My new book, American Betrayal, presents evidence of stunning but little known parrallels between Communist infiltration/Soviet influence during World War II and today's Islamic infiltration/influence in the post-9/11 era.

Here is a one that struck me anew this week after going back to statements by former NSA and CIA chief Michael Hayden on jihad (discussed here).

In October 2010, Hayden said to me:

"People I trust say to be careful not to use the term `jihadist' because it does have a broader use across the Islamic world."

"People I trust"? What sort of "people" would want to stop a US intel chief from mentioning  "jihadist" issues or aims? Not "people" who are eager to stop jihad. Maybe the influence of such "trusted" people explains the fact that US intelligence, US military, US security agencies have now purged all analysts and analysis of jihad.

This set-up made me recall something William Bullitt reported FDR said to him in January 1943. Bullitt had just laid out in writing and a follow-up conversation a lengthy, logical argument to the effect that continued appeasement of Stalin would encourage Stalin to seize at least half of Europe -- exactly what happened in the aftermath of WWII. FDR flatly rejected Bulitt's characterization of Stalin and his intentions on the advice of someone he trusted, too.

From American Betrayal, p. 199:

“Bill, I don’t dispute your facts, they are accurate,” Bullitt quoted FDR as saying. “I don’t dispute the logic of your reasoning. I just have a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he’s not and that he doesn’t want anything in the world but security for his country ...

"Harry" was Harry Hopkins, Roosevelt's top wartime advisor bar none -- someone FDR trusted. The Roosevelt quotation continues:

... and I think that if I give him [Stalin] everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won’t try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace.”

What a good idea -- I guess "Harry" said so!

Harry was either wrong, duped or guilty. FDR appears at least to have been duped by Harry in any case.

I present a dossier on Hopkins in the book that I believe confirms Hopkins' conscious treason on behalf of the USSR, which you can read for yourself.