“In India, the initiative against corruption is coming from the bottom, in Russia from the top, and in the West they simply talk about it in left of centre blogs.”
Rakesh Simha
Category Archives: Pols and Pundits
Intelligence Ramps Up Anti-India Pressure? (Corrected)
UPDATE:
I had a chance to look at the Vohra and Chatwal cases and neither looked to me like anything manipulated from above. The Vohra case looked like an extortion case (false rape charges) that the courts eventually threw out for lack of evidence and Chatwal was also exonerated of felony drug charges. Furthermore, I’m not entirely sure of Manchanda’s credibility since he’s a former Freemason and CIA employee.
I’ve had a few exchanges with him about this case and I didn’t post anything about it because I was leery about the whole business.
So, Makow might be tossing in a couple of red herrings in order to discredit the entire “war on India” line.
[This is just speculation on my part and my concern is that something in this story will be found to be bogus and then discredit everything else in the piece.]
Caveat lector.
ORIGINAL POST
Henry Makow, an anti-feminist conspiracy site that might be disinformation but nonetheless has a lot of good information, has an interesting piece on the travails of Rahul Manchanda, an Indian-origin diplomat who, reportedly, fell afoul of the powers-that-be when he refused to toe the line on Iran.
The dream turned into a nightmare after a fact-gathering trip to Iran in 2006, sponsored by what may have been a CIA-front group called “Network 20.”Manchanda found that contrary to Iran’s image as a fanatic terrorist state, Iranians actually love the USA and just wanted to enjoy the American Dream as well. They weresocrippled by sanctions they could barely keep their economy running, let alone pose a threat. They were friendly, intelligent, moderate people.Manchanda’s “whole world changed.” When he returned, hewas pressured to write a report which vilified Iran. Instead, he urged the US to abandon adversarial colonial approaches and support democratic change in Iran. He says his report possibly influenced the 2007 “National Intelligence Estimate” which determined that Iran was not a threat.(With President Bush in happier times.) Manchanda was a “star” being groomed for higher things. His ethnicity made war mongering more credible to Americans. Similarly, he says “Obama has killed more brown people than any other president. If McCain had done it, he would be a war criminal.”
But after writing this report, the Cinderella Carriage quickly turned into a pumpkin. A series of scurrilous and defamatory lies appeared at “Rip Off Report” online, and both clients and staff fled his law firm in droves. He was subjected to many nuisance tax, labor and disciplinary audits.
“Overnight, I became a pariah,” he says. Suddenly, he was persona non grata in the mainstream media. In 2010, he filed for bankruptcy. A one-man law firm today, he is still one of the top immigration attorneys in the United States.
A George-Soros-funded feminist group, “Sanctuary for Families” got to his wife and she divorced him, taking their two children and involving him a protracted legal battle that was unwinnable because top NYC law firms donated their staff to this agency. Judges live in fear of it. All of his motions were denied. His appeals to higher legal authorities fell on deaf ears.
But the Illuminati weren’t finish yet. A young woman, Kate Bose, left, who has connections with the NYPD Intelligence Dept. entrapped him in a romantic relationship. After they moved into together, she accused him of “menacing” her during a verbal argument. He now faces a year in jail for having an argument with a woman and he is convinced he will be murdered in prison.
Meanwhile Kate Bose, who was practically insolvent, was rewarded with a $100K job with Ralph Lauren…….
The judge Tandra Dawson, left, is reportedly on the Board of “Sanctuary for Families”……
Manchanda is one of a score of Indian-American celebrities being persecuted as a way of pressuring India to take a more anti-Iranian foreign policy. These include banker Rajat Gupta, intellectual Dinesh S’Souza, Indian ambassador Devyani Khobrogade, developer Lakhinder Vohra, hotelier Vikram Chatwal, Mathew Martoma, Indian Ambassador Prabhu Dayal, Indian Ambassador Daughter Krittika Biswas, noted human rights lawyer Chaumtoli Huq, Indian actor Shah Rukh Khan, United States India Political Action Committee CEO Sanjay Puri, and countless others – all in New York City.”
[Lila: I’ve personally verified Manchanda’s earlier troubles with the family court in New York, but haven’t checked the later allegations.]
Of course, the high-level and thorough-going corruption of the US court system and political system never counts as corruption, when it comes to those “corruption indices” produced by the West, on the basis of which writers like Jayant Bhandari come up with
[I rephrased the last line to make it politer.]
Never mind that China, which Lew Rockwell often posits as a kind of answer to the US, is more corrupt than India and is on the 2014 list of the most corrupt countries in the world along with US allies Turkey and Afghanistan.
Are Turkey and Afghanistan – both Abrahamic in faith – also pre-rational?
Never mind that the anti-corruption drive in India is a Trojan horse for a top-down coup fronted by Anna Hazare.
Never mind that the British came to power in India through the most corrupt means ever (the Doctrine of Lapse among them) – despite allegedly uniquely Western rationality and impeccable virtue.
We were all taken by surprise when Raja Saheb walked into the engineer’s house and made this proposition to him: “I know normally a contractor pays five per cent as commission to the engineer supervising his work but this is a big project and it is difficult to calculate each engineer’s share. You being the seniormost among them, I shall bring you on the first of every month a packet containing an amount equal to twice the salary of each member of the engineering staff here and you can distribute it among them.” After consultations with his colleagues, the engineer conveyed their acceptance of his proposal.
The fact is that in 1943 a government officer accepting money for favours rendered in his official capacity was as legal as the unwritten British Constitution, regardless of the stringent punishment provided against it in the written law.”
Rakesh Simha at The Russia and India Report has an excellent analysis of the “corruption” meme, as the Anglo-American powers deploy it and as it really developed:
In the West, India and Russia are depicted as corrupt to the bone. In 1976 the US embassy in New Delhi noted that “corruption is not a phenomenon which was brought to India by the West,” adding, “Hindu and other religious shrines in India have long been known for their corrupt practices.”
And where did the Americans dig up this evidence? “Kautilya, the ancient philosopher, in his treatise Arthasastra refers to various kinds of corruption and prescribes corresponding punishments,” writes the learned diplomat, whoever he or she was.
Surely ancient India did not have a monopoly on corruption. It was at any rate more transparent than most civilisations – past or present. Over 2300 years ago, the Greeks who were defeated by the Indians sent an ambassador to the court of Chandragupta Maurya, the Indian emperor. Megasthenes wrote an account of his years at Patliputra, Chandragupta’s capital, which he described as one of the most efficiently run cities in the world.
Bookkeeping of every economic activity was meticulous and free from corruption – and Victorian moralising. Megasthenes writes: “The Superintendent of Prostitution looked after prostitutes, controlled their charges and expenditures, and appropriated their earnings for two days of each month.” Kautilya says it was the duty of the Chief Controller of Entertainers to ensure the income of a prostitution establishment was not reduced by the extravagance of its madam.
How the West won – with bribes
Nobody is arguing India was corruption-free before the British arrived. But the British institutionalised corruption in India because it was so common back in Britain.
In the year 1651 the British obtained an official order granting exemption from payment of custom duties. Again in 1715, another Mughal emperor in an act of irresponsible magnanimity signed a decree giving the British not just inland trading rights, but the right to keep a garrison.
The British regularly flashed forged decrees at border posts, to sneak through all manners of goods duty-free. They also illegally sold their duty-free passes to Indian traders.
J.M. Opal, associate professor at McGill University, says the collapse of Mughal rule and the onset of civil government by a for-profit British corporation made “an ideal milieu for corruption, venality, and violence”. In 1769-1770 when failed rains triggered severe hunger in Bengal, the British disrupted both the production and distribution of rice, in some cases profiting from the sudden spike in the price of calories – crisis turned into catastrophe. Several million people perished.
American justice: Cash for kids
For sheer venality, nothing is likely to beat the corruption that blights the American justice system. In 2009 an unprecedented case of judicial fraud unfolded in Pennsylvania, where two judges pleaded guilty to taking bribes in return for placing an estimated 5000 youths in privately owned jails.
Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan received $2.6 million for sending juvenile suspects to prisons operated by two companies – the inappropriately named PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care.
Some of the children jailed were as young as 10 and at least one killed themselves because the excessive sentences ruined their lives. Some were locked up even after probation officers recommended against it – one teenager was jailed for two years for joyriding in his parents’ car.
Corruption in the West: Hidden but huge
Corruption in the West rarely makes it to the front pages. This is because income tax officers don’t get caught accepting a briefcase full of cash in exchange for a tax write-off. You don’t have to pay a bribe in London or LA to pass a driver’s test. There are no touts at railway stations.
In the West they have long since moved to the high stakes table. Why chase measly millions when you can start a war and take home billions? American bean counters will forever argue over how many dollars were spent on the disastrous Iraq War. They may settle on US$1700 billion or US$2000 billion, but what is undeniable is that American companies walked away with at least US$138 billion.
No company has profited more from the carnage in Iraq than Halliburton, the company headed by Dick Cheney. The company was given $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts.
Such blatant profiteering sends out only one message to future Cheneys – even during failed wars, the merchants of death profit.
Europe: Closely behind
In 2012 a poll by Eurobarometer showed that 74 percent of Europeans thought corruption was a major problem in their country. The results show around 20 million bribes are paid to officials in the 18 European Union nations covered by the report. The European Commission estimates the cost of corruption is equivalent to 1 per cent of EU GDP, some US$156 billion.
Britain’s BAE Systems, the maker of the Typhoon jet, is alleged to have operated a multi-billion pound slush fund for paying bribes to members of the Saudi royal family and senior military officials. After 9/11, American prosecutors found documents to prove that some of the BAE kickbacks to the Saudis were used to bankroll at least two of the hijackers.
Former prime minister Margaret Thatcher’s son was also allegedly involved in this affair. In fact, the American prosecutors said payments were made with the knowledge and authorisation of Britain’s Ministry of Defence officials.
Return of the bottom feeders
Even as the sharks operate with impunity, the decline in incomes and wealth in the West is coinciding with a rise in corruption in strange places. Last year, a former Apple Inc manager pleaded guilty to accepting kickbacks from suppliers and manufacturers in Asia seeking contracts with the California gadget-maker…..”
Notably, LRC, which published Bhandari, also runs neoconservative mouthpieces like Walter Williams and John Loftus; pieces by ZeroHedge and James Altucher (both carry disinformation), and race-war propaganda, for example, from Jean Raspail (via Charles Burris), thereby proving, contra J. Bhandari, that servility to power and corruption are not solely the monopoly of Indian bureaucrats but flourish even among free market actors.
[I rewrote this last paragraph to make it less ad hominem.]
Roots, Not Symptoms, Mr. Raspail
Michael Hoffman, whose other views I don’t necessarily endorse, sees through Jean Raspail’s race-war propaganda classic, “The Camp of the Saints”:
How strange – not one word from Jean Raspail about who is really at fault for the invasion of France–the French themselves! Who were (and are) too hedonistic and selfish to average three or more French children per couple. Into this vacuum quite naturally (i.e. by the iron law of biology) rush those people who have enough sense to reproduce themselves (the Muslims) and who need lebensraum. Raspail deals, as do so many others, with symptoms and scapegoating: “those politicians” and that “sepulchral media” who vex “the still healthy body of the French nation.”
I assure Monsieur Raspail that the French people are desperately sick, not healthy, and that the “sepulchre” was built by the French themselves and the bones one finds there are of the aborted children who would have obstructed the multiple vacations, the second house, the third car. This sepulchre is also peopled by the spectre of millions of French children who were never conceived, for the same reasons.
Those white nations which do not have sufficient spark of life to reproduce themselves are indeed doomed, but this is no “conspiracy.” These are the inevitable wages of the Masonic, “secular Republic” that is France. The same is true for Italy, where the Catholic Church has auto-destructed and Germany, Spain, Sweden...all secular, all playboys and playgirls.
One cannot merely pay lip service to Christianity, tossing a bone to a mere nostalgia. The French, or for that matter the American intellectuals, even on the Right, dare not look to see what culture and religion prevailed when Charles Martel marched to Poitiers in 732, when Isabella reconquered Granada in 1492, when Pius V was victorious at Lepanto in 1571 and Nicholas, Graf von Salm in Vienna in 1529 and John Sobieski in that same city in 1683.
The West today, ruled ideologically by the spirits of Jean Jacques Rousseau, Charles Darwin, Albert Pike, Sigmund Freud and Menachem Mendel Schneerson cannot conquer, except from the cockpit of a glorified airborne video game attached to missiles.
Who is to blame for the demise of Europe– the healthy, fertile Muslims or the anemic, self-extinguishing denizens of the House of Usher? If lebensraum was a virtue for the Germans is it a vice for the Muslims? The most primitive pagan in the jungle knows what the “advanced” Europeans do not know, that sex without children is death!
And the current “Crusade”? It was only forty years ago that Jacqueline Kennedy wore a black veil at the funeral of her assassinated husband, and Christian women throughout Europe and America–sophisticated women of the middle and upper classes–wore head coverings in church. Now crusader George W. Bush is on a campaign to “free Muslim women” from standards of propriety and modesty not so different–at least in spirit– from what prevailed universally in the West as recently as four decades ago.
France has banned girls from wearing head scarves in its public schools, lest the girls appear too modest, and this in a France where rectums and genitals are on display on every street-corner kiosk, yet there is a morbid fear of the least display of chastity.
The Muslims rightly despise us because we have lost all self-respect; because we are not the people of the West any longer, but the people of the alchemical crucible of constant, ruinous transvaluation.
The West cannot turn its back on God and retain any territory anywhere, and when I say God I am not speaking of the god of the rabbis.
Roots, not symptoms, Monsieur Raspail.”
Do I contradict myself?
A reader writes querulously that he can’t understand why I link so-and-so (a Hindu right-winger), even though I am a believing Christian…..and why I deconstruct the Tamil Tigers, but say nothing about Sri Lankan racism.
He put it a lot more intemperately than that, but that was the substance of it, once the personal attacks are left out.
Another tells me that if I critique neo-conservatives, I must equally criticize Islamicists.
In other words, I have a point of view that is not neutral, according to my readers.
Well, guilty as charged.
I am not neutral, nor would I want to be. I cordially detest the ideology and objectives of the global centralizers. I might call them Zionists or Elites or Power-Elite or any other term, but it’s clear whom I mean, and if it’s not, please search Kleptocracy or New World Order or Zionism on my blog.
Given that, this blog is my small attempt at deconstructing the unceasing propaganda put out by the Controllers, propaganda that extends to every branch of human inquiry, from science to theology, from politics to academics.
One reader wants me to begin every critique of the Tamil Tigers with a “fair and balanced” criticism of Sri Lanka. But why? Are the Tigers, with the backing of Western intelligence groups, with a well-heeled Tamil diaspora and Western (left-wing) church groups behind them, lacking in voice?
Sri Lankan racism is beside the point. If armed insurrection, assassinations, and terrorism against civilians is the proper response to racial chauvinism, God help us all.
The facts show that the Lankan Tigers were manipulated and used by both a part of the Indian intelligence service (RAW) and the Israeli (Mossad). That is what is important.
If the Tigers were concerned about Tamils, they would not have killed them in such numbers. Until the civil war, they assassinated more Tamils than their enemies did.
I am sure Sri Lankans can be racist. Who doubts it? That goes with the human condition.
But my primary interest on this blog is to show how the Controllers use such inter-ethnic frictions to push their own agenda, using the various players as tools in their larger game. And how that agenda itself drives the friction.
Explaining why some particular tool really had some cause against that other tool isn’t germane to my objective. I am interested in the ones who use the tools. And my sole objective is to neutralize the propaganda.
I am fair, but unbalanced.
I could, of course, flame the fans of race or culture-war in the US, as some do.
And some people might consider some of my posts as tending in that direction. But I’m not interested in culture-wars, except as they are war-gamed by the elites.
I deconstruct homosexual propaganda, only because sexual “liberation” has long been the front behind which the global order brainwashes the young to turn against the very traditions that would protect them from the pathology of that order. For the rest, my beliefs do not require anyone else to subscribe to them.
As for consistency, my political positions on war, the police state, and the government have stayed the same, but in the course of writing and reading, I’ve changed from staunchly pro-choice to strongly pro-life. I’ve gone from being a Christian skeptic to a believing Christian. I’ve gone from being an ardent Ron Paul/Lew Rockwell anarcho-capitalist to a traditionalist conservative, but an antiwar, small government conservative. I have become sympathetic to the men’s rights movement (the part that the elites haven’t co-opted).
That is the nature of the intellectual life. One learns. One grows; sometimes, down, but hopefully, up.
My old posts are up there for everyone to see, revisions, corrections and all. The things I got right, the things I got wrong (pro-choice,).
I link the Hindu right-wing when I think they are right. When they are wrong, I don’t link them. I link others. Is that hard to understand?
Not if you think that truth is more important than ideology.
And that truth, in the realm of politics, doesn’t exist outside a context or a history. And what one takes to be context or where one starts one’s history is not just personal preference but judgment, which is objective and true, but not in an ideological sense. In fact, it requires the abandonment of ideology.
Bloomsbury’s Last Secret: Sado-Masochism
Lytton Strachey, the cultural critic and author of “Eminent Victorians,” a book that aimed to expose the darker nature of Christian public figures like Florence Nightingale, is one of the most celebrated figures of the early twentieth century British intellectual circle called the Bloomsbury group.
The group was named after the Bloomsbury neighborhood in central London where members lived and worked.
The circle included some of the most important intellectuals of the time – the famous economist John Maynard Keynes; the feminist writer Virginia Woolf and her husband, the critic Leonard Woolf; the author E.M Forster and the philosopher G.E.Moore.
Many of them had met while students at Cambridge and they continued to maintain close ties with Cambridge scholars and with groups like the Fabian Society.
The Fabians advocated socialism through gradualism and evolution rather than revolution, but, as with Marx and Engels, they were not from the working-class that they claimed to champion, but from the upper middle-class and higher.
Bertrand Russell, the mathematician, was one of the Fabians and he promoted the one- world government favored by the elite class, as well as its cultural agenda of rampant hedonism, practicing the latter by discarding three wives in turn.
The Fabians also included Beatrice and Sidney Webb, notorious for covering up Soviet communist atrocities; the great playwright George Bernard Shaw, who admitted that the “democratic” part of the Fabian platform was pure propaganda; Annie Besant, a theosophist who was instrumental in the founding of the Indian Independence Movement, which was thus from the start infiltrated by the British; and Harold Laski, whose socialist theories filtered down to the former colonies through his teaching position at the London School of Economics. Generations of post-colonial leaders were indoctrinated there in an ideology that was inherently atheistic, radically egalitarian, and totalitarian in nature.
[Celebrated artist Eric Gill, along with G.K. Chesterton, one of the founders of an alleged “third-way” between capitalism and socialism, was also a Fabian at one point.
Gill was regarded for a long time as a kind of secular saint.
But research in recent years has revealed a different picture.
Unknown to the public, Gill was an incestuous pedophile and adulterer, drew pornographic religious art, and dabbled in exhibitionism, homosexuality, and zoophilia, both before and after his “conversion” to Catholicism.]
Through the Woolfs and their friends, the Bloomsbury group was closely tied to the universities, the occult societies, the Fabians, the left, the anti-colonial leadership, and the League of Nations.
The ideas that permeated one area were inextricably joined with the ideas influencing another.
Property redistribution melded into wife/lover-swapping, polyamory, homosexuality, bisexuality, and pederasty.
Property, Christianity, bourgeois morality, and empire – they all had to fall together.
Not surprisingly, the enlightened Fabian agenda hid many base appetites.
Keynes was an open homosexual/bisexual and pederast:
Zygmund Dobbs wrote in his work Keynes at Harvard:
“ In 1967 the world was startled by the publication of the letters between Lytton Strachey and Maynard Keynes. Undisputed evidence in their private correspondence shows that Keynes was a life-long sexual deviate. What was more shocking was that these practices extended to a large group. Homosexuality, sado-masochism, lesbianism, and the deliberate policy of corrupting the young was the established practice of this large and influential group which eventually set the political and cultural tone for the British Empire.Keynes’ sexual partner, Lytton Strachey, indicated that their sexual attitudes could be infiltrated, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all quite naturally, if need be, without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He further explained, privately, that, “he sought to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual mores—a change that couldn’t ‘be done in a minute,’ but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.” This is a classic expression of the Fabian socialist method of seducing the mind. This was written in 1929 when it was already in practice for over forty years. It is no wonder we are reaping the whirlwind of student disorders where drug addiction and homosexuality rule the day.[9]
Virginia Woolf, who had a history of molestation and mental illness, had a lesbian affair and eventually killed herself.
Strachey himself was a homosexual pederast.
Letters published in 2005 show that Strachey also practiced S&M and once staged a blasphemous sado-masochistic crucifixion scene with his gay lover.
Thus behind the political revolution, we find the sexual revolution, and behind that an agenda that is essentially anti-Christian.
“Although Strachey had had a heterosexual relationship with the painter Dora Carrington, with whom he set up house in 1917, he soon became predominantly homosexual – with an occasional flicker of interest directed at women, including Katherine Mansfield. His last boyfriend was Roger Senhouse, who subsequently became a distinguished publisher.
Dearest old creature, what a villain you are! It was certainly settled that you were to keep Monday for me, and now I gather you’ve arranged to do something else. Tut, tut! What is to be done with you? What fearful punishment? To stand with the right ear nailed in the pillory, I think, at Piccadilly Circus, from midday to sunset on that very Monday!
To Roger Senhouse, Wednesday, July 30, 1930
Strachey had always delighted in verbal blasphemy – and, as described here, playing at crucifixion added erotic spice. I imagine the cut was made, à la Longinus’s spear, in Strachey’s side, which would have made it difficult to apply the salve.
My own dearest creature. Such a very extraordinary night! The physical symptoms quite outweighed the mental and spiritual ones – partly because they persisted in my consciousness through a rather unsettled but none the less very satisfactory sleep. First there was the clearly defined pain of the cut (a ticklish business applying the lanoline – but your orders had to be carried out) and then the much vaguer afterpangs of crucifixion – curious stiffnesses moving about over my arms and torso, very odd – and at the same time so warm and comfortable – the circulation, I must presume, fairly humming – and vitality bulking large… where it usually does – all through the night, so it seemed. But now these excitements have calmed down – the cut has quite healed up and only hurts when touched, and some faint numbnesses occasionally flit through my hands – voilà tout, just bringing to the memory some supreme highlights of sensation…”
How Many German Women Did GIs Rape?
In a recent book, “When The Soldiers Came: The rape of German women at the end of WWII ” (Random House, March 2, 2015) Miriam Gebhardt, a German feminist claims that American soldiers raped 190,000 German women during the occupation of Europe after WWII (1945-1955).
The book is being trumpeted in the mainstream press, from The Daily Telegraph to Der Spiegel and The Daily Mail , and also in the alternative media.
In the process, the 190,000 becomes “hundreds of thousands,” then, “a quarter of a million,” (adding rapes by British soldiers) and then (perhaps by adding other post 1945 occupation estimates) “nearly a million” on the Internet.
However, even the author’s central claim of 190,000 rapes by American soldiers is arrived at by extrapolation from much lower figures in the record, as Der Spiegel reports:
“The total is not the result of deep research in archives across the country. Rather, it is an extrapolation. Gebhardt makes the assumption that 5 percent of the “war children” born to unmarried women in West Germany and West Berlin by the mid-1950s were the product of rape. That makes for a total of 1,900 children of American fathers. Gebhardt further assumes that on average, there
are 100 incidents of rape for each birth. The result she arrives at is thus 190,000 victims.Such a total, though, hardly seems plausible. Were the number really that high, it is almost certain that there would be more reports on rape in the files of hospitals or health authorities, or that there would be more eyewitness reports. Gebhardt is unable to present such evidence in sufficient quantity.
Another estimate, stemming from US criminology professor Robert Lilly, who examined rape cases prosecuted by American military courts, arrived at a number of 11,000 serious sexual assaults committed by November, 1945 — a disgusting number in its own right.”
More scholarly research suggests that Gebhardt’s extrapolations are more true of the Red Army, whose post-war rape of German women is a far better known story.
In July 2009, reviewing the American premiere of “A Woman In Berlin,” a film about the mass rape of German women after the liberation/conquest of Berlin after WW II, an NPR review cites a figure of “2 million” rapes as having been established by historians through hospital records, but then writes that the vast majority were committed by Soviet soldiers. Several hundred rapes, confirmed by court-martial and other records, were committed by Allied soldiers.
In Elisabeth Jean Wood’s “Sexual violence during war: toward an understanding of variation,” (in “Order, Conflict, and Violence,” Shapiro, Kalyvas, and Masoud eds, Cambridge U. Press, 2008), she cites Norman Naimark, “The Russians in Germany: A History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1946-1949“ (Belknap Press, 1995) and Anthony Beevor, “The Fall of Berlin 1945” (Viking, 2002) for estimates of the number of rapes committed by Soviet troops in Berlin alone in 1945, and says the “best estimates” were made by staff at two hospitals in Berlin alone who put the number at between 95,000 and 130,000 (Beevor, 2002, 410).
In The Guardian in May 2002, Beevor describes the situation outside Berlin thus:
“The death rate was thought to have been much higher among the 1.4 million estimated victims in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia. Altogether at least two million German women are thought to have been raped, and a substantial minority, if not a majority, appear to have suffered multiple rape.”
But those are rapes by the Red Army, not by the allies, and that is an established historical narrative, supported by multiple credible authors.
In May 2014, Deanna Spingola, a well-known anti-Zionist “conspiracy” researcher in the alternative media, published a 794 page book on the Allied rape of women in WW II, “The Ruling Elite: Death, Destruction, and Domination“(Spingola, Trafford, 2014).
Spingola’s book only claims 14,000 rapes were inflicted by Allied soldiers, a much more sober account than the mainstream version, suggesting, as usual, that the mainstream purveys paranoia, conspiracy, and libel at least as often as the “conspiracy” community….and usually with much less warrant.
Spingola bases the 14,000 claim on hospital and court records, citing Giles MacDonogh, 2007, and Jeffrey Burds, 2009.
I looked up both books.
“After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation,” MacDonogh, Basic Books, 2007, is the work of a former Financial Times food journalist.
According to this review, MacDonogh’s book covers such horrors as the starvation and/killing/unnecessary deaths of some 3 million Germans in the post-war occupation, the slaughter of some 250,000 Sudetan Germans by Czechs, which I’ve blogged about earlier, and the mass rape of German women.
He writes that the mass rape of German women was largely the work of the Soviet army, although there were several thousands of rapes perpetrated by Allied soldiers, including the American and French. MacDonogh claims that the British were less culpable in this area, preferring to barter for sex.
Mark Weber of the Institute for Historical Research (a scholarly Holocaust revisionist site), reviewing MacDonogh, says this about the rapes:
“Although most of the millions of German girls and women who were ravished by Allied soldiers were raped by Red Army troops, Soviet soldiers were not the only perpetrators. During the French occupation of Stuttgart, a large city in southwest Germany, police records show that 1,198 women and eight men were raped, mostly by French troops from Morocco in north Africa, although the prelate of the Lutheran Evangelical church estimated the number at 5,000. “
Spingola’s other source is Jeffrey Burds, “Sexual Violence in Europe in WWII, 1939-1945” (Politics & Society, 2009).
I couldn’t find the 14,000 number cited by Spingola until I looked at another book from the same year, “Taken By Force: Rape and American GIs In Europe In WWII,“ (Palgrave Macmillan: August, 2007) by J. Robert Lilley, an internationally known criminologist and sociologist, which gives the 14,000 number as the count for all Allied rape victims in France, Belgium, and Germany. Note that Lilley is one of Gebhardt’s sources, from which she extrapolated her 195,000 figure.
In any case, a year before Spingola and two years before Gebhardt, the Allied rape story had already been covered in an academic book.
In “What Soldiers Do: Sex and the American GI,” (U. of Chicago Press, May, 2013) Professor Mary Louise Roberts of Wisconsin University described how GIs raped French women after WWII, again citing the figure of 14,000 for the number of women raped by GIs in Western Europe.
That would include West Germany, but not East Germany, of course, since East Germany was taken over by the Russians, not the Allies.
The book was reviewed by the New York Times. The reviewer describes why an earlier account of GI rape in 2003 by Robert Lilley had had a hard time getting published outside academia – it appeared to show the disproportionate prosecution of rapes committed by black GIs and it was written during the Iraq war.
Another figure for rape in the European theater, 17000, also comes from Lilley, with the explanation that the difference between this figure and the figures in the JAG (Judge Advocate General) record reflects that branch being overwhelmed by cases.
But Gebhardt’s thesis should not entirely be dismissed because of her failure to present convincing evidence.
Her larger argument carries weight. Calling sexual interactions between occupying soldiers and impoverished women in an occupied country “voluntary” is surely a euphemism, as this harrowing account of the interaction between American GIs and Japanese women in occupied Japan argues:
“Immediately after the Japanese surrendered in 1945, the Japanese Ministry of the Interior made plans to protect Japanese women in its middle and upper classes from American troops. Fear of an American army out of control led them to quickly establish the first “comfort women” stations for use by US troops.7 By the end of 1945, the Japanese Ministry of Home Affairs had organized the Recreation Amusement Association (R.A.A.), a chain of houses of prostitution with 20,000 women who serviced occupation forces throughout Japan.8 (Many more women known as panpan turned to prostitution in the struggle to survive in the midst of the postwar devastation.) Burritt Sabin of the Japan Times reported in 2002 that just days before the R.A.A. was to open, hundreds of American soldiers broke into two of their facilities and raped all the women.9 The situation prompted MacArthur and Eichelberger, the two top military men of the U.S. occupation forces, to make “rape by Marines” their very first topic of discussion.10 Yuki Tanaka notes that 1300 rapes were reported in Kanagawa prefecture alone between August 30 and September 10, 1945, indicative of the pervasiveness of the phenomenon in the early occupation.11
Historian Takemae Eiji reports that
. . . US troops comported themselves like conquerors, especially in the early weeks and months of occupation. Misbehavior ranged from black-marketeering, petty theft, reckless driving and disorderly conduct to vandalism, assault arson, murder and rape. . . . In Yokohama, Chiba and elsewhere, soldiers and sailors broke the law with impunity, and incidents of robbery, rape and occasionally murder were widely reported in the press. 12Two weeks into the occupation, the Japanese press began to report on rapes and looting.13 MacArthur responded by promptly censoring all media. Monica Braw, whose research revealed that even mention of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and particularly the effects of the bomb on civilians, were censored, maintains that pervasive censorship continued throughout the occupation years. “It [censorship] covered all means of communications and set up rules that were so general as to cover everything. It did not specify subjects prohibited, did not state punishment for violations, although it was clear that there were such punishments, and prohibited all discussion even about the existence of the censorship itself.”14
Censorship was not limited to the Japanese press. MacArthur threw prominent American journalists such as Gordon Walker, editor of the Christian Science Monitor, and Frank Hawley of the New York Times out of Japan for disobeying his orders. Even internal military reports were censored.15
Five months after the occupation began, one in four American soldiers had contracted VD.16 The supply of penicillin back in the U.S. was low.17 When MacArthur responded by making both prostitution and fraternization illegal,18 the number of reported rapes soared, showing that prostitution and the easy availability of women had suppressed incidents of rape.”
Boyle’s Alleged Threats Against Detractors
I say “alleged,” because these days even email can be forged. But the source is quite credible: renowned law professor, Eugene Volokh’s blog.
Here’s the comment (from the 2003 archives):
****************************************
“MORE THREATS OF CENSORSHIP:
Prof. Francis Boyle at the University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign, is an indefatigable opponent of this Administration; he’s the drafter of the Draft Impeachment Resolution Against President George W. Bush, and has spoken out often and stridently against both the war in Afghanistan and in Iraq.
In the process, he condemns the Administration for various (generally unnamed) violations of the First Amendment…..
A speech entitled “No War Against Afghanistan!” says
“Let me conclude by saying that we still have our first amendment rights, despite Ashcroft’s best efforts.”
Daily Illini article from last Fall quotes him as complaining that
“The climate [at the law school] is very threatening to professors of dissent.”
Curiously, though, a reliable source just passed along to me an e-mail that Boyle sent around last November, which seems to demonstrate a slightly different attitude about the First Amendment:
Subject: To: Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights:”Boyle Bashing“
It has already been reported in national news media sources, that I have filed a Complaint with the Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights, which is currently pending.
Any “Boyle bashing” will be filed with DOJ/OCR in support of that Complaint, including this message.
That could create problems for people dealing with a Character and Fitness Committee who want to be admitted to the Bar somewhere.
Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law
Interesting — a professor threatening to try to jeopardize the careers of people (presumably students, since they’re the ones who would most care about Bar admission) if they criticize (“bash”) him.
(The law school dean, to her credit, promptly condemned Boyle’s actions.)
This is not, however, the first example of Prof. Boyle’s somewhat limited view of free speech. As I mentioned in an earlier post, Prof. Boyle had also sent around (in 1997) a mass e-mail calling for law professors “to prevent[] the appointment of Federalist Society Members to our faculties,” a policy that would violate basic academic freedom principles, and, if engaged in by public schools (such as Prof. Boyle’s own), would violate the First Amendment.
And note also the basis for the Complaint that Boyle’s e-mail refers to (from Reason):
Boyle, described by legendary activist Philip Berrigan as “a lawyer of the quality of Thomas More or Gandhi . . . the most competent and impassioned advocate of international law in the U.S.,” claims he experienced discrimination when he objected to the bar crawls graduate students hold every St. Patricks Day. “A bar crawl in honor of St. Patrick, the Patron Saint of Ireland, and one of the great figures of Western Judeo-Christian Civilization, is completely sacrilegious,” he says.
Boyle’s objections, he says, made him a target.
“It’s clearly a hostile work environment for me,” he says.
“I’ve been subject to ridicule by students and student organizations. This is a hostile environment based on my race — I’m of Irish nationality and a citizen of the Irish Republic — and on my religion — I’m Catholic.”
Indeed, Boyle claims the harassment got so bad that he complained to the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, noting that “it doesn’t cost me anything” to have the government investigate his claims.
Yet when pressed for details, Boyle becomes as vague as Van Morrison lyrics. “I got nasty e-mails,” the professor says, giving no hint of their contents.
“They ridiculed me for being Catholic and ridiculed Catholicism. Two years ago, they even made a T-shirt ridiculing me.”
Was this ridicule based on religion or ethnicity, or do Boyle’s students and colleagues just dislike him? Without examples, it’s impossible to say.
Apparently “the First Amendments rights of . . . freedom of speech” do not, in Prof. Boyle’s book, extend to people who want to ridicule Catholicism, or, for that matter, their professors.
“Free speech for me,” as Nat Hentoff’s book title says, “but not for thee.”
********************************
This incident is also referenced in “Liberty In Troubled Times,” James Walsh, 2004.
Apparently, this is not the only time Professor Boyle has acted high-handedly.
In 2008, he wrote to the state of Illinois to intervene and suspend all liquor licenses for a period of several days:
“The good citizens of Champaign and Urbana will suffer from civil disturbances, large-scale public drunkenness, destruction of property, physical assaults and batteries, rapes and more deaths,” Boyle said in his complaint.
So he asked the commission to suspend all liquor licenses for every bar and liquor store between Lincoln Avenue and Prospect Avenue and between University Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue.
In a separate letter to Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Boyle asked for intervention under the state Illinois Emergency Management Act, which gives the governor power “to suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation of alcoholic beverages.”
Boyle asked the governor to do so in Champaign-Urbana from Feb. 29 through March 2.”
Tamils Tigers Allegedly Paid Francis Boyle, Bruce Fein
Like right-libertarian Bruce Fein (a Ron Paul campaign staff-member), leftist Francis Boyle is alleged to have been hired by the Tamil Tigers in 2009 to propagandize for them.
The Western activists recreated the Tigers as oppressed innocents, in need of a race-based transnational “eelam” of their own.
Bailaman.blogspot.com gives some detailed background on the development of the Tigers in the West, where they are quite content to be a minority ruled by Caucasians, while demanding that Lanka cede half its territory to them.
Bailaman:
The Tamil Tiger sympathisers have always wanted moderate Tamils to think that non-violent demonstrations against laws and policies back in the 40’s, and 50’s fell on deaf years, and the Tamil Tigers were created because peaceful means yielded no results.
I have written in the past how even the non-Tamils protested peacefully at the ‘Sinhalese only law’.
The law was changed in the 50s, the Tigers were formed in late 70s.
Prabhakaran was a bank robber, a common criminal, who transformed his group of thugs into what he called freedom fighters.
Don’t fall for it. I can sit here and point out at the lies in Makenthiran’s article above. But that’s not the purpose of this post.”
(Lila: Tamil Eelam in Lanka has about as much legitimacy as Tamil Eelam in Canada, where, after all, Tamils are also a minority in a Caucasian dominated society.)
Bailaman:
The last time I checked most of Canada’s parliament was Caucasian dominated. Majority and minority representation in a government is no reason to hate. To think that Sinhalese hate Tamils with a passion is beyond logic. Not just Sinhalese, but every ethnic group hated the Tamil Tigers with a passion. And every democratically elected government is bound by laws to protect it’s citizens. No armed entity, like the Tamil Tigers, will be allowed to terrorise parts of Canada with suicide bombs and forced child recruitment to carve out a separate state for only Tamils.
To dream of a mono-ethnic state called Tamil Eeelam, and to prance around like it’s all OK, is just stupid.
Tamil Eelam, the concept and the ideology, is racist in every form.
Educated moderate Tamils should know that any contribution towards segregating Tamils from other ethnic groups in Sri Lanka is morally wrong.
That’s what Eelam stood for.
It wasn’t just a separate state, but half of Sri Lanka’s land mass, and one third of it’s coast handed to terrorist (LTTE) for a Tamil only state.”
(Lila: Since LTTE fronts for Western elite interests, that means the West would in effect have a regional nuclear base in Asia).
Bailaman:
Be ashamed.. Be very ashamed for supporting this doctrine.….
…Rudrakumar is said to have invested over $400,000 on both Fein and Boyle as spokesmen to regurgitate Tamil Tiger propaganda. He hoped that the two distinguished non-Sri Lankans will influence western decision makers. More importantly, he hoped that their criticism of Sri Lanka would help keep the Tamil Eelam flame alive by influencing the ignorant.
The Tigers raised a million dollars a month in Canada. Those digits are dropping fast. A lot is at stake.
It is no secret that the Tigers have been lobbying for support in the US for their cause. Hillary Clinton too has received donations from the LTTE.”
More Disinformation From Francis Boyle
On Facebook, a reader sifts through the disinformation in Francis Boyle’s “Destroying Libya and World Order, ” (Clarity Press, 2013 ):
Careful reading reveals subtle suggestions and outright lies. I will here give to you some examples
2) The Boyle book, constantly “shows” Muammar al-Qathafi as unstable and unreliable! That being why other nations did not want to deal with him!!!! and that no nation ever took Muammar al-Qathafi or his “Third Universal Theory” seriously…and that this is the major reason why Muammar’s hope for Arab or African unification failed.
3) Boyle also accepted the lie that there was an “Arab Spring”, and on p.178 explicitly states that the uprising in Benghazi was justified!!!!!…saying that the West” immediately hijacked a legitimate but very brief ‘Arab Spring’ in Benghazi…”, etc..
Boyle also discredits the notion of there being a malevolent elitist group in the world espousing Zionism; saying, that this concept of an evil “Zionism is a mental illness evident among some more than others”…………
..6) Boyle also retains the CIA line that Syria was responsible for Lockerbie, the Berlin discotheque and the Italian air flight bombings, etc…(reading pp. 186 and onward)
WE KNOW this is utterly untrue, and once again scapegoating for another take-over…as neither IRAN or Syria are the demons as MSM and the Western Governments have portrayed them.That these acts of terror were FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS committed by the western governments themselves with the CIA, MI 6 and French Intelligence service performing these heinous (amongst innumerable other disgraceful “operations”)……
…I have only barely scratched the errors in this most Western approach to the current situation of North Africa and the contemporary world as mistakenly and falsely portrayed by FRANCIS A. BOYLE.
I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS BOOK!”
The Talented Professor Boyle…….
Deconstruct E-zine, a Serbian blog, turns the spot-light on Professor Boyle’s controversial resume, which, mysteriously, hasn’t ended his high-profile academic/activist/legal career.
Considering how many people have had their careers derailed and lives ruined for advocating unpopular political positions, it is highly suggestive that Professor Boyle has flourished, while very publicly pursuing war-crimes litigation against President Bush, claiming former Libyan president Qaddafi as a close friend, and cavorting with Muslim extremists of all stripes.
He (Boyle) nevertheless maintains a highly visible public profile for a law professor, making appearances on such interview shows as Fox’s The O’Reilly Factor and Moneyline with Lou Dobbs.
Boyle is a United States citizen, but also holds honorary citizenship of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which he received in 1993 while he was an adviser to Bosnian war-time president Alija Izetbegovi?.
Boyle has also taken a strong stand in favor of Hawaiian independence and against a University of Illinois “pub crawl” that occurs on St. Patrick’s Day, arguing that the latter is offensive to persons of Irish nationality. In the former he uses a resolution signed by former U.S. President Bill Clinton apologizing for U.S. involvement in the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy as justification for Hawaiian independence. In the latter, he filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, claiming that he had to endure a “hostile work environment.”
And more:
There are a number of journalists who were forced to become “independent reporters” because they dared to veer off the required Serb-bashing “angle,” and some world renowned intellectuals and cultural figures were all-but crucified simply because they refused to fall in line and gang-up alongside others pounding the Serbs, like one of the greatest Austrian writers, Peter Handke.
But Professor Boyle seems to be flourishing, despite his pigheaded support for Islamic radicals world around and dogged efforts to bring great misery upon his own country, by sending its highest representatives to another Kangaroo Court, such as The Hague’s ICTY where Serbian nation is being customarily branded as a nation of genocidal maniacs, oftentimes without even the semblance of a proof.
I guess one should congratulate the Western Elite for managing to turn the world on its ear and foul-up every trace of common decency and basic sense of justice.”