VIDEO - L'Amérique d'abord, le slogan de politique étrangère de Trump
L'Amérique d'abord: Donald Trump veut une politique étrangère moins interventionniste
Le slogan de politique étrangère de Trump, «l'Amérique d'abord», a un passé pro-nazi Le candidat à la primaire républicaine a utilisé une expression, «America First», qui fait écho à la neutralité des États-Unis vis-à-vis des nazis. Dans un long discours le 27 avril, le candidat républicain Donald Trump a dévoilé ses objectifs en matière de politique étrangère, et il les a résumés en un slogan simple: «l’Amérique d’abord», ou «America first». Or dans l’histoire des États-Unis, ces mots ont une histoire chargée de sens. En effet, le slogan est associé au comité America First, créé en 1940 dans le but d’empêcher les États-Unis d’entrer en guerre contre l’Allemagne nazie. Son porte-parole le plus célèbre était l’aviateur Charles Lindbergh, qui a dit beaucoup de bien du Troisième Reich dans les années 1930, et ne voyait pas la légitimité d’entrer en guerre contre le nazisme. Il est ausssi connu pour ses commentaires antisémites et racistes, et de nombreux membres du comité America First partageaient ces points de vue.
«L'Amérique d'abord», la politique étrangère «du XIXe siècle» de Donald Trump Donald Trump a passé son grand oral. Depuis un hôtel de Washington, le leader de la primaire républicaine a dévoilé sa philosophie en matière de politique étrangère. C’est donc « l’Amérique d’abord », un slogan piqué à l’isolationniste Charles Lindbergh, opposé à l’intervention américaine pour combattre le nazisme. « Ma politique étrangère placera toujours les intérêts des Américains et la sécurité de l’Amérique avant toute autre chose », a déclaré Trump.
VIDEO - ‘America First’: Trump lays out foreign policy vision in Washington speech
VIDEO - Donald Trump Invokes Infamous 'America First' Slogan | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC
ADL Urges Donald Trump to Reconsider “America First” in Foreign Policy Approach
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today urged presidential candidate
Donald Trump to reconsider his use of the phrase “America First” as a
slogan describing his approach to foreign affairs, citing its
anti-Semitic use in the months before Pearl Harbor by a group of
prominent Americans seeking to keep the nation out of World War II.
Note: Everything is ANTI-SEMITIC TO ADL.
Note: Everything is ANTI-SEMITIC TO ADL.
Trump Urged to Drop 'America First' Slogan Due to anti-Semitic Past The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urged Trump to reconsider the phrase Thursday citing its "anti-Semitic use in the months before Pearl Harbor by a group of prominent Americans seeking to keep the nation out of World War II." According to a statement released by the Jewish watchdog, the most leader of the “America First Committee” was Charles Lindbergh, who "sympathized with the Nazis and whose rhetoric was characterized by anti-Semitism and offensive stereotypes, including assertions that Jews posed a threat to the U.S. because of their influence in motion pictures, radio, the press, and the government."
ADL to Trump: Come up with something other than ‘America First’ Organization reminds Republican front-runner that term is closely associated with WWII-era anti-Semitism, pro-Nazi proclivities.
Non-intervention.com - Trump embraces America First, gives the republic a chance to survive and its foes apoplexy By Michael Scheuer. Trump’s 27 April 2016 speech on foreign policy is not perfect; indeed, parts of it merit strong criticism. But Trump has now said to the American people what no one, save Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, has been willing to say since 1945. That is, the U.S. government exists for only two reasons: (a) to pursue and defend the republic’s genuine national security interests and to wage war only as a last resort, and then slay without mercy those who dared attack them, and (b) to protect and advance the well-being, jobs, liberties, unity, and prosperity of American citizens. In short, Trump seems to believe — as did the Founders — that if the U.S. national government does not make the furtherance of America’s interests its first and absolute priority, it has, to paraphrase Mr. Jefferson, no possible reason to exist, and its citizens, in turn, have every possible justification, and the unavoidable moral and legal responsibility to themselves and their posterity, to ruthlessly destroy it and replace it with one that can be relied on to always act only on their behalf and in their interests.
At Last, America First! By Patrick J. Buchanan Whether the establishment likes it or not, and it evidently does not, there is a revolution going on in America.
Fuhrer Donald Trump and His New America First Movement! By Eugene Elander (...) Case in point -- The America First Movement, a loosely organized national political movement of the 1930s and 1940s which grew out of a reaction and rejection of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, his New Deal, and interventionists allegedly led by Communists and British interests who were urging America into the Second World War. America Firstersoften expressed admiration for the Nazi Fuhrer Adolf Hitler and his Third Reich. Aviation hero Charles Lindbergh and industrialist Henry Ford were seen by many as key leaders of the America First Movement, which pretty-much ended with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. At that point, America finally declared war on both Japan and Nazi Germany -- and thus Americans decisively rejected this isolationist America First Movement as a denial of our most basic international responsibilities towards our fellow nations, as well as being totally counter to our own self-interest. Still, it is truly said that what goes around comes around, and Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump has now resurrected America First as his new campaign theme and slogan. This latest Trumpeting of a failed slogan, and of a failed movement which otherwise might well have lost World War II for the Free World, demonstrates once again the Trumpster s utter lack of any historic perspective, and his small knowledge of Twentieth Century history. But there is even more that is demonstrated, as America First is a campaign gaffe providing insight about Trump.
Trump doubles down on 'America First' foreign policy slogan as he says 'NATO is obsolete' Donald Trump continued to flog 'America First' as his central foreign-policy frame
TIME | The Long History Behind Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ Foreign Policy In the course of an interview with the New York Times, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump had his foreign policy boiled down to two words: “America First.” In an exchange prompted by the Times‘ David E. Sanger, who was the first to use the phrase in the course of the interview, Trump said that he was “not isolationist” but that he was, in fact, “America First.” “I like the expression,” the candidate said. “I’m ‘America First.'” Trump explained that what he meant by the idea was that his administration would prevent other nations from taking advantage of the United States. But whatever he meant, those words come with nearly a century’s worth of political baggage.
Anti-War.com | Nationalism and Its Discontents: The Meaning of Trump The return of dreaded “isolationism” is cause for celebration
Donald Trump Isn't the First American Politician to Put 'America First' PHOTO: Thousands gather at an America First Committee rally in the Chicago Arena to listen to organizations chairmen, Gen. Robert Wood and Col. Charles Lindbergh give speeches advocating for isolationism and cutting off aid to Britain, April 17, 1941.The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images. Donald Trump's foreign policy speech today was the first time that the Republican presidential front-runner clearly declared his foreign policy priorities, and he summarized them as keeping "America First." He isn't the first person to do so. "America First" has been the name of at least two political groups in the past century, both of which focused their platforms on non-interventionist foreign policies. Opposing World War II Intervention The first iteration came in the 1940s with the America First Committee, which was formed largely in an effort to keep the United States out of World War II. Historian Arthur Schlesinger told PBS that there were a number of supporters for the party who went on to be prominent politicians, including later President Gerald Ford, later Rep. Jonathan Bingham, and relatives of the Taft family. The committee's most famous supporter at the time of its existence was famed pilot Charles Lindbergh, who spoke at their rallies and championed the cause.
BLOOMBERG | Trump's New Slogan Has Old Baggage From Nazi Era, By Eli Lake Donald Trump has given up on winning historically literate voters. Consider the theme of his major foreign policy speech Wednesday: "America first." This slogan is most associated with aviator Charles Lindbergh, who spent a great deal of time in the late 1930s gushing at how wonderful the Third Reich was. Before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Lindbergh helped form "America First" committees that campaigned to keep the U.S. from fighting the Axis Powers. Lindbergh rose to become a demagogue and accused President Franklin Roosevelt of colluding with a Jewish lobby and Britain to drag America into World War II. For years this phrase was toxic. Pat Buchanan has used it from time to time, but "America first" and the idea it represented -- American neutrality towards the Nazis -- has been largely banished from respectable discourse. Now Trump is bringing the phrase back to the mainstream. He deploys it at his campaign rallies. And in his major foreign policy speech Wednesday, there it was right at the top. The real-estate magnate promised to "always put the interests of the American people first." He said: "That will be the foundation of every single decision I will make. 'America first' will be the major and overriding theme of our administration."
Trump's 'America First' has ugly echoes from U.S. history (CNN) "My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people, and American security, above all else. That will be the foundation of every decision that I will make. America First will be the major and overriding theme of my administration." It is extremely unfortunate that in his speech Wednesday outlining his foreign policy goals, Donald Trump chose to brand his foreign policy with the noxious slogan "America First," the name of the isolationist, defeatist, anti-Semitic national organization that urged the United States to appease Adolf Hitler. Susan Dunn Susan Dunn The America First Committee actually began at Yale University, where Douglas Stuart Jr., the son of a vice president of Quaker Oats, began organizing his fellow students in spring 1940. He and Gerald Ford, the future American president, and Potter Stewart, the future Supreme Court justice, drafted a petition stating, "We demand that Congress refrain from war, even if England is on the verge of defeat." Trump responds to Hitler comparison Their solution to the international crisis lay in a negotiated peace with Hitler. Other Yale students -- including Sargent Shriver, who served in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, and Kingman Brewster, the chairman of the Yale Daily News, future president of Yale and ambassador to the Court of St. James -- joined their isolationist crusade.
JEWISH JOURNAL | Donald Trump: From America First to America’s Worst Donald Trump recently declared himself in favor of “America First.” It is doubtful he knows anything of the historical antecedents of America First—from Charles Lindbergh’s pre-World War II crusade to “keep us out of war” against Hitler by blaming war mongering on the Jews, to Pat Buchanan’s revival of America Firsterism in his 1992 GOP presidential bid and his vicious anti-Israel magazine, The American Conservative, that all our troubles on sinister forces that seek “to conscript American blood to make the world safe for Israel.” Lindbergh had set the stage by warning—or threatening—that “Jews in this country . . . would be the first to feel its consequences” if they succeeded in “agitating” America into World War II. Trump is very much in the tradition of American Firster Isolationism.
Trump’s Support for America First Is Not Part of His Bigotry: Pacifist Organization Was Prescient in Some of Its Warnings In recent statements, Trump has echoed many on the left including Bernie Sanders in suggesting that America should stop policing the world which has been a recipe for cataclysm, stating: “we were the big bully but not smartly led.” Trump went on to claim that Americans have gotten relatively little in return for underwriting the security of many foreign countries except trade deficits, saying that “we won’t be ripped off anymore because we don’t have the money.” When asked about America First, a pacifist organization founded on the eve of World War II, he said, “I like the expression. Not isolationist, but America first.” Trump’s comments tapped into deep underlying unease with America’s status as an empire garrisoning the globe which carries out covert operations and assassination missions in an estimated 135 countries. Many now sense that the main beneficiaries of the U.S. empire are large corporate interests who have off-shored thousands of manufacturing jobs and saddled the U.S. with extensive debt.
‘America First’ Trump leading GOP to fortress nationalist fringe “Make America Great Again” means keeping foreigners out, reserving American jobs for the American-born, punishing our more “cunning” trading partners — especially Mexico and China — building walls and withdrawing from foreign alliances and wars. This brand of American nationalism is not new. Trump’s “America First” slogan is a throwback to the pre-World War II movement against U.S. entry into the war. The America First Committee, whose most famous member was aviator and Adolf Hitler admirer Charles Lindbergh, argued that the United States should build an impregnable defense but stay out of the war in Europe — a position that was, in the late 1930s, highly popular with the American people.
Trump's new America First slogan was first used by anti-war zealots who claimed the Nazis WEREN'T a danger (...) * Donald Trump's foreign policy slogan - which he debuted to the general public today - was used by non-interventionists before World War II (...) *Trump has used the 'America First' slogan in speeches for the past couple of weeks
Trump's 'America First' theme draws criticis Republican front-runner Donald Trump faced criticism Thursday for saying the focus of his administration will be "America First." That's the same name used by a committee that opposed the U.S. entering World War II to fight Nazi Germany. Its most prominent spokesman, aviator Charles Lindbergh, accused the Jewish people of trying to push the country into war, saying "their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government." The committee largely disbanded after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. In his major foreign policy address on Wednesday, a day after he said he was the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, Trump said, "America First" will be the major and overriding theme of my administration." Here's what Trump said about foreign policy Here's what Trump said about foreign policy Republican front-runner Donald Trump addressed the Washington foreign policy establishment. The Anti-Defamation League, which has been critical of some of Trump's previous comments, urged Trump to find another theme.
Trump Risks Charles Lindbergh Label with ‘America First’ Foreign Policy Speech
FORWARD | Trump ‘America First’ Slogan Carries Lindbergh Nazi-Friendly Undertones A slogan Donald Trump used in a Wednesday foreign policy speech hearkens back to a phrase used by American aviator Charles Lindbergh, who argued for American neutrality against the Nazis. The “America First” motto, which Trump employed Wednesday, was also used by Lindbergh to argue against American involvement in World War II, wrote Bloomberg columnist Eli Lake. Trump said he would “always put the interests of the American people first. That will be the foundation of every single decision I will make. ‘America first’ will be the major and overriding theme of our administration.” Following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Lindbergh organized “America First” groups that lobbied to keep the U.S. out of the war. The famous pilot argued for an isolationist foreign policy stance, and accused president Franklin Roosevelt of conspiring with Jewish groups and Britain to promote American involvement in World War II. Some of Trump’s policy suggestions, such as decreasing defense support to NATO allies, suggest similar isolationist ideals, Lake wrote.
Donald Trump's 'America First' slogan has a toxic past US history scholar Gary Gerstle tells DW why he is stunned that Donald Trump chose "America First" as his foreign policy motto. He also details why Trump's effort to make the discredited slogan sound innocent will fail.
Trump’s Support for Israel Marred by Troubling Revival of ‘America First’ Slogan Republican frontrunner’s foreign policy speech will remind American Jews of isolationist movement stained by anti-Semitism that tried to block war with Hitler.
As expected, Trump’s ‘America First’ slogan stirs up the Jewish MSM
‘America First’ – The Trump Slogan the Establishment Hates
Is Donald Trump Following in Thomas Jefferson’s Footsteps?
German Foreign Minister Slams Trump for 'America First' Remark Frank-Walter Steinmeier says he hopes U.S. election campaign 'does not lack the perception of reality' after Trump states that if elected, European allies would be left to fend for themselves.
A First: GOP Leaders Like Trump Speech
Trump terrifies (western) world leaders
Neocon Armchair Warhawks Panic Over Trump Foreign Policy
Neocons Make Trump Sound Like Peacenik on Foreign Policy
GOP Foreign Policy Experts Warn A Trump Presidency Would ‘Endanger America’
VIDEO - Éric Zemmour : "La communauté internationale n'existe pas et n'existera jamais" Très bon commentaire sur Obama et sa mise au rancart de l'interventionnisme, qui revient ouvertement dans le discours 'America First' de Trump.
VIDEO - Eric Zemmour sur Donald Trump et Bernie Sanders
Le discours de politique étrangère de Donald Trump
Sheldon Adelson will support Trump as Republican nominee‘I’m a Republican, he’s a Republican,’ says Jewish casino magnate and mega-donor to GOP; ‘he won fair and square’.
Trump on Foreign Defense Aid: Israel Should Reimburse the US
VIDEO - Emergency Committee for Israel: Trump loves Dictators
Trump on foreign policy: Iran deal allowed it to become a 'great power' at Israel's expense
Trump : Obama a abandonné les alliés des Etats-Unis, notamment Israël Le favori des primaires républicaines veut une politique étrangère moins interventionniste
Trump: Obama Made Iran a Great Power at Israel's Expense In first foreign policy speech, Republican frontrunner says U.S. under his leadership would get out of 'nation-building business,' vows to make U.S. allies bear financial burden for their defense.
Trump vows to put 'America first,' criticizes Obama for 'snubbing' Israel In his largely anticipated formal foreign policy speech, the US Republican presidential hopeful laid out a policy putting his country before others and slammed the current administration's treatment of the Jewish State.
Under Obama, candidate laments, 'We pick fights with our oldest friends' Obama ‘snubbed’ Israel, treated Iran with ‘tender love and care,’ Trump charges In speech outlining foreign policy, Republican front-runner hammers home ‘America first,’ says Islamic Republic won’t get nuclear weapons if he’s president.
Trump Says Obama 'Weakened Israel' and Jewish Communities in Europe Trump's adviser Jason Greenblatt promised to 'create a different tone in Europe and around the world.'
Lindsey Graham in Israel: Trump’s foreign policy worse than Obama’s
Trump is worse than Obama on Israel and foreign policy, GOP senator says
Trump on Foreign Defense Aid: Israel Should Reimburse the US
In Indiana, Trump Completes Hostile Takeover of the GOP After the N.Y. billionaire’s Indiana victory, many Americans pinched themselves and said: It’s the end of the world as we know it.
Prominent Republican Jews question loyalty to party under Trump RJC offers cool support for billionaire left alone in the race, while others say they’re standing by the GOP unless the candidate crosses a line.
Sheldon Adelson will support Trump as Republican nominee‘I’m a Republican, he’s a Republican,’ says Jewish casino magnate and mega-donor to GOP; ‘he won fair and square’.
Ron Paul, Secretary of State?
Trump Vows To Seek Better Relations With Russia If Elected
Donald Trump : «Nous avons fait du Moyen Orient un endroit plus chaotique qu’avant»
Donald Trump précise sa vision de la politique étrangère
Le candidat Donald Trump ne ménage pas ses critiques contre l’Otan
Is Trump Right About NATO? I am "not isolationist, but I am ‘America First,’" Donald Trump told The New York Times last weekend. "I like the expression."
Trump: ‘I want to get along with Russia’
Trump to NATO: You’re Fired!
Will Trump Get NATO off Our Backs?
Trump questions need for NATO, outlines non-interventionist foreign policy
‘America First Not Israel’: Detroit billboard urges US to restrict influence of Jewish Lobby
Controversial billboard that reads America first over Israel put up in Detroit
WATCH Donald Trump Is a 'European-style Blood-and-soil Nationalist,' Says David Brooks 'This campaign is in part a debate between an ardent nationalist, which Donald Trump is sort of a European-style blood-and-soil nationalist, vs. a candidate on the Democratic side who is more of a globalist.'
The GOP Convention's Official Guide to Donald and Melania Trump, Kim Jong-un Version The Republican candidate is 'the very definition of the American success story.' His wife is a cross between Cindy Crawford and Mother Theresa. Stand aside, Warren Buffett. Move along, Larry Page. Admit that you’ve been bettered, Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos and even Sheldon Adelson.
GOP’s Last Line of Anti-Trump Defense
Republican Convention in Uproar as anti-Trump Delegates Protest
La convention républicaine promet du spectacle, de vifs échanges sur Israël, et des armes
GOP convention promises delegate drama, Israel dissonance, and guns
Chaos at GOP confab as delegates look to derail Trump nomination
GOP embraces Trump's 'America First' slogan, despite Jewish concerns
GOP convention to be short on Jews
Jewish Republicans Slip Into Crisis Mode as Trump Convention Looms
Trump’s Candidacy and the GOP Platform Are as Much anti-Jewish as 'pro-Israeli' There won’t be many Jews at the Republican convention in Cleveland but there will be multitudes of white supremacist Jew-haters.
INTERVENTIONISM, NOT ISLAM, IS THE PROBLEM
Donald Trump’s Five Questions on US Foreign Policy
The Donald Trump Agenda Trump’s position on immigration reform makes it evident that his administration would add regulations that would burden private-sector businesses, enlarge the police-state grid, and tread heavily on the US Constitution.
Donald Trump might kill the 'special relationship'. That's no laughing matter for Britain
US Military Supports Trump, and Probably Not Why You Think
Donald Trump’s Unsurprising Surprise
Mark Dankof and Jonas E. Alexis on Trump, America First, and The Lobby
Fascism is looming over the US — and it’s bad news for the Jews
Arch NeoCon Robert Kagan on a Trump Presidency– ‘This is how fascism comes to America’
Trump: Bad for Jewish Republicans?
Trump backers hurl anti-Semitic tweets at NY Times editor
The Judaic threats to implode US Economy over Trump presidency begin– ‘Huge, huge losses for stocks if Trump wins’
Jews Face a Precarious Future in a Trump America As Breitbart’s 'Renegade Jew' smear shows, Trump won't denounce his hacks' anti-Semitism. It’s a hatred that's now core to his campaign.
Will Donald Trump turn against the Zionist lobby if elected?
Trump’s dangerous neutrality on Israel
What Do Voters See in Donald Trump? Meet James Traficant, the Man Who Prefigured Him
Donald Trump’s Rise Shows How Much Pro-Israel Politics Has Changed in 5 Years
Crowd Cheers as Trump Declares 'Countries Need to Pay Up' for American Protection 'The really big problem with NATO, I told him this, you have 28 countries but many of the countries are not paying what they're supposed to be paying. They have to pay up.'
Dejected Neocons Lash Out At “Fascist, Huckster” Trump
LE FIGARO : « Populisme» : et si on arrêtait avec les poncifs ? «La montée du populisme»: Cette expression, promise à un grand avenir dans l'année qui vient, est faite pour donner des frissons et un peu de culpabilité supplémentaire aux peuples européens. C'est bien connu, la montée du populisme est la réédition de la montée du fascisme dans les années trente, devant laquelle nous alertent nos gardiens du devoir de mémoire. Cerise sur le gâteau, on a confectionné une expression plus parlante encore: le «national-populisme», au cas où l'électeur n'aurait pas complètement pris la mesure, malgré le matraquage idéologique régnant, de l'époque «nauséabonde» que nous vivons. C'est beau et simple comme un manuel d'histoire pour lycéens! Et lorsque ce n'est pas avec la montée du fascisme, c'est avec la montée du communisme qu'on compare le populisme, ce nouveau spectre qui hanterait l'Europe. Malheureusement on n'a toujours pas établi les connexions idéologiques et pratiques de cette internationale populiste...
The Newt factor: Gingrich as Trump’s VP would be a scary, power-hungry monster Just Like Dick Cheney: Newt would abuse his power when dealing with national security and military affairs
Donald Trump says Newt Gingrich is ‘absolutely’ on his Veep short list
Newt Gingrich Is the Perfect Trump Running Mate Why Donald should pick the former speaker of the House.
Will Donald Trump Pick Fellow Conspiracy Theorist Newt Gingrich For VP?
Dennis Prager Will Support Trump Over Clinton Because Sometimes 'Mature People' Have To Support A Stalin To Defeat A Hitler
Will A Summer Of Violence Accompany A Trump Nomination?
58 Donald Trump Conspiracy Theories (And Counting!): The Definitive Trump Conspiracy Guide
Glen Beck and guest Brad Thor discussing in coded language assassinating Trump to keep him out of power
NY Times editor calls out Trump for ignoring supporters’ anti-Semitic tweets
Donald Trump's New Fundraiser's Israel Connection The vice chairman of the Trump Victory Fund, Elliott Broidy, was removed as chairman of the Tel Aviv-based venture capital firm Markstone Capital Partners after paying bribes to pension fund managers.
Trump backers unleash anti-Semitic tweets at 'New York Times' editor
Glenn Beck guest asks whether 'patriot' would remove Trump from White House
Trump: 'They Want To Slip Joe Biden In To Replace Bernie'
Liberal Jews plan a summer of opposing Donald Trump
They don’t want Trump or Hillary: Half of voters would consider a third-party presidential candidate 47% of registered American voters would vote third party, poll finds, as Trump begins overtaking Clinton nationally.
U.S. Jewish Groups Condemn Breitbart for Calling Bill Kristol 'Renegade Jew' Critics slam 'inappropriate and offensive' article claiming neoconservative commentator betrays fellow Jews by opposing Trump.
Trump Rips Bill Kristol: "All The Guy Wants to do is Kill People and Go to War"
“Isn’t it clear Trump is a pathological narcissist and liar?”: Bill Kristol’s sad boy tweets are a morbid treat Kristol baits Trump on Twitter all day, every day, but still can't score the coveted reply from The Donald
VIDEO - Bill Kristol: Trump And Clinton "Are Scared" Of My Third Party Idea; Mitt Romney "An Impressive Man"
VIDEO - Bill Kristol Goes Off On CNN Anchor Alisyn Camerota For Questioning Third Party Picks
Donald Trump Blasts ‘Loser’ Bill Kristol for Trying to Start Third Party
RAPPEL: NEO-CON King Bill Kristol: 'Iraq War Will Last 2 Months'
Bill Kristol: 'New Presidential Candidate To Enter Race'
Trump, Kristol trade barbs in 'Post' interview with 'Weekly Standard' editor
Trump Unleashes Tirade After Bill Kristol Says Independent Candidate Will Run
Trump posts flurry of tweets after Kristol's 'third-party candidate' prediction
GOP looks for last minute alternative to Trump Donald Trump responded to Bill Kristol's cryptic tweet about a potential third party candidate. NBC's Chris Jansing discusses with a political panel.
Meet Shmuley Boteach, the Right-Wing Reality Show ‘Rabbi’ Hustling His Way Into the Trump Campaign
Donald Trump and William Kristol sling insults over potential third-party challenger
Kristol Eyes Conservative Lawyer David French for Independent Presidential Run
Here in Israel, reading about possible @DavidAFrench candidacy, thought of Herzl: Im tirtzu, ein zo agada. If you will it, it is no dream. — Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) June 1, 2016 Son épouse Nancy French a coécrit un livre avec Sarah Palin, une sioniste plus sioniste que les sionistes...
The (David) French Connection Why Bill Kristol's bewildering pick for a #NeverTrump presidential candidate makes a certain amount of sense.
Qui est David French, le champion inconnu des anti-Trump Cet ancien soldat pourrait se lancer dans la course pour rallier les conservateurs rejetant le candidat officiel du parti républicain...
David French, Proposed Conservative Alternative to Trump, Draws Tepid Response Republican strategists aren’t rallying to Tennessee lawyer, according to people familiar with talks to recruit another contender, By Reid J. Epstein and Patrick O’Connor.
David French: I Will Vote for Donald Trump If He Is the Nominee
VIDEO - Bloomberg Politics : Bill Kristol Eyes David French For Independent Run
The Death of Bill Kristol
Kristol Eyes Conservative Lawyer David French for Independent Presidential Run The conservative editor of the Weekly Standard has been searching for a candidate to challenge Trump and Clinton in the general election.
Kristol looking at National Review staff writer David French for independent presidential run
VIDEO - National Review [--Kristol's journal--] urges Mitt Romney to run for president As many in the GOP jump on board the Trump train, the holdouts hoping to stop it in its tracks have dwindled from a movement with momentum to just an unyielding few. The National Review's David French and political analyst Rick Tyler join to discuss.
Trump and Netanyahu, Purveyors of Hate Both stoke fear of external threats and nurture resentment of internal others to gain power and deflect criticism.
Donald Trump’s anti-Semitism controversies: A timeline Presumptive GOP candidate faces growing accusations his campaign condones Jew-hatred, if not encourages it outright.
Brad Thor Denies He Was Talking About an Assassination Attempt on Trump
Glenn Beck Suspended by SiriusXM for 'Advocating Harm' Against Trump Show's guest Brad Thor asked 'what patriot will step up' if a President Trump overstepped his bounds, to which Beck agreed.
Double Standards: Unrelenting Anti-Trump Media Campaign, Coverup of Hillary “Racketeering Charges”
Paranoia-Rama: Trump's Latest Absurdity, Martial Law Fears & About Those Death Panels…
Rachel Maddow Skewers Donald Trump And One Of His Many Conspiracy Theorist Pals
Trump’s Jewish adviser: He’s not responsible for supporters’ anti-Semitism ‘He can’t keep going around saying I denounce anti-Semitism,’ says Trump’s Orthodox consultant Jason Dov Greenblatt.
You’re Welcome, Anti-Semites: Here Are Some More (((Jews))) For You
Donald Trump’s anti-Semitism controversies: A timeline Presumptive GOP candidate faces growing accusations his campaign condones Jew-hatred, if not encourages it outright.
Trump's Son-in-law Targeted by Jew-tracking App Before Google Took It Down Coincidence Detector enclosed names that its algorithm deemed Jewish in triple parentheses, a symbol that allowed neo-Nazis to more easily aim their anti-Semitic bile.
Who Cares That Ivanka Trump Is Jewish? Some of history’s biggest anti-Semites had Jews that they loved.
With Friends Like President Trump The candidacy clinched, Trump is falling over himself with praise for the Jewish state. But love is no substitute for competence and in foreign policy he hasn’t exhibited any.
Going against the plan: Why the psychopath neocons hate fascist Trump Trump expresses himself in often crude language eg. threatening to "carpet bomb" the Islamic State. He is not coherent. He continues to talk of Iran as an enemy — ignoring the fact that it is as much a potential partner of the US as Russia and China are. Some of the things Trump says — for example his talk of embracing torture — are frankly disturbing. It remains to be seen whether a President Trump if elected would be either willing or able — as he promises — to change the entire foreign policy direction of the US. The fact however remains that Trump has challenged the ideological foundations upon which US foreign policy is built whilst offering an alternative that has elicited a powerful response from the US public. That is why the US political establishment is so alarmed by him.
Trump- American Hero Or Zionist Messiah? “Trump is an enigma. And when we look at Trump we see that there is a divide on the anti-New World Order and anti-Zionist right regard to whether or not we should be supporting Donald Trump,” Dankof said. On the one hand he claims, friends like Michael Collins Piper and Nathanael Kapner have exposed Trump’s “longtime relationship with the Zionist entity and to the Zionist community in New York.” “Trump keeps sending mixed signals. On the one hand he talks about America First. On the one hand he talks about these crazy Middle Eastern military involvements. He’s saying some of the right things of having legitimate diplomatic relationship with Vladimir Putin, and putting a lease on NATO, even getting out of NATO,” Dankof claims. “He said a series of good things about cutting American financial commitments, defense South Africa and Japan, given the American economy,” he said. “And yet nonetheless on the other hand, he has more recent plans, and said a series of things that are absolutely alarming on this whole subject of Israel and Zionism.”
So-called ‘Libertarian’ VP-Candidate uses bankrupt holocau$t canard against Trump
David Duke Wants to be Trump's VP, Says He'd be His 'Life Insurance'
Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and CIA-Cuban “Deep Politics”
Wall Street Insider and former Bush Administration official remarking on Trump’s election chances– ‘It all comes down to the U.S. Military and Intelligence Communities’
Kerry slams Trump's wall, tells grads to prepare for 'borderless world'
Trump now says Muslim ban was ‘just a suggestion’
Trump faults computer ‘error’ for listing white supremacist as delegate
Trump Would Beat Clinton; Sanders Would Beat Trump
Rand Paul Will Endorse Donald Trump
Can anti-Trump Jews Save the Republican Party? Many Jewish conservatives are adrift, impotent and uneasy. Their intense opposition to Trump is not only based on policy but also the anti-intellectual, vulgar and angry culture he represents.
Donald Trump Puzzles Jewish Groups by Failing To Create Communication Channels
Donald Trump refuse de condamner ses supporters néonazis
Republicans Feel ‘Trump Terror’
Trump’s America First Policy: Remarkably Sophisticated
Where Jewish conservatives stand on Donald Trump: A running tally
Personal Insults Fuel GOP Insurrection Against Trump Scorn and ridicule are not only in his nature; they’ve been a main ingredient in the New York billionaire’s success.
Trump's Team: The Bigoted, Unhinged Conspiracy Theorists Benefiting From Donald Trump's Campaign
How the 2016 US election is upending pro-Israel orthodoxies
George H. W. Bush's national security adviser endorses Clinton for president
L’establishment républicain vote Hillary Clinton
Neocons Endorse Hillary as the US Party of Empire Is Finally Revealed
Clinton éviterait les prises de bec ‘obamaesques’ avec Israël Dennis Ross, qui a servi en tant que conseiller du Moyen Orient pour Bill Clinton, avertit qu’Israël devient de plus en plus isolé et appelle à mettre un terme à la construction en dehors des blocs d’implantations
Clinton would avoid Obama-esque spats with Israel, ex-diplomat says Dennis Ross, who served as Mideast adviser to Bill Clinton, warns that Israel is becoming more isolated, calls for end to building outside settlement blocs.
La politique extérieure de Clinton sera plus à craindre que celle de Trump
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton: Defensive Realist vs. War Hawk?
Are Neocons Getting Ready to Ally With Hillary Clinton? Ironique que les néocons se retrouvent à appuyer malgré eux un Clinton.
“She sounds like Netanyahu”: Hillary Clinton goes extra hawkish in her biased, die-hard pro-Israel AIPAC speech
Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy advisers are exactly who you’d expect them to be Une belle bande de juifs bien sûr, mais pas du genre de ces juifs ultra sionistes qui veulent une guerre mondiale. Plutôt comme ces juifs américains qui adorent Goldman Sachs et voudraient propager l'American Way of Life partout dans le monde au nom des droits de l'homme. Si elle est élue, ce sera le retour du vieil interventionnisme. Pas celui de Bush fils, mais quand même...
Hillary Clinton est-elle plus dangereuse que Donald Trump ? article original : "Is Hillary Clinton more dangerous than Donald Trump? "
Cornered Neocons: Trump’s heresy on foreign policy has put Republican hawks in nightmare scenario — backing Hillary Clinton
Clinton Campaign Lurches to the Right. “Overtures to Republican Leaders and Donors”
Hillary Clinton attacks her church over Israel divestment vote
Democratic Party is now split over Israel, and Clinton and Sanders represent opposing camps, says Pew
Sanders appointees want Democratic platform to reference Israeli occupation
Democrats tussle over adding 'occupation’ to party platform
Democrats Are Now the Aggressive War Party
“Extending American, Strategies to Expand U.S. Engagement”: Hillary Clinton’s Project For A New American CenturyFaut pas non plus tomber dans le piège de prendre au premier degré tout ce qu'ils disent... Parfois le plus "ami d'Israel" en public est celui qui ose les combattre en privé, et celui qui prétend être le plus "neutre" peut être en réalité le plus compatible avec les objectifs de Bibi...
Trump and Adelson Were Meant for Each Other Jewish conservatives who condemn the GOP candidate should condemn his Jewish sidekick too.
David Duke blames Trump U controversy on ‘Jewish manipulation of the media’
Pro-Trump former KKK leader blames judge criticism on 'vicious' Jews
Ahead of visit, UK Jewry slams Trump’s ‘troubling’ rhetoric
The Racial Divide Between Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump
‘America First’: Trump doubles down on a term that makes many Jews queasy
Meet the One Jewish Group that Can Attack Donald Trump
Donald Trump Is a Candidate for White Supremacists — Not the Jews
Jewish-controlled Media blasts Dr. Duke for blaming Trump U nonsense on Jewish-controlled Media
Bill Kristol, Neo-Con King in 'High Priests of War', Resurfaces in Desperation Against Trump - Author, Michael Collins Piper
The US Establishment Plans War To Stop Trump – Alexander Dugin
Trump: Hillary Will Flood America With Terrorists
Trump has virtually no support in Arab world, Israeli survey find. Maintenir ce genre de distance vis-à-vis des "Arabes" et vice versa, c'est très utile pour se faire élire aux USA... Malheureusement. Ça en dit plus long sur les Américains que sur les Arabes en fait.
Battle of the Wannabe White House Jewish Son-in-Laws
Donald Trump Calls Hillary Clinton “Trigger Happy” as She Courts Neocons
Zionist Marine Le Pen: Hillary winning presidential election would be a danger to world peace
Donald Trump Accuses Bill Clinton of 'Rape' Deflecting accusations in New York Times article of mistreating women, Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president attacks Hillary Clinton's husband.
VIDEO - RYDAWSON: Radical Islam feeds off of radical American intervention
Les huit erreurs de la politique américaine au Proche-Orient (Chas W. Freeman Jr.)
US Intel Vets Slam State Dept Warmongering
Sanders appointee to 'Post': Democratic platform should include 'occupation,' right to boycott
What the Democratic Platform on Israel Fails to Mention Can Palestinians really be 'free to govern themselves' if no one acknowledges the military occupation? By trying to have it both ways, Democrats ended up with a platform that says nothing.
Elizabeth Warren Is the Surprising Israel Hawk on Hillary Clinton’s Vice Presidential Shortlist
“The Less Evil Argument” by Noam Chomsky, John Halle: “The Left Vote for Neoliberal War-monger Hillary Clinton…”
Trump better choice by far – Alan Sabrosky
Trump’s Vice Presidential Shortlist: Handpicked to Handle Congress
Uh oh: Trump considering pro-Israel NEOCONS for VP
Donald Trump Taps Michele Bachmann, James Dobson and Other Far-Right Leaders For Advisory Board
Is Trump Really the Anti-Neocon?
Donald Trump Pushes Back Against Anti-Israel Question — Vows ‘100%’ Support
Donald Trump’s U-Turn on Palestine, Firmly Committed to the Israel Lobby
Trump's Rhetoric Related to Uptick in anti-Semitism in U.S., ADL Chief Says 'I’m not saying that Donald Trump is a racist or anti-Semite but the racists and anti-Semites have come out of the woodwork during this political season to support him,” Jonathan Greenblatt says.
Time to form an American Jewish Emergency Committee Against Donald Trump
What Republicans in Israel think of Donald Trump and why it matters
Donald Trump Faces Summer of Yucks and Jeers From Liberal Jews
To stop Trump, America needs more solidarity than Britain showed in Brexit vote
'They Shall (Not) Pass': Brexit Vote Shows How Cracks in Anti-racist Coalitions Could Win Trump the White House Few believed the 'rational' Brits would buy a ridiculous, isolationist stunt like Brexit, a better fit for the U.S.' increasingly dark mood. But unlike 70 years ago, the anti-fascist movement is divided.
Blame Facebook for Donald Trump and Brexit The site threatens to impose a world order that is racist, separatist, militant, tribal and religious, and to dismantle any universal, humanist and liberal identity.
New York Primary: For Israel and U.S. Jews, Cruz May Be More Threatening Than Trump When Ted Cruz has gone all out to woo Jewish voters in New York, he touts his sterling Senate pro-Israel positions. But those voters recognize the danger in AIPAC talking points actually becoming American policy.
Clinton Campaign Lurches to the Right. “Overtures to Republican Leaders and Donors”
Hillary Clinton attacks her church over Israel divestment vote
Democratic Party is now split over Israel, and Clinton and Sanders represent opposing camps, says Pew
Sanders appointees want Democratic platform to reference Israeli occupation
Democrats tussle over adding 'occupation’ to party platform
Democrats Are Now the Aggressive War Party
“Extending American, Strategies to Expand U.S. Engagement”: Hillary Clinton’s Project For A New American CenturyFaut pas non plus tomber dans le piège de prendre au premier degré tout ce qu'ils disent... Parfois le plus "ami d'Israel" en public est celui qui ose les combattre en privé, et celui qui prétend être le plus "neutre" peut être en réalité le plus compatible avec les objectifs de Bibi...
Trump and Adelson Were Meant for Each Other Jewish conservatives who condemn the GOP candidate should condemn his Jewish sidekick too.
David Duke blames Trump U controversy on ‘Jewish manipulation of the media’
Pro-Trump former KKK leader blames judge criticism on 'vicious' Jews
Ahead of visit, UK Jewry slams Trump’s ‘troubling’ rhetoric
The Racial Divide Between Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump
‘America First’: Trump doubles down on a term that makes many Jews queasy
Meet the One Jewish Group that Can Attack Donald Trump
Donald Trump Is a Candidate for White Supremacists — Not the Jews
Jewish-controlled Media blasts Dr. Duke for blaming Trump U nonsense on Jewish-controlled Media
Bill Kristol, Neo-Con King in 'High Priests of War', Resurfaces in Desperation Against Trump - Author, Michael Collins Piper
The US Establishment Plans War To Stop Trump – Alexander Dugin
Trump: Hillary Will Flood America With Terrorists
Trump has virtually no support in Arab world, Israeli survey find. Maintenir ce genre de distance vis-à-vis des "Arabes" et vice versa, c'est très utile pour se faire élire aux USA... Malheureusement. Ça en dit plus long sur les Américains que sur les Arabes en fait.
Battle of the Wannabe White House Jewish Son-in-Laws
Donald Trump Calls Hillary Clinton “Trigger Happy” as She Courts Neocons
Zionist Marine Le Pen: Hillary winning presidential election would be a danger to world peace
Donald Trump Accuses Bill Clinton of 'Rape' Deflecting accusations in New York Times article of mistreating women, Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president attacks Hillary Clinton's husband.
VIDEO - RYDAWSON: Radical Islam feeds off of radical American intervention
Les huit erreurs de la politique américaine au Proche-Orient (Chas W. Freeman Jr.)
US Intel Vets Slam State Dept Warmongering
Sanders appointee to 'Post': Democratic platform should include 'occupation,' right to boycott
What the Democratic Platform on Israel Fails to Mention Can Palestinians really be 'free to govern themselves' if no one acknowledges the military occupation? By trying to have it both ways, Democrats ended up with a platform that says nothing.
Elizabeth Warren Is the Surprising Israel Hawk on Hillary Clinton’s Vice Presidential Shortlist
“The Less Evil Argument” by Noam Chomsky, John Halle: “The Left Vote for Neoliberal War-monger Hillary Clinton…”
Trump better choice by far – Alan Sabrosky
Trump’s Vice Presidential Shortlist: Handpicked to Handle Congress
Uh oh: Trump considering pro-Israel NEOCONS for VP
Donald Trump Taps Michele Bachmann, James Dobson and Other Far-Right Leaders For Advisory Board
Is Trump Really the Anti-Neocon?
Donald Trump Pushes Back Against Anti-Israel Question — Vows ‘100%’ Support
Donald Trump’s U-Turn on Palestine, Firmly Committed to the Israel Lobby
Trump's Rhetoric Related to Uptick in anti-Semitism in U.S., ADL Chief Says 'I’m not saying that Donald Trump is a racist or anti-Semite but the racists and anti-Semites have come out of the woodwork during this political season to support him,” Jonathan Greenblatt says.
Time to form an American Jewish Emergency Committee Against Donald Trump
What Republicans in Israel think of Donald Trump and why it matters
Donald Trump Faces Summer of Yucks and Jeers From Liberal Jews
To stop Trump, America needs more solidarity than Britain showed in Brexit vote
'They Shall (Not) Pass': Brexit Vote Shows How Cracks in Anti-racist Coalitions Could Win Trump the White House Few believed the 'rational' Brits would buy a ridiculous, isolationist stunt like Brexit, a better fit for the U.S.' increasingly dark mood. But unlike 70 years ago, the anti-fascist movement is divided.
Blame Facebook for Donald Trump and Brexit The site threatens to impose a world order that is racist, separatist, militant, tribal and religious, and to dismantle any universal, humanist and liberal identity.
New York Primary: For Israel and U.S. Jews, Cruz May Be More Threatening Than Trump When Ted Cruz has gone all out to woo Jewish voters in New York, he touts his sterling Senate pro-Israel positions. But those voters recognize the danger in AIPAC talking points actually becoming American policy.
With more chutzpa than experience, Orthodox lawyer advises Trump on Israel
Anti-Trump Forces Routed in New York
Tensions entre Donald Trump et des donateurs juifs
Make Israel Great Again: Dovish Israeli Politicians Take Page Out of Trump Playbook Nowadays it seems everyone in the Israeli center-left wants to become a tough-talking, BDS-confronting, Haaretz-hating, leftist-basher.
Glenn Beck Conveniently Forgets To Mention That Ted Cruz Cozied Up To 'Kill The Gays' Preacher
Trump Scares the Establishment (dans le journal de la John Birch Society - c'est louche de recevoir l'appui de la JBS!!)
The Corporate Funding of Islamophobia, A Multimillion Dollar Operation in Support of Donald Trump Funding Islamophobia: $206m Went to Promoting 'Hatred' of American Muslims.
12 Fringe Conspiracy Theories Embraced By A Man Who Might Be The Next President
Why isn’t the assassination attempt on Donald Trump bigger news?
By Refusing To Vote For Trump, Glenn Beck Is Standing Against 'The Entire World,' Just Like Gandhi And Nelson Mandela
Rubio to seek re-election, blasts Trump as ‘worrisome’
Why Many Bernie Sanders Supporters Will Soon be Abandoning the Democratic Party And Why Their Super-Delegates Will Some Day Regret Sabotaging His Candidacy
What Red-baiting Jew-hater Calls Bernie Sanders a 'non-Jewish Jew and a non-American American'? Jewish conservative Dennis Prager’s recent screed went far beyond dog whistling: It was a klaxon to anti-Semites on the Right, while betraying the essence of Jewish identity.
Clinton and Sanders Meet, Pledge Party Unity. “It’s Clear Where Sanders Stands”
Clinton: Destroy Syria for Israel
Hillary Clinton’s ‘Entangled’ Foreign Policy
dreuz.info: "Si Hillary Clinton est élue, c’est l’Apocalypse islamique assurée"
If Trump Were a “Clinton Plant”, What Would He Do Differently?
Only Clinton Can Save Trump’s Electoral Victory (pdf)
America’s Many Mideast Blunders
Here’s why Trump’s foreign policy terrifies neocons
Is Trump a New Kind of Fascist?
Trump “The Fascist”: Backdoor Backing of a Political Psychopath Named Hilary Clinton
Donald Trump is Losing Jewish Donors and Intellectuals, But Will it Impact His Bottom Line?
Unmasking the Anti-Semitic Meme of Asuka (Trump's cap)
A Florida rabbi protested Donald Trump – and lost his job
Trump Has Ripped the Mask Off the GOP Pretense on Racism Donald Trump's vicious public attacks have smashed the Republican 'deniability consensus' that's held since the civil rights era: Coded appeal to racial hatreds in, naked bigotry out.
Trump’s Blatantly Racist Campaign
Le trumpisme, un maccarthysme anti-musulman ?
Le Hooliganisme Politique
A Campaign Based on Conspiracy Theory
Qui a vraiment peur de Donald Trump?
The Roots of Trump’s Cruel Populism
There Is a Method to the Madness of Trump's Contempt for Media While Trump's language is more incendiary and he lashes out more personally at reporters than typical for past candidates, he's following a long tradition of modern politicians who shoot barbs at the messenger.
Trump campaign CEO made anti-Semitic remarks, says ex-wife
Stephen Bannon’s former spouse claims custody battle over twin girls
decade ago included him saying he didn’t want them ‘going to school with
Jews’
Trump Campaign CEO Bannon Didn't Want Daughters to Go to School With Jews, Ex-wife Says
Former Breitbart head Stephen Bannon said Jews raise their kids to be
'whiny brats,' Mary Louise Piccard told court in 2007 after Bannon
objected to sending daughters to prestigious L.A. school; Bannon denies
making the remarks.
NY state attorney says he was target of anti-Semitic Trump supporters Eric Schneiderman has joked that he would leave the US for the Dominican Republic if the GOP nominee wins
Sanders Slams Adelson for His Support of Trump 'The American people are sick and tired of billionaires running our economy and our political life,' said the Democratic presidential hopeful.
Vague Apology From Trump Follows Adelson's Urging of More 'Humility' in His Campaign
At a private meeting held last week in New York the billionaire advised
the candidate show a measure of humility, The New York Times reports.
The next day Trump said he regrets 'saying the wrong thing' at a N.C.
Rally.
Adelson, “irrité”, ne financerait pas Trump
Le magnat des casinos qui a soutenu le candidat républicain cet été
“n’a encore rien fait pour Trump” selon une source républicaine
‘Irked’ Adelson said to be holding off from funding Trump
Casino magnate who endorsed GOP nominee earlier this summer ‘has not
done anything yet for Trump,’ according to Republican source
Jewish GOP billionaire abandons Republican presidential nominee
Donald Trump Speaking with The Jerusalem Post, Selig said the event's
organizers put his name on its invitation "without letting me know about
it."
Rep. Steny Hoyer: Trump as president would be ‘dangerous’ for Israel House minority whip also says he thinks Hillary Clinton would be more constructively ‘assertive’ on Israel than President Obama
In US elections, a history of anti-Semitism
Both Trump and Clinton currently stand accused of bigotry, but from the
Civil War era through to the 1990s, there were other presidential
candidates who unapologetically denigrated Jews. A survey of their
rhetoric and their mixed results
Is Donald Trump the ‘Peace President’? American public supports Trump’s non-interventionist foreign policy stances. By Patrick J. Buchanan —
The 9 best Jews to play Trump in Clinton’s debate prep
Casino magnate Adelson still has not donated to Trump
Rep. Steny Hoyer: Trump as president would be ‘dangerous’ for Israel House minority whip also says he thinks Hillary Clinton would be more constructively ‘assertive’ on Israel than President Obama
Un conseiller de Donald Trump accusé de révisionnisme
Is Donald Trump’s proposal to keep out anti-Semites practical — or ethical? US Jews once pushed for ideological tests to keep out Nazis and anti-Semites, but now worry such tests could be cover for discrimination
Trump Pledges to Keep ‘Anti-Semitic Attitudes’ Out of America
If Trump Wins, We Could See the Worst of U.S.-Israel Ties on Steroids The effects of a Trump administration’s specific brand of pro-Israelism would likely accelerate – perhaps dramatically – two trends already in motion.
Does Breitbart News Peddle Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories?
Here, it was Israel. There, it’s Trump
Un conseiller de Trump se serait vanté d’avoir renvoyé des juifs du Pentagone
Liberal America, Don’t Get Cocky About Donald Trump - Take It From Israel Looking at his recent polling disasters, some may think that Trump is finished. But 18 months ago, people said the same about Benjamin Netanyahu.
Michele Bachmann: Donald Trump's New End Times Foreign Policy Adviser
Donald Trump, The Anti-Establishment Candidate? Connections to Wall Street, Blackwater and the CFR
Could Trump Pull Off a Post-Party Coalition?
NYT Anti-Trump Polemic Asked the Wrong Question
American Jewish organizations grapple with the Trump question
Report: Alan Dershowitz Helping Clinton Prepare for Trump Debate New York Public Radio station wNYC says the Harvard law professor will stand in for Trump as Clinton rehearses for the first presidential debate on September 26.
Pro-Israel billionaires 'biggest donors' of Clinton’s super PAC (Soros n'est pas un de ces sionistes, il est un des rares milliardairs juifs à n'être pas sioniste et les sionistes lui en font baver pas rien qu'un peu!)
50 G.O.P. Officials Warn Donald Trump Would Put Nation’s Security ‘at Risk’ Entire Bush Administration foreign policy team endorses Hillary!
THEZOG.INFO: Who Controls Donald Trump?
Rick Wiles: 'God Has Picked' Donald Trump To 'Beat Down The Walls Of The New World Order'
Trump’s Aggressive Foreign Policy
Glenn Greenwald: The U.S. Media Is Essentially 100 Percent United Against Donald Trump
Florida's Jewish voters repelled by Trump, congressman says
Glenn Beck Warns That Donald Trump Is Creating A Dangerous Black Lives Matter-Type Movement
Led by Nazi Apologist, Hitler Youth-Type Group Emerges: ‘Trump Youth’
Could Donald Trump’s ‘Extreme Vetting’ for Immigrants Bar Orthodox Jews and Israelis?
Ivanka Trump Hangs Out with Vladimir Putin’s Rumored Girlfriend Wendi Deng Murdoch
Conspiracies run amok after Ivanka Trump spotted with rumored Putin girlfriend
Ivanka Trump passe ses vacances avec Wendi Deng Murdoch, l'ex-femme de Rupert Murdoch mais c'est hallucinant cette histoire!
Trump’s Immigration Tests for Muslims Recall Disturbing Echoes for American Jews GOP candidate opts to dub himself 'extreme,' even though the same tactic led Barry Goldwater to a crushing defeat in 1964.
WATCH: Yuval Rabin Invokes Dad's Memory in Critique of Donald Trump
Has Trump Campaign Reshuffle Pushed Ivanka and Jared Aside?
Jared Kushner once broke up with Ivanka Trump because she wasn’t Jewish
What Will It Take for the U.S. Jewish Establishment to Break Its Silence on Trump?
Trump's campaign website remains 'neutral' on Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Trump shakes up campaign again, hiring Breitbart official Stephen Bannon as new CEO.
The Associated Press Smears Trump
Trump Hiring a Female Campaign Manager Is Like an anti-Semite Hiring a Jew, Says Gloria Steinem
Why Jewish Conservatives Fear Donald Trump
The Ties That Now Bind Trump to Netanyahu, Breitbart and Jewish anti-Semites Will a harsher and meaner GOP contender do better against Clinton - or will he bring disaster to the party that the Israeli PM gambled on?
Donald Trump Hiring Breitbart Exec Is Slap in Face for Targeted Jews Like Me
Et maintenant, un conseiller de Donald Trump accusé d'antisémitisme
Trump adviser allegedly bragged about firing Jews from Pentagon jobs Former Defense official Joseph Schmitz also accused of making anti-Semitic remarks such as: ‘Ovens were too small to kill 6 million Jews’.
5 Reasons White Supremacists Love Donald Trump
Another Trump Adviser Appears On Radio Network That Features White Nationalists
‘Alt-Right’ Hears Just Enough Dog Whistles To Stick With Donald Trump
How Donald Trump Uses Anti-Semitic Rhetoric Against Hillary Clinton (Even Though She’s Not Jewish)
Ann Coulter Blames Never Trump Movement On Atheism
Trump’s Blindness Toward Slavery, Jim Crow
20 Lies Donald Trump Told At The First Presidential Debate
Trump Fans United by Conspiracy Theories and Boundless Hatred for Clinton
Il semblerait que la décision de Trump de se lancer dans la course à la présidence a été prise après avoir été humilié publiquement par Obama durant le bien-cuit de Trump. Obama s'est moqué de ses théories complotistes ridicules, notammment sur son certificat de naissance (controverse des "Birthers").
Trump, the Alt Right and the Revolt Against Political Correctness C'est juste ça finalement qui fait tout l'attrait de Trump: son opposition au politiquement correct (PC). Mon avis est que les sionistes sont bien au-dessus de l'opposition PC/anti-PC.
A Normie’s Guide to the Alt-Right Un site Alt-Right présente le mouvement Alt-Right (raciste-conservateur, droite raciste)
The Alt Right Means White Nationalism . . . or Nothing at All
God-Emperor Trump and Lord Kek Toward an Alt-Right Religion Une religion du trollage raciste... Ça commence à virer très sectaire et délirant. Piper avait vu ça venir.
Leaving the Fence on the Milo Issue Ils tentent de distinguer un mouvement Alt-Right pro-juif et un mouvement Alt-Right anti-juif, mais c'est de la bouillie pour les chats car les sionistes juifs sont nombreux à être en quasi-total accord avec les fondamentaux du mouvement Alt-Right, même quand celui-ci est anti-juif, car les critiques antijuives du mouvement Alt-Right ne sont que des critiques visant la gauche juive. Les sionistes juifs haïssent radicalement la propagande gauchiste juive! Les sionistes juifs parlent souvent exactement comme des natios blancs.
[Entretien exclusif] La vision géopolitique d'un identitaire européen Europe-Israel Au cours de diverses discussions tenues sur le réseau, il est apparu que la position défendue par tel fervent défenseur de l’Europe était partagée par des intervenants se présentant comme juifs. L’un d’eux a suggéré que soit écrit un petit texte à l’intention de ceux de son entourage.
Top Trump adviser is fighting claims he questioned Holocaust history
Trump Adviser Reportedly Boasted About Firing Jews, Denied Holocaust
Trump says campaign chairman Manafort resigns Paul Manafort, who was initially been hired at the urging of Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has in recent weeks fallen out of favor with both Trump and Kushner, as poll numbers drop and Manafort's reported pro-Russian ties begin to surface.
Donald Trump’s New Nickname for Hillary Clinton Is a Dog Whistle For White Supremacists
Donald Trump Jr. Retweets the ‘Neo-Nazi Movement’s Favorite Academic’
Le clan Trump fait de la pub à Kevin MacDonald, preuve de plus que les
juifs sionistes n'ont pas de problème avec « l'antisémite » MacDonald,
car de toute façon le « problème juif » tient selon lui au fait que les
juifs ont été à la base des mouvements radicaux de gauche,
pro-communiste, cosmopolite et antiracistes. C'est exactement la ligne
de pensée de FOX News (Rupert Murdoch, Glenn Beck), qui juge que les
médias contrôlés par les juifs sont anti-Israël (pour lui les juifs
antisionistes sont des traîtres), et des mccarthyistes d'autrefois qui
ne voyaient le problème juif que sous l'angle de l'implication juive
dans le communisme. Pour des idéologues droitards comme Kevin MacDonald,
le problème avec les juifs est qu'ils diffusent des idées de gauche et la propagande juive se limite au discours de gauche. (C'est bien la
preuve que les identitaires ne sont que des droitards qui n'ont jamais
vraiment dépassé et encore moins démasqué l'escroquerie totale du
clivage duopolistique gauche-droite.)
Pour eux tout le discours de gauche n'est que propagande juive (obsession anachronique du "péril judéo-bolchévique") et toute propagande juive est forcément de gauche. Car pour MacDonald, tout le problème
posé par les juifs tient en une seule phrase : d'un côté, les juifs
gardent le nationalisme jalousement pour eux-mêmes alors que, de
l'autre, ils imposent aux non-juifs le cosmopolitisme international
antiraciste. C'est cette hypocrisie qui est reprochée aux juifs par les
tenants de la théorie de MacDonald, comme Hervé Ryssen et autrefois
Boris Le Lay (avant de tomber dans l'anti-islam obsessionnel). Voilà
une analyse du problème juif qui est extrêmement tordue, incomplète,
inexacte et trompeuse! Qui plus est, c'est une analyse qui tend à
légitimer le sionisme comme un modèle de nationalisme que les non-juifs
devraient imiter! Du coup, l'antisionisme est dépeint par les nouveaux
antisémites comme une attitude anti-nationaliste, antiraciste et, donc,
juive (suivant leur équation « judaïsme = antiracisme pour tous sauf
pour les juifs »)! C'est ce dont Zemmour, ce fan de Trump et lecteur
secret de Ryssen, tente de nous convaincre. Ce n'est pas surprenant de
voir le clan Trump, dépeint comme « nazi » malgré son alignement sur le
sionisme, endosser les analyses de Kevin MacDonald qui d'ailleurs voit
dans le national-socialisme un « reflet-miroir du judaïsme »! Le
candidat Trump incarne les thèses de Kevin MacDonald : avec Trump nous
avons un quasi « nazi » en mode sioniste et philosémite!
Aperçu de l'analyse binaire et ultra simpliste de MacDonald :
Gauche = "propagande juive" Droite = "identité juive"
CONSTAT DE MACDONALD : « LE NAZISME EST UNE COPIE DU JUDAÏSME (SIONISTE) »
SOLUTION
DE MACDONALD : « LES NON-JUIFS DOIVENT COPIER LES JUIFS (SIONISTES) »
en développant un « sionisme pour les blancs ». Le nationalisme blanc a
donc comme meilleur ami les sionistes et comme pire ennemi les
antiracistes tels que les antisionistes.
Or
la réalité est bien plus complexe et ne se réduit pas à des oppositions
binaires aussi simplistes! La réalité est que les juifs ne font pas que
de la propagande de gauche comme au temps révolus du judéo-bolchévisme
et comme la théorie du complot "Soros contrôle tout" voudrait nous faire
croire. En fait ils font aussi de la propagande de droite, afin de
DIVISER POUR RÉGNER. Plien de juifs tiennent un discours ouvertement
pro-nationaliste : ce sont les néocons! Une partie des néocons emprunte
le discours libéral droit-de-l'hommiste mondialiste pour justifier
l'interventionnisme guerrier, mais un autre pan des néocons attaquent en
priorité les idées libérales et droit-de-l'hommistes comme étant la
cause profonde de l'islamisation et de la dégradation des nations en
général. Ces juifs néocons de droite (comme Zemmour, David Horowitz et
les autres amis juifs de MacDonald) mettent en avant la défense de
l'homogénéité culturelle face à l'islamisation et dénoncent le rôle des
juifs dans la diffusion des idées libérales, cosmopolites et
droits-de-l'hommistes! Ces néocons de droite n'ont pas de problème avec
les antisémites et les juifs antisémites tant que ceux-ci ne sont pas
anti-Israel et tant qu'ils blâment les juifs comme étant les principaux
vecteurs des idées de gauche (ce qui n'est plus tout à fait vrai de nos
jours, avec la quantité phénoménale de Goyim qui ont pris le relais du
discours de gauche). En fait les juifs ont maintenant très peur du
discours de gauche anti-impérialiste et anti-raciste (ils ont toujours
en bouche le mot « islamo-gauchisme »), parce qu'une grande partie de la
population se reconnaît dans ce discours, d'une part, et que ce
discours antiraciste conduit forcément à la dénonciation du racisme
impérialiste et particulièrement du sionisme, d'autre part. C'est
pourquoi les idéologues juifs sionistes considèrent que l'extrême-droite
n'est plus un problème pour eux, car l'extrême-droite est maintenant
sur la même ligne anti-islam réactionnaire qui est la leur. Les juifs
sionistes sont maintenant à l'avant-garde de la réaction et du «
nationalisme ». Pour preuve : de nombreux juifs sionistes, surtout les
plus extrémistes réactionnaires, appuient Trump, qui incarne de nos
jours le réactionnaire anti-gauche et le nationaliste raciste par
excellence. Les sionistes se reconnaissent en lui, et seuls les juifs de
gauche le détestent. Quant aux néocons de tendance libérale
droit-de-l'hommistes, ceux-ci ont un peu peur que le discours trop
ouvertement identitaire-nationaliste de Trump ne lève le voile sur le
caractère intrinsèquement identitaire impérialiste-sioniste de leur
projet mondialiste à prétention libérale droit-de-l'hommiste.
Grande confusion de la droite nationale : les identitaires affirment et exigent des choses contradictoires, sans s'en rendre compte. Toutes ces contradictions font qu'on ignore, par exemple, ce qu'ils veulent par rapport à l'immigration (et qu'on ne peut déporter du jour au lendemain). D'un côté ils disent « combattre le métissage » mais de l'autre ils critiquent les immigrants qui « ne s'intègrent pas et ne se mêlent pas » à la société française. Comprennent-ils à quel point ces deux positions sont radicalement contradictoires? Combien sont assez intelligents pour s'en rendre compte? Car combattre d'une part le métissage d'une part et critiquer d'autre part les immigrants qui ne se mélangent pas à la société d'accueil et n'adoptent pas ses règles et sa laïcité, c'est tout à fait contradictoire. Si les identitaires combattent réellement le métissage des immigrés avec la société d'accueil, ils devraient être heureux que ces immigrants ne s'intègrent pas à leur société et décident de toujours rester entre soi, se marier entre soi et conserver leur propre culture, au lieu de se métisser et de mélanger les cultures en adoptant la culture d'accueil! Si les immigrants s'assimilent bien et adoptent la culture d'accueil, ils risquent davantage de se métisser à la société d'accueil! Les identitaires devraient réfléchir à ce qu'ils veulent et mettre tout ça au clair une fois pour toute, pour que leur discours soit enfin un peu cohérent. Si être nationaliste signifie combattre le métissage, alors les nationalistes devraient féliciter et encourager les nationalistes chez tous les peuples et toutes les races. Si être nationaliste signifie, comme l'affirme Zemmour, promouvoir l'assimilation des étrangers dans la culture de la société d'accueil, alors il ne faut pas se plaindre qu'il y ait autant de métissage des cultures et des sangs!
Grande confusion de la droite nationale : les identitaires affirment et exigent des choses contradictoires, sans s'en rendre compte. Toutes ces contradictions font qu'on ignore, par exemple, ce qu'ils veulent par rapport à l'immigration (et qu'on ne peut déporter du jour au lendemain). D'un côté ils disent « combattre le métissage » mais de l'autre ils critiquent les immigrants qui « ne s'intègrent pas et ne se mêlent pas » à la société française. Comprennent-ils à quel point ces deux positions sont radicalement contradictoires? Combien sont assez intelligents pour s'en rendre compte? Car combattre d'une part le métissage d'une part et critiquer d'autre part les immigrants qui ne se mélangent pas à la société d'accueil et n'adoptent pas ses règles et sa laïcité, c'est tout à fait contradictoire. Si les identitaires combattent réellement le métissage des immigrés avec la société d'accueil, ils devraient être heureux que ces immigrants ne s'intègrent pas à leur société et décident de toujours rester entre soi, se marier entre soi et conserver leur propre culture, au lieu de se métisser et de mélanger les cultures en adoptant la culture d'accueil! Si les immigrants s'assimilent bien et adoptent la culture d'accueil, ils risquent davantage de se métisser à la société d'accueil! Les identitaires devraient réfléchir à ce qu'ils veulent et mettre tout ça au clair une fois pour toute, pour que leur discours soit enfin un peu cohérent. Si être nationaliste signifie combattre le métissage, alors les nationalistes devraient féliciter et encourager les nationalistes chez tous les peuples et toutes les races. Si être nationaliste signifie, comme l'affirme Zemmour, promouvoir l'assimilation des étrangers dans la culture de la société d'accueil, alors il ne faut pas se plaindre qu'il y ait autant de métissage des cultures et des sangs!
Bernie Sanders Was Right To Condemn Henry Kissinger. But Why Did He Praise Winston Churchill? The former prime minister was, indeed, a “fan of regime change,” among other things. (...) But for a candidate denouncing Kissinger and his record of atrocities, Churchill is an odd choice as an “influence,” to say the least. Where to start? Churchill’s contribution to the war effort cheered by Sanders helped contribute to the 1943 Bengal famine, which Churchill later callously exacerbated, leading to the fatal starvation of around 3 million people. According to author Madhusree Mukerjee, during World War II, Churchill exported huge amounts of food from India to Britain and various war theaters, despite being repeatedly warned that continued exhaustion of India’s food supplies would lead to famine. He continued to demand more rice even as India starved, declined offers of wheat from the United States and Canada, and had Australian ships carrying wheat bypass India and travel straight to Europe. Leopold Amery, then the Secretary of State for India, recorded in his diary Churchill saying that “the starvation of anyhow under-fed Bengalis is less serious than sturdy Greeks.” While leading the UK in the 1950s, Churchill was responsible for other crimes. One of these was the CIA- and MI6-engineered coup in Iran, which saw the democratically elected Mohammad Mossadeq overthrown in 1953 after he nationalized British oil holdings in the country.
Trump Threatens To Pull The U.S. Out Of The World Trade Organization
Russia expert Stephen Cohen–Trump trying to prevent nuclear war
Gingrich Turns Against Trump, Calling Him ‘Unacceptable’ Choice for President
Trump Wants To Stop The New Cold War
Shimon Peres: Trump’s suggestion not to defend allies unless they pay is ‘a great mistake’
Peres: Trump’s foreign policy proposals would be ‘a very great mistake’
Arch Neo-Con/Israeli asset Robert Kagan– ‘There is something very wrong with Donald Trump’
Why being pro-Trump is anti-Israel
Where Donald Trump Makes Sense
Even Those Who Think Hillary Is Bad for Israel Must Now Believe Trump Would Be Worse
Jewish Journalists Question Melania’s Immigration History, Wait for Trolls
Republicans start effort to bring out Israeli vote for Trump
Trump’s Brother Joined a Jewish Frat To Spite Their Authoritarian Dad
New York Times Relentlessly Biased Against Trump
Interview with Trump's Israel advisor David Friedman, tipped to be Trump's pick for US ambassador to Israel, talks settlements, French involvement, and why Clinton 'is terrible for Israel.'
The Danger of Excessive Trump Bashing
The irrelevant pantomime of Trump’s ‘pro-Israel’ GOP platform
Israeli-American mogul Haim Saban: Trump win would be ‘disastrous’ for Israel
Haïm Saban : une victoire de Trump serait “désastreuse” pour Israël
Uneasy Republicans and confident Democrats diverge on ‘Jewish’ issues
Look to Trump and Corbyn for the Key to Rising anti-Semitism Racism, xenophobia and irrational hatred of ethnic minorities all flourish in a climate of ignorance and suspicion - exactly the climate being created by politicians of Trump and Corbyn’s ilk.
Billionaire hedge funder Seth Klarman backs Clinton over ‘unacceptable’ Trump
Jews Vs Trump–The Secret of Jewish Identity Politics
Israeli firm offers to build Trump’s Mexico wall Je gage qu'il y en aura pas de mégamur à la frontière mexicaine-américaine.
To name or not to name: Jewish organizations grapple with the Trump question Top GOP fundraiser defects to Clinton over ‘demagogue’ Trump Billionaire Hewlett Packard chief Meg Whitman tells NYT she will donate to and raise money for Democratic nominee
Jewish Billionaire Seth Klarman Joins Wealthy Republicans Supporting Clinton
Even Those Who Think Hillary Is Bad for Israel Must Now Believe Trump Would Be Worse While keeping mum on the U.S. election, even Netanyahu must be coming to terms with Clinton, the devil he knows, over Trump and complete uncertainty.
Donald Trump claimed on Saturday that he turned down a meeting with billionaires Charles and David Koch, but top Koch network officials immediately challenged Trump's claim.
Giuliani: Israeli Officials Prefer a Trump Victory in November The former New York City mayor, quoted by The Washington Post, bases his assessment on meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other officials during a March visit to Israel. PM's Office denies Netanyahu had voiced any preferences in the U.S. election.
Donald Trump Wins Surprising Jewish Fan Club — Among Russian Immigrants (18 July 2016)
From NATO to Brexit, Trump has a record of siding with Putin
Foreign Policy: l'exportation de la démocratie réussit mal aux USA
«Les gens pensent qu’il n’y a pas de propagande dans les démocraties»
VIDEO - America First: Trump and the New American Fascist Movement
VIDEO - Extrait du discours du célèbre américain Charles Lindbergh du 11 septembre 1941, juste avant les événements de Pearl Harbour.
Écouter la version originale, plus longue:
VIDEO - Charles Lindbergh's - September 11, 1941 Des Moines Speech
Dans son célèbre discours du 11 septembre 1941 (l'intégrale en format texte, extrait traduit en fr.) contre les fauteurs de guerre (quelques mois à peine avant les événements de Pearl Harbour), Charles Lindbergh, le célèbre patriote américain et leader de l'organisation antiguerre America First Committee, accusait:
1) les Juifs,
2) les Britanniques (Churchill, que l'on sait avoir été dirigé par la clique de financiers juifs The Focus), et
3) l'administration (juive) de Roosevelt (qui avait pourtant promis "pas de guerre")
d'avoir trahi et mené le peuple américain à l'abattoir en faisant pression pour que les États-Unis envoyent leur jeunesse se faire tuer dans une guerre en tous points contraire aux intérêts de la nation états-unienne.
QUESTION:
Qu'ont en commun les personnalités américaines suivantes?
- John F. Kennedy (Président des États-Unis)
- Gerald R. Ford (Président des États-Unis)
- Kingman Brewster (président de Yale)
- Amos Pinchot (homme politique républicain)
- Alice Roosevelt Longworth (fille de Theodor Roosevelt)
- Kathleen Norris (écrivaine)
- E.E. Cummings (poète)
- William Saroyan (écrivain)
- Gore Vidal (écrivain politique)
- Frank Lloyd Wright (architecte)
- Sinclair Lewis (écrivain)
- Général Robert Wood
- Général Hugh Johnson
- Général de la marine Smedley Darlington Butler (auteur de "War is Racket")
Réponse:
Ils ont tous appuyé l'America First Committee !
D'autres populistes et patriotes importants tels Ezra Pound et Henry Ford ont été associés à l'America First Committee, qui s'opposait vigoureusement (comme le peuple américian lui-même) à l'entrée en guerre des États-Unis au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, une guerre dans laquelle les États-Unis n'avaient rien à faire et tout à perdre.
Charles Lindbergh était certes antijuif et pro-nazi, tout comme son grand ami et allié Henry Ford (ce même Henry Ford qu'Hitler admirait au point d'accrocher un portrait de lui dans son bureau), or le fait est que le mouvement anti-guerre aux États-Unis était motivé surtout par le non-interventionnisme (et non par des idées nazies). Le mouvement antiguerre états-unien étant fortement enraciné dans des organisations patriotiques telles que l'America First Committee, dont Lindbergh était non seulement le fondateur mais sa plus importante tête pensante et l'un de ses plus fervents militant.
Joseph Kennedy, un autre grand ami de Lindbergh, appuya lui aussi l'idée d' "America First", car il ne voyait pas l'intérêt
de mener une guerre contre les nazis en Europe. Il avait remarqué avec
justesse, comme le souligne David Irving :"Et l'objet de la haine était bien les Allemands en tant que
peuple,
non pas « les nazis », comme on aime souvent à le faire croire
aujourd'hui. « Les Anglais ne combattent pas Hitler », avait remarqué l'ambassadeur américain, Joe Kennedy, « mais le peuple allemand » (p.189)." (Source: Churchill's War, in "David Irving et Churchill" de Joseph Coutelier)
À lire:
* Il y a 40 ans disparaissait Charles Lindbergh, aviateur, inventeur, écrivain et... « antisémite »
* DEFEND AMERICA FIRST: A Compilation of Five Anti-War Addresses Delivered on Behalf of the America First Committee
* What Did Ezra Pound Really Say? by Michael Collins Piper
* "Ezra Pound Speaking" Radio Speeches of World War II, by Ezra Pound
* Henry Ford et l'antisémitisme américain, par F. Duprat
Henry Ford and the America First Committee:
Ford’s actions show that he was opposed to the forces of war. He did not do himself any favors by opposing the “destructive Wall Street.” In 1915 Ford chartered the Oscar II, otherwise known as the Ford “Peace Ship,” in the hope of persuading the belligerents of the world war to attend a peace conference. The mission received mostly ridicule. Those aboard, including Ford, were wracked with influenza. Ford continued to fund the “Peace Ship” as it traveled around Europe for two years, and despite the ridicule was widely regarded as a sincere, if naïve, pacifist. Dr. Sutton does not mention Ford’s “Peace Ship” or his peace campaign during World War I. Therefore, when he was an early supporter of the America First Committee,35 founded in 1940 to oppose Roosevelt’s efforts to entangle the USA in a war against Germany, he was too easily dismissed as pro-Nazi, as was America First.36 Very prominent Americans joined from a variety of backgrounds, including General Robert A. Wood, president of Sears Roebuck, and among the most active, aviation hero Charles Lindbergh. Socialist Party leader Norman Thomas was a regular speaker at rallies. Many Congressmen and Senators resisted the Roosevelt war machine. They included pacifists, liberals, Republicans, Democrats, conservatives. Of Henry Ford, George Eggleston, an editor of Reader’s Digest, Scribner’s Commentator, and formerly of Life, and a major figure in America First, recalled that so far from being a “Nazi,” Ford expressed the hope that there would be a “parliament of man,” “a world-wide spirit of brotherhood, and an end to armed conflict.”37 ( The Myth of the Big Business-Nazi Axis, K.R. Bolton)
Lindbergh et Ford appuyaient sans réserve Adolf Hitler et comme ce dernier ils ne voulaient pas la guerre, cependant leur opposition à cette guerre ne venait pas de leurs sympathies nazies hitlériennes, elle s'enracinait plutôt dans la pensée non-interventionniste des Pères fondateurs des États-Unis tels que George Washington, Thomas Jefferson et plus tard Andrew Jackson, qui craignaient l'emmêlement de leur pays dans des conflits à l'étranger et pour des intérêts qui ne sont pas les leurs.
Thomas Jefferson a dit: "La paix, le commerce, une honnête amitié avec toutes les nations, d'étroites alliances avec aucune".
À propos de l'antijudaïsme de Jefferson, Michael Collins Piper écrit dans The New Babylon (2009):Although the beloved author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, was a firm advocate for religious liberty in America for Jews and all people, what has been carefully censored from the history books is the absolute fact that Jefferson clearly considered the Jewish religion itself to be quite abominable. Writing to John Adams on Oct. 13, 1813, the widely read intellectual commented on the Talmud and other Jewish teachings: "What a wretched depravity of sentiment and manners must have prevailed before such corrupt maxims could have obtained credit! It is impossible to collect from these writings a consistent series of moral doctrine." Describing himself as "a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus," Jefferson wrote to William Short (on Oct. 31, 1819) that he considered Jesus "the greatest of all the reformers of the depraved religion of his own country," adding in a subsequent letter to Short (Aug. 4, 1820) that while Christ preached "philanthropy and universal charity and benevolence," the Jews followed teachings that instilled in them "the most anti-social spirit towards other nations." Jefferson wrote that Jesus -- as a "reformer of the superstitions of a nation," was in an "ever dangerous" position by opposing "the priests of the superstition" -- the Pharisees -- whom he described as "a blood thirsty race ... cruel and remorseless as the Being whom they represented as the family God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob, and the local God of Israel."
George
Washington a décrit clairement l'isolationnisme américain, qu'il appelle
la doctrine du « non-entanglement » (non-engagement), dans son discours
d'adieu du 19 septembre 1796 :
« Notre Grande règle de conduite envers les nations étrangères est d'étendre nos relations commerciales afin de n'avoir avec elles qu'aussi peu de liens politiques qu'il est possible. Autant que nous avons déjà formé des engagements remplissons-les, avec une parfaite bonne foi. Et tenons-nous en là. L'Europe a un ensemble d'intérêts primordiaux, qui avec nous n'ont aucun rapport, ou alors très lointain. Par conséquent elle est engagée dans de fréquentes polémiques, dont les causes sont essentiellement étrangères à nos soucis. Par conséquent donc il est imprudent pour nous de s'impliquer, à cause de liens artificiels, dans les vicissitudes ordinaires de sa politique, ou les combinaisons et les conflits ordinaires de ses amitiés ou de ses inimitiés. […] Pourquoi renoncer aux avantages d'une situation si particulière ? Pourquoi quitter notre propre sol pour se tenir sur une terre étrangère ? Pourquoi, en entrelaçant notre destin avec celui d'une quelconque part de l'Europe, empêtrer notre paix et notre prospérité dans les labeurs des ambitions, rivalités, intérêts, humeurs ou caprices européens ? C'est notre politique véritable d'avancer exempt d'Alliances permanentes avec n'importe quelle partie du Monde étranger - Aussi loin, veux-je dire, que nous sommes maintenant capables de le faire - ne me croyez pas capable de recommander d'être infidèle aux engagements existants, (je soutiens la maxime non moins applicable aux affaires publiques que privées, que l'honnêteté est toujours la meilleur politique) - Je le répète donc, continuez à appliquer ces engagements dans leur sens véritable. Mais à mon avis, il est inutile et serait imprudent de les étendre. »
Certains individus qui propageaient les idées non-interventionnistes au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale ont été visés par le gouvernement pour des accusations de sédition. Les intellectuels pro-fascistes, pro-nazis et antijuifs Elizabeth Dilling (une amie de la russe anti-judéo-bolchévique Paquita de Shishmareff, auteure de Waters Flowing Eastwards, disponible en français) et Lawrence Dennis ont été mis sur le banc des accusés.
In July 1942 the Roosevelt administration for the first time deployed its police powers against the right. About six weeks after federal agents captured a team of German saboteurs in the United States, prosecutors indicted for sedition twenty-eight German agents, Bund members, and far-right activists including Elizabeth Dilling of the Mothers Movement, and shirt leaders Gerald Winrod and Joseph Pelley. The indictment named the America First Committee and antiwar mother’s groups but no left-wing opponents of war. The trial began in 1944 under new indictments that dropped the antiwar groups and added the alleged pro-fascist Lawrence Dennis. Prosecutors charged defendants with violating the Smith Act of 1940 by conspiring with Nazi agents to overthrow the US government. The trial dragged on through eight inconclusive months and the deaths of the presiding judge. In 1946 a new judge dismissed all charges, ruling that a new trial would be a “travesty of justice”. Conservatives charged the president with chilling free speech and tarring his political opposition as anti-Semitic and pro-fascist. “The crackpots in the so-called sedition trial,” Sterling Morton wrote to Alf Landon, “were the victims of just what the New Dealers would have liked to subject you, Bob Wood, Lindbergh, myself and others if they hadn’t felt that we had too many friends, too much standing, and too many resources to make it worth while.” (Source: White Protestant Nation, by Alan J Lichtman)Lors de ce procès pour sédition qui visa également d'autres patriotes américains tels que Elizabeth Dilling et Paquita de Shishmareff (alias L. Fry), des preuves ont été amenées devant le tribunal pour tenter de démontrer que Dennis n'était pas un blanc mais en partie noir et qu'il n'était en fin de compte qu'un "agent nazi opérant aux États-Unis". Pour convaincre le juge, l'accusation a documenté le fait que les nazis tentaient, à cette époque, d'informer la population noire (afro-américaine) et latino afin de les mettre en garde contre le péril juif.
Selon Dennis, le BN'ai Brith était derrière leur mise en accusation. Voir à ce sujet l'article très complet de Michael Collins Piper intitulé The Great Sedition Trial.
According to Dennis, it was the design of the sedition trial to target not the big-name critics of the Roosevelt war policies, but instead to use the publicity surrounding the trial to frighten the vast numbers of potential grass-roots critics of the intervention in the Eurasian war into silence, essentially showing them that, they, too, could end up in the dock if they were to dare to speak out as the defendants had in opposition to the administration’s policies. (p.4)Lawrence Dennis misait sur l'importance capitale du non-interventionnisme et appuyait totalement la ligne America First (lire à ce sujet son "appel à la raison" republié plusieurs fois par Michael Collins Piper dans ses livres et articles). Plus de détails sur Lawrence Dennis:
“One of the most important Jewish organizations behind the sedition trial was the B’nai B’rith [referring, specifically, to the B’nai B’rith adjunct known as the Anti-Defamation League or ADL].”12 According to Dennis: “Getting the federal government to stage such a trial, like getting America into the war, was a ‘must’ on the agenda of the fighters against isolationism and anti- Semitism (Note 13: Maximilian St. George and Lawrence Dennis, A Trial on Trial. National Civil Rights Committee, p. 68.).(p.7)
* Mr. Lawrence Dennis Appeals to Reason, by Michael Collins Piper
* Tale of a "Seditionist" - The Lawrence Dennis Story, By Justin Raimondo
* The Subversion of Lawrence Dennis by Justin Raimondo REVIEW of The Color of Fascism: Lawrence Dennis, Racial Passing, and the Rise of Right-Wing Extremism in the United States, by Gerald Horne, New York University Press, 2007: 227 pp.
Vous avez peut-être entendu parler du "nationalisme international"... Dit autrement: "Nationalistes de tous les pays unissez vous!" C'est la ligne de pensée des auteurs populistes et nationalistes Willis Carto et Michael Collins Piper depuis des décennies. C'est à lire dans l'intro du livre The Judas Goats (sur l'infiltration ennemie dans le camp nationaliste). Carto a été fortement inspiré par l' "intellectuel fasciste" Lawrence Dennis (accusé d'être en partie non-blanc lors du procès pour sédition), DeWest Hooker (magnat des médias anti-juif, connecté à des organisations nazies américaines), François Genoud (qui finança l'OLP et des premières organisations révisionnistes), et Francis Parker Yockey (malgré certains désaccords). Hooker et Carto étaient liés d'amitié avec Genoud et Dennis.
VIDEO - ALEX JONES CHANNEL: "America First" Slogan to be Outlawed Alex Jones a effectivement de la misère à concilier son anti-nazisme rabique avec le slogan de Trump "America First". Il ne peut s'en sortir sans passer très très vite sur le sujet de "ces populistes des années 30-40 qui au nom de l'Amérique d'abord s'opposaient à l'entrée des USA dans la 2e guerre mondiale". Ça lui permet à peu de frais d'esquiver complètement la question de ses propres contradictions internes concernant le nationalisme et le populisme. Fait saillant de ce petit discours creux d'Alex Jones: selon lui l'un des pires crimes de l'ADL est d'avoir donné des prix à Schwarzenegger, "un nazi notoire". LOL! Schwarzie danse avec les chabad lubavitch et fait des discours excessivement pro-juifs et pro-Israel, notamment à l'époque où il était gouverneur de Californie. Allez Alex, tu peux faire mieux que ça! Comme la "Dissidonce" il tape sur George Soros en priorité... Ça tombe bien pour Alex car il peut mettre le mal commis par Soros sur le dos de "sa collaboration avec les nazis". Puis les méchants sont les Communistes, qui seraient ensuite devenus le parti Républicain d'aujourd'hui... Tu n'y es pas tout à fait, Alex, fais encore quelques efforts et tu saisiras ces nuances qui t'échappent encore.
Jim Marrs, un protégé d'Alex Jones, est le principal promoteur de la théorie de la subversion de l'Amérique par les nazis et de l'assassinat de JFK comme "complot nazi". Évidemment, car ce sont les nazis, selon lui, qui sont aux commandes du "nouvel ordre mondial". Les petits amis Jim Marrs, Robert Groden (juif) et Alex Jones rejettent catégoriquement la moindre implication des juifs ou d'Israël dans l'assassinat de JFK. Pour eux non seulement c'est une distraction mais c'est de toute façon impossible! Pour Jones, si quelqu'un voit une implication juive dans l'assassinat, c'est forcément parce qu'il dénie le rôle de la CIA, du crime organisé, etc.
Pour Jim Marrs et Alex Jones, Charles Lindbergh n'aura été en somme qu'un vulgaire "pion au service de la subversion des États-Unis par les nazis"! Ils se basent notamment sur The Plot Against America du délirant Philip Roth, qui tente de faire croire à un complot nazi américain impliquant le mouvement anti-guerre de Charles Lindbergh. C'est exactement la même accusation qu'on entend du côté de la propagande juive qui tente de nous convaincre que la Seconde guerre mondiale était une guerre juste et inévitable.
Charles A. Lindbergh
SACRIFICING PRIVACY FOR PRINCIPLE
BY MICHAEL COLLINS
PIPER
The private wartime
journals of the famed aviator Charles A. Lindbergh provide remarkable insights
into not only the magnificent brain of this selfless, courageous and unstintingly
conscientious American legend but also into the corrupt and unrelenting power
politics of the period that propelled the United States into the second world
war.
During the years leading up to World War II, Col. Charles Lindbergh
broke a lifetime tradition and began keeping de tailed diaries of his
day-to-day activities, chronicling his views toward the public issues and
personalities of the day, addressing in particular those aspects of U.S. policy
relevant to the growing troubles in Europe.
Lindbergh felt so strongly about the necessity of derailing
the drive toward war that he felt that it was his duty to step out of his own
effective, self-imposed exile from public life and put his reputation forward
as a voice of reason in opposition to the ever-burgeoning push for war. With
this in mind, Lindbergh felt it vital to keep a diary of that stormy period. He
realized, soon enough, that his real views on many issues were being distorted
by a hostile, war-mongering media and while he acknowledged that his diary could
not cover everything, it would “show the falsity of at least some of the
stories told.”
In later years, Lindbergh’s concerns were proven correct. When,
at the urging of publisher William Jovanovich, Lindbergh read just one of the
more than 20 biographies that had been written about him, Lindbergh did so,
later sending Jovanovich a document of 76 typewritten pages listing factual
inaccuracies in the book in question, a volume largely based upon newspaper
stories as the sources. Ironically, according to Jovanovich, this Lindbergh biography
was actually one of the more temperate and evenhanded volumes written, yet it
too relied upon the very “falsity” that rightly concerned Lindbergh.
In 1970 Jovanovich prevailed upon Lindbergh to publish extensive
excerpts from his journals. The final published volume, covering some 1,000
pages, appeared under the title The Wartime Journals of Charles Lindbergh,
covering the period from March 11, 1938, to June 15, 1945, at the time the war
was winding down.
Prior to publishing these diaries, Lindbergh wrote his
publisher a letter reflecting on the period that he spent “re-rereading” his
journals for the first time after so many years and preparing them for
publication. According to Lindbergh:
You ask what my conclusions
are, rereading my journals and looking back on World War II from the vantage point
of a quarter-century in time. We won the war, in a military sense; but, in a
broader sense, it seems to me we lost it, for our Western civilization is less
respected and secure than it was before.
In order to defeat Germany and
Japan, we supported the still greater menaces of Russia and China—which now confront
us in a nuclear-weapon era. Poland was not saved. The British empire has broken
down with great suffering, bloodshed, and confusion. England is an
economy-constricted secondary power. France had to give up her major colonies
and turn to a mild dictatorship herself. Much of our Western culture was
destroyed. We lost the genetic heredity formed through eons in many million
lives. Meanwhile, the Soviets have dropped their iron curtain to screen off
Eastern Europe, and an antagonistic Chinese government threatens us in Asia.
More than a generation after
the war’s end, our occupying armies still must occupy, and the world has not
been made safe for democracy and freedom. On the contrary, our own system of
democratic government is being challenged by that greatest of dangers to any
government: internal dissatisfaction and unrest.
It is alarmingly possible that
World War II marks the beginning of our Western civilization’s breakdown, as it
already marks the breakdown of the greatest empire ever built by man. Certainly
our civilization’s survival depends on meeting the challenges that tower before
us with unprecedented magnitude in almost every field of modern life. Most of
these challenges were, at least, intensified through the waging of World War
II.
Are we now headed toward a
third and still more disastrous war between world nations? Or can we improve human
relationships sufficiently to avoid such a holocaust? Since it is inherent in
the way of life that issues will continue between men, I believe human
relationships can best be improved through clarifying the issues and conditions
surrounding them.
I hope my journals relating to
World War II will help clarify issues and conditions of the past and thereby
contribute to understanding issues and conditions of the present and the
future.
Although publication of the diaries stirred up new debate over
Lindbergh’s prewar views, the book became a best-seller and was actually a
semifinalist for the National Book Award.
Among many others, Lindbergh received a fan letter from former
first lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, whose late husband, President John F.
Kennedy, along with his brother, Joseph P. Kennedy Jr., had been avid
supporters of the America First movement, for which Lindbergh was a leading
spokesman. In her letter, Mrs. Onassis referred to the Kennedys, saying, “That
family—and me—admire you more than anyone,” an interesting nugget of history noted
in A. Scott Berg’s 1998 biography, Lindbergh.
Lindbergh’s reflections in the published Wartime Journals provide
a fascinating look at Lindbergh’s wide-ranging private life and travels
throughout the United States and Europe and his acquaintances and friendships
with some of the most prominent figures of the period. However, like most
journals and diaries of public figures, the Wartime Journals contain a great
deal of personal data and other material that is of interest only to the author
(and his family) and to Lindbergh devotees.
However, Lindbergh’s views on a variety of matters such as
history, culture, religion, law, and, of course, the subject of U.S. involvement
abroad were addressed quite thoroughly throughout the journals and the excerpts
that follow are among the most pointed and representative of Lindbergh’s
thinking at the time.
Lindbergh emerges as a thoughtful, introspective
philosopher, guided by a self-assurance and a sense of humor, and a knowledge that
he was veering onto a course that could (and did) impact upon his place in
history and on the future of the world.
Of special interest, in historical retrospect, are
Lindbergh’s comments on the impact of the news and entertainment media of the
time on shaping public opinion, toward both Lindbergh himself and the views
that he put forth in the public arena. Lindbergh was very much aware of—and
wary of—what might delicately be termed “news management” and found himself
quite occupied with the problem as he sought to make his views heard.
What follows are relevant excerpts from Lindbergh’s journals
on public affairs and his personal philosophy. The excerpts are arranged in
chronological order, from August 27, 1938, up through December 8, 1941—the day
following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor—at which time Congress declared
war.
The dates of the journal entries appear in parentheses at
the end of the selection. The subtitles above each entry are provided by THE
BARNES REVIEW as a guide to the subject matter therein.
The Reality of Soviet
Russia
This is a strange country. They preach the doctrine of
dividing between people according to their need. There is great poverty and at
times actual starvation. Yet I have never seen a greater waste of food than at
some of the lunches and dinners we have attended. The people who have, in
Soviet Russia, do not seem to be greatly concerned about those who have not. I
do not believe the idea of division, equality and state ownership will last
long.
Given a chance, the social classes will develop, much the
same as in the past. The signs are in the parties, the dinners, the women’s dresses,
decorations etc. Of course, there is already a great difference in the salaries
and privileges of different people. (Saturday, August 27, 1938)
Politicians and
Public Affairs
My primary interest lies in the character of a man, and not in
whether he is a Republican or a Democrat. I would as soon vote or one as the
other. The issues between them are quite superficial at this time. I think,
however, that they will begin to clarify and become more fundamental from now
on. Whether or not future issues will choose to follow either of these parties
remains to be seen. As far as I am concerned personally, I have but little fear
of being classed as a Republican for long. I have too little interest in either
politics or popularity.
One of the dearest of rights to me is being able to say what
I think and act as I wish. I intend to do this, and I know it will cause
trouble. As soon as it does, the politicians will disown me quickly enough—and
I will be only too willing. I shall have far more interest in my own ideas than
in their support. At least I shall hold my self-respect—and possibly that of a
number of other people. I have no intention of bending my ideas or my ideals to
conform to the platform of either party. One must make certain compromises in
life—that is a part of living together with other men—but compromise is
justified only when the goal to be gained is of greater importance than what is
lost in compromising. (Saturday, October 7, 1939)
Not all of “Lucky Lindy’s” flights were successful. This
crash occurred in November 1926. It was the second time Lindbergh’s plane had
gone down on the St. Louis-Chicago run in his job as an airmail pilot. Always
remaining undaunted, he was dreaming of the Orteig Prize of $25,000 for the
first pilot to fly nonstop between New York and Paris.
On Running for
President
Among other things, I enjoy too much the ability to do and say
what I wish to ever be a successful candidate for president. I prefer
intellectual and personal freedom to the honors and accomplishments of
political office—even that of president. (Wednesday, October 11, 1939)
The Wrong Kind of
Pacifism
I went to see All Quiet on the Western Front—the bloodiest
film I can ever remember seeing. I wanted to find out what type of war film was
being shown these days. It is a terrible play and enough to turn anyone against
war; but I think it is not a very constructive type to place before the people
of America today. We do not want a nation that is afraid of war if it should
become necessary to enter one. And All Quiet on the Western Front will turn
people against war more through fear than through intellect. It will not add to
the courage of our country. (Thursday, October 19, 1939)
Henry Ford—American
Genius
I talked to [Henry] Ford about the war, the industrial
situation in America, about his ideas of decentralization etc. He is a
combination of genius and impracticability, with the genius definitely on top.
Ford is a great man and a constructive influence in this country. One cannot
talk to him without gaining new ideas and receiving much mental stimulation.
His greatness is demonstrated by his vision and his success industrially and by
his interests and activities in many other fields. (Thursday, December 28,
1939)
Man’s Law vs. Natural
Law
Legal terminology always annoys me, but some of it seems essential
under the conditions lawyers have let themselves get into. They are so tied by
tradition and complication that they have as unique a language as a baby who is
just learning to talk and can be understood only by mother and nurse. It is a
sort of second childhood for the law, though. Why is it that men with an
excellent education—long college training and all that—can’t state their ideas
and agreements in good English?
Sometimes I divide things done by man in my mind into two groups:
those that must conform to natural laws (such as the design of an airplane);
and those that are not bound by any more discipline than comes from the ideas
and arguments of man himself.
Of course, all action—even law—comes eventually within the plan
of nature. It is only in the thoughts of man that he really passes beyond
nature’s bounds.
How interesting and enlightening it is to compare the
streamline of an airplane to the awkward, complicated and conflicting chapters
of a law book. The success of one is clearly measured by nature, while the
value of the other is estimated by partisan men.
How beautiful and simple life really is, and how complicated
man tries to make it. He worships God on the one hand; tries to improve upon
Him on the other. The fallacy is rarely seen. (Tuesday, April 30, 1940)
The Folly of War
To me, the worst part of this war is the hereditary loss to
the countries involved. And the best men are killed first in war. The effect of
this is shown in England today. The leaders she might have had were killed in
the last war. (Sunday, May 12, 1940)
The Problem With the
Newsreels
Everything considered, my personal feeling toward
motion-picture operators is not the best. Still, this present situation
concerns the welfare of the country and should not be decided on personal feelings.
But what advantages and disadvantages are there in speaking for the sound
pictures at this time? The advantage is that additional millions of people will
be reached. The disadvantages include the fact that only a small portion of my
speech would be carried and that I would not be able to control its setting.
The news companies could sandwich my picture and talk between
the sack of cities and the mangled bodies of refugees.
Once they have such a film, they can cut it and use it in
any way they like. I decided against speaking for the sound films. (Sunday, May
19, 1940)
Ignoring Essentials
I become more and more disturbed about the trends and
conditions in this country—the superficiality, the cheapness, the lack of understanding
of, or interest in, fundamental problems. National debt increases; we involve
ourselves unwisely and unnecessarily in the European situation; and we seem to
have no understanding of our own limitations. (Saturday, August 17, 1940)
Controlling Public
Debate
[R. Douglas] Stuart says he is having trouble buying radio time
for the America First Committee. Some of the radio stations have taken the
stand that the committee has to do with a “controversial issue” and therefore
comes under the code they have formed against selling time for controversial
issues. It is a fine state of affairs if the question of war and peace cannot
be debated before the American people because it is a “controversial issue.” (Tuesday,
October 1, 1940)
News Management
The newsreels again requested that I read part of my address
for them after I had broadcast. In the past I have refused their requests—first,
because of the difficulty they have often caused for me; second, and much more
important, because of the Jewish influence in the newsreels and the antagonism
I know exists toward me. . . . However, this is a critical period, and I think
it is worth the chance. (Monday, October 14, 1940)
Personal Privacy vs.
Principle
[My wife’s antiwar] address has been played down in the
newspapers.
There is very little notice of it in any of them. . . . It
is strange, our desire in this instance for newspaper attention. For many years
we have tried to avoid the attention of the press. For years we refused to
speak over the radio, to give statements or interviews, to take part in
political meetings. Now, this morning, we are disappointed because Anne’s
address last night is not carried in the papers on our breakfast table. How can
we justify this attitude, this seeming inconsistency? It is not that we enjoy
seeing our names in the paper or having attention drawn to us any more than
before. That is as unpleasant as ever, and it adds to our difficulties of life;
we cannot go to theaters or restaurants, or walk together on the streets
without being stared at, or run after, or annoyed in some other way. As I
analyze it, I think our apparent change in attitude is due to the intensity of
our feeling about the causes we support.
In the past, the publicity and attention was focused on us,
like a brilliant, burning, hardened spotlight. Now, the light is thrown upon an
approaching danger—upon war, famine, disease, and revolution.
And our attention is focused upon the problems it
illuminates.
They are so important that the few diverging rays that still
fall upon us we hardly notice. We are no longer the objects upon which the
light is thrown; we ourselves are behind and beside it, trying to guide it,
that we and others may see the better and act the more intelligently in this
crisis. (Wednesday, Decem ber 25, 1940)
‘Christmas’ vs.
Christ vs. Christianity
It seems to me that Christmas has deviated as much from the birth
of Christ as Christianity has from His teachings. The keynote at the birth of
Christ was simplicity. The keynote of Christmas today is luxury. The birth and
life of Christ were surrounded with things mystical. Christmas and Christianity
today are surrounded with things material. Sometime I would like to have
Christmas in our home that conforms to the true spirit and significance of that
day 2,000 years ago—a Christmas unadorned by tinsel, uncluttered by gewgaws and
ribboned boxes, unstuffed by roast turkey and sweet potatoes; a Christmas pure
in its simplicity, akin to the sky and stars, of the mind rather than the body.
It should be almost the reverse of a modern Christmas. One should
eat too little rather than too much, see no one rather than everyone; spend it
in silence rather than in communication.
Christmas should be a day that brings one closer to God and
to the philosophy of Christ. (Wednesday, December 25, 1940)
Hunting for Survival
I do not mind shooting a bird to eat occasionally,
especially if I am on an expedition of some sort, and I thoroughly enjoy target
shooting with rifle or shotgun. But this pleasure in seeing something happy and
beautiful fall maimed and fluttering, I do not understand. (Thursday, December
26, 1940)
Cultural Differences
I am beginning to feel the world is divided into two groups
of people (how easy it is to divide problems into two for the convenience of
your momentary argument): those who are inherently suspicious of everything and
those who are not. In my experience it seems that Latin blood (and Asiatic)
tends to suspicion, while Nordic blood tends away from it. Personally, I prefer
to be with people who are not suspicious about everything in life. And, as a matter
of fact, I think the “suspicious” people are wrong more of the time than their
opposites. (Tuesday, February 4, 1941)
An Aviator Views the
Moon
A huge, blood-red moon rose in the evening. It made me think
of Europe and bombed cities. Whenever I see the moon now, I think of the
bombing that is going on over there. As the moon rises here, it is high over
Europe, and bombs are almost certainly falling on English and German cities.
(Friday, April 11, 1941)
Survival of the West
Sometimes I feel like saying: “Well, let’s get into the war
if you are so anxious to. Then the responsibility will be yours.” In comparison
to the work I am now doing, the fighting would be fun.
But my mind tells me that we better face our problems and
let Europe face hers without getting messed up in this war. I have an interest
in Western civilization, and I have an interest in my race, or culture, or
whatever you want to call it, and I have an interest in the type of world my
children are going to live in. That is why I will probably stay on the stump
with the pacifists and why I will resign my commission if necessary and never
regret my action in doing so. This war is a mistake; we will only bring
disaster if we enter it; we will do no good either to Europe or ourselves, and therefore
I am going to put everything I have behind staying out.
No one, not even Germany, was more responsible for the
conditions which caused this war than England and France. They declared the war
without consulting us. If it were possible to help them win, the result would
probably be Versailles all over again.
Europe must straighten out her own family affairs. Our
interference would simply cause another postponement, as the last war did.
Europe faces adjustments that must be made, and only she can work out what they
are going to be. (Friday, April 25, 1941)
Who Favors War?
The pressure for war is high and mounting. The people are opposed
to it, but the administration seems to have “the bit in its teeth” and
hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in this country are
behind war, and they control a huge part of our press and radio and most of our
motion pictures. There are also the “intellectuals,” and the “Anglophiles,” and
the British agents who are allowed free rein, the international financial interests
and many others. (Thursday, May 1, 1941)
A Narrow Escape
We were met at the Minneapolis airport by various members of
the local America First Committee and driven to the La Salle Hotel, where I was
given the “Nordic Suite.” What a press story that could make. But “Nordic” out
here doesn’t mean what it does in the east.
In Minnesota the word “Nordic” has no anti-Semitic taint.
And the situation is probably saved because, as I learned soon after arrival, [British
diplomat] Lord Halifax and his party stayed in this same suite and left only
yesterday. (Saturday, May 10, 1941)
The People vs. the
Press
As I go around to these meetings I feel that, without
question, if this country is run by [the] people, we will not enter this war. I
always feel this way after one of our meetings is over; but I know that
tomorrow, or the day after, as I read the misinformation and propaganda in our
newspapers, I will begin to wonder whether people can withstand such a barrage
indefinitely. And even if they can withstand it, will popular opinion be enough
to keep us out of the war? Which is stronger, the money and power and
propaganda pushing us into war, or the will of the people to stay out? (Saturday,
May 10, 1941)
On Patronizing
Children
. . . There is nothing worse than being confronted with a
group of children if you have made no plans for their entertainment. I am not
one of those politicians who can go out and pat their heads and talk about what
fine-looking boys and girls they are. I remember how I felt about such things
when I was a child, and I have too much respect for them and for myself to do
it. (Monday, June 23, 1941)
At the beginning of America’s rocketry program, physicist
Robert H. Goddard stands for a picture, flanked by his two strongest
supporters. On the left is Harry Guggenheim and on the right stands Charles
Lind bergh, hand in pocket.
A Prejudiced Press
American press accounts of the war are so prejudiced and
confused that it is almost impossible to obtain a balanced picture.
Reports from Russia are headlined while those from Germany
are played down, although the latter are certainly the most accurate.
Results of Royal Air Force raids over the [European]
continent are exaggerated, while results of German raids over England are minimized.
The result is that the impression given by our newspapers is far more favorable
to the British cause than is warranted by the facts. (Saturday, June 28, 1941)
Media Lies and
Misinformation
The newspapers continue to misquote my address and to remove
sentences from their context. Sometimes what they carry between quotation marks
is completely made up and does not even approximate what I have said, or even
what I believe. (Thursday, July 3, 1941)
Frequency vs.
Precision
Personally, I prefer to speak less often and with more careful
preparation. Most of my friends want me to speak more often and with less
careful preparation. (Sunday, July 6, 1941)
On Having his Phone
Tapped
Captain Smith (of America First) came at 3:30. He had phoned
to say he had an urgent message that he must deliver personally.
The message is that the FBI began tapping our telephone last
Saturday and has a constant watch on it. The men in the FBI are, according to
Smith, on the whole, friendly; they are simply following out orders. Smith says
the America First telephones are also tapped. I told him to tell everyone in
America First that there was nothing we wished to hide and that if our phones
were tapped we should speak more plainly, rather than less plainly in the future.
I told him to tell his friends on the FBI that if there was anything they
didn’t understand in my own phone conversations, I would give them additional
information. Captain Smith says he is certain the phones are tapped and that
the information came from friends of his on the FBI, who are also friendly to
me.
Personally, I think it is probable that they are tapped, but
I still have some question. It really makes very little difference as far as I
am concerned. My main interest lies in knowing whether or not these tactics are
being used by the administration. (Monday, July 7, 1941)
Three Groups
Promoting War
When I mentioned [in a speech in Des Moines] the three major
groups agitating for war—the British, the Jewish and the Roosevelt
administration—the entire audience seemed to stand and cheer. At that moment
whatever opposition existed was completely drowned out by our support.
(Thursday, September 11, 1941)
The Unmentionable
Subject
My Des Moines address has caused so much controversy that Gen.
[Robert] Wood has decided to hold a meeting of the America First National
Committee in Chicago. I must, of course, attend. I felt I had worded my Des
Moines address carefully and moderately.
It seems that almost anything can be discussed today in America
except the Jewish problem. The very mention of the word “Jew” is a cause for a
storm. Personally, I feel that the only hope for a moderate solution lies in an
open and frank discussion. (Monday, September 15, 1941)
Private Candor vs.
Public Reticence
[America First leader] John Flynn came at 11:00, and we talked
the situation over for an hour. Flynn says he does not question the truth of
what I said at Des Moines, but feels it was inadvisable to mention the Jewish
problem. It is difficult for me to understand Flynn’s attitude. He feels as
strongly as I do that the Jews are among the major influences pushing this
country toward war. He has said so frequently, and he says so now. He is
perfectly willing to talk about it among a small group of people in private.
But apparently he would rather see us get into the war than
mention in public what the Jews are doing, no matter how tolerantly and
moderately it is done. (Thursday, September 18, 1941)
Lindbergh poses with Richard M. Nixon to promote one of
Lindy’s favorite causes: conservation.
Truth Not Important
to Press
The opposition paper here [Ft. Wayne, Indiana] is carrying a
large advertisement in which statements are attributed to me which I never
made. As far as the “war party” is concerned, what I actually say seems to be
of little importance. They quote me as saying what they wish or think that I
said. They do not bother to refer to my addresses, which are all available; at
best, they refer to some garbled newspaper account. The result is that I am
often quoted as saying things which I not only never said, but which I never
believed. (Friday, October 3, 1941)
Catholic Leaders
Oppose the War
We returned to the hotel after the meeting. People kept
coming up to the room until 12:30. Father [John] O’Brien [of Notre Dame Univer
sity] showed me a telegram he had just received, to the effect that a poll of
the Catholic hierarchy showed that ninety percent were opposed to entering the
war. (Friday, October 3, 1941)
Popular Opinion vs.
War Propaganda
[The] strength and influence [of the America First movement]
is growing rapidly, but the power of our opposition is great. The amazing thing
is not that we are so close to war but that we have been able to hold the war
forces back as long as we have. Their ranks include the American government,
the British government, the Jews, and the major portion of the press, radio,
and motionpicture facilities of the country. We have on our side the mass of the
people, but it is a question of how long the people can withstand the flood of
propaganda with which the country is being covered. They have no accurate
source of information to which to turn. Also, regardless of the attitude of our
people, it is a question as to whether the president will force us into war by
actions and incidents which will make it unavoidable. He is in a position where
he can force war on us whether we want it or not. (Saturday, October 4, 1941)
On Speaking the Truth
[Former President Herbert] Hoover told me he felt my Des Moines
address was a mistake (the mention of the Jews in connection with the
war-agitating groups). I told him I felt my statements had been both moderate
and true. He replied that when you had been in politics long enough you learned
not to say things just because they are true. (But, after all, I am not a
politician—and that is one of the reasons why I don’t wish to be one. I would rather
say what I believe when I want to say it than to measure every statement I make
by its probable popularity.) (Monday, October 6, 1941)
Reporting War News
[Paul] Palmer [an editor with Reader’s Digest] says one of
the reasons why the papers give such an erroneous impression about the war is
that the editors have discovered that their newsstand circulation drops
whenever they headline Axis successes. As a result, they try to find some
Allied success to headline, no matter how insignificant it may be. (Wednesday,
October 8, 1941)
Pearl Harbor
The radio is announcing that Japan has attacked the Philippines
and the Hawaiian Islands and that Pearl Harbor has been bombed. An attack in
the Philippines was to be expected, although I did not think it would come
quite so soon. But Pearl Harbor! How did the “Japs” get close enough, and where
is our Navy? Or is it just a hit-and-run raid of a few planes, exaggerated by
radio commentators into a major attack? The Japanese can, of course, raid the
Hawaiian Islands, or even the West Coast, with aircraft carriers. But the cost
in carriers and planes lost is going to be awfully high unless our Navy is
asleep—or in the Atlantic.
The question in my mind is, how much of it has been sent to
the Atlantic to aid Britain? (Sunday, December 7, 1941)
The Back Door to War
Phoned Gen. [Robert] Wood in Boston. His first words were, “Well,
he [President Roosevelt] got us in through the back door.” . . . The president
spoke at 12:00. Asked for a declaration of war. Senate passed a declaration of
war unanimously. Only “no” in the House. What else was there to do? We have
been asking for war for months. If the president had asked for a declaration of
war before, I think Congress would have turned him down with a big majority.
But now we have been attacked, and attacked in home waters. We have brought it
on our own shoulders; but I can see nothing to do under these circumstances
except to fight. If I had been in Congress, I certainly would have voted for a
declaration of war. (Monday, December 8, 1941)
Photo taken in March 1932 shows the “abduction ladder”
outside the Lindbergh home near Hopewell, New Jersey. Although German-American
Richard Bruno Hauptmann was executed for kidnapping the Lindbergh baby, many
responsible investigators now believe that Hauptmann was actually innocent of
the crime and that a German Jew named Isador Fisch was the real culprit. At
least one in-depth inquiry by an independent investigator concluded that
Lindbergh’s child was not the largely decomposed body found and identified as
the victim of the kidnapping and that Lindbergh’s child survived and grew to
adulthood. Several persons later claimed to be “the Lindbergh baby,” but
Lindbergh himself refused to acknowledge any of them. The controversy continues
to this day. There are those who contend that the Lindbergh kidnapping affair
and the subsequent frame-up of Hauptmann were designed to generate hatred for
German-speaking peoples in the American mindset. In fact, the kidnapping took
place at a time when Adolf Hitler was rising in popularity in Germany, and
elements in the United States were fervently determined to thwart Hitler using
every means possible. Although as in the Kennedy assassination in 1963, there
have been numerous rational and likely solutions offered, the full truth will
probably never be known to the public at large, although (as in the JFK affair)
those who have studied the wide-ranging material available on the Lindbergh
kidnapping have reached their own conclusions, major media misinformation
notwithstanding.
-END OF ARTICLE-
Col. Charles A Lindbergh, the beloved and
heroic aviator, exemplifies, in many ways,
what populism and nationalism is all about.
Extrait de PDF - Willis A. Carto "Populism vs Plutocracy: The Universal Struggle
Charles A. Lindbergh
America First and Always
America First and Always
According
to Gallup and all other public polls, 90 percent of the American people
agreed with Charles Lindbergh that the U.S. should not intervene in the
European struggle that grew into World War II. Contrived war hysteria,
however, brought this nation into the war. History has vindicated
Lindbergh. But will we learn the lesson of history?
Charles
Augustus Lindbergh, "the last hero," was a unique unprecedented and
since-unmatched embodiment of America's authentic political heritage,
populism.
"Lucky
Lindy" was, in fact, the product, heir, and last exemplar of a populist
tradition established in 1849, when his grandfather was first elected
to the Swedish Parliament, and continued by his father in the U.S.
Congress.
The
integrity of this tradition, maintained through three generations, is
unparalleled in American history. Among them, the Lindberghs forcefully
and eloquently articulated every facet of populist philosophy-and all
suffered grievously for their courage.
But
the apogee of the Lindbergh dynasty, and its populist creed, was
reached by the "Lone Eagle" himself, one of the most selfless,
perceptive, courageous, dynamic, and personally attractive heroes in the
American pantheon.
A
true populist paragon, Lindbergh-from his role in the America First
movement, through his championing of farmers and other working people
over bankers and other privileged interests, to his cherishing of racial
differences, integrity, and survival-personified the gracious,
personable, and grand ethic inherent in leaders adhering to populism.
LINDY FAVORED FARMERS, WORKMEN
"I
say to you what my father said a quarter of a century ago," he told an
America First rally in Minneapolis on May 9, 1941, at the height of the
struggle to keep the US. out of another European war.
(Lindbergh's
father, Rep. Charles August Lindbergh, was a great populist in his own
right, and fought hard against President Woodrow Wilson's maneuvering to
embroil the US. in wars with Mexico and in Europe.)
"The
future of American democracy depends on your ability to govern our own
country. It rests in the character of our own people in the welfare of
our farmers and our workmen.
"What happens in Europe is of little importance compared with what happens in our own land.
"It
is far more important to have farms without mortgages, workmen with
their own homes, and young people who can afford families, than it is
for us to crusade abroad for freedoms that are tottering in our own
country."
War,
Lindbergh realized (as far too few Americans then did or now do), is
the single most important influence pushing the US. to socialism.
"Life
as we know it today would be a thing of the past," Lindbergh warned,
should war agitators succeed in transforming the US. "into a military
nation that exceeds Germany in regimentation."
'LONE EAGLE' PUT U.S. FIRST
"Let us look to our own defenses and to our own character," Lindbergh urged. "If we do not attend to them, nothing can save us."
Lindbergh's
'role in the America First movement, however great an impact it had on
his life, and however important to his populist philosophy, formed but
one part of each.
The
America First Committee only existed for about 18 months, from mid-1940
until it disbanded, in the interest of national unity, after Pearl
Harbor.
Nevertheless,
during its brief existence, it drew nearly a million Americans
(membership jumped from 300,000 to 800,000 after Lindbergh joined in the
spring of 1941}--of all political persuasions into the struggle to put
America first.Lindbergh valued the diversity of America First, realizing
that politics is "a luxury" which cannot be allowed to stand in the way
of America's survival as a sovereign nation.
He
perceived, however, that in such coalitions "the brilliant and more
theoretical mind of the liberal is apt to collide with the steadier and
more practical mind of the conservative."
UNITE FOR AMERICA
Nevertheless,
Lindbergh preferred coalition building because, "The conservative can
follow up and consolidate the successes of the liberal, while the
liberal can fall back on the conservative's position after his failures.
"Each
needs the other for success, and possibly even for survival," Lindbergh
wrote in his diary, perceiving that patriots must unite to preserve
America.
Lindbergh,
of course, drew a clear distinction between sincere liberals and
Marxists, whose dubious "support," he wrote, he was glad to be rid of
when the communists switched from opposing U.S. intervention in the
European war to frantically demanding it.
(Communists
broke with America First, and pushed for war mobilization and
intervention, as soon as German armies invaded the Soviet Union.)
Lindbergh's
role in the struggle to prevent the U.S. from being maneuvered into the
European war is the subject of an excellent revisionist history:
Charles Lindbergh and the Battle Against American Intervention in World
War II, by Wayne S. Cole.
The
book, as its title implies, deals only with a few years of the public
life of one of the most admired public men of the century. Its
objectiveness, further, distinguished it from other more comprehensive
biographies of the aviator, in which the biographers' disdain for
Lindbergh's role in America First is excruciatingly evident.
LINDBERGH APPALLED AT GIS' CONDUCT
Lindbergh's Wartime Journals also provide invaluable insights into his philosophy.
The
Journals, incidentally, specifically the final two months of
entries-May, June, 1945-are filled with enlightening passages about the
orgy of raping and looting indulged in by American and other Allied
troops after the German surrender.
Lindbergh
wrote he was "disgusted with" American conduct, abuse of German
prisoners, the flaunting of foodstuffs in front of starving children,
and numerous other offenses, a description of which may prompt Americans
to revise their stereotype of themselves as courageous liberators, and
of the Germans as "Huns."
"To
destroy and loot is considered entirely proper and the right thing to
do as far as the GI is concerned ... the word 'liberate' is used in an
entirely different sense over here (in Germany) than back at home.
''At
home our papers carry articles about how we 'liberate' oppressed
countries and people. Here, our soldiers use the term'liberate' to
describe the method of obtaining loot ... a soldier who rapes a German
woman has 'liberated' her ...
"I
feel ashamed of myself, of my people, as I eat and watch those children
... what right have we to stuff ourselves while they look on-wellfed
men eating, leaving unwanted food on plates, while hungry children look
on ... regulations prevent giving it (any food) to them ...
''What
right have we to damn the Nazi and the Jap while we carry on with such
callousness and hatred in our hearts ... we in America are supposed to
stand for different things.
"
... It was required that a list of the occupants of every building,
together with their ages, be posted outside, on the door ... the ...
soldiers, drunk at night, would go from door to door until they found
the girl's names listed of any age they wished to rape ... most of the
women . . . show in their faces they have gone through hell," Lindbergh
wrote, appalled, while in Germany during those months.
Lindbergh's
sincere compassion, and lack of any bitterness whatsoever, has not been
extensively commented on, yet both qualities formed integral parts of
his way of life.
These two qualities surface as well in his genuine appreciation of racial differences.
VALUED RACES
"I think race is an important and valuable quality," he once wrote.
"Our world would be a much poorer place to live on if its various races did not exist.
''A
man should be proud of his race ... I certainly am. I would like to see
racial pride encouraged ... in my opinion, we should encourage racial
differences ... "
Nevertheless,
Lindbergh "felt no antipathy toward red, yellow, black, or brown,"
believing "that each race must protect its security territorially."
But,
he warned, "for Americans the doctrine of universal equality is a
doctrine of death," and the greatest threat to America is the
infiltration of "alien blood."
Lindbergh
respected racial differences without rancor, expressing admiration for
East Africa's Masai tribe and contributing much time, energy, and his
own prestige to preserving primitive tribes "discovered" in the
Philippines in the early 1970s.
He
held a dim view of Black rioting in this country, however: "I will
never forget the shock of seeing a riot zone in our nation's capital . .
. block after block with window-shattered and fire-gutted buildings,
like a bombed city. I could hardly believe my eyes."
PERCENED CAPITALISTIC THREAT
Lindbergh's
understanding ofthe malignant nature of high finance paralleled that of
his father, who had been very active combating "the money trust."
Lindbergh
accused "capitalists" of being first among "the war agitators." It was
"unfortunate but true," he said, that there are interests in America who
would rather lose American lives than their own dollars.
Lindbergh
also criticized the attitude of British capitalists during the war:
"The British (are) trading as hard as ever," he wrote in October, 1941,
"and were very hesitant about letting Pan American (World Airways) ferry
military planes across Africa lest the company take opportunity to try
for commercial concession on that route!
"Much as they may need the planes for their fighting forces, the (English) can still take time out to make a good trade."
Lindbergh's
motivation in keeping his "Wartime Journals" between March, 1938 and
June, 1945, was his fervent concern for historical truth, as opposed to
the "government by subterfuge" practiced by President Franklin
Roosevelt.
It
was this same concern for truth that led him to urge Harry Elmer Barnes
to author a revisionist history of the true causes of World War II, and
an authoritative account of the non-interventionist case before Pearl
Harbor; Lindbergh wrote several letters to Henry Ford urging the auto
magnate to fund Barnes' book.
(The
late Harry Elmer Barnes, until his death in 1966, was considered the
dean of revisionist historians; he was the author of, among other
things, History of Western Civilization and An Intellectual and Cultural
History of the Western World.)
POPULISM DEMANDS INTEGRITY
"Democracy
is gone from a nation when its people are no longer informed of the
fundamental policies and intentions of their government," he wrote, in
what would have been a speech before an America First rally on December
12, 1941.
"Freedom
is a travesty among men who have been forced into war by a president
they elected because he promised peace," he wrote. "Freedom and
democracy cannot long exist without a third quality, a quality called
integrity. It is a quality whose absence is alarming in our government
today.
"Without integrity, freedom and democracy will become only politicians' nicknames for an American totalitarian state."
Lindbergh charged again FDR was guilty of conducting "government by subterfuge."
"Subterfuge
marked every step we made 'short of war' (FDR's favorite expression for
softening up the public for war mobilization was that each of his moves
was a 'step short of war'), and it now marks every step we are making
'short of a dictatorial system in America.
WAR FEVER THREATENS LIBERTY
"Our nation has been led to war with promises of peace. It is now being led toward dictatorship with promises of democracy."
Lindbergh
had realized war is the most powerful pressure for socialism and
regimentation; he underestimated, however, how easily our Constitutional
rights and liberties can be undermined by orchestrated war hysteria.
Thus,
an American Legion commander (of all people) in Oklahoma City on August
26, 1941-more than three months before Pearl Harbor(!)-could flatly
declare "the time for freedom of speech is past" in 'justifying" for the
city council his contention that Lindbergh should be barred from
speaking in the city. The council agreed the Constitution was dead, and
unanimously voted to rescind permission for Lindbergh to use the
municipal auditorium.
One
anecdote, however, scarcely conveys the alarmingly rapid decline in
Constitutional safeguards throughout 1940 and 1941. In wartime, at
least, suppression of Constitutional liberties can be explained
away-although rarely justified-by alleged "emergency" conditions.
America was not at war until December 8, 1941, but the hair-raising
attacks on Lindbergh and other American Firsters by the Roosevelt
administration and other war plotters long predated Pearl Harbor (and
even FDR's two-month advance warning of that attack).
LINDBERGH VINDICATED
Still
more ominous than FDR's collusion with the interventionist media
(including the motion picture industry) to disseminate war propaganda
was the ugliness his actions elicited in a substantial proportion of the
public.
Lindbergh,
for example, was threatened with the kidnapping and murder of his
surviving children ifhe did not recant his anti-interventionist views.
But
Lindy outlived even his most vicious critics, and today has been
largely vindicated, although the "court historians" of the Establishment
persist in rear-guard action against everyone who has ever put America
first.
Lindbergh's
Autobiography of Values amazingly demonstrated still further
intellectual growth in a man already remarkable for his engineering and
scientific accomplishments.
Not
an autobiography in the strictest sense, the work is a rambling, keenly
thoughtful appraisal of not only his life, but the course and meaning
of not just modern civilization, but primitive life as well. The book
also indicates Lindbergh's final analysis of the true threat posed by
monopoly capitalists: the loss of man's earthy inheritance through
wanton exploitation for profit.
Lindbergh
became a committed conservationist in the last years of his life, often
criticizing the despoiling of the environment. It was during these
years he was active in the Private Association for National Minorities, a
group dedicated to preserving the threatened minority tribes in the
Philippines.
Lindbergh
also had the last word; the introduction to his Wartime Journals,
although containing pessimistic passages, holds out hope that if
Americans understand the issues and conditions of the past, we can
triumph in the present and the future.
CHARLES A. LINDBERGH, SR. (1859-1924)
Although
many Americans are aware of the populist views of Charles A. Lindbergh,
Jr., the famed aviator, few know that his father, for whom he was
named, was a forthright populist himself Lindbergh Sr.'s books, Banking
and Currency and the Money Trust (1913), Your Country at War (1917), and
The Economic Pinch (1923) exposed the menace of the Federal Reserve
System and the threat monopoly capitalism poses to the survival of the
United States. Plates of his books were seized and destroyed.
As
a Republican congressman from Minnesota from 1907-1917, Lindbergh Sr.
fought against the caucus system of secret committees, America's entry
into World War I and most importantly, the money manipulators whom he
referred to as the "invisible government."
Time and time again, the Money Trust conspirators had to revise their plans because of Lindbergh and his associates.
On
one occasion, he was offered a bribe of two million dollars and on
another occasion, he narrowly escaped an assassination attempt.
Seeing
that he could not prevent the "inner circle" from plunging America into
war, he stepped down from Congress to run for governor, carrying his
cause directly to the people.
His Non-Partisan League supporters were often beaten up and arrested without warrants by howling "patriotic" mobs.
"We
must all be foolish and unwise together and fight for our country," the
old patriot would say while speaking on behalf of Liberty Bonds and the
Red Cross.
Some
government officials publicly called for firing squads to suppress
peaceful and non-treasonable (as defined by the Constitution) dissent.
Quite in contrast was the Establishment's attitude toward leftist
dissent during the fruitless, but profitable for some, no-win adventures
against communist aggression in Korea and Vietnam.The government was
comparatively lenient and the national media very understanding of such
dissent even when it took the form of bloody violence, sabotage and
flag-burning treason.
In
the case of American involvement on the side of Zionism in the Mideast,
during the war with Iraq, Americans saw how well the media,
educational, religious, business and labor, and government
establishments can work together to see to it that we all do "our
patriotic duty."
Charles
Lindbergh, Sr. died while running for the U.S. Senate on the
Farmer-Labor ticket, warning us that the harsh Versailles Treaty left
the gap open for another war. In that other war his son would follow in
his footsteps fighting American intervention.
The
Caiaphas Complex--An Unsettling, Unexpurgated Exploration of the Dark
Side of the Power Structure that Misrules America and our World Today...
Michael Collins Piper, p.155-166:
Michael Collins Piper, p.155-166:
Shocking Revelations Emerge in New Book
• Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh and America’s Fight Over World War II, 1939-1941
• Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh and America’s Fight Over World War II, 1939-1941
By Michael Collins Piper
Until
a few years ago, most patriots fondly recalled aviator Charles
Lindbergh for his leadership of the America First movement that fought to
prevent Franklin D. Roosevelt from steering the United States into war
against Adolf Hitler’s Germany.
However, in recent times, pernicious Internet agitprop has convinced
many patriots that heroes like Lindbergh and his “isolationist”
colleagues were actually traitors doing the work of the New World Order.
One broadcaster in particular promotes this nonsense by constantly
harping about “the Nazis,” hyping writers who smear Lindbergh and claim
Hitler’s heirs are today plotting the “rise of the Fourth Reich.”
Those conned by this garbage fail to see this is really a ploy to keep
the image of “the Holocaust” alive, thereby advancing the interests of
Israel, which benefits from the Holocaust in multiple ways, without ever
mentioning the word “Israel” even once. And that’s propaganda at its
most deceptive and calculating.
Even more
disturbing is that—as a consequence of this skewed version of history
taking a grip on the minds of so many—a remarkable number of today’s
patriots have no idea that roughly 90 percent of the American people
agreed with Lindbergh: A war against Hitler was a war America should not
fight.
The history of that period has been savagely distorted and those who should know don’t have a clue as to what really happened.
Ironically, however, coming out of an elite publishing giant, Random
House, is a new book presenting a fascinating look at the efforts by
Lindbergh to stop the push to embroil America in that unnecessary war:
Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh and America’s Fight Over World
War II, 1939-1941.*
The flagrantly pro-British author, Lynne Olson, clearly holds
Lindbergh’s traditional American nationalism in contempt, which explains
why former secretary of state Madeleine Albright—who famously said the
price of 500,000 dead Iraqi children was “worth it”—hails Olson as “our
era’s foremost chronicler of World War II politics and diplomacy.”
Still, though soiled by its pro-New World Order slant, this is a book
patriots need to read. Many books from establishment sources contain a
lot of valuable facts. This is one such volume. Here are just a few of
the author’s amazing admissions:
• Solid data proving that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its
Wall Street backers did not support Hitler, but vehemently opposed him.
• British intelligence set up shop at Rockefeller Center in Manhattan and
collaborated with the pro-war Fight for Freedom—mostly “upper class
East Coast Protestants”—and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai
B’rith, the Jewish espionage agency. All worked closely with FBI
Director J. Edgar Hoover who was tapping the phones of those who opposed
to the drive for war that Lindbergh said was the work of “the British,
the Jewish and the Roosevelt administration.”
• The amazing story of how many high-ranking military officers “fiercely
opposed” FDR’s efforts to arm Britain. Opposing aid to the British was
no less than Gen. George C. Marshall whom the author says is now
“regarded as the country’s greatest military figure in WWII.”
•While Americans today believe Britain was always seen as a grand ally,
the author reveals that, after World War I, “many Americans came to
believe that their country had entered the war not because its own
national interests demanded such action, but because it had been tricked
by the scheming, duplicitous British.”
• FDR utilized warmongering rhetoric of exactly the type today coming
from essentially the same sources, including advocacy of the kind of
police-state measures such as the Patriot Act and the concept of
“homeland security,” which patriots have become convinced was a “Nazi”
invention. Substitute’s today’s Muslim-bashing for German-bashing and it
is history repeating itself.
Declaring any criticism of his policies as detrimental to national
security, FDR spoke of “clever schemes of foreign agents” on American
soil. However, the author admits: “The United States never faced any
serious threat of internal subversion before or during the war. But the
American people never knew that; in fact, they were told the opposite.”
• And, despite Pearl Harbor, most Americans still didn’t see the need
for war against Hitler. The author admits, “the odds are high that
Congress and the American people would have pressured the president to
turn away from an undeclared war against Germany . . . and focus instead
on defeating Japan.” Today, most Americans think Pearl Harbor sparked a
nationwide cry of “Defeat the Nazi Beast.” It never happened.
——
Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show
host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada
and the U.S. He is the author of Final Judgment, The New Jerusalem, The
High Priests of War, Dirty Secrets, My First Days in the White House,
The New Babylon, Share the Wealth, The Judas Goats, Target: Traficant
and The Golem.
The Book’s Publisher Says
The Book’s Publisher Says
Those Angry Days is the definitive account of the debate over American
intervention in World War II—a bitter, sometimes violent clash of
personalities and ideas that divided the nation and ultimately
determined the fate of the free world.
At the center of this controversy stood the two most famous men in
America: President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who championed the
interventionist cause, and aviator Charles Lindbergh, who as unofficial
leader and spokesman for America’s isolationists emerged as the
president’s most formidable adversary. Their contest of wills
personified the divisions within the country at large, and author Lynne
Olson makes masterly use of their dramatic personal stories to create a
poignant and riveting narrative.
While FDR, buffeted by political pressures on all sides, struggled to
marshal public support for aid to Winston Churchill’s Britain, Lindbergh
saw his heroic reputation besmirched by allegations that he was a Nazi.
Spanning the years 1939 to 1941, Those Angry Days vividly recreates the
rancorous internal squabbles that gripped the United States in the
period leading up to Pearl Harbor. After Germany vanquished most of
Europe, America found itself torn between its traditional isolationism
and the need to come to the aid of Britain, the only country still
battling Hitler. The conflict over intervention was, as FDR noted, “a
dirty fight,” rife with chicanery and intrigue, and Those Angry Days
recounts every bruising detail.
Sur ce blog:
Des sympathies et ambitions nationalistes de Joseph P. Kennedy
Un saboteur à la tête du "mouvement" pour la vérité repéré
Ce n'est pas la première fois que l'opération de désinfo d'Alex Jones diffuse la propagande des néocons
Wikileaks révèle que Bilderberg craint le nationalisme... mais Infowars s'entête à répéter que Bilderberg a été fondé par des nazis!
Bilderberg: organisation anti-nationaliste des Rothschild
Bush, Rockefeller, Rothschild et Hitler
Rappel: Non, le grand-père de George W. Bush n'a jamais été "banquier d'Hitler". Et non, les Bush ne sont pas nazis, contrairement à ce qu'affirment George Soros et les larouchistes.
Du mythe des nazis et des fascistes pantins de la ploutocratie: Crédit social, Ezra Pound, fascistes et nazis contre la domination bancaire et usuraire
Du mythe des nazis "pantins de la ploutocratie internationale"
FDR a tout fait pour empêcher une résolution pacifique du conflit
Comment le Lend-Lease de FDR a sauvé l'Union Soviétique
Assassinat de JFK: c'était pas les nazis!
45e anniversaire de l'assassinat de JFK: mystère résolu, et c'est pas grâce à Alex Jones, ni Jim Marrs ni Peter Dale Scott
Rothschild et JFK: les liens de l'avocat "montréalais" Bloomfield (à la tête de Permindex) avec le clan Rothschild documentés
L'administration Obama antijuive? Israël dénonce les propos de l'ambassadeur des États-Unis en Israël, Dan Shapiro, qui s'inquiète du "deux poids deux mesures" systématique d'Israël dans son traitement des droits des juifs et des non-juifs dans les territoires occupés. (En référence aux récentes violences de colons juifs envers des Palestiniens.) Le département d'État renchérit en décidant que l'étiquetage obligatoire des produits des colonies illégales est acceptable et n'est pas synonyme de boycott.
Vers une Seconde Révolution américaine? Les administrations Obama et Netanyahou à couteaux tirés... boycott du discours de Netanyahou au Congrès par plus de 50 Démocrates, menaces, accusations de mensonge sur la place publique... Une première dans l'histoire des relations entre les États-Unis et Israël. Cela alors que le Mossad contredit radicalement la campagne de peur de Netanyahou concernant la prétendue menace nucléaire iranienne. Tout ça juste à temps pour Pourim... L'admin Obama déclassifie un document top-secret sur le nucléaire israélien!
Médias antijuifs? Sur les ondes de MSNBC, discussion sur les néocons responsables de la guerre en Irak pour Israël, leur délirante théorie du complot irakien et leur guerre de cent ans contre le monde arabo-musulman
Les fauteurs de guerre
Le mouvement juif Néo-conservateur : du trotskisme au bellicisme sioniste
William Kristol, fauteur de guerre juif, roi du PNAC néocon, appelle à "défier l'idole de la fatigue de guerre" en se préparant et en se mobilisant pour la guerre
La Judée déclare la guerre à Ron Paul ... Judea declares war on Ron Paul
Ron Paul explique le non-interventionnisme dans les affaires étrangères
Rand Paul se distancie des idées de son père, se rapproche des juifs et reçoit l'appui de l'establishment républicain et des médias
L'EFFET BOOMERANG: LE CONTRE-COUP (BLOWBACK)
L'ancien directeur de l'unité de traque de Ben Laden à la CIA, Michael Scheuer accuse Israël de détenir le Congrès et d'entraîner les USA vers le désastre d'une guerre contre l'Iran
"Je suis un sénateur états-unien, pas un sénateur israélien". Le nouveau secrétaire à la Défense d'Obama, couvert de crachats et de malédictions par le lobby juif
Le président Obama sur la même ligne que le l'ex-directeur de l'Unité de traque de Ben Laden à la CIA, Michael Scheuer: "peu importe qu'Israël survive ou pas"
Israël peut bien disparaître, on s'en moque, dit l'ancien directeur de l'unité de traque de Ben Laden à la CIA
John McCain et les guerres pour Israël
Les médiats juifs tels que le New York Times dissimulent les efforts des groupes juifs pour pousser l'Occident en guerre en Syrie pour lsraël; l'AIPAC confirme timidement son rôle de fauteur de guerres la veille de Roch Hachana, dit le "Jour du Jugement"; les groupes juifs craignent d'être associés à de tels efforts et soutiennent que c'est un devoir moral pour eux de prendre la parole, vu qu'ils s'y connaissent tellement en gazage; leur agent John Kerry (Cohn) dit qu'Assad est comme Hitler et Hussein; une victoire de "l'axe Téhéran-Damas-Hezbollah" gênerait fortement lsraël qui cherche à d'établir un précédent en Syrie afin de faciliter une guerre contre l'Iran.
Chasseurs de complots, au lieu d'énumérer les incohérences du discours officiel, mieux vaut appeler à la fin définitive de l'interventionnisme guerrier occidental au Proche-orient et à travers le monde. Et dénoncer l'hypocrisie, l'empathie sélective imposant une solidarité obligatoire et une solidarité interdite: "peu importe si des milliers de civils sont tués par nos bombardements aveugles ou ceux de nos alliés, ce qui importe c'est de partir en guerre lorsqu'on est soi-même victime de ceux qu'on bombarde; ceux qui contestent cela sont dans le camp ennemi". La "guerre au terrorisme" menée par nos démocraties ploutocratiques est une inversion accusatoire servant à cacher au peuple le fait que les démocraties ploutocratiques sont les plus grands terroristes internationaux.
La France a-t-elle été punie par des fanatiques à cause de caricatures scandaleuses hautement médiatisées et en réplique à la présence de l’armée française en Irak? Ou bien a-t-elle été punie plutôt par des fanatiques pro-israéliens pour ses positions pro-Palestine à l’Onu, afin d’en faire un exemple, montrant au monde entier ce qui arrive à ceux qui refusent de se battre aux côtés d’Israël contre le Hamas et l’ « Islam militant »? Quand Israël perd en crédibilité ou se trouve isolé sur la scène internationale, il redouble d’effort dans le but d’entraîner le « monde libre » en croisade contre l’Islam. Israël perd la guerre de l’info mais gagne du terrain dans la guerre de la désinfo.
Rappel: quand Lee Whitnum faisait trembler le lobby juif en traitant des membres du Congrès de "prostituées pour l'AIPAC" (lobby juif israélo-américain)
Pendant que Corbyn le socialiste pro-palestinien nouvellement élu à la tête du Parti Travailliste anglais se fait trucider dans les grands médias anti-antisémites néolibéraux bien-pensants, de plus en plus de dissidents nationalistes américains (même les antijuifs) tombent dans le piège de la nouvelle droite sioniste et deviennent leurs idiots utiles les plus efficaces: le pitre John Friend endosse Donald Trump et Ann Coulter, deux chèvres de Judas qui mènent le peuple américain à l’abattoir en s’attaquant en apparence à la rectitude politique antiraciste, alors qu’ils servent en fait à rendre respectable le racisme israélien. Car Israël a depuis longtemps rejoint le camp de l’ultra-droite de Jabotinski et Kahane…
Norman Braman, Paul Singer et Sheldon Adelson, des milliardaires juifs au secours de Marco Rubio, le candidat présidentiel favori des likoudniks-néocons
L'auteur populiste antijuif Michael Collins Piper a-t-il été assassiné par ses ennemis liés à la Scientologie sous contrôle du Mossad? Ou a-t-il succombé aux persécutions infligées par ses ennemis au sein du "mouvement" nationaliste alors qu'il était affligé par la maladie?