Sunday, February 17, 2019

American Betrayal

FINALLY -- IN AUDIOBOOK!

ALSO AVAILABLE IN PAPERBACK

"This explosive book is a long-needed answer to court histories that continue to obscure key facts about our backstage war with Moscow. Must-reading for serious students of security issues and Cold War deceptions, both foreign and domestic."

-- M. Stanton Evans, author of Stalin's Secret Agents and Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies

"It is not simply a good book about history. It is one of those books which makes history. ... "

-- Vladimir Bukovsky, author of To Build a Castle and co-founder of the Soviet dissident movement, and Pavel Stroilov, author of Behind the Desert Storm.

"Diana West wrote a brilliant book called American Betrayal, which I recommend to everybody ... It is a seminal work that will grow in importance." 

-- Newt Gingrich, former House Speaker, Fox News contributor

"A brilliantly researched and argued book."

-- Edward Jay Epstein, author of Deception: The Invisible War between the KGB and the CIA, The Annals 0f Unsolved Crime 

"American Betrayal is absolutely required reading. Essential. You're sleepwalking without it."

-- Chris Farrell, director of investigations research, Judicial Watch

“What Diana West has done is to dynamite her way through several miles of bedrock. On the other side of the tunnel there is a vista of a new past. Of course folks are baffled. Few people have the capacity to take this in. Her book is among the most well documented I have ever read. It is written in an unusual style viewed from the perspective of the historian—but it probably couldn’t have been done any other way.”

-- Lars Hedegaard, historian, journalist, founder, Danish Free Press Society

"This is a must read for any serious student of history and anyone working to understand the Marxist counter-state in America."

-- John Guandolo, president, Understanding the Threat, former FBI special agent 

"I've been, quite frankly, mesmerized by Diana West and her new book American Betrayal. If you get it (a) you won't put it down, and (b) you'll be flipping back to the notes section because every paragraph your hair's going to be on fire."  

-- Stephen K. Bannon, Breitbart News Radio

"Every once in a while, something happens that turns a whole structure of preconceived ideas upside down, shattering tales and narratives long taken for granted, destroying prejudice, clearing space for new understanding to grow. Diana West's latest book, American Betrayal, is such an event."

 -- Henrik Raeder Clausen, Europe News

"I have read it, and agree wholeheartedly."

-- Angelo Codevilla, Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Boston Unversity, and fellow of the Claremont Institute. 

No book has ever frightened me as much as American Betrayal. ... [West] patiently builds a story outlining a network of subversion so bizarrely immense that to write it down will seem too fantastic to anyone without the book’s detailed breadth and depth. It all adds up to a story so disturbing that it has changed my attitude to almost everything I think about how the world actually is. ... By the time you put the book down, you have a very different view of America’s war aims and strategies. The core question is, did the USA follow a strategy that served its own best interests, or Stalin’s? And it’s not that it was Stalin’s that is so compelling, since you knew that had to be the answer, but the evidence in detail that West provides that makes this a book you cannot ignore. 

-- Steven Kates, RMIT (Australia) Associate Professor of Economics, Quadrant

Her task is ambitious; her sweep of crucial but too-little-known facts of history is impressive; and her arguments are eloquent and witty. ... American Betrayal is one of those books that will change the way many of us see the world.

-- Susan Freis Falknor, Blue Ridge Forum

"Diana West's new book rewrites WWII and Cold War history not by disclosing secrets, but by illuminating facts that have been hidden in plain sight for decades. Furthermore, she integrates intelligence and political history in ways never done before."

-- Jeffrey Norwitz, former professor of counterterrorism, Naval War College

Although I know [Christopher] Andrew well, and have met [Oleg] Gordievsky twice, I now doubt their characterization of Hopkins -- also embraced by Radosh and the scholarly community. I now support West's conclusions after rereading KGB: The Inside Story account 23 years later [relevant passages cited in American Betrayal]. It does not ring true that Hopkins was an innocent dupe dedicated solely to defeating the Nazis. Hopkins comes over in history as crafty, secretive and no one's fool, hardly the personality traits of a naïve fellow traveler. And his fingerprints are on the large majority of pro-Soviet policies implemented by the Roosevelt administration. West deserves respect for cutting through the dross that obscures the evidence about Hopkins, and for screaming from the rooftops that the U.S. was the victim of a successful Soviet intelligence operation.

-- Bernie Reeves, founder of The Raleigh Spy Conference, American Thinker

Diana West’s American Betrayal — a remarkable, novel-like work of sorely needed historical re-analysis — is punctuated by the Cassandra-like quality of “multi-temporal” awareness. ... But West, although passionate and direct, is able to convey her profoundly disturbing, multi-temporal narrative with cool brilliance, conjoining meticulous research, innovative assessment, evocative prose, and wit.

-- Andrew G. Bostom, PJ Media

Do not be dissuaded by the controversy that has erupted around this book which, if you insist on complete accuracy, would be characterized as a disinformation campaign.

-- Jed Babbin, The American Spectator

[American Betrayal is] the most important anti-Communist book of our time ... a book that can open people's eyes to the historical roots of our present malaise ... full of insights, factual corroboration, and psychological nuance. 

-- J.R. Nyquist, author, Origins of the Fourth World War 

The polemics against your Betrayal have a familiar smell: The masters of the guild get angry when someone less worthy than they are ventures into the orchard in which only they are privileged to harvest. The harvest the outsider brought in, they ritually burn.

-- Hans Jansen, former professor of Islamic Thought, University of Utrecht 

West's lesson to Americans: Reality can't be redacted, buried, fabricated, falsified, or omitted. Her book is eloquent proof of it.

-- Edward Cline, Family Security Matters

In American Betrayal, Ms. West's well-established reputation for attacking "sacred cows" remains intact. The resulting beneficiaries are the readers, especially those who can deal with the truth.

-- Wes Vernon, Renew America

After reading American Betrayal and much of the vituperation generated by neoconservative "consensus" historians, I conclude that we cannot ignore what West has demonstrated through evidence and cogent argument.

-- John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D., Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons

Enlightening. I give American Betrayal five stars only because it is not possible to give it six.

-- John Dietrich, formerly of the Defense Intelligence Agency and author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy.

If you're looking for something to read, this is the most dazzling, mind-warping book I have read in a long time. It has been criticized by the folks at Front Page, but they don't quite get what Ms. West has set out to do and accomplished. I have a whole library of books on communism, but -- "Witness" excepted -- this may be the best.

-- Jack Cashill, author of Deconstructing Obama: The Lives, Loves and Letters of America's First Postmodern President and First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America

If the Soviet penetration of Washington, D.C., was so wide and so deep that it functioned like an occupation …
 
If, as a result of that occupation, American statecraft became an extension of Soviet strategy …
 
If the people who caught on – investigators, politicians, defectors – and tried to warn the American public were demonized, ridiculed and destroyed for the good of that occupation and to further that strategy …
 
And if the truth was suppressed by an increasingly complicit Uncle Sam …

Would you feel betrayed?

Now available from St. Martin's Press, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character

View Blog
Minimize
Apr 27

Written by: Diana West
Friday, April 27, 2018 1:31 PM 

"You remember Iraqgate," the always trenchant William Safire wrote in 1993 ....

Er, well, not exactly ....

Iraqgate, the former-Nixon-Agnew-speechwriter-turned-NYT-columnist continued, was 

the White House corruption of Agriculture's loan guarantee program to slip foreign aid billions through an Italian bank to Saddam Hussein, which he used to finance his secret nuclear buildup. The Bush Justice Department sought to contain the scandal by pretending the Italian bank knew nothing of its Atlanta office's huge Iraqi dealings -- despite suppressed C.I.A. evidence to the contrary."

That would be the Bush 41 White House & Justice Department under the extremely murky Attorney General William Barr and criminal division chief, later US attorney, later acting deputy attorney general, later FBI director, current Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III.

As Safire pieced things together in a series of columns a quarter century ago, it all started when Prince Bandar (a.k.a. "Bandar Bush") convinced Bush 41 to make Saddam Hussein into the sheriff of the Middle East. This disastrous strategy would include a backdoor (i.e., illegal) military (nuclear) build-up via the Ag Department via an Italian bank, which, far from bringing Saddam's Iraq into "the family of nations," as Bush 41 seemed to hope, created the aggressive state actor whom Bush 41 would go to war against, briefly, in 1992. Stories about the banking/Justice/Ag/CIA/White House/State scandal that had erupted into war broke while the nation was still celebrating that same war's "100 hour" victory. Somehow, the establishment bigfeet WaPo and NYT just never mustered much enthusiasm for this Bush 41 "-gate" ... 

Safire's recap continued:

During the '92 campaign, Al Gore accurately charged that "the C.I.A. reported to Secretary of State James Baker . . . that Iraq was clandestinely procuring nuclear weapons" while State was urging more loan guarantees to appease the dictator.

Candidate Clinton, asked if he would favor a special Iraqgate prosecutor under a new Independent Counsel Act, replied unequivocally: "Yes." 

Hah. In a recurring instance of the Bush-Clinton/you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours relationship, the Clinton administration "moved to quash any revelations about Bush's Iraqgate scandal."  Clinton, of course, would soon be busy with his own. One (two, three ...) bad turns deserving another, the Bushes, George, Barbara and George W., would later re-introduce Clinton and his bride back into Swamp society following the couple's White House disgrace.   

It is worth noting just how early Mueller caught Safire's eye. In 1992, Safire wrote that DOJ criminal division chief Mueller was likely to be a target of an Iraqgate grand jury (which would never be convened). Even earlier, in 1991, Safire highlighted Mueller's rubber stamp on a White House investigation of itself over the hiring (for $600,000) of a top aide to White House chief of staff John Sununu by the Saudi ex-spymaster at the radioactive center of the raging BCCI investigation.

What was that all about -- influence peddling? Obstruction of justice? Nuthin', said the White House. 

Mueller, Safire wrote, accepted the White House's "self-inquiry" in an "avid embrace." 

Safire:

Because nobody has held out a bundle of cash and bluntly said "obstruct justice," the complaisant Mr. Mueller will not ask anybody embarrassing questions under oath.      

Decades laters, we know "the complaisant Mr. Mueller" as the politically compliant Mr. Mueller. If an abundance of evidence was not enough in 1991 to cause Mueller to ask anyone embarassing questions under oath (or keep a Hamas operative out of sensitive FBI installations in 2010), a dearth of evidence in 2017 was plenty to cause Special Counsel Mueller to authorize a no-knock, guns-drawn raid on a cooperating witness and his wife in her nightgown. Whether Mueller always gets his man, he always serves his political masters. It's just never about national security.    

In 2001, as Bush 43 was about to tap Mueller to be FBI director, William Safire lamented his looming selection, describing Mueller this way:

A marine with Vietnam service, he headed the Justice Department's Criminal Division in the final years of Bush the elder's administration. I remember him as an intelligent apparatchik who showed a marked lack of interest in pursuing the Iraqgate investigation. He helped staff the Public Integrity Division with time-servers who would not rock the boat.

Credit Mueller with political agility, however. 

In the Clinton years, he applied for a job with Eric Holder, then U.S. attorney here (later famed for his role in the Marc Rich pardon). As Democrat Holder moved up the ladder at Reno Justice, so did his friend Mueller, and -- with the strong support of Senator Barbara Boxer of California -- Mueller was rewarded with a Clinton appointment as U.S. attorney in San Francisco.

Holder and Mueller -- friends? Moving up with strong support of Barbara Boxer? Clinton appointee? This is something I missed in my on-again/off-again Mueller studies.

Then, with Bush the younger's election, he spun about and made his bureaucratic expertise known to the knocked-about John Ashcroft. Named acting deputy attorney general, Mueller made certain his Public Integrity associates remained secure, taught the new deputy the ropes and now has Ashcroft's backing for the F.B.I. job.

Which, of course, he got. On September 4, 2001, Mueller became the director of the FBI. On September 11, 2001, the US came under attack from Al Qaeda as enabled by essential Saudi government support (including from "Bandar Bush").

Fast forward to May 21, 2002, the day FBI whistleblower Colleen Rowley wrote her "bombshell memo" to Director Mueller, revealing that in the summer of 2001, FBI HQ blocked a key FBI investigation underway into "the 20th hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui -- specifically, by preventing agents in Minneapolis from examining Moussaoui's computer. 

Safire's next column, "Rowely's Memo," explained what happened next.

It opened:

Why did F.B.I. Director Robert Mueller desperately stamp ''classified'' on last week's memo to him from the Minneapolis agent and counsel Coleen Rowley?

Answer: Because he is protecting the bureau's crats who ignored warnings from the field before Sept. 11, and because he is trying to cover his own posterior for misleading the public and failing to inform the president in the eight months since. ...

The Mueller modus operandi: It's never about national security.

Safire continued, harkening back to the summer of 2001.

Intimidated by the brouhaha about supposed ethnic profiling of Wen Ho Lee, lawyers at John Ashcroft's Justice Department wanted no part of going after this Arab [Moussawi]. F.B.I. Washington bureaucrats were, in agent Rowley's words, ''consistently, almost deliberately thwarting the Minneapolis F.B.I. agents' efforts.''

To this day, Mueller -- Eric Holder's gift to Justice, held over by an entranced Ashcroft and determined to protect his benefactor from embarrassment -- insists that even an unencumbered investigation would not have stopped 9/11. Not so, says Rowley; her memo told Mueller last week that his protestation was ''an apparent effort to protect the F.B.I. from embarrassment and the relevant F.B.I. officials from scrutiny.''

As Safire pointed out the following week, ("J. Edgar Mueller"), this same Ashcroft-Mueller alibi -- namely, that not even an efficient, intelligent FBI investigation could have thwarted the 9/11 attacks --  was becoming the Big Lie driving the unprecedented expansion of massive government surveillance and "meta-data" collection programs that have eroded our rights as American citizens ever since.

He wrote: 

To fabricate an alibi for his nonfeasance, and to cover up his department's embarrassing cut of the counterterrorism budget last year, Attorney General John Ashcroft -- working with his hand-picked aide, F.B.I. Director ''J. Edgar'' Mueller III -- has gutted guidelines put in place a generation ago to prevent the abuse of police power by the federal government.

They have done this deed by executive fiat: no public discussion, no Congressional action, no judicial guidance. If we had only had these new powers last year, goes their posterior-covering pretense, we could have stopped terrorism cold.

Not so. They had the power to collect the intelligence, but lacked the intellect to analyze the data the agencies collected. The F.B.I.'s failure to absorb the Phoenix and Minneapolis memos was compounded by the C.I.A.'s failure to share information it had about two of the Arab terrorists in the U.S. who would become hijackers (as revealed by Newsweek today).

Thus we see the seizure of new powers of surveillance is a smokescreen to hide failure to use the old power.   

I suspect there is even more to it than that. What was already clear, however, was that Robert Mueller, "Eric Holder's gift to Justice," was in at the creation of the Surveillance State, the non-constitutional political regime born of denial of the facts behind a catastrophic national security failure and cover-up at the highest levels of the government. Throughout his tenure at the FBI, Mueller would only deepen the denial and obfuscation, as seen, for example, in unconscionable FBI efforts to keep Saudi cells in San Diego and Sarasota off limits to investigators, including the Congress of the United States.  

Now, a committee in the Congress of the United States, the Senate Judiciary Committee, has voted to make the powers of this sinister and deeply political figure uncheckable by any government body. 

 

 

Tags:
Donate
Minimize

Print  

Links
Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use
Copyright 2012 by Diana West