The
URL for this article is http://globalresistance.com/docs/gehlen2.htm www.tenc.net Worst Kept
Secrets of the Bumbling Bear Below is an article from the 'San Francisco Bay Guardian', entitled, 'The CIA's Worst-Kept Secret.' It discusses some recently unclassified CIA files. These documents, 18,000 pages in all, confirm that U.S. intelligence recruited and protected Nazis starting at the end of World War II. I am posting and writing about this article for two reasons. First, it includes some useful information about the Nazi-CIA marriage. Second, it presents that information from a perspective that I consider at once mistaken and widespread; hence worth discussing. The article was written by Martin Lee. Mr. Lee argues that after World War II, Nazi spies duped the U.S. into hiring them, thereby protecting themselves and their networks from prosecution. He cites the example of General Reinhard Gehlen. Gehlen had been chief of Nazi intelligence in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. According to Mr. Lee, Gehlen fooled spymaster Allen Dulles, who later was named Director of the CIA as follows:
There's a bit of a problem here. Starting more than a decade earlier, Allen Dulles, a leading diplomat and spy, and his brother, John Foster, a Wall Street insider, had created a financial-intelligence apparatus to assist the Nazis. So Dulles had long-standing, friendly relations with Nazis. That being the case, why would Dulles be upset if he 'learned' that Gehlen (a top Nazi spy) was a Nazi? (1) Moreover, Gehlen had not been some cloistered spy. His job had not been simply to coordinate the gathering of information. He had been a key leader of the work of fascist groups in the occupied East, such as the Iron Guard in Romania, the Latvian Vanagis and the Croatian Ustashe. These groups committed the most unimaginably brutal atrocities against 'Untermenschen', Jews, 'gypsies', Serbs and other Orthodox Christians, as well as anti-Nazis, both Communist and non-Communist, including various Nationalist groups, which resisted the Nazis. Gehlen was a leading war criminal. Did Allen Dulles know all this? Of course he knew all this - he was a U.S. spymaster with almost three decades experience and he had worked with the Nazi leadership for years. Dulles arranged to have Gehlen secretly brought to the U.S. precisely so that the Russians wouldn't get hold of him and put him on trial for war crimes and hang him. Once they had Gehlen safely in the U.S., Allen Dulles and other top U.S. Intelligence operatives met with Gehlen and planned a nightmare creation: a vast European spying-and-subversion apparatus, controlled by Washington but staffed by hundreds and then thousands of Nazi war criminals. The Nazis may have lost the war but Nazism had found new life. (6) Since Allen Dulles knew that Gehlen commanded an army of monstrous war criminals in Eastern Europe and Russia, what is the significance of Dulles' supposed (though frankly unbelievable) belief that Gehlen was not a Nazi? For Mr. Lee to imply that Dulles' rescue and empowerment of Gehlen was somehow less monstrous because he had been 'fooled' about Gehlen's Nazi affiliations and beliefs constitutes, whether intentionally or unintentionally, a whitewash of the whole reasoning behind American actions since 1945. According to this reasoning, it is OK to commit atrocities exactly like those committed by the Nazis as long as at the same time we profess good, wholesome American values. The label or image defines the deed. In promoting this notion, Mr. Lee, the critic, transforms himself into an apologist for the thing he is attacking. Very few of us will ever read the declassified Nazi-CIA documents. Articles like this in the 'San Francisco Bay Guardian', a left-leaning newspaper, must inform our view. Throughout the article, Mr. Lee puts a particular spin on the Nazi-CIA revelations, portraying Washington as naive, trapped by a cold war mentality into recruiting Nazis (or, as he suggests at the end of his article, recruiting too many of them...) WAS THE NAZI-CIA MARRIAGE A MISTAKE CAUSED BY A COLD WAR MENTALITY? This notion is contradicted by two important facts: Fact # 1 - No, Because It Started Too Early Washington began working with high-placed officials in the Vatican at the end of the war to set up Nazi escape routes. Some of the Nazis they helped to escape were spies. Others were just Nazi butchers. The escape routes, appropriately called 'ratlines', started in Eastern Europe and the Balkans, particularly Croatia, and terminated in the U.S., Canada, Australia, Latin America, and so on. How could it be true that the U.S. got swept up in organizing the ratlines due to a cold war mentality when the cold war hadn't yet begun? (2) Mr. Lee is aware that the U.S. began rescuing Nazis before the Cold War began. He points out that this:
Point well taken. But at the same time, Mr. Lee writes:
What does this mean? If aggressive Soviet policies were not to blame for triggering the Cold War, what does it mean to say that "Washington was [already] in a Cold War mode" at the end of World War II? Doesn't a "Cold War" require two sides? Washington wasn't in a "Cold War" mode at the end of W.W. II; it was in an "Attack Russia mode." Indeed, it was precisely Washington's belligerent and criminal actions, such as rescuing Nazi war criminals, that created the international climate of hostility and threat which became known as the "Cold War". We now know that Washington and Wall Street helped put the Nazis in power and aided them once they got in power so that they were able to rebuild the shattered German war industry in record time - and all this for one reason: so that the Nazis could attack Russia. That when the German Industrialists, Bankers and Nazi leaders got tired of their subservient, attack dog role and launched a war of world conquest, Washington and London slapped them down - but hesitantly, refusing to open a Second Front (the Normandy Invasion) until the Nazis had inflicted maximum damage on, and gotten whipped by, the USSR. After World War II Washington didn't go into "Cold War mode." It simply returned to its original plan (if indeed it had ever deserted that plan) of using the Nazis against the USSR. Except now the Nazi apparatus existed all over Eastern and Southern Europe (including in Russia) and Soviet influence was far more extensive as well. Fact # 2 - The U.S. Didn't Only Use the Nazis as Spies The Nazi murderers whom the U.S. helped rescue, in violation of law and decency, were not all spies. Nor were those who were not spies simply dumped in various countries and then left to fend for themselves. Instead the U.S. maintained a great network of the 'escapees' with three purposes: to spy; to nurture networks of fanatical anti-Communists dedicated to infiltrating, subverting and sabotaging the socialist states; and to prepare a force to be sent back to these countries (especially the strategic Baltic and Balkans states) when the time was ripe. The Nazi 'refugees' were maintained at great cost to U.S. taxpayers through programs such as the 'Assembly of Captive Nations'. It is estimated that "by 1953 the CIA was spending as much as $1 billion dollars on the Nazi rescue program." Of course, $1 billion (US) in 1953 money was worth many times more in today's money. (3) In the late 1980s and early 1990s many of the U.S.-protected Nazi war criminals (and/or their children) were shipped back to Eastern Europe and the Balkans where they helped to launch secessionist movements, install U.S. and German puppet governments, assassinate those who resisted and foster national hatreds. For example, returning Fascists helped Franjo Tudjman's neo-Nazi group, the Croatian Democratic Union, or HDZ, take over the Croatian Republic and launch a secessionist war against Yugoslavia in 1991. (4) THE BUMBLING BEAR THEORY OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY Why do critics of U.S. foreign policy so often present Washington as a passive force? Why are we constantly told that the U.S. is being 'used by the Cuban exiles for their own agenda' or that the U.S. has 'screwed up once again by backing the Kosovo Liberation Army' and that 'sooner or later the Americans will find out what kind of monsters these Albanian secessionists are' and so on. (5) Two explanations come to mind. First, wittingly or unwittingly, people tend to censor themselves in confrontation with reckless power. When one is criticizing a country that bombs pill factories because it doesn't like the government (as the U.S. did in Sudan), that bombs Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq with radioactive weapons and then sends its own and allied troops into the contaminated areas, that refuses to punish submarine commanders who cause the deaths of Japanese fishermen while performing daredevil stunts with nuclear submarines - in criticizing such a country one may experience the temptation to exercise restraint. If, for example, one argues that Washington was tricked into working with Nazis one may feel reasonably secure. One is not challenging the basic legitimacy of the Wall Street-Washington Establishment. But if one argues that the nightmares of U.S. foreign policy are (like most coordinated human activities) planned - then one will be accused of being conspiratorial, or extremist, or worse. One may find that certain doors, previously open, are now shut tight. Or worse. Second, American TV and films, viewed by people all over the world, play a big role in conditioning people to think of the U.S. government as a bumbling bear, projecting the image of the Innocent American official: kind hearted, too powerful for his own good; easily fooled and manipulated. Since the movies are largely responsible for this nonsense image of American leaders, let me paraphrase a famous movie speech by way of refutation:
Was Washington a bystander during World War II? It was not. The OSS, predecessor of the CIA, was engaged all over Europe. OSS operatives knew - and reported - that monstrous crimes were being committed by Nazis, following which Washington recruited these same Nazis into its burgeoning covert apparatus, the most sensitive branch of the U.S. government. Think about this. The OSS was a small organization. The Nazi apparatus was huge and well organized. Absorbing the Nazis into U.S. intellgience was like a garter snake eating a rat. What does this mean? It means the most powerful forces in the U.S.A. had decided that the C.I.A. was to be, in essence, a Nazi organization. Washington's goal was to break up the USSR and other Socialist states and bring them under U.S. domination. The way Washington planners viewed things, Nazis had numerous virtues. They respected capitalism. They despised a host of groups (including Serbs and other Slavs, 'Gypsies', other dark-skinned people, etc.) who tended to resist U.S. domination. They were good at playing on prejudice against these groups. Moreover, the intensity of their hate gave an energy of persistence to their work. They were skilled at demagoguery, subversion, assassination, and torture. Numerous virtues; only one fault: a very bad reputation, regarding which, no problem unless the truth came out. And should the truth come out, (as it is indeed trickling out today) the important thing from Washington's point of view was and is to make sure the inevitable criticism has the right slant. One way: set up a committee to study the evidence and declare that it was all a terrible, stupid, unforgivable mistake and we should learn not to do such things ever again. Better to be portrayed as unforgivably stupid than unforgivably evil. Below is the 'San Francisco Bay Guardian' article. Following the article I have posted a few dissenting remarks. -- Jared Israel, 21 May 2001 The CIA's Worst-Kept
Secret Newly
Declassified Files Confirm United States
Collaborationwith Nazis
That's how a 1952 Central Intelligence Agency assessment described Nazi ideologue Emil Augsburg, an officer at the infamous Wannsee Institute, the SS think tank involved in planning the Final Solution. Augsburg's SS unit performed "special duties," a euphemism for exterminating Jews and other "undesirables" during the Second World War. Although he was wanted in Poland for war crimes, Augsburg managed to ingratiate himself with the U.S. CIA, which employed him in the late1940s as an expert on Soviet affairs. Recently released CIA records indicate that Augsburg was among a rogue's gallery of Nazi war criminals recruited by U.S. intelligence shortly after Germany surrendered to the Allies.. Pried loose by Congress, which passed the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act three years ago, a long-hidden trove of once-classified CIA documents confirms one of the worst-kept secrets of the Cold War-- the CIA's use of an extensive Nazi spy network to wage a clandestine campaign against the Soviet Union. The CIA reports show that U.S. officials knew they were subsidizing numerous Third Reich veterans who had committed horrible crimes against humanity, but these atrocities were overlooked as the anti-Communist crusade acquired its own momentum. For Nazis who would otherwise have been charged with war crimes, signing on with American intelligence enabled them to avoid a prison term.
Many Nazi criminals "received light punishment, no punishment at all,or received compensation because Western spy agencies considered them useful assets in the Cold War," the IWG team stated after releasing 18,000 pages of redacted CIA material. (More installments are pending.) These are "not just dry historical documents," insists former congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, a member of the panel that examined the CIA files. As far as Holtzman is concerned, the CIA papers raise critical questions about American foreign policy and the origins of the Cold War. The decision to recruit Nazi operatives had a negative impact on U.S.-Soviet relations and set the stage for Washington's tolerance of human rights' abuses and other criminal acts in the name of anti-Communism. With that fateful sub-rosa embrace, the die was cast for a litany of antidemocratic CIA interventions around the world. The Gehlen Org The key figure on the German side of the CIA-Nazi tryst was General Reinhard Gehlen, who had served as Adolf Hitler's top anti-Soviet spy. During World War II, Gehlen oversaw all German military-intelligence operations in Eastern Europe and the USSR. As the war drew to a close, Gehlen surmised that the U.S.-Soviet alliance would soon break down. Realizing that the United States did not have a viable cloak-and-dagger apparatus in Eastern Europe, Gehlen surrendered to the Americans and pitched himself as someone who could make a vital contribution to the forthcoming struggle against the Communists. In addition to sharing his vast espionage archive on the USSR, Gehlen promised that he could resurrect an underground network of battle-hardened anti-Communist assets who were well placed to wreak havoc throughout the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Although the Yalta Treaty stipulated that the United States must give the Soviets all captured German officers who had been involved in "eastern area activities," Gehlen was quickly spirited off to Fort Hunt, Va. The image he projected during 10 months of negotiations at Fort Hunt was, to use a bit of espionage parlance, a "legend" --one that hinged on Gehlen's false claim that he was never really a Nazi, but was dedicated, above all, to fighting Communism. Those who bit the bait included future CIA director Allen Dulles, who became Gehlen's biggest supporter among American policy wonks. Gehlen returned to West Germany in the summer of 1946 with amandateto rebuild his espionage organization and resume spying on the East at the behest of American intelligence. The date is significant as it preceded the onset of the Cold War, which, according to standard U.S.historical accounts, did not begin until a year later. The early courtship of Gehlen by American intelligence suggests that Washington was in a Cold War mode sooner than most people realize. The Gehlen gambit also belies the prevalent Western notion that aggressive Soviet policies were primarily to blame for triggering the Cold War. Based near Munich, Gehlen proceeded to enlist thousands of Gestapo,Wehrmacht, and SS veterans. Even the vilest of the vile -- the senior bureaucrats who ran the central administrative apparatus of the Holocaust -- were welcome in the "Gehlen Org," as it was called, including Alois Brunner, Adolf Eichmann's chief deputy. SS major Emil Augsburg and gestapo captain Klaus Barbie, otherwise known as the "Butcher of Lyon," were among those who did double duty for Gehlen and U.S. intelligence. "It seems that in the Gehlen headquarters one SS man paved the way for the next and Himmler's elite were having happy reunion ceremonies," the Frankfurter Rundschau reported in theearly1950s. Bolted lock, stock, and barrel into the CIA, Gehlen's Nazi-infested spy apparatus functioned as America's secret eyes and ears in central Europe. The Org would go on to play a major role within NATO, supplying two-thirds of raw intelligence on the Warsaw Pact countries.Under CIA auspices, and later as head of the West German secret service until he retired in 1968, Gehlen exerted considerable influence on U.S. policy toward the Soviet bloc. When U.S. spy chiefs desired an off-the-shelf style of nation tampering, they turned to the readily available Org, which served as a subcontracting syndicate for a series of ill-fated guerrilla air drops behind the Iron Curtain and other harebrained CIA rollback schemes. Sitting ducks for disinformation ...Third Reich veterans often proved adept at peddling data -- muchof it false -- in return for cash and safety, the IWG panel concluded. Many Nazis played a double game, feeding scuttlebutt to both sides of the East-West conflict and preying upon the mutual suspicions that emerged from the rubble of Hitler's Germany. General Gehlen frequently exaggerated the Soviet threat in order to exacerbate tensions between the superpowers. At one point he succeeded in convincing General Lucius Clay, military governor of the U.S. zoneof occupation in Germany, that a major Soviet war mobilization had begun in Eastern Europe. This prompted Clay to dash off a frantic, top-secret telegram to Washington in March 1948, warning that war "may come with dramatic suddenness." Gehlen's disinformation strategy was based on a simple premise: the colder the Cold War got, the more political space for Hitler's heirs to maneuver. The Org could only flourish under Cold War conditions; as an institution it was therefore committed to perpetuating the Soviet-American conflict. "The agency loved Gehlen because he fed us what we wanted to hear. We used his stuff constantly, and we fed it to everyone else -- the Pentagon, the White House, the newspapers. They loved it, too. But it was hyped-up Russian bogeyman junk, and it did a lot of damage to this country," a retired CIA official told author Christopher Simpson, who also serves on the IGW review panel and was author of "Blowback :America's Recruitment of Nazis and Its Effects on the Cold War." Unexpected consequences Members of the Gehlen Org were instrumental in helping thousands of fascist fugitives escape via "ratlines" to safe havens abroad --often with a wink and a nod from U.S. intelligence officers. Third Reich expatriates and fascist collaborators subsequently emerged as "security advisors" in several Middle Eastern and Latin American countries, where ultra-right-wing death squads persist as their enduring legacy. Klaus Barbie, for example, assisted a succession of military regimes in Bolivia, where he taught soldiers torture techniques and helped protect the flourishing cocaine trade in the late 1970s and early '80s. CIA officials eventually learned that the Nazi old boy network nesting inside the Gehlen Org had an unexpected twist to it. By bankrolling Gehlen the CIA unknowingly laid itself open to manipulation by a foreign intelligence service that was riddled with Soviet spies.Gehlen's habit of employing compromised ex-Nazis -- and the CIA's willingness to sanction this practice -- enabled the USSR to penetrate West Germany's secret service by blackmailing numerous agents. ...Slow to recognize that their Nazi hired guns would feign anallegiance to the Western alliance as long as they deemed it tactically advantageous, CIA officials invested far too much in Gehlen's spooky Nazi outfit. "It was a horrendous mistake, morally, politically, and also in very pragmatic intelligence terms," says American University professor Richard Breitman, chairman of the IWG review panel. More than just a bungled spy caper, the Gehlen debacle should serve as a cautionary tale at a time when post-Cold War triumphalism and arrogant unilateralism are rampant among U.S. officials. If nothing else, it underscores the need for the United States to confront some of its own demons now that unreconstructed Cold Warriors are again riding top saddle in Washington. *** (C) 'San Francisco Bay Guardian,' Reprinted for Fair Use Only *** SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE 'GUARDIAN' ARTICLE: 1) FALSE INFORMATION Mr. Lee writes that General Gehlen passed Washington false information about a supposed Soviet buildup and adds that:
First, this is speculation presented as fact. Who knows whether Gehlen invented any particular piece of misinformation, or whether someone in the CIA instructed him to 'invent' it. Second, so what if CIA Nazis sometimes made false reports to heighten tensions or make themselves look good. That sort of thing is always possible in intelligence organizations. (Graham Greene's wonderful novel, 'Our Man in Havana,' is about a British intelligence 'asset' in Cuba who manufactures an entire spy network to keep himself employed.) Indeed, the CIA is itself famous for telling tall tales about the misdeeds of those resisting U.S. domination. Such statements help create a provocative atmosphere in which aggressive policies seem justified. The question is not whether the Nazis sometimes misled Washington, or whether Soviet intelligence could sometimes use the Nazis against Washington. The question is: what were and are Washington's plans? Did Washington want to crush the Soviet Union and install puppet governments throughout Eastern Europe and the Balkans? Does Washington now wish to turn the Balkans into a safe rear while it moves NATO bases up to Russian borders in order to facilitate 'low intensity war' against Russia? I would argue that the answer to both questions is: yes. The Nazi apparatus was and remains userful in carrying out these strategies. 2) HOW MUCH INVESTMENT IN NAZISM IS TOO MUCH?
'Feign allegiance'? What evidence is there that the Nazis were feigning? The problem is Mr. Lee is proceeding from an assumption - that Washington made a mistake in recruiting the Nazis. This assumption is wrong - it is plainly contradicted by the evidence he presents. Like many people, he does not like to change his assumptions, so instead he offers this notion - that the Nazis were insincere. And so what if they were? Many employees 'feign allegiance' to their boss. The question the employer asks is: are they getting the job done. Says Lee, "CIA officials invested far too much in Gehlen's spooky Nazi outfit." Earlier he refers to the "Gehlen gambit." And elsewhere he comments that , this was "more than a bungled spy caper"! This language suggests that that Mr. Lee, like so many Americans, does not fully grasp what is involved here. The 'people' whom Allen Dulles and Co. 'rescued' and recruited into the CIA were not 'spooky'. This was not simply "more than a bungled spy caper." The CIA was staffed, from the time of its creation, with mass murderers. In the worst cases (the Croatian Ustashe) they had overseen the slaughter of thousands of Serbs, Jews and 'Gypsies', carried out with unequalled brutality. For example, they beat their victims to death with hammers and axes, or raped them - men, women, children - until they died, or roasted them on a spit. How much should the U.S. have invested in 'rescuing' and employing such people? In the quote above, Professor Breitman calls the CIA-Nazi marriage a "horrendous mistake." At least he uses the word 'horrendous.' But how can the Professor describe as a mistake something that had to be elaborately planned - i.e., the movement of thousands of war criminals, setting them up with new identities and financing them for half a century to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars, using them to bring fascist regimes back to Croatia and Bosnia, to install a government in Lithuania that honors Lithuanians who massacred local Jews, Orthodox Christians and Bolsheviks? Was the policy a mistake because it didn't work? But, at least in part, it did work. Was it a mistake because it was evil? Well, yes, it was evil, but can't an evil policy be carried out with full intent? Ad if so, is it a mistake? I think Professor Breitman is employing the same sloppy reasoning as Mr. Lee. And unfortunately, by describing the Nazi-CIA marriage, with its 'ratlines' and 'captive nations', as a mistake, Breitman lets Washington off the hook. For if this policy was counter-productive, Washington has already paid a price for its stupidity. Not so. Washington was not stupid and it has not paid an appropriate price for the monstrous crime of saving the Nazis and unleashing them, once again, on the world. Quite the contrary. It gained from the ruthless use of Nazi monsters: gained a ready-made apparatus in Eastern Europe and the Balkans and gained an army of covert operatives ready to carry out any crime around the world. Among other things, this apparatus helped destroy the Soviet Union, which had been a major obstacle to the U.S. drive for world domination. 3) IF NOTHING ELSE... The author concludes with the following comment:
First, why should "nothing else" be done? Why does Washington have the right to set up War Crimes Tribunals to punish people (for instance, Serbian leaders like Miloshevich) whose only crime is that they resisted Washington, but when it comes to Washington's own very real war crimes - such as rescuing and unleashing these Nazi monsters - "confronting some of its own demons" is sufficient? And second, what about this "now that unreconstructed Cold Warriors are again riding top saddle in Washington."? "Again"? If by "Cold Warriors" Mr. Lee means Imperialists, pray tell, when did they ever leave the saddle? Does Mr. Lee mean that William Clinton was not an Imperial warrior, but Mr. Bush is? For all or part of its eight years in office, the Clinton administration waged unrelenting proxy military wars against the people of Yugoslavia, the former Soviet Union, Colombia, Congo, Rwanda, waged a war of sanctions against 70 countries, routinely bombed Iraq while starving its children, and so on . It continued to employ 'captive nations' Nazis in Yugoslavia and Eastern Europe. It greatly developed the use of the National Endowment for 'Democracy', USAID and other government and semi-private agencies and NGOs to create a Fifth Column apparatus in countries around the world. To be sure, the Bush administration is continuing these efforts. But the notion that Bush foreign policy represents some sea change from Clinton foreign policy is without foundation in fact. -- J.I. 21 May 2001 Send this article to a friend! *** Further reading: 1) Concerning Allen Dulles and the Nazis, see: "Nazis in the Attic." The article is broken into 6 parts. Parts 3 and 5 deal specifically with Mr. Dulles. The article begins at http://globalresistance.com/articles/randy/swas1.htm The sections that deal specifically with Allen Dulles are part 3, at http://globalresistance.com/articles/randy/swas3.htm and part 5, which is the second half of at http://globalresistance.com/articles/randy/swas4.htm 2) For a brief
introduction to the ratlines see 'The Vatican, Croatia
and the Nazi Gold' by Seán Mac Mathúna at 3) From 'THE POPE, THE NAZIS, AND THE CIA' at http://globalresistance.com/cos/blowback2.htm 4) For more on U.S. support for Nazi butchers after World War II, see the book, "Blowback: America's Nazis and Its Effect on the Cold War" by Christopher Simpson, April 1988. 'Blowback' may be available in libraries. I checked Barnes and Nobles Online. It does not stock the book, but it does link to several sources that do. Go to - http://www.bookchannels.com/barnes1/barnes_and_nobels/ and enter 'Blowback' in the search box and follow the trail to the alternate sources. 5) Washington was a key force in creating the Albanian secessionist movement in Kosovo. The evidence is there, every step of the way. We will soon post an article, 'Dole Does Kosovo', which documents Washington's open attempt to foster secessionism in Kosovo in 1990. Eight years later, Washington used the cover of the Kosovo Verification Mission to import intelligence operatives and military experts to (attempt to) train the Kosovo Liberation Army so it could function as a modern Army. See: * 'The Cat is Out of the Bag' by Jared Israel at http://globalresistance.com/news/ciaaided.htm. and * 'Why Albanians Fled Kosovo During NATO Bombing' at http://globalresistance.com/interviews/keys.htm This interview includes information unavailable elsewhere. It is well worth reading if you want to understand just how sophisticated and ruthless 'poor, mistake-prone' Washington really is. (6) For more on General Gehlen, see http://globalresistance.com/docs/gehlen2-a.htm (7) The assault on Yugoslavia has occasioned perhaps the most extreme examples of the Washington's foreign policy doctrine, which might be paraphrased as follows: "The lie is mightier than the sword." Case in point: the Kosovo Liberation Army. The U.S. and Germany created this terrorist group. It's strategy, as described by the pro-NATO publication, 'Jane's Defense Weekly', was and remains: to commit acts of terror in order to provoke a government response which can be misportrayed as ethnic repression and thereby used to justify NATO intervention. In oher words, the KLA is openly terrorist. In addition it is openly racist - it appeals to and encourages hatred of Slavs (especially Serbs) and 'Gypsies.' Here's the point: At a rally two years ago, Senator Joe Lieberman described this bunch of terrorist-Nazis as follows:
Thus a group which The lie is mightier than the sword. For more on
Senator Joe Lieberman, see 'SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN - APOLOGIST FOR
THE FASCIST KLA'
at *** Send this article to a friend! {Does not work with all email programs...} We're free, but we definitely need help from our friends... Emperor's Clothes does not charge a subscription fee because we want everyone to read these articles. Instead we rely on help from our readers. We have many expenses. For example, the cost of Lexis, our news media search engine, has doubled. Apparently Lexis figured out that we needed it to rapidly locating news stories from among thousands of sources over the past twenty years. So they doubled the price. At the moment we are almost $1500 (U.S.) behind on Lexis payments. We are also way behind on our long distance phone bill. We use the phone to do interviews, including overseas, consult on editing, on translations, and so on. Any help you can send will be greatly appreciated. You can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321. (USA) You can make a credit card donation by going to our secure server at http://globalresistance.com/howyour.html#donate Or call us and
make a donation over the phone. Call (U.S.A.) 617 916-1705
between 9:30 AM and 5:30 PM, Eastern Time (USA) Thanks for reading Emperor's Clothes! www.tenc.net |