You are here
Home > Posts tagged "World War II"

WWII air veterans of Doolittle Raiders celebrate 71 years of bombing civilians

I read 30 Seconds Over Tokyo when I was still a war-playing kid, before I would understand the mischievous consequences of the Doolittle Raiders B-25 bombers deploying without their bombsights. This was to prevent US war-making advantages falling into enemy hands but it also precluded dropping bombs with accuracy. I'm pretty certain the account for young readers also didn't explain why over a quarter of the squadron's bombs were of the incidiary cluster variety. Readers today know what those are for. Doolittle claimed to be targeting military sites in Japan's capitol, but "invariably" hit civilian areas including four schools and a hospital. Of the American fliers captured, three were tried and executed by the despicable "Japs", who considered the straffing of civilians to be war crimes. After the war, the US judged the Japanese officers responsible, as if their verdict was a greater injustice against our aviators' "honest errors". Today we rationalize our systemic overshoot policy as "collateral damage". Every year since WWII, Doolittle's commandos are feted for their milestone bombing mission. This Veterans Day is to be the last due to their advanced ages. But it is fitting, because isn't it time Americans faced what we're celebrating? There's no denying it took suicidal daring, but the Doolittle Raid inaugurated what became a staple of US warfare, the wholesale terrorizing of civilians from on high, with impunity and indifference. To be fair, the American public has always been kept in the dark. American aircraft have fire-bombed civilians at every diplomatic opportunity since 1942, and a Private Manning sits in the brig for trying to give us a chance to object. We now know that the Doolittle Raid didn't turn the tide, nor shake Japanese resolve. It was a retalliation for the attack on Pearl Harbor, intended to boost US morale as if to say, America wasn't defeated. Kinda like why and how we struck back at Afghanistan after 9/11, just as indiscriminately. The "Mark Twain" ersatz bombsight The Norden bombsight was a closely guarded US secret weapon. An airstrike without it would today be like lobotomizing so-called smart bombs, and deciding to opt for imprecision bombing. The official army record recounts that a subsitute sighting mechanism was improvised for the raid, dubbed the "Mark Twain" and judged to be effective enough. Now a bad joke. Indochina and Wikileaks-wisened, we know the mendacity of that assessment. The vehemently anti-imperialist, anti-racist Twain would not have been honored. Twain satirized Western so-called Enlightenment thus: "good to fire villages with, upon occasion". Post-postwar hagiographies of the raid have suggested the improvised bombsight was better suited to low-altitude missions than the Norden model. That conclusion is easily dismissed because the device was used only for the Doolittle run and never after. The sight's designer, mission aviator C. Ross Greening, offered a explanation for why he named the device after Mark Twain in his pothumously published memoir Not As Briefed. He didn't. The bombsight is named the "Mark Twain" in reference to the "lead line" depth finder used on the

WWII vet, age 92, finally diagnosed with PTSD why, because we care?

Sgt. Stanley Friedman, a 92 yr-old veteran of the WWII North African campaign, was finally diagnosed with PTSD. Pro bono lawyers couldn't even verify his service records, but after sixty years of denying his claims, the VA has at last been forced to grant Friedman compensation. Is this really the result of crafty legal work, at long last, or of a PR climate now overrun by Big Pharma, whose PTSD drug market windfall needed a poster boy for the baby boomer set, the type of veteran Americans favor over those from less "good" wars?

The guard towers of Camp Amache, CO, Japanese-American internment camp

Visitors to what remains of the WWII-era Granada Relocation Center located on Highway 50 past Lamar, are tempted to conclude that the remote location was isolation enough to restrict the movement of its 7,000 Japanese-American internees. Gone are all 560 buildings except their concrete foundations; the few remaining photographs depict a vast layout of spartan barracks, playing host to ordinary civilian lives, minus the atmosphere of incarceration. Were there cyclone fences and watch towers? The answer should not surprise you. Of course. Camp Amache was ringed by the usual multiple perimeters of prison fences, including six watch towers manned by military police, who were there, it was explained, for the internees' protection. I think plans to further restore Amache need to begin with the security fortifications. If such blights on American history as these race-based detention centers are memorialized in the hope that our nation not do it again, it dishonors our victims, and blunts the lesson, not to illustrate our heavy hand. I attended a recent screening of a documentary made of Camp Amache, attended by its producers, who expressed the usual motivation: in remembrance, never again. Special emphasis was placed on the contributions made by Japanese-Americans during the war, and on the magnanimity with which the internees accepted their lot. Survivors were not to receive an official apology until 45 years later, given $20,000 restitution for their livelihoods and families destroyed. It would be safe to say the audience felt well beyond the prejudice that had motivated their parents. Against Japanese-Americans. Unfortunately both the documentary and the filmmakers' commentary left the impression that "never again" describes a successful holding pattern. Of course, America has been at it again and as usual, its citizens have been obliviously complicit. Look at the War on Islam, which has necessitated the internment of Muslim-Americans and Muslims worldwide. Guantanamo is not much different from the Wartime Relocation Authority (WRA) special Isolation Centers such as Dalton Wells, near Moab, where the WRA sent internees profiled as potential insurgency threats. America has been building a network of fresh detention facilities to house Hispanic-Americans who run afoul of the country's illegal labor market. Most of the detainees are promptly deported, but many languish while immigration issues and family ties are sorted out. While ICE pretends to protect the American people from the security-threatening unlawfulness of illegal aliens, in reality its detention centers enforce the successful abuse of a Hispanic-American slave labor pool. You need only visit a traditional prison or jail to see that an overwhelming disproportion of its inmates are African-American and Hispanic-American, far exceeding what can be excused as representative of America's poor. The American judicial system is still stacked against non-whites, and motivated by the same racist premise of protecting the security of white Americans. And of course there are the open air prisons which still incarcerate the Native-Americans, the internment camps we call reservations, the original Wartime Relocation Centers.

Your father’s Lili Marlene, specifically

On the subject of historical misconceptions, you might say I'm hugely sentimental. So the tale of Lili Marlene catches me up like a honey trap. What does the name conjure for you? A Nazi Mata Hari? A fictional musical persona beloved by soldiers on both sides of the Good War? While even antiwar sentiments wax nostalgic about its universal love-conquers-all popularity, the WWII melody evokes romantic memories fueled by dueling propagandas. And when a victorious meme writes the history, it can erase its footprints, leading from what was effectively a literary rape. A recent folk reference for example, an otherwise impeccably adroit Lili Marlene Walks Away, about Marlene the streetwalker, leaves me just sick in the heart. The historical narrative has it that Lili Marlene was actually Lili and Marleen, two girlfriends for whom German soldier Hans Liep pined from the trenches of WWI. With unchivalrous poetic license Liep conflated the two and penned a love poem as it might have been written to him, "signed, Lili Marleen." Two decades later a German composer set the words to music and then came the outbreak of the next war. The original recording by Lale Anderson was a flop until broadcasts to the front lines over Radio Belgrade captivated homesick Wehrmacht soldiers and eventually the lovelorn battling on both sides. Lili Marlene emerged the most popular song of all time, translated in as many languages as fought in the war. Was this owed to a universal empathy toward the pangs of love, or was it the appeal of a truly catchy melody and lyrics carefully crafted to suit the moment? And how did Lili's character become redefined? For the German audience, the character of Lili Marlene did not change. For some the song lost its sheen for having been co-opted by the Third Reich war machine. But even as the singer's living embodiment of "Lili Marleen" became tarnished by her Faustian-won fame, the title role of "Lili" remained the non-fictional love interest with whom her soldier lover spent every furtive off-duty moment, revisited in memory and in anticipation. Concurrent translations across the European continent stuck to the same essential theme, owing no doubt to listeners being in the main multilingual. They understood enough of the original German not to be sold another Lili Marlene. English was another story, but the Allies didn't start it. Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels at first banned the song because he saw it as demoralizing to soldiers enduring the deprivations of war. He referred to Lili Marlene as "The tearjerker with the death-dance smell" until its popularity reached a critical mass even he couldn't stop. When opposing forces seemed also to succumb to the song's wiles, Goebbels sought to intensify the poison's venom. The original German lyric was written in an ambiguous voice, either that of the soldier or his faithful girl, revisiting their every last moment together and the promise of more. Even as the imagery may have been accepted as a soldier's fantasies, the singer's female gender

Rekindling Hiroshima: Shock and Awe

The 65th anniversary of dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima marks the first time the US will send an emissary to Japan for the commemoration. Will it be to reconsider remorse for committing history's most time-compressed crime against humanity, or as part of the fear-nukes campaign being waged against Iran? While anti-nuclear activists forever protest against arms buildups and proliferation, the US government is pleased enough to rekindle the specter of the bomb. Witness the Zionist crockumentary COUNTDOWN TO ZERO, this year's anti-Islamic OBSESSION, focused not on who has too many WMDs, but on the axis of evil smoking gun mushroom cloud.

De Gaulle urges resistance in occupied France, Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan

June 18 marked the 70th anniversary of the Free-French General de Gaulle's famous 1940 radio address when he urged occupied France to resist because victory over their invaders would be inevitable. Does the western media commemorate de Gaulle's message without an inkling of irony?   Of course, today's occupied peoples cannot be offered the same assurance, that help is on its way. Just as Europe was overwhelmed by Hitler's superior force, de Gaulle knew that US industry would trump that. There will be no white knight to rescue Iraq and Afghanistan, but "L'Appel du 18 Juin," celebrated in 2010, reaffirms every people's right to resist foreign invaders. And not nonviolently. General Petain, leader of France's Vichy government, was forever condemned for surrendering France and collaborating with the Germans. But he too knew that US industrial might, and its unlimited resources, ensured an allied victory. Petain can be thanked for sparing French cities the excessive ravages of war. Most of France's historical architecture survived WWII because Petain played along with the occupiers. But France is free today thanks to the resistance.

Ignoble WWII bombing of Coventry commemorated with coined slur, ours

Here's a bit of WWII distortion the History Channel is passing off as, um, history. Did you know that those dirty Krauts leveled the English city of Coventry so completely that they coined a word to celebrate it? Apparently that term was "Coventrated." Oh, it's a real verb alright -- trouble is, it's English. The British intelligence office seized upon the conjugated Coventriert to mean: subjected to heavy bombardment, and pretended the Huns were such bastards they commemorated the atrocity by mocking their victims in the Teutonic dictionary. Also problematic, the barbaric Teutons failed to "coventrate" with equal efficacy anywhere else. But the Allies sure did. By night and by day, the UK and US bombers respectively "coventrated" the German and Hungarian homelands, with all the more ferocity because they were dishing the Nazis, haha, a taste of their own medicine. The bombing of Coventry was tragedy enough, and might have been ameliorated had Churchill responded to the intelligence forewarning but risk betraying that the Brits were intercepting Germany's secret ciphers. Allowing Coventry to fall victim was one of the high prices of keeping ULTRA a secret, but Hitler's choice to bomb the historic city and its famed Cathedral was to provoke much enmity with the English public. Britain's propaganda ministry was able to compound the resentment against the Germans for the devastation of Coventry by portraying the enemy as not just Philistine, but Bombast. Of course more German cities suffered under the 24-hour US-UK tag-team bombing raids, many incurring orders of magnitude greater casualties than the 600 dead of Coventry. Notable among the Axis cities was the medieval capital of Dresden which possessed not one legitimate military target. No mention of those victims in the History Channel's records of military misdeeds, meanwhile propagandist Newscorp property HarperCollins is weaving the coventriert detail for revisionist Dresden-deniers. The stories of America's firebombing of Japanese cities have already been suppressed. Apologists have long been at work justifying the use of atomic weapons against civilians in Hiroshima and Nagazaki. Where were the propagandists to conjugate Hiroshima? America's other unique bombing method would later be described minus geographical references, as simple carpet bombing. The History Channel is part of the A&E network, co-owed by warmongers Disney, Hearst and NBC/GE. Their mention of "coventrate" came in a program about Lao Tsu's Art of War, as his military edicts might have predicted, Nostradamus-like, the outcome of the Viet Nam War. Here's an example of the program's perspective: The Vietcong lost the public support of many Vietnamese when they executed thousands of South Vietnamese under the employ of the US. Meanwhile the American cause lost its public support when the US public caught sight of photographs of US war casualties. Sound like a fair comparison? The Vietnamese weren't demoralized by the millions killed in their midst, while the antiwar movement was not galvanized by the revelations of US atrocities? Right.

You have forgotten what to remember

Can someone please explain to me what it means to fly this flag? The POW-MIA flag is ubiquitous these days around veterans. Our town hall flies this black flag halfway below the Stars and Stripes. When the latter is at half mast, the former hangs indecorously low. Which reminds me of a pirate ship stalking a wavering Old Glory.   I understand POW and MIA, and "you are not forgotten." But there is no flag for the veterans, the dead or wounded, to whom does this lone flag speak and why? Since the Gulf War, the US military maintains that it loses track of none of its soldiers. We've had POWs but they've been returned, and we've had MIAs whose bodies have been found. One was recovered even recently, though it was the body of a pilot lost over Iraq, understood to have died. Casualties at sea are still sometimes unrecoverable, but at least something about American war-making proficiency now permits us to confirm deaths even sans corpus. Supposedly. US military engagements between those wars, and later, have been kept outside public scrutiny, or not officially admitted. As a result, they've added no POWs or MIAs for the home front to worry over. Which leaves Vietnam, from whose era comes the dark silhouette of a bent inmate in the shadow of a prison guard tower. According to the last report, there remain 1728 American soldiers missing in action in Indochina. They are unaccounted for -- it might be more fair to say--not missing persons, expected to turn up. During the Vietnam War, the MIA list gave hope that your soldier wasn't among the fallen. It was a hope that loved ones could cling to for even years after the fall of Siagon. On the radio, a Dick Curless hit from 1965 continued to resonate even as the war receded from memory. "Six Times a Day" told of a bride in post-WWII Germany who met the trains every day, awaiting the return of her German soldier, held by the Soviets in war-reparation labor camps until the Russians considered them to have atoned. Was this what we expected Vietnam was doing? Six times a day the trains came down from Frankfort The night he came ten years were almost through She held him close and said I knew you'd be here He said I had no doubt you'd be here too American wives were determined to wait even longer, except evidence of post-war prisoners never came. There was speculation of a cover-up, suspicions which politicians like John Kerry and John McCain do little to assuage. After the war, some believe that prisoner GIs were left behind, whom the North Vietnamese hoped to exchange for war reparations. Instead of paying, it's conjectured that the US government chose to deny the existence of those men. No American diplomat has ever confirmed the scenario, and no surviving GI has ever surfaced. The closest we've come to rescuing POWs was at the movies, when Rambo went back for a jailbreak and

Armed UAS drones need no defending

I was curious about the etymology of the term "drone" applied to military (& DHS) Unmanned Aerial Surveillance aircraft, these days, mostly Armed. Obviously Armed UAS are not named after the stingless unproductive bees whose task it is to impregnate the queen, nor lazy idlers, nor clueless computer sales techies, nor thankless menial worker drones. Anyone who's been around Radio Controlled model planes knows drones are named for the sound they make, a steady drone as they labor across the sky. While military aerial surveillance predates the Wright Brothers, and RC model airplanes have been around for half that time, it took the advent of asymmetric warfare to open the window to military drones. Their constant buzz offering the most intractable reason. By "asymmetric" I do not mean the US intelligence code for off-textbook warfare, for counter-insurgency methods outside von Clausewitz etiquette. I mean the inherency they obscure, war between foes lopsided. Look at a drone's design. It's more Gossamer Condor than military aircraft. Obviously an unmanned vehicle comprises fewer mechanical systems because it doesn't need to propel, nor sustain, a crew of human beings. It might need less armature for the same reason, except of course, today's drones are of high value in their own right. So why no armament? Why too, no powerful jet engines or swept wings for aeronautic superiority? This drone looks about as robust as a paper glider. Laymen can distinguish bombers from jet fighters, as they can trucks from a race cars. I'd say the military drone resembles more a stick insect than its accidental namesake the bee. Do Armed UASs have no need for evasive maneuver capability? I'll ask another obvious question, why do drones carry no customary insignia designating to whose side it belongs? In particular this element would be of primary importance when encountered by other aircraft. But a drone doesn't encounter enemy aircraft, nor allied aircraft who might confuse it for belonging to an adversary, because drones operate where aerial supremacy is already absolute. The key to a drone's military usefulness is that there is no opponent to shoot it down. An Armed UAS can drone all it wants, taking its sweet time laying siege to defenseless objectives and other targets of opportunity. The US Predator or Reaper models can glide when they want to surveil in silence, although otherwise their motors project their presence with the deliberate imposition of a school hall monitor. It is more efficient to deter the placing of IEDs than to try to catch insurgents in the act. Meanwhile all civilians are terrorized by the sound, associating it with sudden, unpredictable and often unjustified destruction and death. The WWII German Stuka dive bomber had inverted gull wings which were thought to produce a horrifying wail as the notorious aircraft attacked city populations, Guernica among them. In fact the sound was produced by a siren the Nazis called Jericho's Trumpet, mounted purposefully to spread fear on the ground. Like modern drones, the Stuka were not designed to fend off attackers

Top 10 secret armies of the CIA

Found this on the web, will try to retrace provenance, worth a read: The United States have a well known history of providing military support to countries in need. But from time to time, the US Government has provided secret forces. While many are successful, there have also been a number of failures. This is a list of the ten top secret armies of the CIA. 1. Ukrainian Partisans From 1945 to 1952 the CIA trained and aerially supplied Ukranian partisan units which had originally been organised by he Germans to fight the Soviets during WWII. For seven years, the partisans, operating in the Carpathian Mountains, made sporadic attacks. Finally in 1952, a massive Soviet military force wiped them out. 2. Chinese Brigade in Burma After the Communist victory in China, Nationalist Chinese soldiers fled into northern Burma. During the early 1950s, the CIA used these soldiers to create a 12,000 man brigade which made raids into Red China. However, the Nationalist soldiers found it more profitable to monopolise the local opium trade. 3. Guatemalan Rebel Army After Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz legalised that country’s communist party and expropriated 400,000 acres of United Fruit banana plantations, the CIA decided to overthrow his government. Guatemalan rebels were trained in Honduras and backed up with a CIA air contingent of bombers and fighter planes. This army invaded Guatemala in 1954, promptly toppling Arbenz’s regine. 4. Sumatran Rebels In an attempt to overthrow Indonesian president Sukarno in 1958, the CIA sent paramilitary experts and radio operators to the island of Sumatra to organise a revolt. With CIA air support, the rebel army attacked but was quickly defeated. The American government denied involvement even after a CIA b-26 was shot down and its CIA pilot, Allen Pope, was captured. 5. Khamba Horsemen After the 1950 Chinese invasion of Tibet, the CIA began recruiting Khamba horsemen - fierce warriors who supported Tibet’s religious leader, the Dalai Lama - as they escaped into India in 1959. These Khambas were trained in modern warfare at Camp Hale, high in the rocky mountains near Leadville, Colorado. Transported back to Tibet by the CIA operated Air American, the Khambas organised an army number at its peak some 14,000. By the mid-1960s the Khambas had been abandoned by the CIA but they fought on alone until 1970. 6. Bay of Pigs Invasion Force In 1960, CIA operatives recruited 1,500 Cuban refugees living in Miami and staged a surprise attack on Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Trained at a base in Guatemala, this small army - complete with an air force consisting of B-26 bombers - landed at the Bay of Pigs on April 19, 1961. The ill-conceived, poorly planned operation ended in disaster, since all but 150 men of the force were either killed or captured within three days. 7. L’armee Clandestine In 1962, CIA agents recruited Meo tribesmen living in the mountains of Laos to fight as guerrillas against Communist Pathet Lao forces. Called l’armee Clandestine, this unit - paid, trained, and supplied by the CIA - grew into a 30,000 man force. By 1975

How to spot a Jap in Afghanistan

This is an excerpt from the WWII training manual "HOW TO SPOT A JAP." Can you doubt our military blimpnecks aren't giving the same xenophobic advice about how American servicemen should be sizing up their robe-clad insurgent adversaries in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Who owns images of American dead?

AP photographer Julie Jacobson was reticent to publish her picture of dying US Marine Lance Cpl. Joshua Bernard. Though his father was opposed, the Associated Press overruled. But this was no victory for the public's right to see a true reflection of war. The D.o.D. is still indignant, but I suspect Jacobson's report was ultimately vetted in their favor. Military propagandists need to represent America's growing losses in Afghanistan. Jacobson's image provides their limited hangout. Like the other photographs of casualties which have escaped through embeds, the image of Lance Corporal Bernard is desaturated of blood, and the surrounding events fit the military endorsed narrative. Have you noticed that all combat images coming out of today's wars are drab and lifeless. Obviously this motif is not being applied to the PR shots of jets and military hardware, but scenes of soldiering in Iraq and Afghanistan are dusty and grey, like scenes from a dark virtual world. The colors in Jacobson's controversial photo are similarly under saturated. Earlier casualty pics have even been rendered as black and white, and this is no exercise of artistic license. Colorless images telegraph little resemblance to our real world lived in color. An emotional distance is created, most obviously like the detachment we feel looking into the past. Everything before the late sixties happened in monocrome. Early color photographs always shock children with the prospect that lives in generations past might have been been lived in a world of contemporary vibrance. The photographs from Vietnam were helped by that nation's lush tropical greens. Images of the wounded were all the more gripping --and demoralizing from the military's point of view-- because unlike in Korea and WWII, the blood was red. Most images taken in Vietnam came through the military staff photographers. The unapproved subjects, which subverted the official face of the war, emerged from the cameras of independent journalists. Julie Jacobson facilitated the release of this picture, by letting slip two details pertinent to the official US narrative in Afghanistan. Would you believe, just prior to this engagement, friendly Afghans came out of their houses to tell the US soldiers where they could find the Taliban? Probably to ensure Corporal Bernard's squad pointed their guns away from their homes, but that's not how the story was spun. Jacobson recounts that these Afghans were eager to inform on the Taliban. The jocular Jacobson records another telltale crowd-pleaser in the aftermath of the Taliban "ambush," when she found herself flanked by Afghan National Army troops. When the firing started, Jacobson sought immediately the ranks of US soldiers, because the freakin' ANA Afghans "aren't very good." Today's media embeds are basically a privatized signal corps. Their photos should belong to the taxpayers. Insinuations that military families should dictate what images can be used, in the event of death, is a cruel irony. Are the families consulted about what Uncle Sam wants to do with their loved one when he's still alive? Millions of federal

Unseen 1945 Hiroshima Ground Zero pics loosed from personal stash

Let's file this under more soul-less disregard for your fellow travelers. Never before seen photographs of Ground Zero at Hiroshima have emerged in time for the 64th anniversary of the record-setting war crime. The US army photo record, which had escaped the government's suppression efforts, remained in someone's personal stash for decades. The damning documentation his to neglect, and, fortunately, to accidentally discard. In the early 1970s this gentleman and a friend discovered a chest full of pictures obviously taken at the epicenter of the atomic bomb blast in Japan. His friend kept the chest and he stuffed the photos into an old suitcase which he then left to the damp of his basement. Somewhere in the process of housecleaning and moving, the suitcase was thrown to the curb, where a garbage sleuth made the find. The US military took scrupulous records of the devastation of Hiroshima. Immediately after Japan's capitulation, Army photographers circulated all over Ground Zero, doubtless paying for it with the cancer shortly thereafter. The images were kept from the US and world public indefinitely, and relatively few of them have ever been shown. In an attempt to trace the provenance of these photos, the original house owner was contacted for the full story. He didn't know it, having chanced upon it himself, but he greeted the call without a clue: “The photographs? Of Hiroshima? You have them? I thought they were in my basement! How do you get them?”   “This is wild! I must have thrown them out by accident when I was moving stuff out. I never would have purposefully gotten rid of those photographs. I’ve been carrying them around with me since 1972!”

Next to the White House

While visiting Washington DC in March, I found it interesting to note the edifices closest to the White House. EAST, WEST The neighbor to the immediate East of the Obama's White House is the Department of the Treasury. Is that any surprise? Of course not, but how bourgeois! I could imagine Scrooge McDuck sneaking across the White House garden twice a day to check his reserves. To the West is what we now call the Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building. It's the site of the suspicious office fires which may or may not have masked a recent vice-president's misdeeds. The edifice looks straight out of A Series of Unfortunate Events, and check out the plaque which commemorates what the building used to be called: Probably that should be no surprise as well: the White house sandwiched between Treasury and War. "State, War and Navy." How so much less duplicitous than the "Department of Defense." SOUTHWEST Behind the former War offices, to the Southwest of the White House, lies the war memorial to end all war memorials. It's the WWI Memorial, of considerably diminutive size compared to those commemorations of subsequent wars which have spilled unto the Mall, but its form followed the convention of the typical Great War monuments erected throughout Europe among the nations who had participated. Except the American version is dedicated to the "Expeditionary Forces" which I just love. That's what WWI was about for the US. The trenches of Europe were no place Americans needed to defend their freedom. The troops we sent, to relieve France and England, represented a foreign expedition, exactly that. More precisely, our troops were an R&D expedition for our blustering capitalists. (This may be no time or place to note that history books do not link America's WWI experience with the Influenza outbreak of 1917-18, which began in the barracks of US soldiers being mobilized for war. American soldiers took their flu to Europe and ultimately killed 50 million people. Those were not the days before we knew better to stay home to prevent infecting others.) The US entry into WWI was bitterly opposed by a peace movement which the war-opportunist-profiteers maligned as isolationist. Selfish globalization-denying isolationism has been the slander ever since, used against anyone who tries to block military interventions in all their guises. Ultimately WWI was no affair of ours, had the Huns emerged victorious, American foreign affairs would hardly have changed. Our foreign trading partners would have numbered more Germans, that's all. But it's useless to compare alternative outcomes of WWI, all things staying constant, because America participated and profited wildly. If American investors had not jumped in Over There, the greatest business opportunities of blossoming industrialism would have been missed. The opportunities offered by the Europeans fighting amongst themselves, proved to have been momentous. And here was the monument to those lost American lives, sacrificed so that American industrial might, in particular the new banking monopolists, could seize the European spheres of influence throughout the world. Of course the lost lives

UCSB Prof William Robinson pro-Semite

Wouldn't you think it bad form for Israeli militants to behave like Nazis, while immunizing themselves with the self-righteous indignation that any criticism of their actions can simply be dismissed as "anti-Semitic?" Photographs and confessions emerging from the IDF's atrocities in Gaza just beg comparison the German Einsatzgruppen in Poland. Earlier this year UC Santa Barbara professor William Robinson forwarded an email photo essay to a UCSB listserv, the already much-circulated side by side comparison to the WWII atrocities. Two students complained, plagiarizing stock IDF lingo. Now the Anti-Defamation League wants Robinson to recant. With IDF propagandists pouring on the bullshit, let's revisit the documents. As has already been noted, Professor Robinson is a harsh critic of US foreign policy, and already a likely target for the goon squad enforcers of Western Capitalism. Not many of America's actions are defensible, so Robinson has to be attacked by desperate means. Lucky for the lackey-jackals, Robinson chose to criticize Israel's atrocities against the Palestinians of Gaza. Bingo! The Israeli propaganda machine has armed aspiring Israel-defenders with a blanket rebuttal: just yell "ANTI-SEMITISM!" And what a load of crap that is. Much turns on the definition of "anti-Semitism." It packs the punch of meaning someone who hates Jews, but the advocates of Zionism have expanded the definition into 3-D! Zionist apologist Nathan Sharansky has coined the 3D definition of ant-Semitism: demonization of Israel, double standards, and delegitimization. You don't have to look closely to note that those points outline all the rebuttals of criticisms of Israel and any question of the legitimacy of the Zionist usurpation of Palestine. The criticisms posed by those concerned for the fate of Gaza are the same expressed by a large portion of the Israeli Jewish population as well. But the US Israeli lobby, militantly Zionist, has the complicity of the US war-mongering corporate media, thus the IDF Megaphone protestations get traction. These are the same cheap shots leveled against Ward Churchill. By flooding the internet to create the sensation that the indignation was shared, the IDF spammers have been successful in slandering these dissenting academics. Since we're seeing this technique being slopped unto our comment forums, let's examine the statement for which Robinson is being attacked. First we'll present Robinson's email. The next post will feature the ensuing letters of complaint, two from UCSB students, and third from the ADL. Original Email Here is Professor Robinson's original email, including his attachment of the Judith Stone article. This accompanied the aforementioned photo essay he forwarded. Subject: [socforum] parallel images of Nazis and Israelis From: "William I. Robinson" ... Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:00:05 ... If Martin Luther King were alive on this day of January 19, 2009, there is no doubt that he would be condemning the Israeli aggression against Gaza along with U.S. military and political support for Israeli war crimes, or that he would be standing shoulder to shoulder with the Palestinians. I am forwarding some horrific, parallel images of Nazi atrocities against the Jews and Israeli atrocities

One man’s Guerrier, another’s Terroriste

WELL LOOKY WHAT I FOUND! Published in France just after the war, this book is about "LES TERRORISTES." Can you tell by the cover art, who play the title role? USA POST-2001: America designates its war zone detainees as EPWs, or "Enemy Prisoners of War," because to call them POWs would confuse public sympathies. To the average American, "P.O.W." commemorates the GI captivity experience in Vietnam or Korea. When a soldier of ours is caught, that's a POW. To grant both sides equal status would be to humanize our enemy. Of course, POW used to mean all "Prisoners Of War," ours and theirs, in WWII days, before, and as mentioned in all international conventions. We label the people of Iraq or Afghanistan who resist our occupation, as insurgents. Be they Bathists or Taliban, we call their cause an insurgency, not a resistance, because that would confuse American public affection for the French Resistance: La Resistance! Every nation in Occupied Europe had a resistance movement, and the WWII archetypes are still fresh. Occupiers equal Germans. Collaborators equal cowards, traitors, Qwislings, Vichy. Resistance fighters equal the heroes. Since then, American occupations, of postwar France for example, have avoided mention of their assigned task. In Germany and Japan, US soldiers are merely "stationed" there. In countries which we've invaded, like Vietnam, Americans denied being the despised occupiers, we were advisors, protectors, etc. And the populations who opposed our military administration were insurgents, and if they attacked us by unconventional means, they were terrorists! In Iraq as well as Afghanistan, the American spectator can discern that al-Qaeda has been the only named terrorist organization, yet Sunni, Shiite, and Taliban fighters are all called terrorists. Militant Islam is considered terrorist, Hezbollah and Hamas liberation movements are called terrorist, even the Somali pirate brigands are being condemned as terrorists. So who were "Les Terroristes" of Occupied France? The book cover heeds us to "Souvenais-vous!" Never forget them. The book is full of their pictures and accounts of their brave deeds. Most of them fell to the Nazis, to firing squads and Gestapo tortures. The brave Terroristes were the scourge of the German Occupation, rooted out and almost eradicated before the last year of the war. The Nazis called them "terrorists," they were LA RESISTANCE!

Warmongers do end run on Vietnam Wall

WASHINGTON DC- Who knew it wasn't just the Vietnam War veterans who had misgivings about Maya Lin's design for a memorial? Fair enough it doesn't celebrate the achievements of our armies. This peripheral statue offers the more conventional bronze tribute. It depicts as addendum, three survivors emerging from the woods, disheveled and still brandishing assault rifles. They appear to regard the wall and its visitors with wariness. I recognize the faces now, they are the chicken hawks who didn't go, but still want to wage war, and had to figure out how to get America over that wall. Nearby, the WWII memorial celebrates the victors more than it commemorates the dead, it's fashioned like a stone coliseum, as might have been fashioned by the world champion rooster after an undefeated string of cockfights.

Hummel volunteers were unfit for Nazis

Godmother Superior of kitsch, Maria Innocentia Hummel, intended her “Volunteers” to be a plea for peace. The forlorn would-be soldiers were an insult to Hitler, but a half century later, the United States would pervert Hummel’s satire and enlist the little boys into the war against Iraq.

Bishop Williamson must RECANT says Pope

At the behest of the Vatican, Bishop Richard Williamson apologized for offense caused by his statements regarding WWII historical records of the Nazi concentration camps. But Pope Benedict weighed the bishop's statement as insufficient. Now he's demanding a full retraction before he will reconsider the latter's excommunication. Being urged to recant may be a scandal in papal circles, but history buffs and cineasts have only ever seen truth-clinging heretics assailed with cries to "RECANT!" Google it yourself. Oddly this development puts Bishop Williamson in esteemed scientific and theological company. But this is just historical revisionism. Especially aimed against closely held popular beliefs, revisiting the official version of the Holocaust is like backing a losing horse still too early after the "fact." However, has blasphemy ever met with other than an officially disgusted welcome? Certainly the challenging argument only compounds its offense by deeming to compare itself to earlier, now orthodox, heresy. One might well wonder where this episode is leading. Has the Pope been oblivious to the Holocaust issue, as his spokesmen would have us believe, or is the German pontiff deviously reopening the official discussion? As with any reform, leaders may be receptive, but know in the meanwhile that their subjects are the hardest to win over. The brunt of resistance is thus diverted toward the heretic, until the case is made. Only in the movies do champions of the status quo look unbecoming in defeat. In the real world the holdouts are populist champions representing the overwhelming majority of adherents. Bishop Richard Williamson's public statements have caused great offense, and the Pope's recent move to make peace with the renegade Williamson, among others, has reignited the fury of the Bishop's critics. But of what import do non-Catholic opinions have on the subject of how the Vatican administrates its ranks? Surely a bishop's personal, non-religious views, soon return to obscurity. By throwing the ball back in the Bishop's court, Pope Benedict unquestionably directs the media spotlight back on the "question" of the Holocaust. It's hard to imagine that he expects anything other than a firm committed stand by the bishop. What are men of faith but what they believe? At stake is more than the rehabilitation of Bishop Williamson, but the soul of modern Germany. A re-characterization of the Nazi death camps would mean reassessing the collective guilt of Europe's non-Jews. It might also mean a reprieve for the German People whose national identity for generations has been defined by their participation in the most unspeakable of evils. I'm not sure why the Pope's having once been a Hitler Youth is always dismissed out of hand. Although perhaps, for the sake of argument, that's as it should. The Vatican might also gain something themselves by bringing more light to critical analysis of the Holocaust. They could be seeking a possible mitigation of their infamous role in the Nazi genocide. There's no escaping the evidence that the Catholic church collaborated with Hitler. If they can paint his "Final Solution" as

Wikipedia and those romantic Zionists

In researching the evolution of Zionist terrorism, from clandestine militias like Bar-Giora, to Hashomer, Haganah, Etzel, and the pro-Nazi Stern Gang, I came upon this opening paragraph in Wikipedia. Describing Bar-Giora, it began: "On September 28, 1907, a group of activists from Poalei Zion gathered in Yitzhak Ben-Zvi's tiny Jaffa apartment. There was no furniture, the men sat on the floor in a circle and used a crate for a desk." Some helpful Wiki elf was obviously feeling sentimental. Here's the full paragraph, one third of the only more nostalgic full article: On September 28, 1907, a group of activists from Poalei Zion gathered in Yitzhak Ben-Zvi's tiny Jaffa apartment. There was no furniture, the men sat on the floor in a circle and used a crate for a desk. Inspired by Israel Shochat's ideas, they agreed that the only way to fulfill the dream of becoming a Jewish nation was to rise up and assert themselves through cultivating and defending their land themselves. The state of things in the early years of the 20th Century in Palestine, was such that Jewish farmers employed Arabs to work their farms and protect them, and in turn were subject to landlords, such as Edmond de Rothschild's agents. There was much discontent and disillusionment. Thus I was sparked to delve into the oft-derided accusation that Wikipedia is biased toward Israel. Compare the paragraph above, to the introductions of Wiki articles about militant Muslim or Arab groups. Start with Wiki's official terrorist list and judge for yourself. CAMERA Electronic Intifada documented an interesting story last year, when they interrupted the Zionist site CAMERA from organizing commando edit raids on Wikipedia to ensure Israel was always shown in a favorable light. In its report, EI leaked the email thread which, by the way, serves as a great instruction manual for aspiring Wiki editors. We'll reprint the conversation below. The episode is documented in several articles. Beginning with EI exclusive: a pro-Israel group's plan to rewrite history on Wikipedia, The Electronic Intifada, 21 April 2008. (Reprinted in Global Research 4/24.) Alex Beam, of The Boston Globe, broke the story in print on May 6, 2008, in War of the virtual Wiki-worlds. Next came Israel Shamir, Wiki, the Chaos Controlled, who asserted that CAMERA's interrupted zeal masked Wikipedia's already Zionist admins. Shamir's continuing battle with Wikipedia can be followed in wiki/Talk). IRGUN, ET AL About the clandestine pre-Israel paramilitary organizations, which eventually became the Israel Defense Force? Their history is very interesting. The Zionist policy of using "retaliation" to justify strikes, started right from the beginning. When the Jewish settlers, many of whom were immigrating into Palestine illegally, felt that British authorities were not giving them preferred treatment in disputes with local Arabs, they organized private armies to quell Arab unrest over their expanding landholdings. During WWI, these fighters, formed as Hashomer, worked behind the lines with an intelligence branch named Nili, to help the British drive out the Turks. When the Paris Treaty of 1919 did not yield a Zionist state as promised,

Bishop Williamson and Auschwitz 1.0

I am curious as to why a Roman Catholic bishop would risk a second excommunication over the historic particulars of the Holocaust. Bishop Richard Williamson is being labeled a "Holocaust Denier" because he questions the extent, and mechanism, of the official version of the Holocaust. Because Williamson is also criticized for his skepticism about the official 9/11 narrative, and for his praise for the Unabomber's manifesto, I want to take a closer look, and wonder what is he reading? Here's what the outspoken Williamson told Swedish SVT in a November 2008 interview, as transcribed by the BBC: "I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against, six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler… I believe there were no gas chambers [during World War II]" First, I'm compelled to pose a naive question: If we can all agree that Jews died in huge numbers by incomparable horrors at the hands of the Nazis, would it matter what the exact death toll was, or which killing method predominated? Why? What is the need for laws to restrict historians who are trying to reconstruct the record from emerging facts? Must preemptive "anti-defamation" laws mandate that historians stick to the official "untold" number and "indescribable" evil? Even if we postulate, albeit cynically, that Holocaust reverence is critical to upholding American public support for Israel's "right to exist" in the Middle East, how could a revision of the casualties, in any case a horrific magnitude, make an difference? Millions of Jews fell victim to the Third Reich. No one is denying it, and historical revision is not trying to bring the Holocaust victims back to life. Holocaust Remembrance of the Jewish victims has remained a political priority around the world, advocating commemoration in education, literature, civic life, and pop culture. Why then, an aversion to scrutiny? Last week a fellow Society of St. Pius X member, Rev. Floriano Abrahamowicz was ejected from SSPX for coming to Williamson's and the Pope's defense. While the usual politicians and Jewish community leaders are voicing their indignation, can we ask, are the Bishop's beliefs really at odds with accepted orthodoxy? The media will reiterate that the Six Million figure has always been beyond dispute. All the while, official scholarship has been recording otherwise. In Germany, revisionist historians are jailed for Holocaust Denial. Yet bit by bit, mainstream historians have been able to publish divergent theses which withstand legal refutation. For the sake of argument, let's dismiss all the "deniers" as kooks, and look only at the traditionally vetted voices. On the subject of Auschwitz, where four million of the total six million Jews were believed to have perished, Der Spiegel managing editor Fritjof Meyer a continued critic of revisionism, summarized in Osteuropa 52, 5/2002, p. 631: “In 1945, the Soviet Investigatory Commission numbered four million victims in the National Socialist work and extermination camp of Auschwitz-Birkenau, a product of war propaganda. Under coercion, camp Commandant Höß named three million and recanted. Up until

American arrogance

Protests as US warship docks in Nagasaki What incredible arrogance and bad taste! This is your military and government, Americans! Look in the mirror and weep!

Gaza is not the Holocaust that the Jews suffered in the Warsaw Ghetto of WWII

"Pointing out that the suffering endured by Gazans is not comparable in scope to the Holocaust or other well-known genocides, does not diminish it. However, it is crucial to provide accurate historical context to the current conflict, for two reasons. If Gaza is today's Warsaw, then Palestinians have no hope. "Firstly, the use of highly charged historical comparisons that do not hold up to scrutiny unnecessarily weakens the Palestinian case against the occupation. In a propaganda war in which Palestinians have always struggled to compete, handing Israel's supporters the gift of inaccurate or exaggerated comparisons does not help this struggle, particularly not in Israel and the US, the two most important battlegrounds in this conflict." --excerpted from a commentary of Mark LeVine published by Al Jazeera titled Gaza is no Warsaw Ghetto

Holocaust Remembrance Day inaction

I'd like to commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day, January 27, with this photograph of modern day Israelis, who came to a hilltop overlooking Gaza to watch the IDF soldiers do their work. I've yet to encounter a WWII photograph of German citizens cheerleading as their soldiers rampaged through their neighbors' homes. Of course, this situation is different. These Israelis are hoping to settle, or resume their illegal settlements, the occupied territories, as soon as enough of the Palestinians are driven out or exterminated. Jewish survivors of the Holocaust vow "never again," but it only applies to them.

Actual Holocaust revisionists unmasked

In the face of escalated Israeli atrocities and war crimes against the inhabitants of Gaza this week, is the Zionist Holocaust Remembrance juggernaut losing its nerve? A major publisher has canceled plans to distribute a WWII concentration camp memoir when it was discovered that key elements of the tale were untrue. But that never stopped Holocaust Rememberers before. Herman Rosenblat had been peddling the fictional details for a decade, details which made his particular Holocaust experience unique. But historians questioned the very premise of his title, Angel at the Fence, and Rosenblat confessed his wife's part was fabricated. Taking a cue from James Frey, Rosenblat is hoping the film can be distributed as fiction. This example is not as bad as Belgian author Monique De Wael, writing under the pen name Misha Defonseca, who had to confess that her memoir of escaping the camps to live with wolves was fictional, and that she wasn't Jewish, but "felt Jewish." The original key witness account by Eli Wiesel, the leading patriarch of Holocaust Remembrance, turned out to be inaccurate enough that the memoir Night had to be reclassified as a novel. Despite the inventions, Wiesel's book remains in the canon of Holocaust literature. Bolstered by François Mauriac who wrote that Night is "...a book to which no other could be compared." Wrote A. Alverez, it was "almost unbearably painful, and certainly beyond criticism." Eli Wiesel made this pitch in 1955: "...ten years or so ago, I have seen children, hundreds of Jewish children, who suffered more than Jesus did on his cross and we do not speak about it."

Top