Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955
File 033
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 033. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 29, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/32.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 033. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/32

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 033, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 29, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/32.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. IV, No. 9, October 1955
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date unknown
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 4 1955; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States
Item Description
Title File 033
Transcript by constitutional means, and make it slick. We took for granted that resistance to Communist attack would remain our national policy. If the President had staled what was official policy, what could hinder us from following the new course? We did not believe the one essential fact—the colleetivist, global. pro-Soviet elite never quits. It only goes underground, until the conflict is forgotten. Then it surfaces again, ready for action, while we sleep. It puts on a new cover of pro- Americanism, but it is unchanged. From 1947 to today the colleetivist elite has let the pro-Americans win the public victories, but it has promptly pulverized the true American policies in secret. It may help to call the globalist-collec- tivist-pro-Russian group the Acheson group. We are, however, dealing with something much stronger than personalities. Forrestal is dead, but his policy has been revived again and again. Acheson is gone, but the evil that he did lives after him. The important point is that we did not have a united American government which could, after debate, set a final American policy. We had two centers of policymaking competing for mastery. The globalists made no attempt to attack or debate the Forrestal policy of rearming. They set out secretly to undermine it, so tbat it would sink slowly, silently into the ground, and collapse in a heap of dust. As soon as they thought it safe their tame columnists began to beat the drums. Their friends in the State Department and other government agencies came forward piously with their loaded proposals—always under a carefully innocent surface, proposals to sabotage hard mililarv resistance and go back to the Teheran-Yalta policies. You know what happened to Forrestal. You may not remember what happened to his successor. Louis Johnson. He tried desperately with reduced appropriations, to gel American military forces in readiness in 1950. A few weeks after the Korean war began, the columnists who worked wilh the elite began a bitter attack on him. He was let oul summarily. He learned from the newspapermen of his replacement by General Marshall. On the foreign-policy front thc colleetivist one-worlders diverted the Truman doctrine for hard military aid "gainst communism into Ihe Marshall plan for economic aid for people in the line of march of thc Communisl legions. ' have said again and again thai the Marshall plan was Greek-Turkish aid with ils claws pulled. It could roar fiercely at Soviet Russia but never burl ". In fail, il was selling the table for Stalin, enriching the countries the Soviel Union intended to take without conquest. Was President Truman to blame for abandonment of the hard Truman doctrine and ils replacement by the soft policy of economic aid? I do not say so. So long as two competing centers of power battle for control of the American government, any President is nearly helpless. The elite was stronger than President Roosevelt. It was stronger than President Truman. Early in 1952, in describing the Colossus on the Potomac, I said I did not want President Truman to head up such powers. I did not want any Democratic President to bead up sucb powers, and I did not want any Republican President to head up such powers. Neither am I criticizing the Demo- eieeiii- party. This supraconstitutional elite is stronger than any American political party. Slowly our security deteriorated on every front. In June, 1948, Senator Vandenberg bad introduced the resolution authorizing a regional pact with European nations. He did not suspect this was one of the interchangeable purls in lhe plan for NATO. Our security was tied to nations in which nearly one-third of the electors voted Communist, and where the trade unions, seaports, rail lines, and other services were under tight Communist control. Secretary Acheson drew a line in the Pacific leaving Korea to the Communist Empire. Our troops were withdrawn and Formosa was solemnly excluded from the territory necessary to make the Pacific a peaceful lake, and to keep the west coasl of the United States secure. When the Communists struck in Korea, the collectivisl one-worlders talked victory but they set oul secretly to undermine it, to belittle it, to tie it up in a legal maze. You remember the steps. The one-worlders put our troops under the United Nations, but the UN included Soviet Russia and her satellites. They pretended we were fighting the war in Korea for Korea, though the war actually was for all Asia, and it should have been fought on lhe territory of thc real enemy—Red China. The elile di- verted badly needed American troops to Europe in spile of bitter opposition in Congress. Then when victory was in sight, thev agreed to a cease-fire on terms the Soviet LInion had proclaimed six months before. Our pro-American mililarv and naval officers pulled us oul of the cease-fire negotiations with honor. They refused lo return the anti-Communist Chinese prisoners of war to the Communists io be murdered like the hostages surrendered eil 'ledla. That success, however, was not to last. In December, 1952, at the UN, Krishna* Menon, in league with the American one- worlders, rewrote the cease-fire agreement and provided for a new brainwashing of the pitiful prisoners, so the Communists could be saved from the disgrace of losing most of the Chinese soldiers, who found a chance to get away. In the election of 1952 the American people voted overwhelmingly for pro- American foreign and military policies, but that meant nothing to the globalist elite. They went underground again. President Eisenhower replaced obsequious Joint Chiefs of Staff with a x igor- ous pro-American body. Secretary Wilson and the new Joint Chiefs set out to repair the damage from our "accordion" defense policy, which by running appropriations up and down has kept our military program in turmoil. President Eisenhower also rescinded the shameful order by which the 7th Fleet had been sent to defend the Red China coast against the Nationalist blockade. Peace was imminent in Korea. The American military were aware of our obligation to make sure the battle-lrard- encd Chinese armies in North Korea were not moved to another place on the chessboard, like Indochina, to capture more millions of human slaves. Americans breathed easy for the first time in many years. That was our mistake. It was the moment the elite were waiting for. The one-world collectivists knew thev could soon surface again, and reduce to dust the courageous policies of the Presidenl and lhe Joint Chiefs. In Berlin in February, 195 I. the Red Chinese were given de facto recognition as the legal government of China, on equal footing with the United States. The siege of Dien Bien Phu, which had some of the earmarks of a planned disaster, focused the world's attention on thc difficulties of jungle fighting. In a theatrical atmosphere of defeat the Western nalions surrendered at Geneva half of the richest section of Asia, the military key to the South Pacific. Our military were caught napping. Suddenly ihey talked of entering the Indochinese war by sending Americans to fight on the soil of Indochina. The onh Bound strategy would have been to equip both the South Koreans and the Nationalists to the highest point of efficiency and then say to Red China— "'The instant ibere is a Communist uprising in Indochina, the Koreans and Nationalists will move in on your railroads and airfields." We can have confidence in the patriotism and intelligence of our military men. lt was from them 1 learned of the pitiful transportation lines from North to South (Continued on Page 34) Facts forum news, Oetabtr, 1955 Page 31
File Name uhlib_1352973_v004_n009_033.jpg