Wednesday, August 14, 2013

A Peace to End All Peace

This article describes how the British stole the world's largest supply of oil, how they set the Middle East on a course of permanent misery and suffering, how they invented the myth that Jews control the world, and how they blame the Jews for their own crooked behavior.

Notes

The words “Ottomans” and “Turks” are, for the most part, used interchangeably throughout the article, as are the words “Ottoman Empire” and “Turkey.” The Turks were, after all, the ones who led the Ottoman Empire, for the most part. And after World War I, what was left of the Ottoman Empire became known as Turkey.

Throughout the article, whenever I included information from another source, I listed the source in parenthesis. Usually, the source is listed as a page number from a book. Page numbers which do not include a title are from the Kindle edition of the book “A Peace to End All Peace” by David Fromkin. Page numbers which include the title “The Prize” come from the Google Play version of the book “The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power” by Daniel Yergin. Page numbers which include the title “The Young Turks in Opposition” come from the Google Play version of the book “The Young Turks in Opposition” by M. Sukru Hanioglu. Page numbers which include the title “Preparation for a Revolution” come from the Google Play version of the book “Preparation for a Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902-1908” by M. Sukru Hanioglu. Kindle Locations which include the title “A Brief History” come from the Kindle edition of the book “A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire” by M. Sukru Hanioglu. References which include the phrase “The Times” come from the newspaper The Times of London. Page numbers which include the title “OSS in China” come from the book “OSS in China: Prelude to Cold War” by Maochun Yu. Page numbers which include the title “Legacy of Ashes” come from the book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” by Tim Weiner.

As a final note, if anyone would translate this article into Arabic (or any other language) and post it all over the Internet I would be forever grateful.

Links

Part 1: Introduction

A friend once asked David Fromkin to explain to him why the Middle East has, over the years, had to endure so many tragedies. The book “A Peace to End All Peace” is his answer to that question. The title of the book was derived from a quote by Field Marshal Earl Wavell, who once said, “After ‘the war to end war’ they seem to have been pretty successful in Paris at making a ‘Peace to end Peace.’”

For centuries, the Ottomans ruled the Middle East. But after “the war to end war,” otherwise known as World War I, Europe dissolved the Ottoman Empire and fundamentally reshaped the region. In his book, Fromkin argues that those changes caused the misery and suffering that now engulf the people who live there. For him, the settlement which ended the war “does not belong entirely or even mostly to the past; it is at the very heart of current wars, conflicts, and politics in the Middle East.” (Page 565) The conflict between Israel and the Arabs, the civil war in Lebanon, the hijackings, the assassinations, the massacres throughout the region, all these atrocities can all be traced back to the end of World War I, according to Fromkin. (Page 9)

Part 2: A Trojan Horse

Whoever won the war could annex territory from the countries who lost. That meant the British, after they won the war, could annex the Middle East, they could steal the world's largest supply of oil, if they could convince the Ottomans to become their enemy, if they could convince the Ottomans to form an alliance with their opponents, Germany and Austria. At the start of the war, they had Germany win a string of impressive victories against the Russians. The victories convinced the Ottomans that Germany would win the war, that they should ally themselves with the Germans as that would allow them to annex territory from Russia after the war ended. (Page 70)

Despite those victories, however, there were many Ottomans who were leery of joining the war at all. Some, like Djavid Bey, the Minister of Finance, argued his country could not afford to go to war. The country was bankrupt. (The Rupture With Turkey by The Times 12/11/14) The Ottomans had another reason for refusing to fight. Their recent history indicated they were not very good at it.

In the preceding years, the Ottomans had suffered a series of defeats at the hands of the Europeans. In 1911, Italy declared war on the Ottomans in the hopes of extracting Libya from them, a goal which Italy achieved. In the First Balkan War, which began in 1912, the Ottomans lost nearly all of their territory in Europe. With their empire disappearing before their eyes, the Ottomans decided they had to ally themselves with one of the Great Powers in order to ensure their survival. (Page 48) They first asked Britain for an alliance, then France, they even asked Russia, their mortal enemy, the country which had been trying to destroy them for the past 150 years. (Page 66) None of those countries were willing to form an alliance with them. (Page 49) With seemingly no where else to turn, the Ottomans formed an alliance with Germany.

The information released, the documents which describe how the Germans and the Ottomans would come to embrace each other, those documents are filled with holes and inconsistencies. It is impossible, based on what I have read, to definitely describe how and when their alliance was formed. But that does not mean an examination of the evidence is not worthwhile. The evidence proves, conclusively, that the Ottomans were both pushed into the alliance by the actions of Britain and they were pulled into the alliance by the actions of the Germans themselves. Not only did Britain refuse to form an alliance with the Ottomans, Britain did everything in her power to provoke them, to push them away, into the hands of the Germans. The Germans, meanwhile, did everything they could to entice the Ottomans, to force the Ottomans to join the war on their side. The Germans and the English were two heads of the European monster, whose actions were meant to force the Ottomans into forming an alliance with Germany, an alliance which would destroy their empire.

Part 3: The Young Turks

The rapid advances made by Europe during the Industrial Revolution had, by the late 19th century, left the Ottomans in a precarious position. They were far behind their European competitors. They were in danger of losing their empire, of being swallowed up by Europe. The Ottomans realized they needed to learn how to modernize their country from the Europeans. They sent their students to Paris to study. (Page 6 of The Young Turks in Opposition) The Ottomans wanted their students to learn how to reproduce European technologies and nothing more. But the French taught them something else. Once in Paris, some of the students formed oppositions groups dedicated to overthrowing the Ottoman government. The most prominent of these groups was the Young Turks, otherwise known as the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP). In 1908, they managed to seize power and overthrow the Ottoman sultan.

It is ironic, and perhaps not even a coincidence, that the Young Turks executed their revolution in 1908, the same year in which Ford produced its first Model T. Perhaps Britain knew how revolutionary that car was, knew that the Middle East had an ocean of oil buried beneath it, and forced the Young Turks into action, knowing that the Young Turks would destroy what they vowed to save.

William Morton Fullerton, an American journalist in Paris who had watched the Young Turks for a decade prior to the revolution, predicted that they would “wreck their country” in three years time after assuming power. (Page 24 of Preparation for a Revolution) The Young Turks did indeed destroy their country, though it took them a bit longer than Fullerton thought.

Part 4: The War

At the start of 1915, the British attacked the Dardanelles. At that time, the Ottoman forces there were dangerously low on ammunition. Some of their gunboats only had enough ammo to fire for a single minute. (Page 134) The British began their attack on February 19. (Page 134) The Ottomans ran out of ammo a month later. (Page 151) But right as that happened, the British commanders at the Dardanelles decided to halt their attack and wait for the army to arrive. (Page 153) Winston Churchill was in disbelief. He knew the Ottomans had run out of ammo. Everyone knew that. He wanted to force the navy to resume their attack. But the decision was not his to make. The decision belonged to the prime minister, who sided with those who wanted to wait. (Page 153) And so they waited.

Part 5: The Settlement

At the peace conference, when it came to the Middle East, the French foreign minister declared there were “only two parties whose interests had seriously to be considered and reconciled, namely, Great Britain and France.” The British foreign minister agreed. (Page 400) As for the people of the Middle East, their wishes and desires, their hopes and their dreams were ignored.

America wanted the British to ask the people of Iraq for their opinions, for their ideas on how to reconstitute the Iraqi government. But the British replied that there was no way of asking the Iraqis for their opinions. (Page 450) Muslims were outraged.

“You said in your declaration that you would set up a native government drawing its authority from the initiative and free choice of the people concerned, yet you proceed to draw up a scheme without consulting anyone,” said one leading Arab political figure in Baghdad. “It would have been easy for you to take one or two leading men in your councils and this would have removed the reproach which is levelled against your scheme.” (Page 451)

Asking Muslims for their opinions would have been a waste of time. The British already had a plan for recreating the Middle East, a plan which they knew Muslims would hate.

Part 6: Conclusion

There are three narratives for World War I. One narrative, which is told by most historians, including Fromkin, is premised on two ideas. The first idea is called Hanlon’s Razor which says, “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” When applied to World War I, it means that the actions taken by Britain, which destroyed the Middle East, were not intended to have that effect. Those actions were simply mistakes. The British were not evil. They were stupid.

The second idea comes from a quote by Blaise Pascal, who once said, “Cleopatra's nose, had it been shorter, the whole face of the world would have been changed.” According to this idea, the course of history is determined by random events such as the length of someone’s nose, the assassination of the Archduke of Austria, and a monkey who bit the King of Greece.

The second narrative for the war comes from Britain, who argues that Jews secretly controlled the world. This narrative is believed by many on the Internet and by many people who live outside the West. Iran, for example, often blames the misfortunes of Muslims on Zionists, though when they say Zionists, they are referring to Jews, not Britons.

The third narrative is the one I have argued here, that the war was a conspiracy hatched by Britain, a conspiracy to steal the world’s largest supply of oil, a conspiracy to destroy the Muslim world, a conspiracy to prevent Muslims from reaping the benefits of their naturally abundant resources.

Now let’s determine which narrative seems most likely to be true.

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

The Park report

“If the O.S.S. is permitted to continue with its present organization, it may do further serious harm to citizens, business interests, and national interests of the United States.”
– Colonel Park (Part II, Page 1)

Five months before Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt authorized the creation of a new intelligence agency, the Office of the Coordinator of Information. William Donovan was put in charge of this agency. During the war, the name of this organization would change to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS).

A few months before the war ended, Colonel Richard Park Jr. wrote a blistering report about the agency. The report contains three parts and three appendices.

Secret Intelligence / Secret Operations

Appendix III contains an outline of the activities performed by OSS. This is the outline:
  1. Secret Intelligence
    1. Liaison with undergrounds, minority groups, and subversive groups in various countries throughout the world.
    2. Espionage.
    3. Interception (radio, telegraph, telephone, etc.).
    4. Dark chamber (cryptanalysis).
  2. Secret Operations
    1. Sabotage.
    2. Subversive activities.
    3. Subversive propaganda.
  3. Research and Analysis
  4. Counterintelligence
  5. Propaganda, counterpropaganda and miscellaneous activities
For me, the most interesting part of the outline is section 1a and section 2. I recently read a book about OSS (the book is called OSS in China: Prelude to Cold War). The book mentioned that OSS engaged in secret intelligence and special operations, but the author never defined those terms. While I was reading the book, I kept wondering what was involved in special operations and secret intelligence. I tried to find a definition for these terms on the Internet but I couldn’t find a satisfactory answer there either. This outline provides the answer (I assume secret operations is another name for special operations).

After reading this outline, I came to the conclusion that I had a hard time finding a proper definition for these terms because the government does not want the public to know what these terms mean. The government, I presume, rarely if ever has defined those terms publicly. That is why it is hard to find an accurate definition for those terms on the Internet. Why the government was willing to declassify this document is something of a mystery to me.

From section 1a and section 2, we can deduce that secret intelligence and special operations involves using subversive groups, including minorities, to destabilize other governments. Over the years, the Chinese government has often complained that the West is using minorities like the Tibetans and the Uyghurs to stir up trouble for them. And based on this outline, they are probably correct. Such activities apparently fall under the category of secret intelligence and special operations.

The Park report, however, does not talk about how OSS tried to use minority groups to attack other countries. Instead, the report mostly depicts OSS as an agency that had no idea what they were doing.

Incompetent

“One Assistant Secretary of State said the O.S.S. has made mistakes which not even the Boy Scouts could be guilty of had they entered this field.”
– Colonel Park (Appendix I, Page 18)

As an example, Park cited the techniques OSS used to deliver money to the field. These techniques “were so amateurish that they tipped off the Gestapo and other intelligence agencies, pointing the way to O.S.S. agents in the field with the result that they were either apprehended or kept under close surveillance and fed false information.” (Appendix I, Page 21)

In Lisbon, OSS agents tried to infiltrate the Office of the Japanese Naval Attaché. They did such a lousy job some speculated that they were double agents working for Japan. The Japanese became worried about American intelligence activities in Lisbon and changed their code books. Until then, America had been able to decode Japanese messages. But after the switch, America could not decode Japanese messages for ten weeks. (Appendix I, Page 28)

“How many American lives in the Pacific represent the cost of this stupidity on the part of the O.S.S. is unknown,” said one American official. (Appendix I, Page 28)

While in Bucharest, Donovan lost his briefcase which contained important papers. Apparently, the briefcase was seized by a Romanian dancer during a party. The dancer later gave the briefcase to the Gestapo. (Appendix I, Page 26)

At a restaurant in Istanbul, four foreigners were sitting at a table. One of them was known to be a member of the Gestapo. An OSS officer, who came uninvited, sat down at that table and began talking about his job at OSS. (Appendix I, Page 26)

One army officer declared that OSS activities in India were beyond belief. In Bombay, a Chinese girl, Mabel Wong, was working for OSS. The army officer discovered that she was a Japanese agent. She was collecting information from an OSS official who would later abscond with $40,000 of OSS money. When the army officer told another OSS official about this situation, he was told to mind his own business. (Appendix II, Page 8)

The army officer noticed that Japanese agents were scrutinizing the OSS office in Bombay. He recommended that a security survey be performed on the site. But OSS declared that such an idea was asinine. He asked if he could tell military intelligence about what was going on. But OSS declined his request, saying that a dereliction on their part would make OSS look good. (Appendix II, Page 8)

Entertainment

OSS spent a considerable amount of money on entertainment. In order to befriend the various Allied intelligence agencies in Bombay, OSS “threw a big party” in a hotel suite. They invited so many people that they could not all fit inside the suite. So they moved the party to the local OSS office.

“The party was evidently a real orgy as source reports no work was performed at the office for the following three days," said Park. (Appendix I, Page 13)

OSS India distributed $25,000 worth of liquor to Allied intelligence agencies in exchange for information. This was necessary because those agencies “held the O.S.S. in utter contempt and would not give them any data except in exchange for liquor, hosiery or lipsticks.” (Appendix I, Page 13)

Communists among us

“The Communist element in O.S.S. is believed to be of dangerously large proportions.”
– Colonel Park (Part II, Page 1)

Allegedly, one of the doctors at an OSS facility in Virginia was a Soviet agent. (Appendix I, Page 2) Another OSS official, Leonard E. Mins, worked for Communist International. In 1943, Congressman Martin Dies declared publicly that Mins was a Communist. But OSS didn’t remove him until three months later. (Appendix II, Page 10)

Alexander Barmine defected from the Red Army and joined OSS. He provided OSS with the names of Communist moles who had infiltrated the agency. But instead of taking action against those moles, OSS fired Barmine. (Appendix II, Page 8)

When the Soviets arrived in Sofia, a newspaper reporter, Charles Lanius, publicly declared that he was a member of the American Secret Service and he provided the Soviets with the names of his men and his associates. He was an OSS official. (Appendix II, Page 7)

Cover blown

You can guess what was the result of all this incompetence. In Spain, the Gestapo uncovered the names of virtually all the OSS agents there. (Appendix II, Page 7) In Portugal, they claimed to know about all OSS activities throughout the country. (Appendix II, Page 7) In Romania and Bulgaria, either the Soviets or the British knew the identity of all the local OSS agents. (Appendix II, Page 7) In Istanbul, Turkish police had a dossier on all the OSS officials there. (Appendix II, Page 8) In Stockholm, the Swedish Secret Police knew about the identities and activities of all OSS personnel. (Appendix II, Page 11)

…and executed

OSS incompetence led to the death of many allies. In Austria, three OSS agents met with six leading members of the underground. Later that day, the Gestapo arrested those six Austrians and executed them. (Appendix I, Page 25) In Turkey, despite repeated warnings, OSS used a well-known Hungarian double agent to deliver a radio set to Colonel Kadar, a member of the Hungarian opposition. Subsequently, the colonel was arrested and executed. (Appendix I, Page 26)

Personnel selection

Much of this incompetence was likely the result of hiring unqualified people. Colonel Ellery Huntington was the OSS security officer. He was a former corporate lawyer who had no experience in intelligence. (Appendix I, Page 5) Colonel John Haskell was the OSS Chief of Moscow. He too had no background in intelligence and had “the reputation of being a naïve person.” (Appendix II, Page 7)

Rather than hire the most qualified person, in many instances OSS hired the relatives of current OSS employees, including the wives of Colonel Goodfellow and Colonel Huntingon. Neither of them had any experience, but both received excellent positions. Most of the members of Donovan’s law firm acquired important positions in OSS. The social director of the St. Regis Hotel became a Lieutenant Colonel in OSS (Donovan lived in that hotel). (Appendix I, Page 31)

Method to the madness

Though Colonel Park argues that OSS was merely incompetent, in many cases, I believe their “mistakes” were intentional. Consider that party in Bombay. OSS may have used that party to gather intelligence. If so, it would not be the only time OSS pulled a stunt like this.

In Washington, OSS asked a widow with "unusual social connections" if she would host parties for them. OSS would pay for the parties and would pay her a salary. They would tell her who to invite. During the parties, she would try to extract information from those people. (Appendix I, Page 14)

OSS probably made the party in Bombay a “real orgy” by giving their guests alcohol. Once they were intoxicated, their guests would lose their inhibitions and spill their secrets. OSS may have intentionally invited too many guests. Perhaps they wanted an excuse to move the party to their office. I would bet their office was wired with recording equipment which allowed them to record the naughty behavior of their guests. Later on, OSS could use the recording to extort them. Unless their guests did what OSS wanted, OSS would release the recording to the public.

This kind of extortion is relatively common. For example, in China, Zhang Rongkun, the chairman of Fuxi Investment Holdings, had sexually explicit videos of the officials he bribed. (cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=06SHANGHAI6957) Most likely, he made these tapes to protect himself. If the government went after him, he could use the tapes to strike back.

The communist infiltration of OSS was probably not accidental either. Remember, for most of the war, the Soviets were allied with the West. As such, allowing the Soviets access to our secrets was probably part of the alliance. In China, OSS secretly supported the communists. The West wanted the communists to emerge victorious after the war, not because America supported communism, but because the West wanted China to have an ideology different from our own. That allowed the West to isolate China after the war. I wrote an article about this subject, in case you are interested: (www.twitlonger.com/show/jpoov3).

British control

“O.S.S. is hopelessly compromised to foreign governments, particularly the British. Further questioning of British intelligence authorities will evince nothing but praise because the O.S.S. is like putty in their hands and they would be reluctant to forfeit a good tool.”
– Colonel Park (Part II, Page 1)

The connection between OSS and Britain started at the top with Donovan. He frequently interacted with prominent Englishmen, including Winston Churchill. He once declared that OSS owed its existence to (1) Churchill and (2) Roosevelt. (Appendix II, Page 4)

Britain had their men planted throughout OSS. One OSS official, Patrick A. Meade, was a British citizen who spent 16 years in the British Army. (Appendix II, Page 4) Another OSS official, Lieutenant Adams, worked as a British agent in San Francisco for five years. (Appendix II, Page 4) A third OSS official, Victor Oswald, was a citizen of Switzerland. He was also a British agent. (Appendix II, Page 3) OSS put a British officer, Lieutenant Colonel Coffey, in charge of their Calcutta office. He recruited positive intelligence agents for East Asia. He forwarded economic and political information to OSS and to the local British authorities. (Appendix II, Page 3) The British infiltration of OSS was so pervasive that the Czechs considered OSS and British intelligence as one entity. (Appendix II, Page 3)

OSS New York

Britain had a very close relationship with the OSS office in New York. That office was located on the same floor as the alleged headquarters of British secret intelligence in America (which was the British Passport Central Office). This made it easy for the British to keep tabs on everyone who visited the OSS in New York. (Appendix II, Page 6)

Britain used this situation to their advantage when a prominent Frenchman met with Mr. Hughes, the Chief of the OSS New York office. This Frenchman wanted to hand over a set of important documents to OSS. But Britain was placing him under considerable duress. He declared that OSS should not tell the British about what he was doing. But the following day, British intelligence contacted him and told him that they knew all about his meeting with Hughes. (Appendix II, Page 6)

The access OSS provided to Britain was not reciprocated.

One way street

“While the O.S.S. knows details about normal British intelligence, it knows very little about British secret intelligence. On the other hand, the British are believed to know everything about the O.S.S. and exercise quite a good deal of control over the O.S.S.”
– Colonel Park (Appendix II, Page 1)

In Cairo, the British knew the names of all OSS personnel while OSS only knew the identity of non-secret intelligence British personnel. (Appendix II, Page 1) In France, the British participated in all OSS secret intelligence activities. However, Britain did not tell their OSS counterparts about their secret intelligence activities in the country. (Appendix II, Page 2) In Spain and Portugal, due to an agreement made in 1943, Britain knew the identities of all OSS agents in those countries. What's more, before they arrived on the peninsula, those agents were trained in London. And after they were deployed, they stayed in close contact with British intelligence. On the other hand, Britain only told OSS the names of a few of their agents.  And OSS may have already known the identities of those agents beforehand through their counterintelligence work. (Appendix II, Page 2)

Examples of control

The Park report contained several examples of how Britain controlled OSS. Though OSS wanted to locate one of their headquarters in Algiers, Britain convinced them to remain in London. (Appendix II, Page 2) OSS wanted to build a worldwide secret intelligence radio network. But the plan was abandoned due to pressure from the British “who desired to control all S.I. radio communications.” (Appendix I, Page 17)

By controlling OSS, that allowed Britain to use OSS to gather information about America. According to Park, there were “numerous cases in New York where the British desired certain economic or commercial information in postal censorship and requested the O.S.S. to obtain it for them.” (Appendix II, Page 5) As an example, he cited a case where Britain failed to convinced Washington to give them certain documents whereupon Britain had the OSS New York office retrieve the documents for them. (Appendix II, Page 5)


Negative impacts

Park listed several cases where Britain used its control of OSS to undermine America. In one case, an OSS officer, Captain Temple Fielding, who was stationed in Yugoslavia, had a British chauffeur. This chauffeur traveled with Fielding wherever he went until one day when he disappeared.

“Shortly thereafter, according to an unbelievable report from an authentic source, the British tried to have Fielding seized and hanged,” said Park. “He managed to escape to an O.S.S. base in Italy where he pleaded with U.S. authorities to take action in his behalf. The British put such pressure on the O.S.S. that he was removed to a hospital ship, locked up and listed as a mental case. He was released shortly after his arrival in the U.S.” (Appendix II, Page 5)

OSS appointed foreigners to key positions, positions which allowed them to influence policies and access personnel and intelligence information. Many of them worked for foreign companies that competed with American companies. For example, F. A. Guepin was the Chief of OSS in the Near East and a manager at Shell Oil. (Appendix I, Page 20)

“He has jokingly confided in friends that all American businessmen in that area who joined the O.S.S. will never live it down and that many of them who have resigned and are no longer with O.S.S. are still pointed out by the British and other nationals as U.S. secret agents," said Park. "Their business careers and the progress of their U.S. companies are likely to be handicapped to the advantage of the British and the Dutch.”

In Cairo, the government paroled all anti-Fascist prisoners except for one - the manager of an American oil company. According to Park, he was not “paroled because of the influence of the O.S.S. and its Shell Oil non-American executive.” (Appendix I, Page 20)

The Middle East was divided into separate areas. Either the British or OSS would operate within a given area. The British gave themselves by far the better area to operate in. (Appendix II, Page 3)

At one point during the war OSS contemplated separating itself from the British “but it was difficult to understand how this could be accomplished as the British were believed to know almost without exception the name, location, cover, and assignment of O.S.S. agents throughout the world.” (Appendix II, Page 7)

You may be wondering if British control of American intelligence continued after the war. During the war, Allen Dulles was the Chief of OSS in Switzerland. According to Park, he was “strongly influenced” by Royall Tyler, another OSS official who also happened to be a British secret agent. (Appendix II, Page 2) After the war, Dulles served as the director of the CIA from 1953 to 1961.

In 2010, the British House of Commons issued a report called “Global Security: UK-US Relations.” (www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmfaff/114/11402.htm) In that report, the House of Commons declared that Britain still enjoyed a “special relationship” with American intelligence.

British motives

It seems unlikely that all OSS incompetence was intentional on their part. Remember, their incompetence led to the death of many of our allies. Had America known the extent of their stupidity, we might have shut down the agency. To prevent that from happening, British intelligence gave OSS credit for activities they did not perform. (Appendix II, Page 1) As long as OSS was still around, Britain could control U.S. secret intelligence activities.

One Briton said his country was having a hard time building up the reputation of OSS because their agents were so incompetent. (Appendix II, Page 1) That is ironic because Britain trained those agents to begin with. Many of them were trained at Camp X, a British training facility located in Ontario. One might think that Britain should have done a better job of training them. As long as those agents were acting so foolishly, Britain was running the risk of having America close OSS and replacing them with an organization that Britain could not control.

So why did Britain make OSS so stupid? This is my theory. Britain had three reasons.

Reason #1:

As long as they were idiots, Britain could control where OSS operated. For example, due to its many blunders, OSS was prohibited from sending their agents into European enemy territory. Britain was given the exclusive right to send their agents into that region. (Appendix I, Page 39) So to prevent OSS from operating in a certain area, Britain would somehow inform Allied command of all the blunders committed by OSS in that area. And to prevent America from shutting down OSS entirely, Britain gave OSS credit for achievements they were not responsible for.

Reason #2:

Britain probably wanted OSS to hire idiots because idiots are easily manipulated. If you want someone to do something stupid, you’d better ask an idiot to do it. A smart person would refuse your request.

Reason #3:

Perhaps most importantly, if Britain taught OSS everything they knew, if OSS officials weren't stupid, then OSS would not need Britain.

Same old, same old

Though nearly seven decades have passed since the end of the war, when it comes to the relationship between American and British intelligence, much remains the same. After the war, and after several name changes, OSS would emerge as the CIA. The CIA is still much more visible then any other intelligence agency. You will often see former CIA agents talk to the media (e.g. Robert Grenier, Michael Scheuer, Robert Baer, Christopher Johnson, John Stockwell, Bruce Riedel, Glenn Carle, Marc Sageman, Reuel Marc Gerecht).

By contrast, I only know about one British intelligence official, David Shayler. Britain prosecuted him for handing over classified documents to the Mail on Sunday. In Britain, it is a crime, it is a violation of the Official Secrets Act to divulge secrets even if doing so is in the public interest. This is almost certainly why so little is known about British intelligence. And the law is a gigantic red flag which shows that the actions of British intelligence are extremely illegal.

Still to this day, CIA has at best a questionable reputation. Though conservatives may have a positive view of the CIA, amongst the left, the CIA is hated. And that’s in America. Overseas, the CIA’s reputation is much worse. Much less is known about British intelligence. For the most part, when one thinks of British intelligence, the only thing that comes to mind is James Bond. Ironically, Ian Fleming, the author of James Bond, was trained at Camp X, which suggest that James Bond is nothing more than a publicity stunt for British intelligence. Notice that British intelligence has a good reputation while the reputation of American intelligence is mixed at best.

Reason for the Park report

A copy of the Park report was given to President Truman. The report provided Truman with the justification he needed to close OSS, which he did on September 20, 1945 when he signed an executive order which dissolved OSS and moved its components into other agencies. But that was not the end of the story. The remnants of OSS were placed in an agency called the Strategic Services Unit (SSU) which would later become part of the CIA. In the end, the order to dissolve OSS resulted in little more than a name change.

So why the theatrics? Why did America have Colonel Park write a report which justified the closure of OSS when, in the end, they only shifted its functions to a new agency, the CIA? During the war, OSS made an agreement with the Chinese Nationalists. The agreement was called the Sino-American Technical Cooperative Organization Treaty. The agreement prohibited OSS from operating independently of the Nationalists in China. America hated this agreement. By closing OSS, that allowed America to weasel its way out of the agreement (because the agreement was made with OSS). America needed the agreement during the war, as the agreement provided the foundation for cooperation between the Nationalists and America against Japan. However, once the war was over, America wanted to rid itself of the agreement’s restraints and so America dissolved OSS. But needless to say, American intelligence did not stop meddling in China once OSS was closed. For more information on SACO, the Park report, and OSS involvement in China, read the book OSS in China: Prelude to Cold War (the part that deals with the Park report and the closure of OSS is contained in Chapter 12).

And in case you believe the problems with American intelligence aren’t a big deal because they only screw up things overseas, consider this.

The New Gestapo

“General Donovan made a proposal for the organization of a new secret world-wide intelligence agency which would control all other U.S. intelligence agencies. It has all the earmarks of a Gestapo system.”
– Colonel Park (Part II, Page 2)

Even before the creation of the CIA, OSS was running “what many claim to be an American Gestapo.” (Appendix I, Page 27) In 1943, OSS added another 1,000 officers, 3,000 enlisted men, and 5,000 Women’s Army Corps (WAC) members to their ranks. A third of these officials would operate in America. One OSS agent declared that these officials would work as a sort of U.S. Gestapo. They would have the power to penetrate every government agency, trade union, and large corporation in America. (Appendix I, Page 27) During the war, many officials who worked for different agencies in Washington publicly declared that they were OSS agents. For example, Pierre Crenier, an official at the Board of Economic Warfare, declared that he was an OSS agent and that OSS had planted their agents throughout the government. (Appendix I, Page 28)

The British weren’t the only ones who infiltrated America. Donovan invited the French Secret Service and officers from Belgium to operate in the western hemisphere. This allowed the French to gain a foothold here. (Appendix II, Page 11)


“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
– George Washington

(walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/02/what_to_read_this_fourth_of_july_weekend)

The Park Report

Parts 1 to 3:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjM2o1Nm9YTk5ibTQ/edit?usp=sharing

Appendix I (Page 1 to 10):
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjMWVNQnVwd2tEbzA/edit?usp=sharing

Appendix I (Page 11 to 20):
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjMGNXcWlzNGNJcFU/edit?usp=sharing

Appendix I (Page 21 to 30):
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjb3hfVVFWeGd4ajA/edit?usp=sharing

Appendix I (Page 31 to 40):
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjUnE1VWpMZ2JrV0U/edit?usp=sharing

Appendix II:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjQ1ZBUldTa0dxcVU/edit?usp=sharing

Appendix III:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BI_OoKPhKjZ2EtQVlReXFKRjA/edit?usp=sharing