dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Looking around a little more…the first foreign policy casualty (?) Makes me wonder if the Wetstart incident wasn't a pissing on the grave sort of thing.

Finally, history is re-written. For The Post in 1999, Forrestal’s destruction is related primarily to the disputes in which he became embroiled over the reorganization of the armed services:

In the well-received recent biography “Driven Patriot: The Life and Times of James Forrestal,” authors Townsend Hoopes and Douglas Brinkley argue that conflict with his own secretary of the Air Force, Stuart Symington, a passionate advocate of the supremacy of air power, played a key role in his professional and personal decline.

This conflict The Post elaborates upon at typically great length. When it briefly mentions Forrestal’s opposition to Truman’s Palestine policy, it changes the subject so fast the reader could easily miss it. This passage comes on the heels of a discussion of Forrestal’s objection to rapid military demobilization in the face of the growing threat from the Communists:

In fact, Forrestal found himself standing against his president on other key issues—he opposed making the support of the new state of Israel a pillar of American foreign policy (at least in part because he was keenly aware of the Navy’s dependence on cheap Arab oil) and fiercely campaigned against Truman’s desire to curtail the Navy’s independence by unifying all branches of the military.

That is The Post’s only mention of Israel in the entire article, although there was general recognition in the newspapers at the time of his death that Forrestal’s eclipse was heavily tied up with the prominent position he had taken in opposition to our sponsorship of Israel. Working as hard as it is to convince its readers that Forrestal was not assassinated, it’s certainly not going to give them any help in figuring out what the motive might have been.

David Martin

November 20, 2004

http://www.dcdave.com/article4/041120a.html