YouTube In the following 5-part interview at YouTube from the 15th of March, 2010, Dr. Alan Sabrosky, PhD, the former director of studies at the US Army War College, talks to Phil Tourney about Dr Sabrosky’s most recent article, “The Dark Face Of Jewish Nationalism”. Dr Sabrosky says that the military brass now know that Israel and traitors within the US were behind the attacks of 9/11.
Transcript of Dr. Alan Sabrosky interview, March 15, 2010.
Mark Glenn: Dr. Sabrosky, welcome to the programme.
Dr. Alan Sabrosky: Thank you very much, Mark. A pleasure to be here.
MG: Well, believe me, the pleasure is ours. As I said, this article that you wrote this week – there are very few articles that really catch my attention these days, as you can understand, Dr. Sabrosky, because there’s just so much information out there and so many people talking. But this one particularly caught my interest and held my interest throughout the duration of reading this article – which I will be reading here in just a minute. But before I jump into that I’m just going to go ahead and give you the floor here, and let you say some things that I think need to be said.
AS: Mark, we had talked about this earlier and, you know, my feelings are that I’m perfectly willing to debate issues with anyone on any subject. Most of us have different views of things and none of us, I think, believes we have the entire truth for ourselves. Anyone who does is a fool.
On the subject that I wrote this time, it caught my attention as well because if there is anything that is more significant it is loyalty: loyalty to country, loyalty to people, loyalty to constitution. And to my displeasure and my shame – because I have some Jewish relatives, none of whom are Zionist – a large majority of American Jews give their allegiance to a foreign country. They may have American citizenship, but their allegiance is to Israel. And as I said in the piece, this is a form of political bigamy which is every bit as dishonest as marital bigamy. I’m not married now, but when I was, loyalty to my spouse was absolute. It has to be there. I could look and say, “Aha! there is Farrah Fawcett,” and I could admire someone out there but I didn’t give that person my allegiance. There’s a difference between admiring from a distance and giving allegiance to that thing. And it’s the same with a country.
Some of my [American] relatives are German, some are Irish, and all of them have a measure of allegiance to those cultures, but it’s not a political allegiance. It’s a social allegiance. It’s like, “We’re gonna stand up on St Patrick’s Day,” or “We’re gonna stand up on Oktoberfest,” or “We’re gonna celebrate this,” and we’re proud of being German, or Irish, or whatever it happens to be. But none of us gives our allegiance to Ireland or to Germany. Jews do. And if we don’t say it – I don’t care if we’re called anti-Semites or not – if we don’t stand up and say, “Truth is truth, their allegiance is to a foreign country, they are traitors,” then we’re dishonest to ourselves.
MG: It would be one thing if they had allegiance to this foreign country, and this foreign country’s national interests mimicked ours – but this isn’t the case. The third leg of this chair here today is a man who experienced first-hand the fact that the national interests of this other country are not the same as the national interests of this country.
AS: But it’s even more than that, Mark. I’ve had a bitter argument with one of my Jewish cousins who moved to Israel and kept an American citizenship. If someone loves another country enough to go there: more power to them. They go, that’s it – they’re gone. But they keep the American citizenship so that they can continue to participate in our elections, stand in our offices – look at Rahm Emanuel: he served in the Israeli armed forces, not in the American armed forces, and he is easily the second most powerful person in this country – easily.
That’s treason. I will tell you right now: if Palestinians had the same influence in America I would oppose them in the same way. I don’t care what the country is, what the allegiance is, what matters to me is that if you are American, you love this country first, last, and that’s the end of it. And I don’t care if you’re Navy, Marine, whatever you are. Phil, you and I will probably agree on this and probably one of the few things that a Navy and Marine guy would agree on, but I think both of us would agree that loyalty to America is the only non-negotiable part of American citizenship.
Phil Tourney (USS Liberty Survivor): Absolutely, Alan, and I’ll tell you, you being a United States Marine, that is inbred in you, and being a Marine – semper fidelis, always faithful – you’re faithful to your country; and I’m sorry you had the argument with your cousin but you’re still faithful to your country and I understand exactly where you’re coming from.
Mark, I don’t think at the beginning of the show that you read the Doctor’s credentials off. I wish you would, because it means a lot, and it means a lot to me to hear them.
MG: Absolutely, and I will do that right now since I’m about to launch into reading this excellent article.
Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a graduate of the US Army War College.
Now, not only that – Dr. Sabrosky correct me if I’m wrong here – not only are you a graduate of the US Army War College, but you were a director of studies there for some period of time – is that correct?
AS: That’s correct. For five-and-a-half years.
MG: Five-and-a-half years as director of studies at the US Army War College. You know, of all the things that I would love to have trailing behind my name, Dr. Sabrosky, being the director of studies at the US Army War College would definitely be one of them.
AS: Thank you very much, I appreciate that.
MG: Alright, ladies and gentlemen, as much as it’s going to appear as if I’m acting as a school mom here in reading this article to you. Nevertheless, I’m going to do it. Not as an intellectually insulting gesture towards you – because I know you can all read very well – but I was so impressed with this article that I want it entered into the record here within the context of this conversation, and that’s the reason I’m going to read it.
Dated March 12th, 2010, by Dr. Alan Sabrosky:
The Dark Face of Jewish Nationalism
Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu once remarked to a Likud gathering that “Israel is not like other countries.” Oddly enough for him, that time he was telling the truth, and nowhere is that more evident than with Jewish nationalism, whether or not one pins the “Zionist” label on it.
Nationalism in most countries and cultures can have both positive and negative aspects, unifying a people and sometimes leading them against their neighbors. Extremism can emerge, and often has, at least in part in almost every nationalist/independence movement I can recall (e.g., the French nationalist movement had The Terror, Kenya’s had the Mau Mau, etc.).
But whereas extremism in other nationalist movements is an aberration, extremism in Jewish nationalism is the norm, pitting Zionist Jews (secular or observant) against the goyim (everyone else), who are either possible predator or certain prey, if not both sequentially. This does not mean that all Jews or all Israelis feel and act this way, by any means. But it does mean that Israel today is what it cannot avoid being, and what it would be under any electable government (a point I’ll develop in another article).
The differences between Jewish nationalism (Zionism) and that of other countries and cultures here I think are fourfold:
1. Zionism is a real witches’ brew of xenophobia, racism, ultra-nationalism, and militarism that places it way outside of a “mere” nationalist context — for example, when I was in Ireland (both parts) I saw no indication whatsoever that the PIRAs or anyone else pressing for a united Ireland had a shred of design on shoving Protestants into camps or out of the country, although there may well have been a handful who thought that way — and goes far beyond the misery for others professed by the Nazis;
2. Zionism undermines civic loyalty among its adherents in other countries in a way that other nationalist movements (and even ultra-nationalist movements like Nazism) did not — e.g., a large majority of American Jews, including those who are not openly dual citizens, espouse a form of political bigamy called “dual loyalty” (to Israel & the US) that is every bit as dishonest as marital bigamy, attempts to finesse the precedence they give to Israel over the US (lots of Rahm Emanuels out there who served in the IDF but NOT in the US armed forces), and has absolutely no parallel in the sense of national or cultural identity espoused by any other definable ethnic or racial group in America — even the Nazi Bund in the US disappeared once Germany and the US went to war, with almost all of its members volunteering for the US armed forces;
3. The “enemy” of normal nationalist movements is the occupying power and perhaps its allies, and once independence is achieved, normal relations with the occupying power are truly the norm, but for Zionism almost everyone out there is an actual or potential enemy, differing only in proximity and placement on its very long list of enemies (which is now America’s target list); and
4. Almost all nationalist movements (including the irredentist and secessionist variants) intend to create an independent state from a population in place or to reunite a separated people (like the Sudeten Germans in the 1930s) — it is very rare for it to include the wholesale displacement of another indigenous population, which is far more common of successful colonialist movements as in the US — and perhaps a reason why most Americans wouldn’t care too much about what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians even if they DID know about it, is because that is no different than what Europeans in North America did to the Indians/Native Americans here in a longer & more low-tech fashion.
The implications of this for Middle East peace prospects, and for other countries in thrall to their domestic Jewish lobbies or not, are chilling. The Book of Deuteronomy come to life in a state with a nuclear arsenal would be enough to give pause to anyone not bought or bribed into submission — which these days encompasses the US Government, given Israel’s affinity for throwing crap into the face of the Obama administration and Obama’s visible affinity for accepting it with a smile, Bibi Netanyahu’s own “Uncle Tom” come to Washington.
The late General Moshe Dayan, who — Zionist or not — remains an honored part of my own Pantheon of military heroes, allegedly observed that Israel’s security depended on its being viewed by others as a mad dog. He may have been correct. But he neglected to note that the preferred response of everyone else is to kill that mad dog before it can decide to go berserk and bite. It is an option worth considering.
MG: So writes Alan Sabrosky PhD, former director of studies at the U.S. Army War College.
Dr. Sabrosky, I cannot think of an article that I have read in recent memory that basically sums up the problem that we are dealing with right now as accurately and as succinctly as this essay that you have written. You have, for all intents and purposes, nailed this thing on the head. I guess the reason why I got so excited over this article, Dr. Sabrosky, is because one of things that I have noted about the problem that we’re dealing with – in terms of Zionism, the power of the Jewish lobby, and what-not – is that everything is shrouded in some type of confusion or mystery, and I think deliberately so. I think one of the biggest components to this powerful foreign interest being able to get as far as it has. I mean, let’s face it: it got away with attacking a United States ship for close to two hours killing 34 men – this was an act of war, they got away with it. Not only did they get away with it, they were rewarded with three-billion dollars a year minimum. When we look at the two wars that the United States finds herself in, and on the cusp of at least two others, and all of this for the benefit of a certain foreign country sitting on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea – they have been wildly successful at bringing all of this about and I think one of the main components of this is the fact that very few people really understand the nature of the problem – and I think that your article here basically lays out the problem, which is that when you have people that try to make this claim that they are loyal to America and, at the same time, loyal to a foreign government, it is a lie.
AS: It is, and it’s more than that, Mark. What we need to stand up and say is that not only did they attack the USS Liberty, they did 9/11. They did it.
I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Headquarters Marine Corps, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100% certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period.
You know, Phil, I don’t denigrate what happened to USS Liberty in the slightest – you understand that – but for most Americans what happened to the USS Liberty, or in Vietnam, was history. Now this is history. You know, they can be concerned about it, but they’re not going to get mad about it.
9/11 has led directly to 60,000 Americans dead and wounded, God knows how many hundreds of thousands of people in other countries that we’ve killed or wounded or made homeless, and it’s an on-going sore. It’s not your sore from the USS Liberty, it’s not my sore from Vietnam. Both of us have those, both of us care about. But this is an open wound. And what Americans need to understand is that they did it. They did it. And if they do understand that, Israel’s going to disappear. Israel will flat-ass disappear from this Earth.
I sent a film to one of my colleagues and it basically had Americans grieving over their dead coming back. And I showed one of them – it was a woman – just wrenched by grief over her dead soldier. And I said, you know, if Americans ever know that Israel did this, they’re gonna scrub them off the Earth, and they’re not gonna give a rat’s ass – forgive my language – what the cost is. They are not going to care. They will do it. And they should.
And they should.
PT: Alan, your article and your heart and your testimony and what you believe in is heart-wrenching to me. It is like our founding fathers, and their shadows, talking and saying, “We have to fix this, we have to make our own way, and we have to do it now, or we will go down.”
AS: Exactly. Absolutely, Phil. I agree fully.
PT: Your article needs to be shipped off to the library of congress immediately.
AS: Well, I can tell you it’s being read by some people in Headquarters Marine Corps and at the Army War College. I sent it off to them this past week and I’ve had some long discussions with people up there, and there’s some really, really unhappy people.
MG: What are they saying, if you can talk about that, Dr. Sabrosky?
AS: Astonishment. The first thing, Mark, is astonishment. They didn’t know. They truly didn’t know. And these are not unintelligent people. They really didn’t know.
And the next statement is rage. Real rage. And the Zionists are playing this as truly an all-or-nothing exercise, because if they lose this one, if the American people ever realize what happened, they’re done.
And I will tell you frankly – I don’t think either one of you has any Jewish ancestry. I do. You know, I have one grandparent who’s Jewish. As Phil Weiss from Mondoweiss were talking about it – he’s a Jewish guy who puts a lot of critical stuff out there on Israel – and I said for the Orthodox Rabbinate I’m not a Jew. For the Nazis, I’ve been there. And if this explodes, I’m gonna go down with the rest of them. And I know this. I flat-out know this. But if that was the price for making America whole again…
When I took my oath 51 years ago to the United States marine corps, no one promised us life. No one did. They promised us duty and loyalty and service – and maybe death. And that’s how they talked to us in 1959. I don’t think they talk to them that way anymore. But in 1959 they did, and if my death were a requirement for the saving of America – well, hell, I could’ve died in Vietnam. It’s my service, my country, my corps. And, Phil, it’s like you in the Navy: we signed onto this, and we love our service. And none of us wishes to die. Certainly I don’t. I don’t think either one of you guys do. But if that’s the price, then that’s the price I pay. I mean that.
PT: When you’re talking about Marines, I have the utmost respect and I know your duty to country. When the torpedo hit our ship and I opened up to scuttle, guess who I pulled out of there: a United States marine, named Bryce Lockwood. And he was holding on to another sailor and saved his life, and he received a silver star. God bless him for that.
And I understand wholeheartedly what’s in your heart, because I have it my heart. I didn’t learn it by becoming a sailor as such, but I learned it through the grace of God for saving our ship, I learned it through scholars like you, I’ve learned it through good friends like Mark Glenn and my shipmates – and I’ve learned it through actions of Israel. And when you struck me very, very hard just a second ago when you talked about 911. You’re very willing to say that, yeah, they did it: 911. Yes, they did. And, you know, my heart broke. And I saw that plane – the last one – go into the tower. And to see that… I mean, I know it’s in your heart, and Mark’s, and everybody else’s, to see your fellow Americans being slaughtered and murdered just as they did the USS Liberty. Alan, it is something that, if we don’t talk about it, if we don’t tell people about it – I believe God wants us to – and if we don’t: shame on us.
AS: I agree very much on that side, and I’ll tell you – I have a dream, as Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, and my dream is that the 5th and 6th US fleets take Israel and cream it.
And that’s the end of it.
MG: Just for the record, Dr. Sabrosky, it was about three years ago – and I can remember distinctly I was on a radio programme in the run-up to the reunion that Liberty guys were going to be having in DC – and I made a prediction on the air that I believed with all my heart at the time and I believe with all my heart now, but someday, some way – I don’t know exactly how it’s going to happen – I have my suspicions – but someday and some way, maybe a lot sooner than any of us realize, the United States is going to find herself at war with Israel. And I mean a real, live shooting war.
Now, technically speaking, we are at war with her because she is at war with us. She is out to destroy us. We just haven’t figured it out yet.
My personal prediction is that probably – again, sooner than any of us realize or would like to envision – Israel is going pull off another 9-11. She’s going to pull of another USS Liberty. Obviously, some pretty powerful people in some pretty prominent places, such as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen, believe this is a possibility because he cut short a trip he made to Europe a few years ago to hastily fly to Israel to meet with his counterpart and warn him in no uncertain terms how important it was that there not be another USS Liberty part two.
So, in as far as what you two fellows were just talking about, that we need to talk about this, I’m going to offer another theory here for discussion. We would already have had that 9/11 part two, or that USS Liberty part two – that would already have been a fait accompli were it not for the fact that a growing number of people have been talking about this problem since 9/11.
I think that Israel has been watching all of this and has been saying, “We need to kind of let things cool a little bit for now – if we try to pull another one off right now then that’s it: we’re going to blow our cover.”
AS: It’s not only a matter of blowing our cover. If Americans ever truly understand that – they’re history. It’ll be a bloody, brutal war – and they’re gone. I mean, it’s not even going to be a close contest. And they know that. What they understand, I think, as well, is that their leverage is on the political appointments. Their leverage is not in the uniformed services.
If you pick up the Army Times, or the Navy Times, or any of the journals of any of the services you’ve got a very different view than you get looking at the Congress and the White House. And the military has not been bought. The military is loyal but it has not been bought. And if it ever understands this – really, really, deeply understands this – and this is what I got when I put some of these things to the Army War College and to Headquarters Marine Corps – and I mentioned to a contact in Headquarters Marine Corps, I said, “You know they did 9/11…,” and it was, “You don’t mean it.” I said, “Absolutely”.
And if they ever understand that, these people are history.
MG: Well, now let me ask you something, Doctor, and obviously I understand that we need to protect the names of the innocent here-
AS: There are no innocent! [laughter]
PT: I agree.
MG: I’d like to know a little bit more about this. I mean, these conversations that you’re having with your colleagues who are still serving in uniform. What is the reaction on their part when you tell them things like this?
AS: First is disbelief, and what I show them immediately afterwards is an interview with a Danish demolitions expert named Danny Jowenko, and it shows the third building at the World Trade Center going down – WTC7. And they look at that, and I said, “Now you understand that if one of the buildings was wired for demolition, all of them were wired for demolition.” And that’s it. That’s the tipping point.
I mean, getting into arguments about who was flying what, and where they were, and whether there was nano-thermite – those things are true, but they’re incidental. The thing that’s necessary is to tell people: three buildings went down; the third was not hit by a plane, it was wired for controlled demolition, therefore, all of them were wired for controlled demolition. And at that point the reaction is rage. First disbelief, and then rage.
MG: Well, I’ve got to tell you, that I find to be very encouraging because based upon the cursory conversations I have with some military people – and I have to be real careful about what I say because you just don’t know what you’re walking into when you start a discussion of this type with one of them – based upon these cursory conversations that I’ve had with some of them, they’re clueless and they don’t want to here about it. They are loyal to the flag that is on their left sleeve as a patch, and the thought that the government could be in any way involved in any kind of high crimes and treason against the people of the United States is just unthinkable to them, so I’m glad to hear that there still is some grey matter and some patriotism left – at least in the circles where you travel, Dr. Sabrosky.
AS: Well, it’s not that they don’t want to hear it, it’s that don’t know of it. What I have done when I’ve presented it to these people and I said, “Just look at this – just look at this picture. I’m not going to give you an argument – just look at it.” And they look at the film and without exception they come back and they say, “They did it, didn’t they.” I said, “Yep – they did it.”
PT: Can I jump in here for a second – I just wanted to mention, talking about military people, some of the most distinguished military people that I’ve ever had the pleasure to be around… Admiral Thomas Moore, former Joint Chiefs of Staff which supported us completely in the USS Liberty investigation, and so on and so forth.
And then Ray Davis – he was a commandant of the United States Marine Corps. He directly said – this is of course not going into 911 – that the USS Liberty was not a mistaken identity, it was an act of cold-blooded, premeditated murder. So there are people out there in the military.
Now these guys were retired at the time – but when you’re educating people, like you’re doing, Alan, people who serve in the military now, you’re exactly right: they just don’t know, because nobody knows. It’s been hid up. Everything’s been hid. It’s been covered up so good it’d almost take a Messiah to get us out of this thing.
MG: Dr. Sabrosky, I wanted to ask you – since we are to a certain degree prognosticating today, and making predictions – what do you think is going to happen here?
I mean, I was having a conversation with someone the other day about this situation with Iran, and the fact of the matter is that irrespective of whether or not Iran is actually actively engaged in building a nuclear weapon, or not, the fact of that is that Israel cannot afford to have this war not take place. There has to be something that takes place, even if it’s just lobbing a couple of bombs into Iran and then really spectacularising it through their control of the media. They have to do something to recoup some of their public image, so would you agree with me on that, and assuming that you do agree with me on that, what do you think Israel is going to be doing in the near future.
AS: We’re going to have a war with Iran. And my guess is that the Arab Street is going to explode.
PT: I agree.
AS: And American forces, American units, like 5th fleet headquarters in Bahrain, the rest of it – there’s going to be a casualty list that we’re not even going to care to think about.
PT: Alan, I think this thing was predestined from day one. It started in Afghanistan. They go to Iraq, and Iran has been the big prize all along. What do you think?
AS: Yes. No question at all. And in fact if the Iraqi resistance hadn’t been so strong it would have already happened in the second Bush administration.
PT: Absolutely. I agree 100%.
MG: So all of this reticence, reluctance – whatever you want to call it – what appears to be reticence and reluctance on the part of the Obama administration – what do you think is going on? I mean, look, just this past week we had some what I consider pretty dramatic things being said on the part of the Obama administration with regards to Israel with the settlements and what-not. What is this? Is this just posturing on the part of the Obama Administration or are they really trying to pull back on their end?
AS: The Obama Administration hasn’t withheld a single dollar, a single plane – nothing. Words are cheap.
The Israelis made a tactical error in that they insulted Biden – and Biden is not one of my favorite people, but he is a street smart guy and he doesn’t like being humiliated. This is a given. But nothing has happened to affect in a tangible sense anything that we’re giving to Israel. Nothing. And as long as nothing happens to tangibly affect what we’re giving to them, nothing else will matter.
MG: Why are we not already at war with Iran then?
AS: Partly because we can’t find a good enough excuse for it that will allow us to sidestep what we’re doing in Afghanistan and, to a lesser extent, Iraq. It’s that there’s just a little too much there.
I’m pretty sure that the pattern was: Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq 2003, Iran 2005, Syria 2007. The problem was that the Iraqi resistance didn’t let that happen. So now the time frame is a little bit different, and I’m not sure how that’s going to play out, but I think that the way we’re going to it is to try and create an excuse for a war.
And after the war takes place people can question it, but it doesn’t change the fact of the war.
MG: You’re right. If there’s anything that we learned from Vietnam it’s that once the troops are committed, right or wrong, you stand by the troops. That’s one of the things that I noticed with the first Gulf war, and this is before I knew anything about anything.
I thought, boy, when you look at the kind of protests that took place – and I was in college at the time of the first Gulf War – when you look at the kind of protests that took place during Vietnam – and of course on college you had a few people grumbling and saying this and saying that but, in general, the Neo-Cons really played the whole Vietnam thing beautifully – if such a word can be used for something as tragic as that. And don’t misunderstand me, Dr. Sabrosky: I know that you’re a Vietnam vet and I hold these guys in the highest regards too, and when I say they played this thing beautifully, they made the protesters look like these grotesque, ugly, unpatriotic people to the point where, when the next big war started, nobody would dare raise their voice up against the troops the way that they did in Vietnam.
AS: Yep, absolutely on it. Mark, I’m going to have to separate in just a minute.
If I could make sort of a concluding statement… And I think that you would second me on this.
Nothing to me is more important than loyalty to or allegiance to my country. Nothing is. But that requires my country and my government to also behave in an honorable fashion. Our government, today, does not behave in an honorable fashion. And there is something in the Declaration of Independence which says that whenever any form of government becomes oppressive of these ends it is the right and duty of the people to alter or abolish it, and I think we have gone to the point where we need to alter or abolish it. And I say that as a man who spent his entire life loyal to the United States.
PT: I understand you. God bless you for that. God bless you.
MG: Ladies and gentlemen: “The Dark Face of Jewish Nationalism”. Look it up on the internet – I don’t think you’re going to have any trouble finding it. Written by our very good friend and special guest tonight: Dr. Alan Sabrosky.
Doctor, I hope we will be lucky enough to have you back on the programme in the near future, and in the mean time please keep up your excellent work. Honestly, as much as this is going to sound like posturing to you, there are very few people, as I said, who say anything that really causes me to take a double-take and to sit down and pay attention, and you’re definitely one of them.
AS: I appreciate that, Mark. You take care of yourself.
Phil, warmest regards. Semper fi to you, my friend.
PT: Semper fi. God bless you, sir, and we will talk again.
For more information go to the link here.