Tuesday, June 06, 2023
View Blog
Feb 2

Written by: Diana West
Monday, February 02, 2015 8:09 AM 

One of the exercises I undertook in American Betrayal was to try to track certain key facts and personages that had disappeared from the current form of the historical record, the "court history" we are taught by consensus historians. 

For example, in sworn testimony before Congress in 1949 and 1950, retired Army Maj. George Racey Jordan revealed that during World War II and the top-secret Manhattan Project, the Roosevelt administration shipped atomic materials, including uranium and heavy water, to the USSR, flouting the embargo on uranium exports set by Manhattan Project chief Gen. Leslie Groves.

Where is this fact or this personage in our history books? If true, our understanding that it was the Rosenberg spy ring that enabled the Soviet Union's covert assault on the US atomic program seems suddenly incomplete. The FDR White House, or some part therein, was party to it also. 

From p. 124:

... by what mechanism did Jordan and his sensational findings completely vanish from U.S. consciousness? Then again, was what Jordan said legit? Was he crazy? Was any of this for real?

Here was my next step: to determine whether Jordan’s claims were ever proven or disproven, whether he himself had been vetted as a witness. As I had learned, conventional “history books” would be inadequate, barely hit and mostly miss. Relevant chronicles mainly overlook Jordan’s evidence altogether despite the significant attention, both media and political, that his charges drew at the time. Indeed, it turned out his claims, which originally aired over a national radio broadcast, were subject to thorough FBI investigation and congressional questioning under oath. In those cases where posterity does record Jordan’s contributions at all, however, they are almost invariably smeared or discounted. For example, George C. Herring’s Aid to Russia, 1941–1946, a 1973 study I have found otherwise useful, had this to say: “In 1949 one disgruntled former lend-lease official even issued sensational accusations that Roosevelt and his pro-communist advisers had given the Russians the raw materials and technical information necessary to produce an atomic bomb.” Herring goes on to identify Jordan as the “disgruntled” official in his endnotes. He continues, “Congressional investigations proved these most extreme charges without foundation.”

Really? I quote from the March 3, 1950, testimony of Donald T. Appell, former FBI agent and investigator for the House Committee on Un-American Activities, specifically concerning Jordan’s charges regarding the Lend-Lease shipment of atomic materials to the Soviet Union: “As to the shipment of ura- nium and heavy water, two specific shipments of uranium oxide and nitrate and shipments of heavy water have been completely documented to include even the number of the plane that flew the uranium and heavy water out of Great Falls.”

Appell testified to further corroboration on four out of five Jordan claims at issue in these hearings (the fifth, to be discussed, stands unconfirmed but not, by any means, ruled out). Clearly, Jordan has vaulted the initial threshold of credibility, prompting the question: What happened to this man in the historical record? What are the implications of his claims? What does it mean for the historical record that his claims, his testimony, almost without exception, have receded into, at best, anonymous limbo?

The fate of Jordan’s testimony might seem like a small thing, but it shows, in a defined and demonstrable example, how it is that waves of misinformation wash away the facts, leaving behind a false trail and debris of doubt. We went from “completely documented” atomic-related transfer in 1950 to ”disgruntled official” in 1972. By 2004, in Albert Weeks’s Russia’s Life-Saver: Lend-Lease Aid to the U.S.S.R. in World War II, a book drawing on Russian revisionism—i.e., newly available archival material in Russia attesting to the existence of vital American Lend-Lease aid—Jordan’s evidence of atomic aid had evanesced into unverifiable myth.

In between come the obliterating layers of disinformation. It began, first, with what Jordan described in the preface to his 1952 book as the “efforts of the character assassins and the press experts to keep the implications of this story from being brought into proper focus.” I may be a sucker for italics, but this point about implications (Jordan’s word in this case, not mine) is so important to the progression of our mortal illness as a civilization—nonjudgmentalism regarding mortal threats—that I have to flag it. The effort to keep implications from coming into relevant focus is the story of our lives.

The assassination attempts on Jordan’s character—for example, spurious allegations that he was being paid by the GOP—began right after the first public airing of his story on Fulton Lewis’s radio show on December 2, 1949. This was just a couple of months after President Truman announced on September 23, 1949, that the Soviets had exploded an atomic bomb. The president’s announcement, Jordan wrote, left him “shocked and stunned to the depths of my being,” and made him realize that he, personally, must have “expedited” the transfer of key parts of the Soviet atomic program. He had to do something. “There was evidence in my possession, I was convinced,” he wrote, “proving that the disaster was chargeable not only to spies but to actual members of the Federal hierarchy” (emphasis added). Soon, Jordan was able to bring his story to the attention of Senator Styles Bridges (R-NH) and Lewis, a popular national radio personality. Lewis’s staff investigated the story, after which Lewis broke it on the air. FBI investigators methodically, exhaustively vetted the same charges. This was a far cry from the dead-end apathy that greeted Jordan back in 1944 when he attempted to alert his superiors in Washington to his suspicions. A few days after the radio broadcast, Jordan would testify before the Un-American Activities Committee, returning to testify a second time in 1950.

Question: In light of the evidence Jordan provided, which has been corroborated, is it possible to continue to regard the creation of the Soviet bomb as solely resulting from the thievery associated with known, KGB-directed espionage rings? Jordan’s evidence proves there was more to the story, that the U.S. government itself, via Lend-Lease, played a key role outside the criminal channels we know about.

Or was the U.S. government acting inside criminal channels, too? That is, just because Lend-Lease, in effect, said everything was all right—even as Lend- Lease cogs Jordan and Kravchenko knew what was going on wasn’t all right— was the Lend-Lease atomic flow, indeed, all right, kosher, and aboveboard from the point of view and national interest of Uncle Sam? Or was Lend-Lease cov- ering up a rogue operation? Was Lend-Lease, as run out of the White House by the president’s top adviser Harry Hopkins, itself a rogue operation?  ...


Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use
Copyright 2012 by Diana West