U.S. Intelligence Cells Work Against Israel
July 14-20, 1994 - Bruce Brill - Jewish Journal of South Florida
Unique in the history of jurisprudence is the post-World War II indictment of whole institutions at the Nuremberg trials. Gerald Dickler in Man on Trial states, "In a move as novel as it was significant, a number of key Nazi groups were named as defendants." The judgments handed down found The Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party, the Gestapo, and the SS guilty. This cleared the way for their members' subsequent prosecution.
With few exceptions, the defendants at Nuremberg hid behind "the Fuehrer principle," insisting they had no personal responsibility for their actions, and were simply abiding by German national policy. Dickler states, "In general, they tried to create the impression that they had been lowly supernumeraries in a war effort run entirely by Hitler, Goebbels,
Himmler, and Bormann," adding, "The Fuehrer principle enabled the German people to put their consciences on ice . . . " Acting under superior orders had always provided a formidable traditional defense under international law. Understandably, this position has always been convenient for military organizations.
The Fuehrer principle was disallowed by the Nuremberg Trial Charter which "recognizes that one who has committed criminal acts may not take refuge in superior orders nor in the doctrine that his crimes were acts of states . . . [H]eretofore...[t]hose in lower ranks were protected against liability by the orders of their superiors. The superiors were protected
because their orders were called acts of state." This disallowance of the Fuehrer principle put the German citizen of the Nazi Reich in a fearful position. First he had to have the discernment to see the illicit in a superior's orders. The necessary courage to defy it in a totalitarian state such as Nazi Germany, "swarming with political police devoted to the
extirpation of faintheartedness," was shown by few Germans.
By 1942 the "thousand year Reich," showed clear signs of dissolution and accountability for war crimes could be just around the corner. Yet, it was only a clairvoyant during World War II who could have foreseen the Nuremberg Judgments of 1946; the well-worn Fuehrer principle would serve as it always had as legal refuge.
Roday, the Nuremberg Judgments have become part of the American -- indeed, the civilized world's-- consciousness and conscience: the Fuehrer principle can no longer find moral quarter.
The US intelligence community is much like a "totalitarian state" in that it is impervious to the monitoring of the democratic government that it purports to serve. The inevitability of getting caught and the severe consequences an intelligence analyst would pay for a security violation are hammered home at regular security sessions. Nor is there any foreseeable power that would redeem an American intelligence worker who felt obliged by the Nuremberg Judgments to defy his secrecy oath . . . only God Himself.
Yet, how can the US Intelligence Community be compared to a Nazi organization held indictable in Nuremberg? This writer has revealed that Jew-free departments within the US National Security Agency actively --albeit covertly-- work toward Israel's demise. For example, in 1973 unquestionable US intelligence about the imminent coordinated Syrian-Egyptian surprise invasion of Israel was kept from the Israelis.
Apparently this vital information was not only suppressed, but manipulated: Misinformation was passed to the Israelis that duped them into the complacency that cost them dearly in lives and nearly cost them their country.
Loftus and Aarons in The Secret War Against the Jews claim that this was not one isolated incident but a policy that has spanned much of this century and continues to this day. They write, "The savage extent of the secret wars against the Jews will horrify the Western public."
When Jonathan Pollard saw his supervisors' suppressing vital intelligence legally due the Israelis by the 1983 Binational Intelligence Exchange Agreement, he violated his secrecy oath. He wrote, "I'd rather be rotting in prison than [mourning] . . . the hundreds of thousands of Israelis who would have died because of my cowardice." Were he a German soldier during World War II, his heroism would have been as indisputable as such cases were rare. The scene being American, however, obscures the guilt of his superiors whose
misdeeds would harm innocent victims of an ally. Pollard's being Jewish and acting for potential Israeli victims ironically allowed the claim of dual-loyalty to totally obscure the wrongdoings of the cells of Israel-demise-seekers.
In light of the letter and even more compelling spirit of the Nuremberg Judgments, an indictment of those Jew-free departments working toward Israel's demise within the US Intelligence Community is in order . . . and long overdue.
Return to other articles by Bruce Brill