Pages

Jump to bottom

24 comments

1 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 8:24:40am

[Link: www.spongobongo.com…]

From 1943 until 1980, unbeknownst to virtually everyone, the National Security Agency intercepted every Soviet message going from or to the United States. It was not until 1994 that their existence was even acknowledged, and 1995 when the first 1,400 of 240,000 intercepts were released to the public. Their content was damning and supportive of the contentions of not only McCarthy but Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, Hoover, and others.

The collapse of Communism opened files of not only internal Soviet spy documents but also gave the FBI, CIA, and American scholars access to the files of the American Communist Party that had been hidden in a Russian warehouse since 1950. The cat was out of the clichéd bag.

Just who was exposed by these documents. Alger Hiss who had been the number three man at State behind Dean Acheson and Dean Rusk, and who, most assuredly, at some point, would have eventually been Secretary of State. Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, who purposely withheld allocated funding for the Chinese Nationalists, during their Civil War, that destroyed their currency and, thus, their efforts against Mao’s Communists.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had been conduits for even more damaging information than the atom bomb, for which they were executed. Lauchlin Currie, Special Assistant to F.D.R. Samuel Dickstein, member of the House of Representatives from Brooklyn.

William and Martha Dodd, son and daughter of the U.S. ambassador to Germany in the 1930’s. Lawrence Duggan, State Department Director of Latin American Affairs. Harold Ickes, Sr., father of Clinton’s impeachment flack, who was Secretary of the Interior. Finally, William Weisband, U.S. Army Signal Security Agency. This is just a very few, the most prominent or household names one might say.

Was Robert Oppenheimer, the Director of the Atom Bomb Project at Los Alamos, New Mexico, a member of the Communist Party? Quite emphatically, no! His wife was. His brother was. His mistress was. As were many of his closest associates at the University of California. In addition, Oppenheimer was one of those scientists in the 40’s who thought that all scientific information should be shared universally for the good of mankind.

Were any of the aforementioned exposed by McCarthy? Not one. He’d been too late at the spy discovery game. After all, Alger Hiss got Richard Nixon the Vice-Presidency. White had been shifted to that historical ashbin where failures are allowed to “resign” to, the International Monetary Fund.
Just how many did McCarthy catch? Darn few. Of the 10,000 government employees who were exposed as Communists, security risks, or of questionable loyalty and lost their jobs, at the least, only forty can be attributed to McCarthy.

Any of the major players? None, as most had either been moved laterally by Truman or snared by the FBI.

Most of the forty were small time functionaries such as Owen Lattimore, John Stewart Service, Philip and Mary Jane Keeney, and Howard Shapley; and these were the most prominent. In every case, of the forty, they were all accorded trials and attorneys before their dismissal.

Lattimore had been Director of the School Of International Relations at Johns Hopkins University, advisor to FDR on China in 1941, advisor at State in 1946-1947, preached that Mao’s Communists were “agrarian reformers”, in 1948 encouraged George Marshall to stop aid to Chiang Kai-Shek and his Nationalists, and in 1949 urged U.S. withdrawal from Korea….

…Was he a pillar of virtue? Hardly! He was a dreadful alcoholic and eventually died from cirrhosis of the liver. He was a bully, unkempt, crude, and a lout. He once unmercifully pummeled Drew Pearson, his antagonist in the press, after a dinner party, in the coat room of a Washington doyenne. He had many physical and character shortcomings. But he was right.

Since I am more interested in the MESSAGE and not the MESSENGER, hamfisted tactics and all, I stand by McCarthy.

2 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 8:32:46am

re: #1 Oh no…Sand People!

[Link: www.spongobongo.com…]

Since I am more interested in the MESSAGE and not the MESSENGER, hamfisted tactics and all, I stand by McCarthy.

His tactics were reprehensible. Keep in mind that Beck thinks Bush and Obama are part of the Cloward-Piven conspiracy to destroy America. He’s not resisting real communists. The prospect of Michelle Bachman running Council on UnAmerican Activities based on Birch Society conspiracies should scare the shit out of you. These people want to bring back McCarthyism and they’re very dangerous.

3 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 8:34:26am

re: #1 Oh no…Sand People!

I also don’t get the point. Your link shows McCarthy didn’t accomplish much in fighting communism yet you “stand by McCarthy”.
Was that a sarc?

4 ShaunP  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 8:55:46am

re: #1 Oh no…Sand People!

[Link: www.spongobongo.com…]

Since I am more interested in the MESSAGE and not the MESSENGER, hamfisted tactics and all, I stand by McCarthy.

The cause of anti-communism, which united millions of Americans and which gained the support of Democrats, Republicans and independents, was undermined by Sen. Joe McCarthy … McCarthy addressed a real problem: disloyal elements within the U.S. government. But his approach to this real problem was to cause untold grief to the country he claimed to love … Worst of all, McCarthy besmirched the honorable cause of anti-communism. He discredited legitimate efforts to counter Soviet subversion of American institutions.

~William Bennett

5 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 9:06:44am

re: #3 Killgore Trout

I also don’t get the point. Your link shows McCarthy didn’t accomplish much in fighting communism yet you “stand by McCarthy”.
Was that a sarc?

He did manage to get 40 + people in government, this acted, in my opinion, as the catalyst that resulted in more than 10,000 + after the fact. That’s pretty huge to oust people while CURRENTLY in the governmnet system as opposed to getting them after the fact. I stand by him.

6 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 9:12:12am

re: #2 Killgore Trout

His tactics were reprehensible. Keep in mind that Beck thinks Bush and Obama are part of the Cloward-Piven conspiracy to destroy America. He’s not resisting real communists. The prospect of Michelle Bachman running Council on UnAmerican Activities based on Birch Society conspiracies should scare the shit out of you. These people want to bring back McCarthyism and they’re very dangerous.

I completely understand what Beck is trying to do, but McCarthy sans Beck, was still right.

What it appears to me is that by using ‘Beck’, you are trying to use ‘Beck’s’ ‘off the railsness’ to discredit something that is really beyond contestation, McCarthy and Communist infiltration which is historically accurate regardless.

7 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 9:18:34am

re: #5 Oh no…Sand People!

Dude, that’s twisted.

8 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 9:42:04am

If this is from the same show, then Glenn Beck, who claims to believe in the civil rights movement, has a really fucked up idea of who he should be quoting when it comes to civil rights:

[Link: thinkprogress.org…]

9 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 9:50:35am

re: #8 Lidane

If this is from the same show, then Glenn Beck, who claims to believe in the civil rights movement, has a really fucked up idea of who he should be quoting when it comes to civil rights:

[Link: thinkprogress.org…]

1966, yes, the communist threat was very real. As stated above McCarthy got it all started.

But I don’t understand the ‘disgraced’ (from the article) when it comes to Sen. McCarthy? It’s tossed around, but no matter how many times is stated, the history doesn’t back up the accusations.

10 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 9:55:55am

re: #9 Oh no…Sand People!

But I don’t understand the ‘disgraced’ (from the article) when it comes to Sen. McCarthy? It’s tossed around, but no matter how many times is stated, the history doesn’t back up the accusations.

What? Of course it does. After his final censure, his colleagues avoided him, his speeches were given in near empty chambers or ignored, and his public speaking dwindled to almost nothing.

Hell, the guy pretty much drank himself to death in the end. That’s not something that a person who’s on top of the world does. Someone who’s been disgraced and shamed drowns themselves in booze like that.

11 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:06:10am

re: #10 Lidane

What? Of course it does. After his final censure, his colleagues avoided him, his speeches were given in near empty chambers or ignored, and his public speaking dwindled to almost nothing.

Hell, the guy pretty much drank himself to death in the end. That’s not something that a person who’s on top of the world does. Someone who’s been disgraced and shamed drowns themselves in booze like that.

Whoa, with that I will have to disagree. Alcoholism can be such that regardless of ‘happy’ / ‘depressed’, one can’t control the drinking. You don’t have to be depressed to be an addict.

So if the world censured Al Gore for Global Warming and told him it was a blatant lie and fraud foisted upon the people, would that make it a lie? I bet Al would possibly question himself a lot, but in the end it appears he is standing on his beliefs. I completely respect that.

12 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:11:36am

re: #11 Oh no…Sand People!

Whoa, with that I will have to disagree. Alcoholism can be such that regardless of ‘happy’ / ‘depressed’, one can’t control the drinking. You don’t have to be depressed to be an addict.

I’m well aware of what addiction entails, since my grandfather was an alcoholic and died from the disease.

However, if you try to tell me that McCarthy’s censure and downfall didn’t lead to his personal disgrace and his drowning himself in booze, I’m going to have to disagree. History clearly bears that out.

So if the world censured Al Gore for Global Warming and told him it was a blatant lie and fraud foisted upon the people, would that make it a lie? I bet Al would possibly question himself a lot, but in the end it appears he is standing on his beliefs. I completely respect that.

Except we’re not talking about Al Gore. We’re talking about McCarthy and his lies and smears of good people. He ruined lives. I have a real hard time finding any sympathy for the guy.

13 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:20:23am

re: #12 Lidane

Except we’re not talking about Al Gore. We’re talking about McCarthy and his lies and smears of good people. He ruined lives. I have a real hard time finding any sympathy for the guy.

The entire point: They weren’t lies and smears. No matter how one wants to ‘nuance’ it and ‘frame the debate’, at the end of the day he was correct in who he pointed out.

So, that’s it, love him or hate him, one can even disagree that communism wasn’t as large a threat as it was made out to be (different topic entirely) regardless of what he was personally, what he did stands on it’s own. That ‘standing’ on it’s own, is what I care about. Not his personal flaws, or whether or not if his methods were ‘palatable’ to the masses. He was right.

14 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:25:54am

re: #13 Oh no…Sand People!

You’re seriously defending and standing beside McCarthy?

We’re going to have to agree to disagree. As far as I’m concerned, he was a liar that ruined lives, and he’s not worthy of anything but contempt.

15 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:25:58am

re: #13 Oh no…Sand People!

If you stand by Joe McCarthy, you’re standing alone. The man was deranged and hateful, and ruined many innocent people’s lives.

That’s not someone any decent person should support. Joe McCarthy wasn’t “right.” He was an un-American fear-mongering scumbag.

16 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:44:29am

re: #14 Lidane

You’re seriously defending and standing beside McCarthy?

We’re going to have to agree to disagree. As far as I’m concerned, he was a liar that ruined lives, and he’s not worthy of anything but contempt.

Absolutely.re: #15 Charles

If you stand by Joe McCarthy, you’re standing alone. The man was deranged and hateful, and ruined many innocent people’s lives.

That’s not someone any decent person should support. Joe McCarthy wasn’t “right.” He was an un-American fear-mongering scumbag.

I am not going to let people’s opinions of the guy change what is born out by history. There were actual card carrying members of the communist party, and at the time to be that was ‘verboten’, and he ferreted them out. Not just verbal sympathizers, actual card carrying members whose allegiance is literally documented by the card they carried. That coupled with the files on each of the actions they took to subvert the government was enough for McCarthy to take action.

Am I going to say his methods and means were super fantastic? No.

17 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:49:48am

re: #16 Oh no…Sand People!

I am not going to let people’s opinions of the guy change what is born out by history.

So basically, you’re going to ignore the real history of McCarthy in favor of what you’d like to believe? Fair enough.

Don’t expect a whole lot of sympathy for that, though. The guy was an asshole, a fear-monger, and ruined the lives of many good people. He was a contemptible little troll of a man.

Also? The Cold War ended back when the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union collapsed. It’s been over 20 years now. Red baiting and looking for a mythical commie threat in this day and age is as laughable as it is outdated.

18 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 10:56:18am

re: #17 Lidane

So basically, you’re going to ignore the real history of McCarthy in favor of what you’d like to believe? Fair enough.

I am calling for a logical, objective look into history and the actual facts.

Don’t expect a whole lot of sympathy for that, though. The guy was an asshole, a fear-monger, and ruined the lives of many good people. He was a contemptible little troll of a man.

Again, he was all of those characterizations. The only disagreement I have is ‘ruined the lives of many good people’. They were card carrying members.

Also? The Cold War ended back when the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union collapsed. It’s been over 20 years now. Red baiting and looking for a mythical commie threat in this day and age is as laughable as it is outdated.

I have zero disagreement with you on this.

Here is what makes me tick:

It comes down to this in my mind. I believe in honoring, obeying and sustaining the laws of the land. Even though I hate a LOT of them, I will still obey them. At that time, those participants involved went against the law of the land.

19 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 11:01:25am

re: #18 Oh no…Sand People!

The only disagreement I have is ‘ruined the lives of many good people’. They were card carrying members.

Again— you’re only seeing what you want to see. For all of the supposed “card-carrying members” that he found, there were hundreds more that he still smeared and still ruined financially and personally. It took some of those folks decades to get their lives back, if they even managed to do so at all before their deaths. And that doesn’t even begin to take the friends and families of those other people into account, who were also affected.

Fuck McCarthy, fuck his tactics, and fuck his supposed belief that he was doing the right thing. He’s not worth defending or standing next to, and trying to justify the man’s actions is absurd.

20 tnguitarist  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 11:25:00am

Lumping McCarthy with Hoover won’t gain any fans. They both used their offices to carry out personal vendettas against enemies.

21 tnguitarist  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 11:29:41am
Due to Hoover’s insistence upon keeping the identity of his informers secret, most subjects of loyalty-security reviews were not allowed to cross-examine or know the identities of those who accused them. In many cases they were not even told what they were accused of.

Wow. That’s scary stuff. Why is it, when trying to root out people we consider subversives, we inevitably end up using the tactics which caused us to despise them in the first place?

22 Shiplord Kirel  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 11:42:11am

I’m surprised at you, ONSP. Nobody here is a more dedicated or consistent opponent of communism than I am. Unlike many contemporary Americans, I believe in the reality of communist subversion in education, the media, and government.
Even so, McCarthy is not someone I can hold up as an example or a model. His excesses, failures, and malfeasance have been a shield behind which real Reds and fellow-travelers have hidden for over 50 years. He had nothing to do with exposing the Rosenbergs or even the Hollywood agents of influence. His favorite tactic was to find some junior government employee who had been associated in some way with some kind of Red front years earlier, usually before World War 2, then publicly vilify, not them, but their supervisors and bosses. This set off miniature witch-hunts throughout the government. Needless to say, having some kind of sympathy for communism in, say, 1935, was a whole different animal from doing so in 1953.
His attack on the army, which ultimately led to his censure, was nothing but retaliation for the army’s failure to grant special privileges to McCarthy staffer David Schine, who had been drafted in 1953.
McCarthy was a drunk, a bully, and an inveterate liar who knew no limits until he was forced to back down.

23 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 12:08:45pm

re: #22 Shiplord Kirel

I’m surprised at you, ONSP. Nobody here is a more dedicated or consistent opponent of communism than I am. Unlike many contemporary Americans, I believe in the reality of communist subversion in education, the media, and government.
Even so, McCarthy is not someone I can hold up as an example or a model. His excesses, failures, and malfeasance have been a shield behind which real Reds and fellow-travelers have hidden for over 50 years. He had nothing to do with exposing the Rosenbergs or even the Hollywood agents of influence. His favorite tactic was to find some junior government employee who had been associated in some way with some kind of Red front years earlier, usually before World War 2, then publicly vilify, not them, but their supervisors and bosses. This set off miniature witch-hunts throughout the government. Needless to say, having some kind of sympathy for communism in, say, 1935, was a whole different animal from doing so in 1953.
His attack on the army, which ultimately led to his censure, was nothing but retaliation for the army’s failure to grant special privileges to McCarthy staffer David Schine, who had been drafted in 1953.
McCarthy was a drunk, a bully, and an inveterate liar who knew no limits until he was forced to back down.

In no way am I going to justify his methods. He was all of those things you are describing.

I don’t believe the ends justifies the means.

24 Lidane  Fri, Jun 25, 2010 12:24:39pm

re: #23 Oh no…Sand People!

In no way am I going to justify his methods. He was all of those things you are describing.

I don’t believe the ends justifies the means.

Yet you applaud his results, which makes no damned sense.

If you truly believe he was “a drunk, a bully, and an inveterate liar who knew no limits” (to borrow SK’s words) in your eyes, then wouldn’t McCarthy’s results be suspect at best, if not entirely worthless? How can you condemn the man personally, but still take the results of his witch hunts and smear campaigns as truth? He’s either a drunk and a liar and a bully, or he was telling the truth about the people whose lives he destroyed. You can’t have it both ways.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2021-06-05 2:51 pm PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Uncommon US Flags #2: Commissioning Pennant A Commissioning Pennant is a flag flown from the masthead of a warship from the moment the ship is placed in service until the moment it is decommissioned. The only time the pennant is not displayed on a US ...
Anymouse 🌹🏡😷
2 days, 16 hours ago
Views: 272 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 5
Tweets: 1 •