Taking Back Our Stolen History
After the Japanese had Already Agreed to Surrender, the USA Drops an Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and the Famously Christian City of Nagasaki Three Days Later.
After the Japanese had Already Agreed to Surrender, the USA Drops an Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and the Famously Christian City of Nagasaki Three Days Later.

After the Japanese had Already Agreed to Surrender, the USA Drops an Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and the Famously Christian City of Nagasaki Three Days Later.

DID THE ATOMIC BOMB WIN THE WAR AGAINST JAPAN? 

Admiral William Leahy also stated in I Was There, “My own feeling is that  being the first to use it (the atomic bomb) we had adopted an ethical  standard common to the Barbarism of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make  war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and  children.”

Gar Alperowitz notes, p. 16, “On May 5, May 12 and June 7, the Office of  Strategic Services (our intelligence operation), reported Japan was  considering capitulation. Further messages came on May 18, July 7, July 13  and July 16.”

Alperowitz points out, p.36, “The standing United States demand for  ‘unconditional surrender’ directly threatened not only the person of the  Emperor but such central tenets of Japanese culture as well.”

Alperowitz also quotes General Curtis LeMay, chief of the Air Forces, p.334,  “The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and  without the atomic bomb. PRESS INQUIRY: You mean that, sir? Without the  Russians and without the atomic bomb? LeMay: The atomic bomb had nothing to  do with the end of the war at all.” September 29, 1945, statement.

THE NAGASAKI BOMB 

When the Air Force dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, with William  Laurence riding in the co-pilot’s seat of the B-29, pretending to be Dr.  Strangelove, here again the principal target was a Catholic church. P.93,  The Fall Of Japan, by William Craig, Dial, NY, 1967, “the roof and masonry  of the Catholic cathedral fell on the kneeling worshippers. All of them  died.” This church has now been rebuilt, and is a prominent feature of the  Nagasaki tour.

After the terror bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the victorious Allies  moved promptly to try Japanese officials for their “war crimes”. From  1945-51 several thousand Japanese military men were found guilty of war  crimes by an International Military Tribunal which met in Tokyo from 1946 to  1948. Twenty-eight Japanese military and civilian leaders were accused of  having engaged in conspiracy to commit atrocities. The dissenting member of  the Tokyo tribunal, Judge Radhabinod of India, dismissed the charge that  Japanese leaders had conspired to commit atrocities, stating that a stronger  case might be made against the victors, because the decision to use the  atomic bomb resulted in indiscriminate murder.

A very popular movie in Japan today is Pride, The Fateful Moment, which  shows Prime Minister General Hideki Tojo in a favorable light. With six  others, he was hanged in 1968 as a war criminal. During his trial, his  lawyers stated to the International Tribunal for the Far East, the Asian  version of Nuremberg Trials, that Tojo’s war crimes could not begin to  approach the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The  prosecutors immediately objected, and censored their statements. That was  the last time there was any official recognition of the atomic bomb  massacres in Japan. Japanese officials have been effectively prevented from  taking any stand on this matter because the American military occupation,  which officially ended in 1952 with the Treaty with Japan, was quietly  continued. Today, 49,000 American troops are still stationed in Japan, and  there is no public discussion of the crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

AMERICAN MILITARY AUTHORITIES SAY ATOMIC BOMB UNNECESSARY

The most authoritative Air Force unit during World War II was the U.S.  Strategic Bombing Survey, which selected targets on the basis of need, and  which analyzed the results for future missions. In Hiroshima’s Shadow, the  U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey report of July 1, 1946 states, “The Hiroshima  and Nagasaki atomic bombs did not defeat Japan, nor by the testimony of the  enemy leaders who ended the war did they persuade Japan to accept  unconditional surrender. The Emperor, the lord privy seal, the prime  minister, the foreign minister, and the navy minister had decided as early  as May 1945 that the war should be ended even if it meant acceptance of  defeat on allied terms…. It is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior  to December 1, 1945 and in all probability prior to November 1, 1945, Japan  would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped and  even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”

Both military, political and religious leaders spoke out against the atomic  bombing of Japanese civilians. The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ  in America issued a formal statement in March 1946 (cited by Gar  Alperowitz):

“The surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible.  Both bombings must be judged to have been unnecessary for winning the war.  As the power that first used the atomic bomb under these circumstances, we  have sinned grievously against the laws of God and against the people of  Japan.”-Commission on the Relation of the Church to the War in the Light of  the Christian Faith.

On p.438, Gar Alperowitz quotes James M. Gillis, editor of Catholic World,  “I would call it a crime were it not that the word ‘crime’ implies sin, and  sin requires a consciousness of guilt. The action taken by the Untied States  government was in defiance of every sentiment and every conviction upon  which our civilization is based.”

One of the most vociferous critics of the atomic bombings was David  Lawrence, founder and editor of U.S. News and World Report. He signed a  number of stinging editorials, the first on August 17, 1945.

“Military necessity will be our constant cry in answer to criticism, but it  will never erase from our minds the simple truth, that we, of all civilized  nations, though hesitating to use poison gas, did not hesitate to employ the  most destructive weapon of all times indiscriminately against men, women and  children.” On October 5, Lawrence continued his attack, “The United States  should be the first to condemn the atomic bomb and apologize for its use  against Japan. Spokesmen for the Army Air Forces said it wasn’t necessary  and that the war had been won already. Competent testimony exists to prove  that Japan was seeking to surrender many weeks before the atomic bomb came.”  On November 23, Lawrence wrote, “The truth is we are guilty. Our conscience  as a nation must trouble us. We must confess our sin. We have used a  horrible weapon to asphyxiate and cremate more than 100,000 men, women and  children in a sort of super-lethal gas chamber- and all this in a war  already won or which spokesman for our Air Forces tell us we could have  readily won without the atomic bomb. We ought, therefore, to apologize in  unequivocal terms at once to the whole world for our misuse of the atomic  bomb.”

David Lawrence was an avowed conservative, a successful businessman, who  knew eleven presidents of the United States intimately, and was awarded the  Medal of Freedom by President Richard M. Nixon, April 22, 1970.

ANOTHER EISENHOWER SPEAKS 

Although Eisenhower never changed his opinion of the use of the atomic bomb,  during his presidency he repeatedly voiced his opinion, as quoted by Steve  Neal, The Eisenhowers Doubleday, 1978. P.225, “Ike would never lose his  skepticism of the weapon and later referred to it as a ‘hellish  contrivance’.”

His brother, Milton Eisenhower, a prominent educator, was even more vocal on  this subject. As quoted by Gar Alperwitz, p.358, Milton Eisenhower said,  “Our employment of this new force at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a supreme  provocation to other nations, especially the Soviet Union. Moreover, its use  violated the normal standards of warfare by wiping out entire populations,  mostly civilians, in the target cities. Certainly what happened at Hiroshima  and Nagasaki will forever be on the conscience of the American people.”

During his Presidency, Dwight Eisenhower tried to find peaceful uses for  atomic energy. In The Eisenhower Diaries, p.261, we find that “The phrase  ‘atoms for peace’ entered the lexicon of international affairs with a speech  by Eisenhower before the United Nations December 8, 1953.” Control of atomic  energy had now given the New World Order clique enormous power, and  Eisenhower, in his farewell speech to the American people on leaving the  Presidency In Review (Doubleday, 1969), on January 17, 1961, warned, “In the  councils of government we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted  influence, whether sought or unsought, by the miliary-industrial complex.  The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will  persist.”

By failing to name the power behind the military-industrial complex, the  international bankers, Eisenhower left the American people in the dark as to  he was actually warning them against. To this day they do not understand  what he was trying to say, that the international bankers, the Zionists and  the Freemasons had formed an unholy alliance whose money and power could not  be overcome by righteous citizens of the United States.

MACARTHUR’S WARNING 

General Douglas MacArthur also tried to warn the American people of this  threat, as quoted in American Ceaser, by William Manchester, Little Brown,  1978, p.692, “In 1957, he lashed out at large Pentagon budgets. ‘Our  government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear-kept us in a continuous  stampede of patriotic fervor-with the cry of grave national emergency.  Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not  blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant funds demanded. Yet, in  retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have  been quite real.”

This was the restatement of Senator Vandenberg’s famous comment, “We have to  scare the hell out of ’em.”

THE NEW ATOMIC AGE 

The scientists who had built the atomic bomb were gleeful when they received  the news of its success at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In the book, Robert  Oppenheimer, Dark Prince, by Jack Rummel, 1992, we find, p.96, “Back in the  United States the news of the bombing of Hiroshima was greeted with a  mixture of relief, pride, joy, shock and sadness. Otto Frisch remembers the  shouts of joy, ‘Hiroshima has been destroyed!’ ‘Many of my friends were  rushing to the telephone to book tables at the La Fonda Hotel in Santa Fe in  order to celebrate. Oppenheimer walked around “like a prizefighter, clasping  his hands together above his head as he came to the podium”.'”

Oppenheimer had been a lifelong Communist. “He was heavily influenced by  Soviet Communism “: A New Civilization, by Sidney and Beatrice Webb, the  founders of Fabian Socialism in England. He became director of research at  the newly formed U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, with his mentor, Bernard  Baruch, serving as chairman. Oppenheimer continued his many Communist Party  Associations; his wife was Kitty Peuning, widow of Joe Dallet, an American  Communist who had been killed defending Communism with the notorious Lincoln  Brigade in Spain. Because Oppenheimer was under Party discipline, the Party  then ordered him to marry Kitty Peuning and make a home for her.

Baruch resigned from the Atomic Energy Commission to attend to his business  interests. He was replaced by Lewis Lichtenstein Strauss, of Kuhn, Loeb Co.  Strauss was apprised of Oppenheimer’s many Communist associations, but he  decided to overlook them until he found that Oppenheimer was sabotaging  progress on developing the new and much more destructive hydrogen bomb. It  seemed apparent that Oppenheimer was delaying the hydrogen bomb until the  Soviet Union could get its own version on line. Furious at the betrayal, he  asked Oppenheimer to resign as director of the Commission. Oppenheimer  refused. Strauss then ordered that he be tried. A hearing was held from  April 5 to May 6, 1954. After reviewing the results, the Atomic Energy  Commission voted to strip Oppenheimer of his security clearance, ruling that  he “possessed substantial defects of character and imprudent dangerous  associations with known subversives”.

Oppenheimer retired to Princeton, where his mentor, Albert Einstein,  presided over the Institute for Advanced Study, a think tank for refugee  “geniuses”, financed by the Rothschilds through one of their many secret  foundations. Oppenheimer was already a trustee of the Institute, were he  remained until his death in 1966.

THE REBIRTH OF ISRAEL 

Einstein considered the atomic age merely as a stage for the rebirth of  Israel. On p.760 of Einstein; His Life And Times we find that Abba Eban, the  Israeli Ambassador, came to his home with the Israeli consul, Reuben Dafni.  He later wrote, “Professor Einstein told me that he saw the rebirth of  Israel as one of the few political acts in his lifetime which had an  essential moral quality. He believed that the conscience of the world  should, therefore, be involved in Israel’s preservation.” by Ronald W.  Clarke, Avon Books 1971.

On March 1, 1946, Army Air Force Contract No. MX-791 was signed, creating  the RAND Corporation as an official think tank, defining Project RAND as “a  continuing program of scientific study and research on the broad subject of  air warfare with the object of recommending to the Air Force preferred  methods of techniques and instrumentalities for this purpose.” On May 14,  1948, RAND Corporation funding was taken over by H. Rowan Gaither, head of  the Ford Foundation. This was done because the Air Force had sole control of  the atomic bomb, RAND Corp. developed the Air Force and atomic bomb program  for the Cold War, with the Strategic Air Command, the missile program, and  many other elements of the “terror strategy”. It became a billion dollar  game for these scientists, with John von Neumann, their leading scientist,  becoming world famous as the inventor of “game theory”, in which the United  States and the Soviet Union engaged in a worldwide “game” to see which would  be the first to attack the other with nuclear missiles. In the United  States, the schools held daily bomb drills, with the children hiding under  their desks. No one told them that thousands of schools children in  Hiroshima had been incinerated in their classrooms; the desks offered no  protection against nuclear weapons. The moral effect on the children was  devastating. If they were to be vaporized in the next ten seconds, there  seemed little reason to study, marry and have children, or prepare for a  steady job. This demoralization through the nuclear weapons program is the  undisclosed reason for the decline in public morality.

In 1987, Phyllis LaFarge published The Strangelove Legacy, The Impact Of The  Nuclear Threat On Children, chronicling through extended research the moral  devastation wreaked on the children by the daily threat of annihilation. She  quotes Freeman Dyson, who stated the world has been divided into two worlds,  the world of the warriors, and the world of the victims, the children. It  was William L. Laurence, sitting in the co-pilot’s seat of a B-29 over  Nagasaki, and the children waiting to be vaporized below. This situation has  not changed.

THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF NUCLEAR WARFARE 

Because Japan was occupied by the U.S. Military in 1945, the Japanese  Government was never allowed any opportunity to file any legal charges about  the use of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although Japanese  leaders were tried and executed for “war crimes” no one was ever charged for  the atomic bombings. It was not until 1996 that the World Court delivered an  opinion on the use of nuclear weapons, (p.565, Hiroshima’s Shadows) “In July  1996, the World court took a stand in its first formal opinion on the  legality of nuclear weapons. Two years earlier, the United Nations had asked  the Court for an advisory opinion. The General Assembly of the United  Nations posed a single, yet profoundly basic, question for consideration. It  the threat of use of nuclear weapons on any circumstances permitted under  international law? For the first time, the world’s pre-eminent judicial  authority has considered the question of criminality vis-a-vis the use of a  nuclear weapon, and, in doing so, it has come to the conclusion that the use  of a nuclear weapon is ‘unlawful’. It is also the Court’s view that even the  threat of the use of a nuclear weapon is illegal. Although there were  differences concerning the implications of the right of self-defense  provided by Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, ten of the fourteen judges  hearing the case found the use of threat to use a nuclear weapon to be  illegal on the basis of the existing canon of humanitarian law which governs  the conduct of armed conflict. The judges based their opinion on more than a  century of treatise and conventions that are collectively known as the  ‘Hague’ and ‘Geneva’ laws.”

Thus the Court ruled that nuclear weapons are illegal under the Hague and  Geneva conventions , agreements which were in existence at the time of the  Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. They were illegal then, and they are  illegal now.

GANDHI SPEAKS 

Among world leaders who spoke out about the United States’ use of atomic  weapons in Japan, Mahatma Gandhi echoed the general climate of opinion.  P.258, Hiroshima’s Shadow: “The atomic bomb has deadened the finest feelings  which have sustained mankind for ages. There used to be so-called laws of  war which made it tolerable. Now we understand the naked truth. War knows no  law except that of might. The atomic bomb brought an empty victory to the  Allied armies. It has resulted for the time being in the soul of Japan being  destroyed. What has happened to the soul of the destroying nation is yet too  early to see. Truth needs to be repeated as long as there are men who do not  believe it.”

by Eustice Mullins (Source: Rense.com)

Illuminati Gains from World War II

From David Allen Rivera’s 1994 book “Final Warning: A History of the New World Order”, Chapter 6:

So what did World War II accomplish for the Illuminati? With the Japanese prepared to surrender in February, 1945, the war was prolonged in order to destroy much of the industrial areas of Japan with a devastating air attack of incendiary and atomic bombs. This allowed the ground to be cleared for the Illuminati to rebuild Japan with new industries so they could use cheap labor to flood the American market with cheaply manufactured goods. This would turn the United States into a nation that consumed more than it produced, creating unemployment and financial instability.

As stated previously, on the European front, the War enabled the Russians to gain control of Eastern Europe, promoted Communism, paved the way for the United Nations, and the creation of the nation of Israel.

At a cost of about $400 billion, the War raised our National Debt to $220 billion, and pushed us deeper into the clutches of the Illuminati’s international bankers. Because of all the intricate angles involved in this conflict, it would not be an understatement to say that World War II was probably the most costly event in American history. We may have won, but in the long run, we lost.

Mrs. Diana West asks some bold but legitimate questions. Did all these people (the glorious FDR administration) really conduct the Second World War in the interests of Western democracies, or was it in the interests of Comrade Stalin? Having declared that war to defend the freedom of Poland, the Western democracies ended it by surrendering Poland and a dozen other nations to a totalitarian empire worse than Hitler’s. Was that really a victory? Above all, was that outcome inevitable, or did it, to a greater or lesser extent, result from the work of the Soviet agents of influence in the positions of power in the West?

Having researched the mountains of evidence, she persuasively demonstrates:

  • How the most important strategic decisions of the WWII, such as effectively abandoning the Italian front to concentrate forces for the invasion of Normandy, were taken because Stalin demanded them. Against the counsel of Churchill and military commanders on the ground, the pro-Soviet FDR administration rejected such sensible alternatives as advancing from Italy to Balkans and Eastern Europe, which might have limited the Red Army’s advance to the West.
  • How every attempt by anti-Nazi underground in Germany to secure Allied support for their plots to overthrow the Nazi regime was thwarted by Soviet agents in Washington – because the German conspirators were anti-communist as well as anti-Nazi. So another opportunity to destroy the Nazi regime and win the war without letting Stalin conquer half of Europe was lost.
  • How the notorious Yalta division of Europe, surrendering half the continent to Stalin, was accepted by the pro-Soviet FDR administration without any serious attempt to find an alternative solution. In effect, the US simply went along with the Sovietisation of Eastern Europe in breach of Yalta Agreement, and betrayed the allied democratic governments of East European states.
  • How thousands of American POWs “liberated” by Soviets from the Nazis were simply abandoned to rot in the Gulag as hostages to Stalin, in the vain hope of preserving good relations with Moscow after the war.

Additional Reading: