The Rebuttal: Defending 'American Betrayal' From the Book-Burners by Diana West Page B

tell.
    SURREALISM
RULES
    Typically, Radosh has other, wrong
ideas – that is, ideas that are not in my book.
    He begins:
    “Should
the United States have joined Germany to fight the Soviet Union? Bizarre as it might sound, this is the
fourth pillar of West’s argument.“
    You
bet it sounds bizarre. In fact, surrealism rules again: Radosh now embarks on
another discussion that is not in my book. In other words, what
Radosh is calling “the fourth pillar of West’s argument” is not contained
within the pages of my book.
    He
continues with more statements that are not in my book:
    “In her effort to
paint the Roosevelt administration as a puppet of Soviet intelligence, she
argues that towards the end of the war, the American government turned down the
opportunity to arm German soldiers willing to form a new army to go to war
against the USSR. “
    Surrealism
still rules: I never discuss any “opportunity” the US government “turned down”
to “arm German soldiers.” Such a subject never comes up. None of these German
efforts got farther than extending “peace feelers” and making inquiries. That
is the whole point of the chapter.
    Once
again, the question forms: Did Radosh read my book? Did he understand what he
read? Or did he purposefully distort it?
    Radosh
continues:
    “American leaders
were so pro-Soviet, in other words, that they missed one final opportunity to
halt the Red Army’s advance into Eastern Europe, thereby delivering these
countries to Stalin’s tender mercies and precipitating the Cold War.“
    “American
leaders” are not part of this part of the story of Chapter 10. I discuss at
length the parleys between various American (and some English) representatives
abroad, most of whom had connections to the OSS, with various anti-Nazi,
anti-Communist Germans. These efforts invariably reach a point at which the
Americans (or English) are blocked from moving up the command chain, more often
than not from choke points manned or influenced by a Soviet agent or asset.
    RADOSH MISSES (AND DISTORTS)
THE CRUX OF MY THESIS – AGAIN
    He
continues:
    “Her case rests
on a story told by FDR’s old friend and former Governor of Pennsylvania, George
H. Earle.”
    This is a falsehood. No, it’s a lie. But
thus begins Radosh’s last aggressive attack on detail: George H. Earle.
    It
is utterly false and absurd to say that my case rests on “a story” told by
Earle.
    Earle
published his account of his work with the German Underground in an August 1958
article titled “F.D.R.’s Tragic Mistake” in Confidential magazine.
    Here are some of my other sources besides
Earle:
    Ÿ   Allen Dulles, Germany’s Underground (New
York: Macmillan, 1947).
    Ÿ   “Full Story of Anti-Hitler Plot Shows
That Allies Refused to Assist,” New York Times, March 18, 1946.
    Ÿ   “Gen. Menzies, Ex-British Intelligence
Chief, Dies,” New York Times, May 31, 1968.
    Ÿ   “Eisenhower Praises Anti-Nazi
Resistance,” New York Times, May 11, 1945.
    Ÿ   Peter Hoffman, The History of the German Resistance, 1933–1945, 3rd English ed. (Montreal: McGill- 
Queen’s University Press, 2001)
    Ÿ   “Canaris Hanging Related,” New York Times, October 11, 1952.
    Ÿ   “Lubavitch Jews Want Admiral Canaris Honoured by Yad Vashem,” Agence
France Presse, August 6, 2009, 
http://www.ejpress.org/article/38250.
“Following historical research we have established that Admiral Canaris saved
Rabbi Yosef Schneerson—sixth in that lineage—and 500 other Jews
from the Warsaw ghetto,” said [Rabbi Benjamin] Lipshitz.”
    Ÿ   Czeslaw Milosz, The Captive Mind (New York: Vintage Books, 1981)
    Ÿ   Ian Colvin, Hitler’s Secret Enemy (London: Pan Books, 1957).
    Ÿ   Harry Hopkins Papers, Georgetown University Library.
    Ÿ   Richard Harris Smith, OSS: The Secret History of America’s First
Central Intelligence Agency (Guilford, CT: 
Lyons Press, 2005), 368,
quoting Secret and Personal, by F. W. Winterbotham (New