Posted on 06/02/2004 12:07:32 PM PDT by cvq3842
By I. N. Tanswer - June 9, 1944
Tuesday's invasion of the European continent by primarily American and British forces may go down in history as the biggest military blunder of all time. The presumptuousness of the invasion's name alone, "Operation Overlord", should have been our first clue as to the state of mind of the people who concocted this foolhardy and now obviously disastrous scheme. As the number of casualties continues to rise, with estimates approaching 50,000 dead and 240,000 wounded, many patriotic Americans are forced to ask if Mr. Roosevelt's preemptive war against the people of Germany has been worth the cost of so many innocent young lives.
Ever since the December 7, 1941 "surprise attack" on the American-occupied Hawaiian naval base at Pearl Harbor, administration officials and their xenophobic supporters have been itching to rattle their sabers of imperialism at the sovereign nation of Germany. While it can at least be argued that striking back at the Japanese Empire was a reasonable response to the regrettable events of that winter's day two and a half years ago, one is hard-pressed to find any justification for this most recent act of aggression. To this day, no link between Chancellor Hitler and 12/7 can be found, yet in spite of this fact, Roosevelt has persisted in his unilateralist quest to overthrow the National Socialist regime in Berlin.
With international support for his war deteriorating, particularly in central Europe, the Philippines and various South American nations, Roosevelt is now faced with the prospect of losing popular support here at home. The shocking miscalculations which have lead to the appalling loss of American lives on the beaches of western France earlier this week may stand as a monument to this administration's ill-conceived foreign policy initiatives and knee-jerk, reactionary mentality. But will such developments dissuade Mr. Roosevelt from advancing his plans for conquest?
While questions concerning what exactly Mr. Roosevelt knew about the Pearl Harbor attack prior to December 7 still swirl about the Capitol like a political tornado, new inquiries into the lack of U.S. military preparedness at the onset of the conflict are now being conducted on the Hill. A Tavistock poll released last week found that a growing minority of Americans doubts that the president had no inkling an attack was imminent, in spite of his proclamations to the contrary. Although a Japanese ambassador delivered a formal message to his administration just before the assault took place, expressing that it was "useless" to continue down any diplomatic road with the U.S., FDR continues to stand by his assertion that the event took him completely by surprise. The message "contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack", insisted Roosevelt, yet many question the veracity of this claim.
New York Congressman Hamilton Fish III has stated that "We were forced into the war" by Roosevelt, and that he is responsible for "the biggest cover-up ever perpetrated in the United States of America." Such accusations continue to deal fierce blows to the president's integrity, and while the full scope of the horrific military debacle in Europe has yet to be fully realized by the American people, it seems clear that recent calls for Roosevelt's impeachment by some of his political opponents will be taken all the more seriously in the coming months.
Jessie Wallace Hughan, founder of the 'War Resisters League' once said "War, rather than any foreign state, is the supreme enemy of country and mankind. One day citizens will covet for this nation the prestige of being the first to escape the shackles of war." In my humble estimation, Ms. Hughan could not have been more accurate in her assessment of so vile and destructive an undertaking as the one into which our Commander in Chief has cast us. Perhaps one day future generations of Americans will come to embrace the wisdom inherent in her words, and avoid the folly of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's recent actions. Only time will tell I suppose.
Meanwhile, the senseless carnage continues at the water's edge on beaches with nicknames like Omaha and Utah, and the blood of our children will mark the pages of this darkened chapter in the great American history book evermore. The belligerence of the Roosevelt administration, which has induced our brave soldiers to die by the tens of thousands in these and other far away places, is unparalleled in modern times, and leads this reporter to wonder if, perhaps, our nation's honor has not just been surrendered to the forces of arrogance and stupidity forever.
Click below for more DarcPrynce articles http://users.adelphia.net/~thofab/index2.htm
For what it's worth.
Hollywood director Michael Moore ("Bowling For Nuremberg", "Roosevelt Is A Big Fat Jewish Liar", "Ants In Their Plants of 1939") has also commented, "The SS are not terrorists...they are freedom fighters, like our Minutemen...and they will win!"
LOL! Although I don't know whether to laugh or cry . . .
The question is, is this for real?
Not far off the mark:
Mugshot of traitor/Nazi propagandist Mildred Gillars (aka Axis Sally):"Damn all Jews who made this war possible. I love America, but I do not love Roosevelt and all his kike boyfriends."
"It's a disgrace to the American public that they don't wake to the fact of what Franklin D. Roosevelt is doing to the Gentiles of your country and my country."
Has anyone been asked 15 times by the media to apologize yet?
Here's the thread I originally started.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1146313/posts
By the way, I wrote that article. :o)
http://users.adelphia.net/~thofab/index2.htm
No... I wrote it in order to illustrate the absurdity of modern day anti-war propagandist policies.
You'll note that I. N. Tanswer is code for Int. ANSWER, the socialist anti-war group.
No... I wrote it in order to illustrate the absurdity of modern day anti-war propagandist policies.
You'll note that I. N. Tanswer is code for Int. ANSWER, the socialist anti-war group.
No... I wrote it in order to illustrate the absurdity of modern day anti-war propagandist policies.
You'll note that I. N. Tanswer is code for Int. ANSWER, the socialist anti-war group.
:)
Thanks for correction. I searched but it didn't come up.
VERY thought-provoking. Thanks for writing it!!!
Thanks. I am always half a day late, and miss it in the search. Oh well . . .
Good job, but, uhhh, one thing. It wasn't a pre-emptive war. Hitler declared war on us in support of his ally, Japan.
What you COULD write about was before the war: We committed provocative acts against both the Japanese (cutting off oil and scrap) and the Nazis (supplying the Brits, protecting convoys, etc). "Why do they hate us? WAAAAH!"
I'm glad you liked it. :o)
I am not the actual author, but perhaps he, or someone else, will respond in detail.
What can I say? Everything is the "cause" of something. Son of Sam killed people because he thought a neighbor's dog told him so. People have to judge for themselves whether the "reason" for an action was a justified one.
This is absolutely perfect!!!!
Just in case your friend, like me, is occasionally humor impaired, I meant "satrically write about," not "write about as justification for their evil deeds."
While questions concerning what exactly Mr. Roosevelt knew about the Pearl Harbor attack prior to December 7 still swirl about the Capitol like a political tornado, new inquiries into the lack of U.S. military preparedness at the onset of the conflict are now being conducted on the Hill. A Tavistock poll released last week found that a growing minority of Americans doubts that the president had no inkling an attack was imminent, in spite of his proclamations to the contrary. Although a Japanese ambassador delivered a formal message to his administration just before the assault took place, expressing that it was "useless" to continue down any diplomatic road with the U.S., FDR continues to stand by his assertion that the event took him completely by surprise. The message "contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack", insisted Roosevelt, yet many question the veracity of this claim.
Seems many have forgotten that the US was technically at war with Japan on December 5th, 1941. Whoa! How's that pray tell.
Well, it seems that during the meetings between Churchill and FDR at Placentia Bay (as in Newfoundland, the Atlantic Charter meetings), in exchange for Britain and Holland joining the oil embargo against Japan, FDR committed US armed support to defense their territories in the Far East. If the Japanese went beyond the Isthmus of Kra, the US would fight. And, the Japanese went beyond that point on December 5th, 1941.
Two things: (a) this FDR agreement did not become known until the Joint Congressional Hearings into the Pearl Harbor, and (b) cutting off - totally - Japan's oil support can be seen as a "provocation" - another step taken pushing them to go to war.
From John Toland (recently deceased), "The comedy of errors on the sixth and seventh appears [sic December 1941] appears incredible. It only makes sense if it was a charade, and Roosevelt and the inner circle had known about the attack." And, from Robert Stinnett, "We knew."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.