Rep. Paul Findley was a guest on my RBN radio show. The U.S.S. Liberty attack was one of many topics we covered. Until more Americans like Paul Findley step forward and "Name The Jew", we will endure more terror attacks and usurpation of our God given rights in this country and world wide.
People should strive to do the "Right" thing no matter how they are labeled; "racist", "intolerant", "xenophobic", or "haters", it doesn't matter. It all boils down to "Right vs Wrong", and it is wrong to allow a foreign country, such as Israel, to control the inner-workings of our government.
"I have done the research..." to coin a phrase by a popular access cable personality, and there is more evidence showing Israel's involvement in the 911 terror attack then there is for the controlled demolition theory...and yet we hear dead silence from these "conspiracy theorists" and "truth scholars" when it comes to discussing Israel's culpability in 911.
How long will you stick your head in the sand to avoid the "uncomfortable truth" about Israel's history of misdirection, deception and blatant acts of war on our people?
Peter Schaenk
(Please vist Shanknews for the latest news from around the world!)
[America lost her independence the day the attack on Liberty was whitewashed]
By Paul Findley
In the greatest service of his long public life, former President Jimmy Carter warns of the grave consequences of America’s phenomenal subservience to Israel. In his latest book and recent lectures, he focuses on how Israel’s cruel occupation, made possible by massive and unconditional U.S. support, has subjected the Palestinian people to terrible suffering for 40 long years.
Beyond that grave human tragedy, candid observers must cite U.S. complicity in Israeli lawlessness as the major factor that prompted the horror of 9-11 and lured America into launching three costly, wrong-headed and failing wars—Afghanistan, Iraq and the war on terror.
The linkage is easily identified. America’s support of Israel’s brutality was the main motivation for 9-11. Nine-eleven would not have happened if any U.S. president in the last 40 years had refused to finance Israel’s humiliation and destruction of Palestine.
Michael Scheuer, a former CIA analyst now a consultant to CBS News, recently told a congressional committee that “our unqualified support of Israel” was the main reason for 9/11. Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, President George W. Bush’s first special envoy to the Middle East, has stated that the United States invaded Iraq for Israel and oil.
The U.S. acts of war in Afghanistan and the war on terror were President Bush’s retaliation for 9-11—Israel and only Israel—urged the United States to invade Iraq. Israel’s lobby in Washington pushed hard and prevailed.
Despite this grim record, U.S. subservience to the wishes of Israel’s leaders does not change. Israel is the only nation urging the United States to attack Iran. The lobby is pushing hard again. If the United States assaults Iran it will be on Israel’s behalf.
Congress, like the rest of America, is totally devoid of debate on the amazing role of this small nation in critical U.S. policy. Members are fulsome in public praise of the Jewish state, but no politician mentions the illegal behavior of Israel or the staggering burden it imposes on our country.
How did Israel gain this influence?
It all started 40 years ago. On June 8, 1967, the U.S. commander in chief, President Lyndon B. Johnson, turned his back on the crew of a U.S. Navy ship, the USS Liberty, despite the fact that the ship was under deadly assault by Israel’s air and sea forces. The Israelis were engaged in an ugly scheme to lure America into their war against Arab states. They tried to destroy the Liberty and its entire crew, then pin the blame on the Arabs. This, they reasoned, would outrage the American people and immediately lead the United States to join Israel’s battle against Arabs.
The scheme almost worked. It failed because, despite the carefully planned multipronged assault, the Liberty crew managed to broadcast an SOS over a makeshift antenna. When the appeal reached U.S. aircraft carriers nearby, the commanders immediately launched fighter planes to defend the ship.
Informed of the launch, President Johnson ordered the rescue planes to turn back immediately.
For the first time in history, forces of the U.S. Navy were denied the right to defend a Navy ship under attack. Johnson said, “I don’t care if the ship sinks, I am not going to embarrass an ally.” Those were his exact words, heard by Navy personnel listening to radio relays.
The ally Johnson refused to embarrass was Israel. When the SOS reached the top military commanders in Israel, they immediately canceled the assault, claiming it was a case of mistaken identity. At the White House, Johnson accepted Israel’s claim, even though he knew it was a lie. Then Johnson magnified the day’s infamy by ordering a coverup of the truth. Liberty survivors were sworn to secrecy. Even those in hospital beds and badly wounded were threatened with court martial if they told anyone what actually happened. The coverup has been continued by every administration since Johnson’s.
It proved to be a fateful turning point in Israel’s power over U.S. foreign policy. The Liberty experience convinced Israeli officials that they could get by with literally anything—even the murder of U.S. sailors—in their manipulation of the U.S. government. Financial aid to Israel began to pour like a river, all of it with no strings attached. According to The Christian Science Monitor, this outpouring has now cost U.S. taxpayers more than
$1.4 trillion.
Costs go far beyond money. Thousands of American families are blighted forever, with America’s once high moral standing in shambles. Because of its unqualified support of Israel, Washington is hated worldwide as never before.
The principal source of Israel’s influence is the fear it seems to instill in every sector of our society. The most effective instrument of intimidation employed by its lobby is the reckless accusation of anti-Semitism, often leveled at anyone criticizing any aspect of Israeli behavior.
I can personally certify that for many years it has cast a blanket of fear over Capitol Hill and blocked any semblance of debate.
I unintentionally contributed to that fear in 1985 when my book, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, was published. It reports in detail the efficiency of Israel’s U.S. lobby, its history and tactics.
My book became a bestseller. I hoped it would inspire public officials and other citizens to revolt against the lobby’s influence on U.S. policy, but several of my former colleagues told me it had the opposite effect. One said, “After what AIPAC did to you and (Charles) Percy, I vote with the lobby every time.”
Israel’s grip on America seems impervious. Two distinguished political scientists, John Mearshiemer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard, strode resolutely into the Middle East minefield a year ago by co-authoring a paper on Israel’s lobby. More recently, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, a book written by former President Carter, revered worldwide for his effective work on international conflict resolution, was published.
With few exceptions, America’s major editors, producers, commentators, academics and politicians have given these courageous initiatives the silent treatment. Nationwide, the lobby’s influence is pervasive, sustained and deep, a phenomenon unprecedented in U.S. history. It is impossible to explain the silence except as a reflection of profound fear.
The situation is highly dangerous. America has already paid a towering price for our subservience to Israel, and great additional burdens seem inevitable. If the United States is involved in acts of war against Iran, anti-American protest will rise to new heights, especially throughout the Islamic world. It will inevitably deepen the widely held belief among Muslims that America seeks to undermine Islam.
The outlook for reform is grim. Elected officials of both major political parties in Washington seem hopelessly captured by Israel’s agents. So does every serious candidate for the presidency in 2008. All U.S. citizens must accept a measure of responsibility for Israel’s grip on America. Those of us who knew what was happening did not protest with sufficient force and clarity. Those who did not know should have taken their responsibility as citizens more seriously. They should have informed themselves.
The scene is likely to improve only if U.S. elected officials are criticized so forthrightly from home that they fear a constituent revolt more than they fear Israel’s lobby. This, of course, will not happen until the countryside benefits from a rigorous and edifying public debate about Israel’s role in our national life.
Paul Findley, a U.S. representative from Illinois from 1961-83, lives in Jacksonville, Fla. He is the author of five books, including the Washington Post seven-week bestseller, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, Chicago Review Press.
PLEASE GO TO THE U.S.S. LIBERTY MEMORIAL WEBSITE FOR MORE INFO RE ISRAEL'S TREACHEROUS ATTACK!
American Free Press
Could Ron Paul be keeping quite on this fundamental problem, like JFK did on Vietnam? JFK was said to go with the flow of keeping troops in Vietnam but really planned to remove them. This was before he was murdered by the Jewish Cabal.
It's pretty pathetic how Americans think Britney Spears is more important than to take interest in their National safety and security.
Posted by: K-Sensor | September 12, 2007 at 04:13 PM
There is no evidence that Kennedy was going to pull the troops out of Vietnam. This is wishful thinking by fans of Kennedy, who romanticise his legacy.
Posted by: Peter Schaenk | September 12, 2007 at 11:52 PM
Peter, I am a big fan of your show. In fact, I think you are on the top guys out there in league with William Cooper and Eustace Mullins. But I disagree with you about JFK planning to end the Vietnam War. There is documented proof of this. I refer you to this webpage...
Plus, there is a FOIA released memo that was mentioned in Oliver Stones limited hangout incomplete movie JFK. While much was left out of that movie, one thing they did get correct was the Kennedy plan to remove all troops by 1965 which was reversed only days after JFK died. In fact, reversed on the day of his funeral.
Peter Dale Scott, among others has written at length about exactly this.
the authorization for the OPLAN 34A program is contained in NSAM 273, the first National Security Action Memorandum signed by President Johnson (on November 26, four short days after President Kennedy's murder, following an emergency meeting on Vietnam on the 24th). This NSAM was drafted the day before Kennedy's fateful motorcade ride in Dallas, but the draft version differs markedly in the scope of authorization for such a program, and in any case Kennedy never saw or signed it.
Beyond the above is the larger question of Kennedy's policies and plans in Vietnam. Here, serious gaps in the record have been filled in since the passage of the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act. The gaps have been filled in with more details on the plans for complete withdrawal from Vietnam which were drawn up in the spring of 1963, and initiated on October 11 with NSAM 263. This gave the order for an initial pullout of 1000 men before the end of 1963, an event which never occurred.
With the filling in of the record - why were these documents a state secret for 35 years? - the debate among historians has shifted. No longer is the issue whether there was a plan to withdraw - the question has moved to whether it was "serious enough" to survive the change in reporting of the battlefield conditions which occurred in the wake of Kennedy's murder, from optimistic to pessimistic. Some historians, including David Kaiser (American Tragedy) and Howard Jones (Death of a Generation) now argue that Kennedy was determined to withdraw despite a change in conditions, joining Peter Dale Scott, John Newman, and no less than Robert McNamara
Posted by: mondo | September 17, 2007 at 03:22 PM