Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy

[SmedlyButler]

During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.’s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: “People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day.”

Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.

Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
President Harry S. Truman

I was going to work it in somewhere. So terse yet so eloquent.

 

[Camp]

If the discussion were to turn to Hopkins role as a back channel contact between FDR and Stalin, as an intelligence operative and gatherer as the main American with access to the Soviet dictator and his abilities as a master manipulator, heads may explode. Could be the reason Gen. Marshall spoke so highly of Hopkins and said Hopkins would never get the credit he so much deserved.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A People’s History of Koch Industries: How Stalin Funded the Tea Party Movement

The Roots of Stalin in the Tea Party Movement | Alternet

Wow, PC Laid the butthurt on you that badly.

 

[regent]

If there is a gene for creating conspiracies I think conservatives are blessed with the larger gene. There should be an olympic award for best conspiracy creation and if so, my nomination would be the Birch water fluoridation conspiracy, The conspiracy went something like this: The commies want to put fluoride in the water not to prevent kids from tooth getting tooth decay, but because fluoride softened people's brains and made them turn communistic. Well something like that, but if there was an olymic award I would submit the fluoride charge for the gold. I understand Texans stopped brushing their teeth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.’s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: “People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day.”

Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.

Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
President Harry S. Truman

Conservatives were against FDR Programs because they sucked and failed.

FDR averaged 20% unemployed during his first two terms.

That's a fail

FDR can go fuck himself

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.

FDR: 20% unemployment

Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment

 

[SmedlyButler]

Jordan, one of PC's "sources" was a prime purveyor of this myth. I posted this earlier;

"In the 1960's Jordan publicly "condemned fluoridation as a secret Russian revolutionary technique to deaden" the minds of Americans."

 

[Bfgrn]

During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.’s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: “People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day.”

Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.

Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
President Harry S. Truman

Conservatives were against FDR Programs because they sucked and failed.

FDR averaged 20% unemployed during his first two terms.

That's a fail

FDR can go fuck himself

That '20%' is bullshit Frank. It is dishonest right wing manipulation by right wing revisionist Amity Shlaes' discredited book "The Forgotten Man"

Shlaes both wholly omits some relevant data and deviously manipulates other numbers:

Shlaes makes a different argument about numbers, because she uses different numbers. She starts each chapter with a rat-a-tat of just-the-facts, but instead of GDP, which represents the overall economy, she quotes the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which represents the maybe 10 percent of Americans who owned stock...Let's look at a figure Shlaes gives twice in her book and again in her Wall Street Journal editorial: She has unemployment at 20 percent in the 1937-38 recession. That's appalling—almost as bad as 23 percent in 1932. Based on such a statistic, you could think the New Deal wasn't alleviating the Great Depression. But that number hides something: A third of the people Shlaes counts as unemployed had a job that the New Deal gave them through its relief programs.

By this measure, government jobs don't count as jobs, and therefore their estimates of unemployment are far higher. To understand how manipulative this is, imagine the howls of protest conservatives would be airing if, in criticizing George W. Bush, Democrats took today's unemployment data and then inflated it by counting the millions of people who work for federal, state and local governments as unemployed.

Shlaes is backed up by other conservatives, who are slightly more honest than her in acknowledging unemployment may have decreased during the New Deal. But these right-wingers then inevitably claim that unemployment only decreased a little bit in the New Deal, and only significantly dropped when World War II and the subsequent defense buildup started.

So to end this historical revisionism once and for all - to compare apples to apples, rather than apples to conservatives' fuzzy math - let's go to the great equalizer, the Census Data, and specifically Census document HS-29 (available in PDF or Excel formats). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

Census document HS-29 (available in PDF). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%

ROOSEVELT WWII
1941 Unemployment Rate: 9.9% (5.5 million total unemployed)
1944 Unemployment Rate: 1.2% (670,000 total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -8.7
Total unemployment percentage change: -87.9%

TRUMAN
1945 Unemployment Rate: 1.9% (1.0 million total unemployed)
1952 Unemployment Rate: 3.0% (1.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +1.1
Total unemployment percentage change: +81.0%

EISENHOWER
1953 Unemployment Rate: 2.9% (1.8 million total unemployed)
1960 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (3.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: +110.03%

KENNEDY
1961 Unemployment Rate: 6.7% (4.7 million total unemployed)
1963 Unemployment Rate: 5.7% (4.0 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.0%
Total unemployment percentage change: -13.6%

JOHNSON
1964 Unemployment Rate: 5.2% (3.7 million total unemployed)
1968 Unemployment Rate: 3.6% (2.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: -25.6%

NIXON
1969 Unemployment Rate: 3.5% (2.8 million total unemployed)
1974 Unemployment Rate: 5.6% (5.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: +82.0%

FORD
1975 Unemployment Rate: 8.5% (7.9 million total unemployed)
1976 Unemployment Rate: 7.7% (7.4 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -0.8%
Total unemployment percentage change: -6.6%

CARTER
1977 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (6.9 million total unemployed)
1980 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (7.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.0
Total unemployment percentage change: +9.24%

REAGAN
1981 Unemployment Rate: 7.6% (8.2 million total unemployed)
1988 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (6.7 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: -19.0%

BUSH I
1989 Unemployment Rate: 5.3% (6.5 million total unemployed)
1992 Unemployment Rate: 7.5% (9.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.2
Total unemployment percentage change: +47.2%

CLINTON
1993 Unemployment Rate: 6.9% (8.9 million total unemployed)
2000 Unemployment Rate: 4.0% (5.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change -2.9
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.3%

As you can see, in terms of the unemployment rate - that is, the percentage of the total workforce not working - the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the single largest drop in American history. Yes, I'll say that again for conservatives, just to make sure they get it: The PRE-WWII New Deal era from 1933-1940 - not the WWII era - saw the largest drop in the unemployment rate in American history. And by the way, that even includes the recession of 1937-1938.

Now, it is certainly true that the percentage drop of total unemployed was bigger in WWII than it was in the pre-WWII New Deal era. But as the data show, even by that metric, the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the second largest percentage drop in total unemployed in the 20th century, going from 12.8 million unemployed in Roosevelt's first year in office to 8.1 million unemployed at the end of his second term in 1940. That's a 36.7 percent drop - larger than the Clinton era (36.3%) and, yes conservatives, larger than the Reagan era (a mere 19%). At the absolute minimum, that would suggests the New Deal was a positive - not negative - economic force (and empirically more positive than, say, Reagan's free-market agenda).

These are the hard and fast numbers conservatives would like us all to forget with their claim that history proves massive spending packages like the New Deal will supposedly harm our economy.

The Forgotten Math: Pre-WWII New Deal Saw Biggest Drop In Unemployment Rate in American History

And you keep forgetting that your right wing austerity approach doesn't work. FDR found that out. FDR had his own right wing regressives to contend with, HERE is where that led.

The Recession of 1937–1938 was a temporary reversal of the pre-war 1933 to 1941 economic recovery from the Great Depression in the United States. Economists disagree about the causes of this downturn, but agree that government austerity reversed the recovery. wiki


The greatest yearly increase in GDP occurred during the New Deal, AND, the LARGEST DROP IN UNEMPLOYMENT in America history occurred during the New Deal...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.’s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: “People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day.”

Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.

Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
President Harry S. Truman

Conservatives were against FDR Programs because they sucked and failed.

FDR averaged 20% unemployed during his first two terms.

That's a fail

FDR can go fuck himself

That '20%' is bullshit Frank. It is dishonest right wing manipulation by right wing revisionist Amity Shlaes' discredited book "The Forgotten Man"

Shlaes both wholly omits some relevant data and deviously manipulates other numbers:

Shlaes makes a different argument about numbers, because she uses different numbers. She starts each chapter with a rat-a-tat of just-the-facts, but instead of GDP, which represents the overall economy, she quotes the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which represents the maybe 10 percent of Americans who owned stock...Let's look at a figure Shlaes gives twice in her book and again in her Wall Street Journal editorial: She has unemployment at 20 percent in the 1937-38 recession. That's appalling—almost as bad as 23 percent in 1932. Based on such a statistic, you could think the New Deal wasn't alleviating the Great Depression. But that number hides something: A third of the people Shlaes counts as unemployed had a job that the New Deal gave them through its relief programs.

By this measure, government jobs don't count as jobs, and therefore their estimates of unemployment are far higher. To understand how manipulative this is, imagine the howls of protest conservatives would be airing if, in criticizing George W. Bush, Democrats took today's unemployment data and then inflated it by counting the millions of people who work for federal, state and local governments as unemployed.

Shlaes is backed up by other conservatives, who are slightly more honest than her in acknowledging unemployment may have decreased during the New Deal. But these right-wingers then inevitably claim that unemployment only decreased a little bit in the New Deal, and only significantly dropped when World War II and the subsequent defense buildup started.

So to end this historical revisionism once and for all - to compare apples to apples, rather than apples to conservatives' fuzzy math - let's go to the great equalizer, the Census Data, and specifically Census document HS-29 (available in PDF or Excel formats). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

Census document HS-29 (available in PDF). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%

ROOSEVELT WWII
1941 Unemployment Rate: 9.9% (5.5 million total unemployed)
1944 Unemployment Rate: 1.2% (670,000 total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -8.7
Total unemployment percentage change: -87.9%

TRUMAN
1945 Unemployment Rate: 1.9% (1.0 million total unemployed)
1952 Unemployment Rate: 3.0% (1.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +1.1
Total unemployment percentage change: +81.0%

EISENHOWER
1953 Unemployment Rate: 2.9% (1.8 million total unemployed)
1960 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (3.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: +110.03%

KENNEDY
1961 Unemployment Rate: 6.7% (4.7 million total unemployed)
1963 Unemployment Rate: 5.7% (4.0 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.0%
Total unemployment percentage change: -13.6%

JOHNSON
1964 Unemployment Rate: 5.2% (3.7 million total unemployed)
1968 Unemployment Rate: 3.6% (2.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: -25.6%

NIXON
1969 Unemployment Rate: 3.5% (2.8 million total unemployed)
1974 Unemployment Rate: 5.6% (5.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: +82.0%

FORD
1975 Unemployment Rate: 8.5% (7.9 million total unemployed)
1976 Unemployment Rate: 7.7% (7.4 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -0.8%
Total unemployment percentage change: -6.6%

CARTER
1977 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (6.9 million total unemployed)
1980 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (7.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.0
Total unemployment percentage change: +9.24%

REAGAN
1981 Unemployment Rate: 7.6% (8.2 million total unemployed)
1988 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (6.7 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: -19.0%

BUSH I
1989 Unemployment Rate: 5.3% (6.5 million total unemployed)
1992 Unemployment Rate: 7.5% (9.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.2
Total unemployment percentage change: +47.2%

CLINTON
1993 Unemployment Rate: 6.9% (8.9 million total unemployed)
2000 Unemployment Rate: 4.0% (5.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change -2.9
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.3%

As you can see, in terms of the unemployment rate - that is, the percentage of the total workforce not working - the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the single largest drop in American history. Yes, I'll say that again for conservatives, just to make sure they get it: The PRE-WWII New Deal era from 1933-1940 - not the WWII era - saw the largest drop in the unemployment rate in American history. And by the way, that even includes the recession of 1937-1938.

Now, it is certainly true that the percentage drop of total unemployed was bigger in WWII than it was in the pre-WWII New Deal era. But as the data show, even by that metric, the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the second largest percentage drop in total unemployed in the 20th century, going from 12.8 million unemployed in Roosevelt's first year in office to 8.1 million unemployed at the end of his second term in 1940. That's a 36.7 percent drop - larger than the Clinton era (36.3%) and, yes conservatives, larger than the Reagan era (a mere 19%). At the absolute minimum, that would suggests the New Deal was a positive - not negative - economic force (and empirically more positive than, say, Reagan's free-market agenda).

These are the hard and fast numbers conservatives would like us all to forget with their claim that history proves massive spending packages like the New Deal will supposedly harm our economy.

The Forgotten Math: Pre-WWII New Deal Saw Biggest Drop In Unemployment Rate in American History

And you keep forgetting that your right wing austerity approach doesn't work. FDR found that out. FDR had his own right wing regressives to contend with, HERE is where that led.

The Recession of 1937–1938 was a temporary reversal of the pre-war 1933 to 1941 economic recovery from the Great Depression in the United States. Economists disagree about the causes of this downturn, but agree that government austerity reversed the recovery. wiki


The greatest yearly increase in GDP occurred during the New Deal, AND, the LARGEST DROP IN UNEMPLOYMENT in America history occurred during the New Deal...

You should read what you post

"ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)"

Unemployment averaged 20% Unemployment during FDR's first 2 terms

 

[Camp]

A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.

FDR: 20% unemployment

Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment

Typical deflection and attempt at thread kill. What the heck does unemployment or economics during the depression have to do with the slanderous accusation that the great American, Harry Hopkins was a spy for Stalin during WWII?

 

[Camp]

First I'll answer a question you pose towards the end of this poorly conceived and executed continuation of an attack on this quintessentially American political master. (Churchill called him "Lord Root of the Matter". In one of the volumes of his autobiography he said ths of Hopkins;
"There he sat, slim, frail, ill, but absolutely glowing with refined comprehension of the Cause. It was to be the defeat, ruin, and slaughter of Hitler, to the exclusion of all other purposes, loyalties, or aims. In the history of the United States few brighter flames have burned.
Harry Hopkins always went to the root of the matter. I have been present at several great international conferences, where twenty or more of the most important executive personages were gathered together. When the discussion flagged and all seemed baffled, it was on these occasions he would rap out the deadly question, "Surely, Mr. President, here is the point we have got to settle. Are we going to face it or not?" Faced it always was, and, being faced, was conquered. He was a true leader of men, and alike in ardour and in wisdom in times of crisis he has rarely been excelled. His love for the causes of the weak and poor was matched by his passion against tyranny, especially when tyranny was, for the time, triumphant."

The answer to your query "How am I doing so far"? would be a resounding, room rattling guffaw if it wasn't for the fact that your attack, a pathetically manufactured web of conspiracy and lies though it may be, is on a great American 68 years dead who is not here to throw truth back into your face.

To start with, your short bio does Hopkins a disservice. His influence and participation in the events of the mid 20th century are way broader and deeper than your short outline suggests, but that's not really the heart of the matter, this is;
. "The leading evidence that Hopkins was a spy for Joseph Stalin is presented by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."

Every serious scholar since the revelations of the Vassiliev notebooks do not give any credence to their "evidence". I pointed this out in a previous post;
"These notebooks put a “case closed” end to the mystery of “19.” Source no. “19” was Laurence Duggan. Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 1935–37, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions). In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America. He left the State Department in 1944. He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department". LINK:Hopkins was not Agent 19

I don't know why you keep repeating this disccredited slander.

Next: Where did you come up with this? "One of those groups, led by Lee Pressman, was established within the Department of Agriculture in late 1933, and Hopkins was a member"

Pressmen's own testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee is clear;

Mr. PRESSMAN. I was asked to join [the Communist Party] by a man named Harold Ware. For the reasons which I have already indicated, I assented, and I joined with the group which had, in addition to myself, three other persons, all of whom at that time were in the Department of Agriculture.
.........
Mr. NIXON. .... Just so there will be absolute clarity of the record, as I understand, the records of this committee show that the three members of the group who were in the Department of Agriculture were John Abt, Nathan Witt, and Henry Collins?
Some back and forth about whether Collins was a member....
Mr. WOOD. I will ask you to name the other employee of the Department of Agriculture who was a member of the group.
Mr. PRESSMAN. The third person among the individuals who have been named as members of this group who was an employee of the Department of Agriculture when I was in 1934 was Charles Kramer.

Pressmen named Abt, Nathan Witt, and Kramer as the three other members of his group. LINK: HUAC Testimony

You seem to see some machiavellian nature in Hopkins relationship with FDR, really it's pretty simple;

Churchill again, "As FDR's point man or unofficial emissary, Winston Churchill held Hopkins in high esteem, once remarking, "He was the most faithful and perfect channel of communication between the president and me." Or, "Beloved by some--such as Churchill, who believed that Hopkins "always went to the root of the matter"--and was trusted by most--including the paranoid Stalin--there were nevertheless those who resented the influence of "the White House Rasputin."-David Roll

And then you really enter the twighlight zone. Emanuel M. Josephson? Really? The "paranoid's paranoid". e.g.;

"Josephson argues that almost half of all US presidents were drawn from the Roosevelt - Adams -Delano "dynasty" and the dynasty acquired ambitions to return the US to some kind of elected monarchy. FDR had absorbed from Germany the "Bismarxist ideology" and during his administration had entered alliance with the Rockefeller empire. This alliance, along with the long established naval interests of the Roosevelt-Delano branch of the dynasty, that accounts for US participation in the world wars and cold war."

Josephson is the archetype for the History as Conspiracy school. Check out his bibliography.
Maybe you should edit your copy and pastes a little better, leaving this out... 5. "Josephson, who was hardly an admirer of Roosevelt and his New Deal, lacks references for his allegations" might have been a good idea.

And Murray Garsson makes a fine star witness; God only knows what manipulation of reality went on between him and Josephson.

"After his release from prison, Murray Garsson was impoverished and subsisted on the charity of friends. For the last three weeks of his life, Garsson, destitute, lived in the reception room of Dr. Emanuel Josephson, 230 East 61st Street. Dr. Josephson prescribed barbiturates for Garsson. On March 7, 1957, Garsson was found unconscious at the foot of a staircase in the 61st Street building. He was taken to Bellevue Hospital, where he died a few days later. Milton Helpern, the chief medical examiner, performed an autopsy and determined the cause of death was brain hemorrhage, the result of a fall down a flight of stairs." LINK: Murray Garrson's pathetic life, and death

No human being is perfect, you can find fault in the most saintly among us. You have failed miserably even at this simple task. You should have followed my hint;

"And there's only one path that I've left open for you to take in your feverish desire to actually hang something out there that might negatively reflect on Hopkin's brilliant and honorable career. So find this minor footnote and exploit it to the best abilities of those you will C&P."

You didn't, and you've produced nothing except more impotent clawing at a great man's reputation.

Back on topic.

 

[Camp]

This is from an article by two Conservative scholars from the Conservative FrontPageMag. They prove that Harry Hopkins was not Agent 19 and describe how and why Edourd Mark came to the wrong conclusion. (They were friends and colleagues of Mark) I've given you the bottom line from this article before. You continue to assert HH was agent 19. Was West that hypnotic? Repeating a lie or misconception over and over will not make it true.

I hate to C&P so much of this but maybe you don't have time to follow the LINK I've also edited it to shorten, hopefully without losing impact and in no way changing conclusions.

".... But while hundreds of cover names were identified, there remained hundreds that were not due to the paucity of the information provided about the person’s activities. One of those unidentified cover names was a Soviet source with the cover name “19.
Source “19” appears in a single Venona message numbered 812, dated 29 May 1943, and sent to Moscow from the New York station of the NKGB (predecessor to the Cold War era KGB). The NKGB station operated out of the Soviet diplomatic consulate in New York City. The National Security Agency declassified the decrypted Venona messages in 1995-96 and has made them public on the web".[3]

"In 1999 we published Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, a book that explored what could be learned from the Venona decryptions about Soviet intelligence operations in the United States. We discussed the mysterious “19” at length,....."

".... Unfortunately, the deciphered parts of the message do not give the exact date of Source no. 19’s conversation with Roosevelt and Churchill.”[5] Additionally, we noted that even the identity of Zamestitel was not clear. Since in Russian it means “deputy,” Venona project analysts at first though it referred to Vice President Henry Wallace but later suggested that it might be Harry Hopkins. We thought the original Wallace designation the more likely."

"....While we judged “19” to be unidentifiable, a colleague had reached a different conclusion. The late Eduard Mark published an essay in 1998 entitled “Venona’s Source 19 and the Trident Conference of May 1943: Diplomacy or Espionage?”[6] We knew and respected Mark’s scholarly ability. We discussed the agent “19” issue with him as he was preparing his essay (and we were then preparing our Venona book) and, at his request, commented on early drafts of his essay. Mark’s argument was essentially a “last man standing” one. He meticulously went over records of who was known to have been at various Trident-related events to narrow down the list of who was present simultaneously with Roosevelt, Churchill, and Wallace and could plausibly have discussed the second front issue. (Mark also considered the possibility of Zamestitel being Hopkins but, as we had, thought Wallace more likely.) Mark came down to seeing only four plausible candidates for “19”: Harry Hopkins, Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King, London-based Lend-Lease coordinator W. Averill Harriman, and Britain’s Lord Beaverbrook. He then considered each in turn and finally concluded, “the fact remains that there is no plausible candidate for 19 but Hopkins.”[7]

"....We disagreed and told him so when his essay was still in draft form. In our view a “last man standing” argument is indirect and circumstantial and is only convincing when one can definitely identify all of the possible candidates and eliminate all but one. While the records of who attended formal Trident conference events were largely reliable, those of Trident-related events, particularly less formal social events, were not. Record keeping in that era of social functions were simply too casual to be regarded as definitive. Not everyone on an invitation list showed up, and those that did would, particularly if they were of senior standing, bring a guest. Mark was of the view that most social events could be ignored because something as sensitive as the second front would not be discussed. Our view was that senior officials in that era were notorious for gossiping about such matters among themselves even at such events and those venues could not be ruled out. Consequently, one could not be confident of knowing all of the possible candidates for “19” and a “last man standing” argument could not be viewed with certainty due to the fragility of the scaffolding of evidence.

Mark, however, was confident of his argument and proceeded with publication. We made note of his argument that “19” was Hopkins in our Venona book which was published subsequent to Mark’s essay and noted that he also concluded “that the readable portions of the message do not allow a clear determination of whether Hopkins/19 was a Soviet covert source or as a benign ‘back channel’ diplomatic contact between Roosevelt and the Soviets. We agree that the partial decryption and ambiguity of the message does not allow a confident judgment on Source no. 19’s relationship to the Soviets; while impressed by Mark’s analysis, we view the evidence as too slim to enable us to reach a judgment about Source No. 19’s identity."

Their final conclusion in this matter came some time later, and I've given this to you before with the link;Again the LINK

We did not, in fact, give any more thought to the identity of “19” until we gained access to the Vassiliev notebooks. These notebooks put a “case closed” end to the mystery of “19.” Source no. “19” was Laurence Duggan. Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 1935–37, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions). In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America. He left the State Department in 1944. He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department.

Agent 19 was Duggan Repeat after me Agent 19 was Duggan. I think CAMP gave you this before and maybe others. Do you ever admit you're wrong? Are you afraid removing one of the cards will cause the whole structure to fall?

And lets give this a bump.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Thanks to the clandestine services on both sides, the US and USSR never had a hot or nuclear war. That being the case, condemning any operative is to try and rewrite history with unknown outcomes.

 

[Camp]

Sad that clandestine operators don't get credit for their sacrifices. Takes a special kind of individual to dedicate themselves knowing they will not be recognized by their fellow citizens and family for their efforts and patriotism. Makes it worse and so much sadder when political operatives, novice or professional, besmirch them long after they are dead and gone.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.

FDR: 20% unemployment

Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment

Typical deflection and attempt at thread kill. What the heck does unemployment or economics during the depression have to do with the slanderous accusation that the great American, Harry Hopkins was a spy for Stalin during WWII?

Yes, you're right. Hopkins was one of Stalin's best assets, let's stay with that

 

[PoliticalChic]

If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?

This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;

.... “these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.” The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999

Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author. Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?

BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. Smugly Backside. It's almost as if you're subconsciously channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what they say.)

If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?

This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;

.... “these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.” The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999




If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly.....on the very same page that you quote above:

"Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately warned the Soviet embassy in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."


Stalin loved him....and with good reason.

Again....you said:
"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."


Pretty good tireless work for America?

Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?

 

[Camp]

A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.

FDR: 20% unemployment

Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment

Typical deflection and attempt at thread kill. What the heck does unemployment or economics during the depression have to do with the slanderous accusation that the great American, Harry Hopkins was a spy for Stalin during WWII?

Yes, you're right. Hopkins was one of Stalin's best assets, let's stay with that

If you could just provide some academic or scholarly data to back up that claim it would be great. So far, all the information that has been provided to support your assertion, posted by another poster, has been shown to be obsolete due to the release of more accurate and reliable documents and data. The original allegations on Hopkins were based on speculation about the identity of an agent referred to as Agent 19. The situation is explained in great detail in one of the above post. So why do you persist? What do you know that others that have looked into this topic don't know? Are you just refusing to adjust your opinion because you are just stuck and stubbornly holding on to a belief even after it has been debunked or do you have pertinent information to support the allegations you repeatedly make? Are you a bullshiting liar who thinks it is OK to bare false witness against a dead patriot to promote your political agenda or something else? Maybe you think the data posted by myself and others that dispute you claims are wrong. That would be fine. Maybe you could show us how it is wrong. Just sayin', if you are going to call a dead patriot a traitor you should be able to back it up to some degree or on some level.

 

[Camp]

If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?

This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;

.... “these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.” The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999

Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author. Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?

BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. Smugly Backside. It's almost as if you're subconsciously channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what they say.)

If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?

This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;

.... “these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.” The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999




If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly.....on the very same page that you quote above:

"Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately warned the Soviet embassy in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."


Stalin loved him....and with good reason.

Again....you said:
"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."


Pretty good tireless work for America?

Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?

Just like today, and even more so back during Hoover's hay days of blackmailing and running his own little private secret police force, the FBI was not always trusted with certain types of information. Other government agencies did not want Hoover or the FBI in on their operations and secrets, just like other government agencies don't want the FBI in on operations and secrets today.
Ofcourse Stalin was happy whenever Hopkins was in the picture. It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. That is what a back channel operative does. He or she becomes somewhat of a trusted friend and creates an atmosphere whereby opponents can communicate in ways outside of normal diplomatic and leader to leader protocals and restraints.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

We all owe a debt to both sides for averting nuclear war. Especially, and in particular notable Soviets like

Oleg Gordievsky,
Oleg Gordievsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Two of Gordievsky's most important contributions were averting a potential nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union when NATO exercise Able Archer 83 was misinterpreted by the Soviets as a potential first strike..."

Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov,
Stanislav Petrov - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"On September 26, 1983, he was the duty officer at the command center for the Oko nuclear early-warning system when the system reported that a missile was being launched from the United States. Petrov judged the report to be a false alarm,[1] and his decision is credited with having prevented an erroneous retaliatory nuclear attack on the United States and its NATO allies that could have resulted in large-scale nuclear war. Investigation later confirmed that the satellite warning system had indeed malfunctioned.[2]"

And President Putin,
The World Was Never Closer To Nuclear War Than On Jan. 25, 1995 - Business Insider
"The World Was Never Closer To Nuclear War Than On Jan. 25, 1995"

"Boris Yeltsin was alerted, and immediately given the Cheget, the "nuclear briefcase" that connects senior officials while they decide whether or not to launch Russia's nuclear weapons. Nuclear submarine commanders were ordered to full battle alert and told to stand by.

Apparently Yeltsin doubted the U.S. would launch a surreptitious attack and within five minutes, Russian radar came back confirming the missile was heading harmlessly out to sea.

Russian citizens didn't find about about the incident for weeks, and of course it's been reported in the U.S. news since. But the event never achieved the renown of the Cuban Missile Crisis, though it seems to have brought us even closer to the brink of nuclear war. "

 

[Delta4Embassy]

How close we've come to nuclear war is truly disturbing and reminds me of the bit from "Men In Black" that's never been more true and applicable:

"There's always an alien battle cruiser, or a Korilian death ray...or an intergalactic plague about to wipe out life on this planet. The only way people get on with their happy lives...is they do not know about it!"