We Will Pay
Israel has always been a criminal undertaking, as an important 1951 book chronicles, and duped America has always been the enabler of its crimes.
The following is an excerpt from The Iron Curtain over America, by John Beaty. It was first published in 1951 and went to a twelfth reprint by 1954. Beaty was a former Colonel of the Military Intelligence Service during WWII. He was the individual responsible for preparing the digest of the news gathered through military intelligence from across the world and presented to the president for his daily briefing.
This excerpt has enormous relevance to what is occurring today in Palestine. It begins with a quote from The New York Times of Oct 29, 1948:
[start of excerpt]
President Truman made his strongest pro-Israel declaration last night. Speaking at Madison Square Garden to more than 16,000 persons brought there under the auspices of the Liberal Party, the President ignored the Bernadotte Report and pledged himself to see that the new State of Israel be “large enough, free enough, and strong enough to make its people self-supporting and secure.”
The President continued:
What we need now is to help the people of Israel and they’ve proved themselves in the best traditions of hardy pioneers. They have created a modern and efficient state with the highest standards of Western civilization.
In view of the Zionist record of eliminating the Arab natives of Palestine, continuous bombings, and the murder of the United Nations mediator, hardly cold in his grave, Mr. Truman owes the American people a documented exposition of his conception of “best traditions” and “highest standards of Western civilization”
Indeed, our bi-partisan endorsement of Zionist aggression in Palestine — in bidding for the electoral vote of New York — is one of the most reprehensible actions in world history.
The Soviet- supplied “Jewish” troops which seized Palestine had no rights ever before recognized in law or custom except the right of triumphant tooth and claw (see “The Zionist Illusion,” by Prof. W. T. Stace of Princeton University, Atlantic Monthly, February, 1947).
In the first place the Khazar Zionists from Soviet Russia were not descended from the people of Hebrew religion in Palestine, ancient or modern, and thus not being descended from Old Testament People (The Lost Tribes, by Allen H. Godfrey, Duke University Press, Durham, N.C., 1930, pp. 257, 301, and passim), they have no Biblical claim to Palestine. Their claim to the country rests solely on their ancestors’ having adopted a form of the religion of a people who ruled there eighteen hundred and more years before (Chapter II, above). This claim is thus exactly as valid as if the same or some other horde should claim the United States in 3350 A.D. on the basis of having adopted the religion of the American Indian! For another comparison, the 3,500,000 Catholics of China (Time, July 2, 1951) have as much right to the former Papal states in Italy as these Judaized Khazars have to Palestine! (Bible students are referred to the Apocalypse, The Revelation of St. John the Divine, Chapter II, Verse 9.)
Moreover, the statistics of both land-ownership and population stand heavily against Zionist pretensions. At the close of the first World War, “there were about 55,000 Jews in Palestine, forming eight percent of the population…. Between 1922 and 1941, the Jewish population of Palestine increased by approximately 380,000, four- fifths of this being due to immigration. This made the Jews 31 percent of the total population” (East and West of Suez, by John S. Badeau, Foreign Policy Association, 1943, p. 46). Even after hordes from Soviet and satellite lands had poured in, and when the United Nations was working on the Palestine problem, the best available statistics showed non-Jews owning more land than Jews in all sixteen of the county-size subdivisions of Palestine and outnumbering the Jews in population in fifteen of the sixteen subdivisions (UN Presentations 574, and 573, November, 1947).
The anti- Communist Arab population of the world was understandably terrified by the arrival of Soviet- equipped troops in its very center, Palestine, and was bitter at the presence among them — despite President Roosevelt’s promise to Ibn Saud — of Americans with military training. How many U.S. army personnel, reserve, retired, or on leave, secretly participated is not known. Robert Conway, writing from Jerusalem on January 19, 1948, said: “More than 2,000 Americans are already serving in Haganah, the Jewish Defense Army, highly placed diplomatic sources revealed today.” Conway stated further that a “survey convinced the Jewish agency that 5,000 Americans are determined to come to fight for the Jewish state even if the U.S. government imposes loss of citizenship upon such volunteers.” The expected number was 50,000 if no law on forfeiting citizenship was passed by the U.S. Congress (N.Y . News cable in Washington Times-Herald, January 20, 1948).
Among Americans who cast their lot with “Israel” was David Marcus, a West Point graduate and World War II colonel. Col. Marcus’s service with the “Israeli” army was not revealed to the public until he was “killed fighting with Israeli forces near Jerusalem” in June, 1948. At the dedication of a Brooklyn memorial to Colonel Marcus a “letter from President Truman… extolled the heroic roles played by Colonel Marcus in two wars” (New York Times, Oct 11, 1948). At the time of his death, Colonel Marcus was “Supreme commander of Israeli military forces on the Jerusalem front” (AP dispatch, Washington Evening Star, June 12, 1948).
The Arab vote in the United States is negligible—as the Zionist vote is not—and after the acceptance of “Israel” by the UN the American government recognized as a sovereign state the new nation whose soil was fertilized by the blood of many people of many nationalities from the lowly Arab peasant to the royal Swedish United Nations’ mediator. “You can’t shoot your way into the United Nations, “said Warren Austin, U.S. Delegate to the UN, speaking of Communist China on January 24, 1951 (Broadcasts of CBS and NBC). Mr. Austin must have been suffering from a lapse of memory, for that is exactly what “Israel” did!
Though the vote of Arabs and other Moslem peoples is negligible in the United States, the significance of these Moslem peoples is not negligible in the world (see the map entitled “The Moslem Block” on p. 78 of Badeau’ s East of Suez). Nor is their influence negligible in the United Nations. The friendly attitude of the United States toward Israel’s bloody extension of her boundaries and other acts already referred to was effectively analyzed on the radio (NBC Network, January 8, 1951) by the distinguished philosopher and Christian (so stated by the introducer, John McVane), Dr. Charles Malik, Lebanese Delegate to the United Nations and Minister of Lebanon to the United States… To his radio audience Dr. Malik of Lebanon spoke, in part, as follows:
MR. MALIK:
The United States has had a great history of very friendly relations with the Arab peoples for about one hundred years now. That history has been built up by faithful missionaries, educators, explorers, and archaeologists and businessmen for all these decades. Up to the moment when the Palestine problem began to be an acute issue, the Arab peoples had a genuine and deep sense of love and admiration for the United States. Then, when the problem of Palestine arose, with all that problem involved, by way of what we would regard as one-sided partiality on the part of the United States with respect to Israel, the Arabs began to feel that the United States was not as wonderful or as admirable as they had thought it was. The result has been that at the present moment there is a real slump in the affection and admiration that the Arabs have had towards the United States. This slump has affected all the relations between the United States and the Arab world, both diplomatic and non- diplomatic. And at the present moment I can say, much to my regret, but it is a fact that throughout the Arab world, perhaps at no time in history has the reputation of the United States suffered as much as it has at the present time. The Arabs, on the whole, do not have sufficient confidence that the United States, in moments of crises, will not make decisions that will be prejudicial to their interests. Not until the United States can prove in actual historical decision that it can withstand certain inordinate pressures that are exercised on it from time to time and can really stand up for what one might call elementary justice in certain matters, would the Arab people really feel that they can go back to their former attitude of genuine respect and admiration for the United States.
Thus the mess of pottage of vote-garnering in New York and other doubtful states with large numbers of Khazar Zionists has cost us the loyalty of twelve nations, our former friends, the so-called “Arab and Asiatic” block in the UN!
It appears also that the world’s troubles from little blood-born “Israel” are not over. An official “Israeli” view of Germany was expressed in Dallas, Texas, on March 18, 1951, when Abba S. Eban, ambassador of the state of “Israel” to the United States and “Israel’s” representative at the United Nations, stated that “Israel resents the rehabilitation of Germany.” Ambassador Eban visited the Texas city in the interest of raising funds for taking “200,000 immigrants this year, 600,000 within the next three years” (Dallas Morning News, March 13, 1951) to the small state of Palestine, or “Israel.” The same day that Ambassador Eban was talking in Dallas about “Israel’s” resentment at the rehabilitation of Germany, a Reuters dispatch of March 13, 1951 from Tel Aviv (Washington Times-Herald) stated that “notes delivered yesterday [March 12] in Washington, London, and Paris and to the Soviet Minister at Tel Aviv urge the occupying powers of Germany not to “hand over full powers to any German government” without express reservations for the payment of reparations to “Israel” in the sum of $1,500,000,000.
This compensation was said to be for 6,000,000 Jews killed by Hitler. This figure has been used repeatedly (as late as January, 1952 — “Israeli” broadcast heard by the author), but one who consults statistics and ponders the known facts of recent history cannot do other than wonder how it is arrived at. According to Appendix VII, “Statistics on Religious Affiliation,” of The Immigration and Naturalization Systems of the United States (A Report of the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States Senate, 1950), the number of Jews in the world is 15,713,638. The World Almanac, 1949, p. 289, is cited as the source of the statistical table reproduced on p. 842 of the government document. The article in the World Almanac is headed “Religious Population of the World.” A corresponding item, with the title, “Population, Worldwide, by Religious Beliefs” is found in the World Almanac for 1940 (p. 129), and in it the world Jewish population is given as 15,319,359. If the World Almanac figures are correct, the world’ s Jewish population did not decrease in the war decade, but showed a small increase.
Assuming, however, that the figures of the U.S. document and the World Almanac are in error, let us make an examination of the known facts. In the first place, the number of Jews in Germany in 1939 was about 600,000 — by some estimates considerably fewer — and of these, as shown elsewhere in this book, many came to the United States, some went to Palestine, and some are still in Germany. As to the Jews in Eastern European lands temporarily overrun by Hitler’s troops, the great majority retreated ahead of the German armies into Soviet Russia. Of these, many came later to the U.S., some moved to Palestine, some unquestionably remained in Soviet Russia and may be a part of the Jewish force on the Iranian frontier, and enough remained in Eastern Europe or have returned from Soviet Russia to form the hard core of the new ruling bureaucracy in satellite countries (Chapter II). It is hard to see how all these migrations and all these power accomplishments can have come about with a Jewish population much less than that which existed in Eastern Europe before World War II. Thus the known facts on Jewish migration and Jewish power in Eastern Europe tend, like the World Almanac figures accepted by the Senate Judiciary Committee, to raise a question as to where Hitler got the 6,000,000 Jews he is said to have killed. This question should be settled once and for all before the United States backs any “Israeli” claims against Germany. In this connection, it is well to recall also that the average German had no more to do with Hitler’s policies than the average American had to do with Franklin Roosevelt’s policies; that 5,000,000 Germans are unaccounted for — 4,000,000 civilians (pp. 70, 71, above) and 1,000,000 soldiers who never returned from Soviet labor camps (p. 137); and that a permanent hostile attitude toward Germany on our part is the highest hope of the Communist masters of Russia.
In spite of its absurdity, however, the “Israeli” claim for reparations from a not yet created country, whose territory has been nothing but an occupied land through the entire life of the state of “Israel,” may well delay reconciliation in Western Europe; and the claim, even though assumed under duress by a West German government, would almost certainly be paid — directly or indirectly — by the United States. The likelihood of our paying will be increased if a powerful propaganda group puts on pressure in our advertiser-dominated press.
As to Ambassador Eban’s 600,000 more immigrants to “Israel”: Where will these people go — unless more Arab lands are taken and more Christians and Moslems are driven from their homes?
[end of excerpt]
The blood of the Palestinian people is not on our hands, it is on the hands of our Jews. The blood of the Palestinians is, however, on our knees, and for that our people will pay an awful price.
I think it would be a mistake to equate Ashkenazi Jews w/ Khazaria. Even tho such a linkage distances present day Jewish inhabitants of Israel from Hebraic biblical ancestors, the dna evidence is lacking, primarily because there is no extant Khazar population to match Ashkenazi Jews with.
This is a complex subject, one I've struggled w/ for years , starting w/ my reading of Koestler's 13th Tribe. But Koestler himself admits his argumentation was motivated by a desire to distance the Israeli Zionists from real Jews, left-liberal Jews like himself. Those colonialist thugs were not part of the civilized, peace-seeking, intellectual tradition he was part of. Did such an ideological bias cause him to overstate his case? I believe so and so does Laurent Guyenot. https://www.unz.com/article/lev-gumilev-and-the-khazar-chimera/#a-jewish-coup-in-khazaria
T'would be better to hold the Khazar proposition as an unproven hypothesis. There is surely some admixture to the total Jewish gene polo, but not the overwhelming 90% the Ashkenazim represent. Important to keep in mind: the word Ashkenazi means German not Khazarian.
It wasn't the last time little adolescent Israel made his barking voice heard in Dallas.