 2004.  In that same year Paper Clips, an "award-winning" Miramax documentary, was released.  Regarding the pencils, a Texas junior high school issued a press release on May 15, 2007:  "Six million pencils for Holocaust project."  They hope to get 167,000 per month, achieving their total by 2010.

 

6.  It is true, however, that the Zionist push for a Jewish homeland had begun in earnest as early as 1900; the Balfour Declaration of 1917 declared British support for the "establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."  The process was thus in motion several decades before the end of World War II, but it was the Holocaust that was the last straw, inducing the UN to create the state of Israel in 1948.

 

7.  The Holocaust is often invoked in the Iranian conflict, both in reference to Ahmadinejad's "denial" of it, and to a future attack on Israel.  The threat of military action comes from both the United States and Israel (but from nowhere else).  A recent example:  On August 7, 2008, Time magazine reported the story "Israel Preparing for Iran Strike."  The Israeli Deputy Prime Minister is quoted as saying, "Israel takes Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's statements regarding its destruction seriously.  Israel cannot risk another Holocaust."


--



__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

Viktor Suvorov: Who Started World War II?

 

US Banks Foreclosed on Record One Million Homes in 2010 
BBC News 

Banks repossessed a record one million US homes in 2010, and could surpass that number this year, figures show. Foreclosure tracker RealtyTrac said about five million homeowners were at least two months behind on their mortgage payments. Foreclosures are likely to remain numerous while unemployment remains stubbornly high, the group said. Among the worst hit states were Nevada, Arizona, Florida and California, once at the heart of the housing boom. 


Wage Drop Has Been Worst In Decades
Huffington Post 

Wages for American workers have fallen dramatically since the financial crisis, in what will likely turn out to be the worst such plunge since the Great Depression, the Wall Street Journal reports. When hard times hit, employers typically are reluctant to reduce wages. But this downturn has been different ... Among people who are lucky enough to have work, living standards have been significantly downgraded. 


What's The Difference Between Nazi And Zionist War Criminals?
Alan Hart 

Short answer: Great effort is made to hunt down and prosecute suspected Nazi war criminals, no effort is made to bring Zionist war criminals to justice. On 13 January, the BBC's World News web site had a lengthy story with the headline Global Nazi investigations rise for a second year ... If there was an institution working to bring Zionist war criminals to justice, it would have to award failing grades to every country on Planet Earth. As Efraim Zuroff said, it is a matter of political will, but President Obama's burial of the Goldstone Report is surely proof that it does not exist for calling and holding Israel's leaders (some of them) to account for their crimes. 


'And No One Wants to Know': Israeli Soldiers on the Occupation
David Shulman -- The New York Review of Books 

The publication in Jerusalem of Occupation of the Territories: Israeli Soldiers' Testimonies 2000-2010 -- unprecedented first-hand accounts by over one hundred Israeli soldiers of their experiences while serving in the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] ... But apart from atrocities like that one, what most shocks the reader of these testimonies is the routine, daily terror and humiliation inflicted on an innocent civilian population ... Most painful of all is the inescapable realization that the events reported by the soldiers -- in straightforward, unpretentious, searing language -- are in no sense unusual. They describe the rule and the norm, the very stuff of the occupation, now forty-three-and-a-half years old and going strong. 


In the Struggle for Peace and Justice: Countering Jewish-Zionist Power 
Mark Weber 

... By supporting Israel and its policies, the United States betrays not only its own national interests, but the principles it claims to embody and defend. The only country in the world that has a nuclear weapons arsenal, that occupies territory of its neighbors, and which is in violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions - is Israel. In fact, if the United States were to hold Israel to the same standards that it has applied to Iraq, Serbia, and other countries, American bombers and missiles would be blasting Tel Aviv, and American troops would seize Israel's leaders and punish them for war crimes and crimes against humanity. 


Global Economy Cannot `Face Major New Shocks,' Says World Economic Forum 
BBC News 

The global economy is "in no position to face major new shocks", according to the World Economic Forum (WEF). Its Global Risks 2011 report warns that economic imbalances, volatile commodity prices and currencies, and governments' budget shortfalls are "unsustainable". Rapid population growth is another risk, pushing up demand for food, water and energy by 30-50% by 2030. The WEF warns that there is no sign of governments agreeing on how to achieve sustainable economic growth worldwide. 


The German Red Cross During World War II 
Video 


A brief 1944 German color film report on the wartime German Red Cross. With English subtitles. Runtime 2:35 mins. 



US Is Reaching `Point Of No Return,' Warns Former Budget Director Stockman
Nathan Diebenow -- Raw Story 

The Obama administration's $78 billion cut to US defense spending is a mere "pin-prick" to a behemoth military-industrial complex that must drastically shrink for the good of the republic, a former Reagan administration budget director recently told Raw Story. "It amounts to a failed opportunity to recognize that we are now at a historical inflection point at which the time has arrived for a classic post-war demobilization of the entire military establishment," David Stockman said in an exclusive interview. "The Cold War is long over," he continued. "The wars of occupation are almost over and were complete failures -- Afghanistan and Iraq. The American empire is done." 


Spinning Unemployment in a Collapsing Empire
Paul Craig Roberts 

... Today the United States has only 11,670,000 manufacturing jobs, less than 9% of total jobs. Yet, despite America's heavy dependence on foreign manufactures and foreign creditors, the idiots in Washington think that they are a superpower standing astride the world like a colossus ... The U.S. government, regardless of political party or president, is committed to American hegemony over the world. The Congress has just passed the largest military budget in history, and there is no indication that any of America's wars and military occupations are near an end ... A country that is the font of war and oppression, whose dominance rests on the weak reed of puppet states, and whose economy is collapsing will not long remain dominant. 


Stalin: `Chief Culprit' of World War II
Victor Suvorov - C-Span - Video 

Viktor Suvorov, a Russian historian and former Soviet military intelligence officer, explains why Stalin should be considered the "chief culprit" of World War II. In this lecture, based on research for several books including The Chief Culprit, he presents evidence to show that the German attack against the Soviet Union in June 1941 was a preventive strike to counter an imminent Soviet assault against Germany and Europe. This two-hour talk was given at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC, Feb. 3, 2009. Suvorov also responds to questions from the audience. 


Examining Stalin's 1941 Plan to Attack Germany
Daniel Michaels - Institute for Historical Review 

... Free Russian and German historians are collaborating to ascertain the historical decisions and actions that led to that bloodiest of all conflicts. Wolfgang Strauss, a respected German Slavicist and political analyst, explains this clarifying historical process in "Operation Barbarossa and the Russian Historians' Dispute," ... He examines here the research of revisionist scholars in Russia and Germany on Stalin's role in igniting the German-Russian conflict and his efforts to expand the Soviet empire across Europe ... Strauss affirms the view of German historian Ernst Nolte that Hitler's militant anti-Communism was an understandable reaction to the looming Soviet threat to Europe and humanity. 


World War II, the Third Reich and Hitler: A Witness of History Remembers
Otto Ernst Remer - Institute for Historical Review 

... The initial successes of our forces against the Soviets were due to the fact that the Russians were not stationed in defense positions, but were instead positioned right at the front for attack, which made it possible for us to quickly encircle large Soviet forces. Thus, in the first weeks of the war, we were able to capture more than three million prisoners of war as well as enormous quantities of war equipment, all of which was on the frontier, positioned for attack. That's the truth of the matter, which can be proven. 


Putting Down the `Valkyrie' Conspiracy: My Role in Berlin on July 20, 1944
Otto Ernst Remer 

... About an hour and a half after the "Valkyrie" order was given [by the von Stauffenberg conspirators], my regiment, by then combat-ready, moved into the areas to be sealed off in accordance with its orders. The normal guard units, such as those at the War Memorial and the Bendlerblock, the headquarters of the Commander of the Replacement Army and of the Defense Production Office, remained at their posts ... Goebbels asked me to address the troops assembled there, which I did. Their outrage at the traitorous goings-on was so great that they would have torn every single conspirator to pieces, had they been there. 


Economists Foretell of US Decline, China's Ascension
Reuters 

To hear a number of prominent economists tell it, it doesn't look good for the U.S. economy, not this year, not in ten years. Leading thinkers in the dismal science speaking at an annual convention offered varying visions of U.S. economic decline, in the short, medium and long term. This year, the recovery may bog down as government stimulus measures dry up. In the long run, the United States must face up to inevitably being overtaken by China as the world's largest economy. And it may have missed a chance to rein in its largest financial institutions, many of whom remain too big to fail and are getting bigger. 


Joseph Goebbels: `Casanova' of the Nazis
The Telegraph (Britain) 

A new biography of Joseph Goebbels, the limping Nazi propaganda chief, shows him to be a serial seducer who kept detailed notes of his affairs ... In his 912-page study, Joseph Goebbels: Biography, Peter Longerich, a German academic and history professor at the University of London, has delved into rarely-accessed material from his subject's diaries, which span 30 years, to paint a remarkable portrait of the man who became one of Hitler's most trusted lieutenants. 


Goebbels and the `Big Lie' Legend 
Mark Weber 

...The popular image of this man, particularly in the United States, is a crude caricature... Contrary to popular belief, Goebbels was successful as a propagandist not because he was a master of the "Big Lie," but rather as a result of his fidelity to facts and truth. As biographer Heiber notes: "Goebbels was accordingly able to celebrate his information policy as being not only superior to the enemy's in its monolithic character, but also of a `seriousness and credibility' which `simply cannot be surpassed.' The boast could be made with some justification: Seen in the long view, Goebbels preached, the best propaganda is that which does no more than serve the truth." 


Israel's Orthodox Rabbis: 'Palestinians to the Ovens!'
Richard Silverstein -- Tikun Olam 

Back in the days of the Shoah, one of the slogans of the Jew haters was: "Jews to the Ovens." Now, it causes me anguish to say, we have Israeli Orthodox rabbis saying the same about the Palestinians ... A shocking passage in an Israeli Orthodox "family magazine," Fountains of Salvation, which suggests that Israel will create death camps for Palestinians in order to wipe them out like Amalek. 


Bit By Bit, A Mexican Police Force Is Eradicated
The New York Times 

... It was an ominous punctuation mark on the wave of terror that has turned this cotton farming town near Texas into a frightened outpost of the drug war. Nearly half of its 9,000 residents have fled, local officials say, leaving block after block of scorched homes and businesses and, now, not one regular police officer. Far from big, infamous cities like Ciudad Juárez, one of the most violent places in the Americas, the war with organized crime can batter small towns just as hard, if with less notice. The cotton towns south of Juárez sit in territory disputed by at least two major drug trafficking groups, according to government and private security reports, leading to deadly power struggles. 


New Hitler Package Tour Causes Controversy
The First Post (Britain) 

Historians are divided over plans for a luxury, eight-day package tour of sites relating to Adolf Hitler, with some saying it will turn into a "perverse pilgrimage".The trip, scheduled for June, will visit the Munich beer cellar where the future Fuhrer launched his ill-fated 1923 putsch, Berchtesgaden where Hitler had his 'Eagle's Nest' castle, and Berlin where he committed suicide. 


Basic Premises
Charley Reese 

What follows are a few of the basic premises on which I base my thinking. You might or might not agree with them, but may I suggest that you make a list of your own basic premises. It will help you clarify your thinking ... The universal franchise is a bad idea. The notion that the destiny of the nation should be put in the hands of ignoramuses, parasites, boobs, party hacks and idiots is absurd on its face. Public education in America is a failure and is so flawed it cannot be reformed. Not much has changed in the past 5,000 years of human history. 


New Book Exposes Zionist Occupation As Seen By Israeli Troops 
AFP 

... "The book exposes the operational methods of the Israeli military in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the impact of these methods on the people who live in the territories -- Palestinians, settlers and the soldiers themselves," reads the introduction in an advance copy obtained by AFP. The book targets ordinary Israelis and tries to show that, contrary to the army's claims that its actions are purely defensive, the policy on the ground is "an offensive one which includes expropriation of territory, tightening control over the civilian population and instilling fear." 


Former Israel Soldiers Testify Against Army Abuses 
The Independent (Britain) 

Former Israeli soldiers who have testified against army abuses have for the first time given up their anonymity, to make their voices all the harder to ignore ... / For anyone who has covered Israel, the West Bank and Gaza over the past few years, reading Occupation of the Territories, the new book from the Israeli ex-soldiers organisation Breaking the Silence, can be an eerily evocative experience ... While Israeli forces have indeed had to deal with "concrete threats in the past decade, including terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens", their operations, especially in the West Bank, extend beyond the solely defensive and "systematically" lead to the "de facto annexation" of occupied territory "through the dispossession of Palestinian residents". 


Walking Santa, Talking Christ: Why Americans Claim to Be More Religious Than They Are
Slate.com 

... The results are surprising. Americans are hardly more religious than people living in other industrialized countries. Yet they consistently -- and more or less uniquely -- want others to believe they are more religious than they really are. Religion in America seems tied up with questions of identity in ways that are not the case in other industrialized countries. When you ask Americans about their religious beliefs, it's like asking them whether they are good people, or asking whether they are patriots. 


The Farce of a Secular and Democratic Jewish State 
Gideon Levy -- Haaretz (Israel) 

... Ten times more significant is the question whether we happen to be living in the only country on earth where clerics determine the right to citizenship. No less important, how do we dare continue deceiving ourselves that this is a secular and democratic state? The rabbis are Israel's gatekeepers. What most of them believe became painfully evident recently when they published a ruling that prohibits renting apartments to Arabs and foreigners ... The time has come for normalcy, for joining the enlightened world, in which immigration laws are determined solely by civil criteria. Not entry for all - there's no such thing anywhere in the world - but criteria of a state and society, not of God and religious law. 


Secret 1970s Files Show Trident Strike `To Kill Ten Million Russians' 
The Guardian (Britain) 

The British government opted for the Trident nuclear weapons system because it estimated it could kill up to ten million Russians and inflict "unacceptable damage" on the former Soviet Union, according to secret Whitehall documents written in the 1970s. The macabre calculations that underpinned the decision in 1980 to replace Polaris nuclear missiles with Trident have been revealed by a Ministry of Defence memo, marked "personal and top secret". In a nuclear war, Britain would have had to be prepared "to finish what we start", it said. Other MoD documents set out in chilling detail exactly how an attack on Moscow and St Petersburg could cause enough death and destruction "to bring about the breakdown of the city as a functioning community". 


In Egypt, Outrage Over Israeli Killing of Captured Prisoners 
Reuters (2007) 

Egypt summoned Israel's envoy to Cairo yesterday after Israeli media allegations that the Israeli Army may have killed 250 captured Egyptian soldiers at the end of the 1967 Middle East war. Two ruling party lawmakers demanded the ambassador's expulsion. Another called for a special parliamentary session for a declaration of war on the Jewish state. Egyptians were outraged by an Israeli documentary film which, according to media reports, alleged an army unit led by Benjamin Ben Eliezer, now Israel's infrastructure minister, may have killed 250 prisoners of war in the Sinai Peninsula rather than transferring them to POW camps. 


Author Called `Nazi' For Writing Guide to Dating Jews
The Observer (Britain) 

Kristina Grish has been described as a "Nazi" and little better than a prostitute. Her crime: writing a light-hearted, non-Jewish woman's guide to understanding Jewish men. On Web sites and letters pages in Israel and the US, Jewish women have railed at Grish, an American Protestant, accusing her of making it harder for them to find a Jewish man and trying to destroy Judaism. On the surface, Boy Vey! The Shiksa's Guide to Dating Jewish Men, has little in common with Mein Kampf, but Grish has touched the insecurity of some Jews who feel that marrying outside their religion will lead to its gradual erosion. The title is a play on the Yiddish exclamation Oy vey, and shiksa is a Yiddish word for a non-Jewish woman. 


A Far From Happy New Year
William Pfaff 

The United States will begin 2011 waging one major war that is now ten years old and showing serious signs of being lost ... It also possesses by far the largest armed forces on Earth, which demand from a profoundly indebted nation still more sophisticated equipment and better recruits, since the Americans they are now enlisting, by standard U.S. military criteria of IQ and level of education, come from the bottom of the barrel of eligible men and women, so that it has become increasingly necessary to recruit from immigrant and foreign populations ... The inevitable result will simply be more aggression, war, reciprocal terrorism, defeat and failure. This promises a far from happy new year! 


Lindbergh's April 1941 New York Speech 
Charles A. Lindbergh 

... There is a policy open to this nation that will lead to success -- a policy that leaves us free to follow our own way of life, and to develop our own civilization. It is not a new and untried idea. It was advocated by Washington. It was incorporated in the Monroe Doctrine. Under its guidance, the United States became the greatest nation in the world. It is based upon the belief that the security of a nation lies in the strength and character of its own people ... The time has come when those of us who believe in an independent American destiny must band together, and organize for strength. We have been led toward war by a minority of our people. This minority has power. It has influence. It has a loud voice. But it does not represent the American people. 


Who Started World War II? 
Victor Suvorov - Video 

In this lecture, Viktor Suvorov shows that Stalin should be considered the "chief culprit" of World War II. In his much-discussed book "Icebreaker," and in several follow-up works, the Russian historian presents extensive evidence to show that the German attack against the Soviet Union in June 1941 was a preventive strike because Stalin was preparing to launch a massive Soviet assault against Germany and Europe. This lecture by Suvorov was given at the US Naval Academy in Oct. 2009. This video presentation is in four parts. Runtime of this first part: 13 mins. 


Who Was Planning to Attack Whom in June 1941, Hitler or Stalin?
Viktor Suvorov -- RUSI Journal (1985) 

... Between August 1939 and April 1941, the number of armies on the Soviet Western border increased from zero to eleven. Three more joined them during May together with five airborne corps. If Hitler had not attacked first, Stalin would have had 23 armies and more than 20 independent corps facing him. This took place before general mobilization ... If all this is viewed in the context of the Zhukov doctrinal framework outlined earlier, then it becomes clear that the only credible military intention which Stalin could have had was to begin the war himself in the summer of 1941. 


Did Hitler Want War? 
Patrick J. Buchanan 

.. . But if Hitler was out to conquer the world - Britain, Africa, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, South America, India, Asia, Australia - why did he spend three years building that hugely expensive Siegfried Line to protect Germany from France? Why did he start the war with no surface fleet, no troop transports and only 29 oceangoing submarines? ... Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell? Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser's fleet? Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez? 


Israel Deliberately Choked Gaza Economy, US Cable Reveals 
AFP 

Israel deliberately maintained the economy of the Gaza strip "on the brink of collapse" without "pushing it over the edge," a leaked US diplomatic cable from 2008 showed Wednesday. According to a cable from the US embassy in Tel Aviv dated November 3, 2008 -- obtained by WikiLeaks and posted online by Norwegian daily Aftenposten -- Israeli officials told US diplomats of their intention to strangle the economy of Gaza. "As part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed ... on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge," the secret cable, posted online in its original version, read. 


On Palestine, the US is a Rogue State
John Whitbeck -- The Guardian (Britain) 

... Of the world's nine most populous states, eight (all except the US) recognise the state of Palestine. Of the world's 20 most populous states, 15 (all except the US, Japan, Mexico, Germany and Thailand) recognise the state of Palestine ... By its slavish subservience to Israel - as reflected yet again, both in the absence of a single brave voice raised against this new House resolution and in the Obama administration's recently rejected offer of a huge military and diplomatic bribe to Israel in reward for a mere 90-day suspension of its illegal colonisation programme - the United States has effectively excluded itself from the true international community (redefined to refer to the great majority of mankind) and become a true rogue state, acting in consistent and flagrant contempt of both international law and fundamental human rights. 


Furor Over Censored Edition of Twain's 'Huckleberry Finn'
BBC News 

A new edition of Mark Twain's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is causing controversy because of the removal of a racially offensive word. Twain scholar Alan Gribben says the use of the word "nigger" had prompted many US schools to stop teaching the classic. In his edition, Professor Gribben replaces the word with "slave" and also changes "injun" to "Indian". But the publisher says hundreds of people have complained about the edits. First published in 1884, Huckleberry Finn is considered one of the great American novels. While telling the story of a boy's journey down the Mississippi River some time between 1835 and 1845, the novel satirises Southern attitudes on race and slavery. 


--


Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___