Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Professor Francisco Gil-White interviewed by "Argument"


copyright (c) 2007 by Professor Francisco Gil-White

Reprinted with permission of the author

Excerpt: "It turns out that, starting with Jimmy Carter, the U.S. began a secret program to arm this state that makes Saudi Arabia 'ultimately...the largest beneficiary of U.S. weapons sales in the entire world [and] one of the most heavily armed countries in the world'. [14] In other words, Israel is not the country getting the most weapons from the U.S. -- that title goes to Israel's mortal enemy Saudi Arabia".

YERUSHALIYIM, Israelite Tribal Territories of Judah and Benjamin, Kingdom of David and Solomon, United Israelite Kingdom of Judah and Joseph, Fifth Day, Eleventh Month ("Shvat"), 5767; Yom Revi'i (Fourth Day of the Week/"Wednes"-day, January 24, 2007), Root & Branch Information Services [] []:


Osmund Gjerde from the Norwegian magazine "Argument" recently interviewed me. The list of questions and answers turned out to be too much material, so we decided on the following solution: I would publish the full list of questions and answers here, and he would write an article for his magazine based on some of this material. Mr. Gjerde's article appears this coming February.

[Note from DBA - for purposes of brevity and personal emphasis I share question 9 and Professor Gil-White's answer]

9. Question:

Why would the U.S. want Iranian dominance in the Middle East? What proof do you have to support the claim that this is actually a goal for U.S. policy makers?


Let's start with the evidence, and then move to the motivations. H.I.R. has a piece that summarizes the entire history of U.S. foreign policy toward Iran in order to put the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq in its proper geopolitical context. I will briefly repeat that summary here below. [42]

Before 1979 the U.S. had a policy to support the repressive, unequal, and totalitarian regime of Shah Reza Pahlavi. Most people believe that ever since 1979, when the Islamist regime replaced the Shah, the U.S. government has been an enemy of the new Iranian government. However, the facts suggest otherwise.

Immediately after the Ayatollah Khomeini succeeded in his coup d’etat against the Iranian Revolution (which had not been primarily Islamist), he provoked a war against Iraq. The Iranian military had been depleted in the revolutionary struggles and it was almost entirely U.S.-made, so Khomeini could not afford to provoke a war with Iraq unless he knew he was going to be supplied by the U.S.

And he was.

Though Khomeini and the Reagan administration exchanged dramatic insults in public, throughout the Iran-Iraq war the Reagan administration secretly supplied the Iranians with billions of dollars in U.S. weapons and spare parts every year.

When caught -- this was called "the Iran-Contra scandal" because the U.S. was simultaneously arming the Contra terrorists in Central America) -- the Reagan administration explained that it had been trying to get on Iran's good side in order to beg for Iranian influence on the Hezbollah terrorists who had taken some US citizens hostage in Lebanon.

This absurd explanation could not be true even in principle because the arms shipments began in 1981, as a Congressional investigation subsequently showed, and the first hostage in Lebanon was taken in 1982.

When the war ended badly for the Iranians in the 1988 cease fire, Zalmay Khalilzad, a big power, fretted out loud that year, and then again in 1989, that it was very bad for Iran to be weak relative to Iraq, and called for "strengthening Iran and containing Iraq".

The next year, in 1990, Khalilzad became Assistant Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Planning. The year after that, 1991, we had the Gulf War. This war destroyed Iraq. Thereafter the United States followed a policy of containing Iraq, which in turn strengthened Iraq's rival Iran, precisely as Khalilzad had recommended.

During the 1990s the U.S. Pentagon teamed up with the Iranian government to import tens of thousands of mujahedin "holy warriors" into Bosnia, so they would help out Alija Izetbegovic's other Muslim terrorists in the slaughter of innocent Serbs.

Recently, Iran helped out in the initial stages of the invasion of Iraq.

The greatest beneficiary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq (which everybody now agrees was probably not launched for the stated reasons) is...Iran. As The Guardian said, explaining the obvious:

"Iran is the true winner of that war. They only had to sit tight and smile as the West delivered on a golden plate all the influence Iran had always sought in the Middle East. The U.S. and its allies will soon be gone from Afghanistan and Iraq, leaving Iranian-backed Shias dominant in both countries, their influence well spread across Syria, a chunk of Saudi Arabia and other countries for decades to come. Historic Iranian ambitions have been fulfilled without firing a shot while the U.S. is reduced to fist-shaking. How foolish was that?" [43]

Foolish? That is one hypothesis. Another is that this is what the U.S. ruling elite wants. This latter hypothesis would be consistent with everything I summarize above, and with the reasonable assumption that the greatest power in history probably usually gets what it wants.

It is consistent also with the fact that the U.S. has not really tried to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, despite the noise about it, and will obviously not attack Iran (something H.I.R. predicted back in February, 2006, when everybody was saying an attack against Iran was imminent). [44]

It is also consistent with how the Congressional Iraq Study Group has now made an official recommendation that the U.S. ask the Iranians to stabilize Iraq! [45]

Although the Bush administration has made a show of reacting negatively to this recommendation, I believe this is theater: The public fact of the recommendation is making the idea imaginable, preparing the ground for when it will seem inevitable.

As pointed out earlier, Iran already controls Syria, Lebanon, and Hezbollah, so control of Iraq gives it a land corridor all the way to the northern border of Israel.

The true policy aims of a government, in my view, have to be inferred from that government's behavior, not its public statements, because we all know that government officials will say the opposite of what they are doing if it suits their purposes (it is called "diplomacy" and also "propaganda").

During the Iran-Iraq war, the entire Reagan administration said they preferred an Iraqi victory and that they were bitter enemies of Iran, all the while stealing the U.S. taxpayer’s money to arm to the teeth an Iranian regime that slaughtered its own children in "human wave" attacks that launched thousands of youngsters against Iraqi tanks, and that wishes to exterminate the Jews.

Actions speak louder than words. It is best, when producing a political analysis, to leave aside what government officials say they are doing (unless one is making an analysis of propaganda). U.S. officials say they support Israel, but recent U.S. policy has made it much easier for Iran to attack Israel.

Why does the U.S. ruling elite want Iranian dominance in the Middle East?

In my view, because the U.S. ruling elite that determines U.S. foreign policy is not like ordinary Americans -- it has a quite different ideology. This is of course why the U.S. government has to lie to its citizens about what it does: They would not approve.

What is the ideology of the U.S. ruling elite? This was made dramatically clear by historian Christopher Simpson's investigation, published in 1988. [46]

Simpson showed, with a trickle of partially declassified documents belatedly obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (and which reveal but the tip of the iceberg), that almost the entire Nazi war criminal infrastructure had been absorbed by the U.S. government, in secret, after the Second World War, creating U.S. Intelligence with this personnel. When Simpson's book was released, The Washington Post wrote:

"It is no longer necessary -- or possible -- to deny the fact: The U.S. government systematically and deliberately recruited active Nazis by the thousands, rescued them, hired them and relied upon them to serve American interests and purposes in postwar Europe". [47]

Actually, it was tens of thousands of Nazis, and these Nazis became U.S. Intelligence (the C.I.A. and the rest of the intelligence alphabet soup).

The Toronto Star added:

"Many East European Nazi collaborators, leaders of fascist groups and governments in Eastern Europe, and leaders of pro-fascist East European emigre organizations soon became politically active in the States [because they were brought to the U.S. in secret by the C.I.A. and given new identities]...and gained remarkable access to the most powerful intelligence chiefs, politicians, business associations and media moguls in America". [47a]

This is indeed documented in Simpson's book.

The Washington Post and The New York Times tried to apologize for all this, rather than denouncing it as a truly free press should have done. Soon after this, all mention of Simpson's book in the media died completely, and the book has been taken out of circulation.

Since it is U.S. Intelligence that determines U.S. foreign policy, and since it is a nest of Nazis, should we be surprised that U.S. policy has been making it easier and easier for Iran, which denies the Holocaust while loudly calling for another one, to attack the Jewish State?

Perhaps we should be surprised that the U.S. ruling elite absorbed all those Nazis after the war?

Not according to the recent investigations of historian Edwin Black, who in "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race", published in 2003, showed that the dominant ideology in the U.S. ruling class, in the first half of the 20th century, was eugenics. [48]

The eugenics movement preached the biological superiority of Germanic stock, and the natural right of "Germans" to rule everybody else. This ideology was popular in the Western ruling classes because they could claim to be of Germanic stock ("Arians").

German tribes conquered all of Europe when the political structure of the Roman Empire collapsed. The result was that these Germans became the aristocracies all over Western Europe (Visigoths in Spain, Ostrogoths in Lombardy, Franks in France, the Low Countries, and Germany, Anglo-Saxons and then also Normans in Britain, and hence also in the United States, and the Scandinavian tribes in the north -- all Germanic).

The same eugenics ideology preached the extermination of the "mentally retarded", who would be identified employing the "I.Q." tests that these same eugenicists invented (with a series of frauds and cultural biases meant to ensure that the "Arians" -- which is to say, the upper classes -- would come out "smartest").

Hundreds of thousands of humble and innocent U.S. citizens were forcibly sterilized or incarcerated in the first half of the 20th century, by the U.S. government, because the eugenicists were largely in control of it.

The eugenics movement was bankrolled by the great fortunes of the American robber barons, people such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, who launched the eugenics movement to attack the working classes who were trying to end what the journalists of the day called "industrial feudalism" only to find themselves attacked, militarily, by the hired guns of Carnegie, Rockefeller, et al.

These robber barons also spent their money taking over government institutions, and used them to grow the eugenics movement all over the world, but spending especially large fortunes growing it in Germany. They handed over the reins of the movement to Adolf Hitler after they had educated him, and precisely at the moment when the Nazi Party was roaring on its way to victory thanks to disastrous economic conditions in Germany that the Western powers had been careful to create.

H.I.R. has published a book that traces much of the history of the eugenics movement down to the present day, paying special attention to the I.Q. fraud and its consequences, which are still pervasive all over U.S. society, where they have been used in the second half of the 20th century to attack blacks, especially. [49]

To conclude, then, the absorption by the U.S. ruling elite of the most successful eugenics movement -- the Nazi war criminal infrastructure -- after the World War is perfectly consistent with the ideology of the U.S. ruling class before the war.

As H.I.R. has shown, it is also perfectly consistent with the behavior of the U.S. ruling elite during the war, because the U.S. government cooperated with the Final Solution, denying refuge to the desperate European Jews, refusing to bomb the death camps or the railroads leading to the death camps, and refusing until the last minute -- and only because ordinary Americans exerted heavy pressure -- to do anything about rescuing any Jews. [50]

Thus, we should not be surprised if U.S. foreign policy since the war, determined as it is by government institutions that supported the attack against the Jews and then absorbed the criminals directly responsible for this, turns out to be anti-Jewish.

In my experience, whoever learns this will raise the question: But why is the U.S. ruling elite against the Jews, in particular? You yourself have asked me...

The North American Union is modeled after the Nazi-designed "European Union."
The industrialists supported Hitler, just like the globalists today (all members of the cult of CORPORATISM) are aiding and abetting Germany's Fourth Reich to secure its position throughout the world.

No comments: