'The Morgenthau Plan' As Death Sentence....

[regent]

Chic: soon the historians will be rating the presidents again and since they rated FDR number one; the greatest; best we've ever had, might you cut and paste a llttle something that will make them question their ratings? Apparently most of them know little of your efforts and just rely on the same old history, so at least send them your evidence as soon as possible. boy will they be stunned.

 

[rightwinger]

Stalin's policy was simple: the result of the war had to leave Germany a smoldering wreckage

Damn...works for me

Why does PC want to leave the Nazi Death Camps in place?

I'm not sure she would have actually favored leaving the Death Camps in place, her sympathy for the Hitlerians may not extend quite that far. Still, her dismay at the allies demanding unconditional surrender and not allowing Hitler and/or his cohorts negotiating the best deal possible might raise a few eyebrows around an American Legion luncheon table. Her humanity certainly shines through in her concern for the treatment of the Nazis post war. After the war in which about 42 million Europeans were killed (of which only about 14 million were soldiers) and every major city sustained horrific damage and much of the life-sustaining infrastructure, rural as well as urban, was destroyed, most of the rest of the World was baying for blood. P.C. seems to think the World should have been more loving, more forgiving toward the wild beast that was Hitler's Germany. What a noble soul she must be. The Morgenthau Plan was designed to curtail Germany's war making capability, dismantling or destroying or confiscating the steel making capacities and the factories and heavy industry and mines. Other measures were definitely designed to be punitive and did inflict harm on the German people who hadn't exactly rose in unison to protest the murderous Nazi policies. This was one of the main reasons Roosevelt approved the plan. As he said, "Too many people here and in England hold the view that the German people as a whole are not responsible for what has taken place – that only a few Nazis are responsible. That unfortunately is not based on fact. The German people must have it driven home to them that the whole nation has been engaged in a lawless conspiracy against the decencies of modern civilization". Actually considering the horrors inflicted on the World by the Nazi nation it might be surprising to some that the harshest of the measures were being rolled back by 1947 and eventually Germany would benefit from the policies of the Marshall plan along with the European nations that had actually been allies in the most destructive war in human history. As an aside, taking the historical record into account P.C. is giving Stalin significantly more credit for implementation of the Plan than any responsible historian would or could. He wasn't at the Quebec Conference where FDR and a reluctant Churchill initialled the plan.He had more homicidal plans for the Germans himself. And resistance to the plan in the U.S. Government was led by people like Secretary of State Hull and Henry L. Stimson, who if my memory serves me P.C. has in the past accused of being leading lights in the Communist infiltration of the FDR's administration. Sometimes her Machiavellian and imaginative versions of history are mind-numbingly paranoid and confused. Still, It's refreshing to see that she has a big heart, even if she reserves her sympathies for Humanity's rejects like Hitler, I guess.

It is the nature of Frau Braun to bemoan the Allied treatment of her beloved Adolf

Why did FDR have to be so hard on the poor Nazis?

Only about the 18th thread on it

 

[regent]

Ickes suggested that Hopkins and Morgenthau were like peas in a pod.
(my cut and paste)

 

[Camp]

The linked Front Page article by Haynes addresses everything in your link. You are simply ignoring the most recent revelations that came out with the secret Vassilieves Notebooks. All of your links are based on the obsolete pre-Vasilievs Notebooks that were based on the wrong assumption that Hopkins was Source 19.

Go ahead.....show each of the proofs I have provided are inaccurate.


I especially like this:

1.Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days. The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):

a. Hopkins’s pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments are available for viewing. Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, he continued to ply his influence with FDR, who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.

After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of “reparations.” At this point, Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta. “Mr. President,” this said, “the Russians have given in so much at this conference I don’t think we should let them down. Let the British disagree if they want—and continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings]” (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).


b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had “given in” to FDR—the entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction.
http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm


Harry Hopkins.....Stalin's most highly placed spy: in the White House itself.

You....a decrepit fool and dupe.


True?

Your link from "dc dave" does exactly what I said. It relies on the pre-Vasiliev's Notebooks and the faulty assumption that Hopkins was Source 19. Like you, dc dave chooses to ignore the debunked notion of Hopkins being Source 19 because without that misinformation you a thesis based on a proven lie.

Even before the United States formally entered the war, Hopkins made it clear that he saw the struggle as a world revolution. In an article published in the American Magazine in July, 1941, he wrote:
"This is not only a fight for freedom of speech, religion and assembly. It is a fight for economic freedom for the people of the world, a fight to fulfill in this generation all that our fathers fought and strove for in the last 200 years. . . When a democratic victory is won, then the great wealth of the world must be shared with all people." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.95.

Now....does that sound like a communist?

You betcha'!!


Harry Hopkins.....Joseph Stalin's most highly placed spy.

You....a decrepit fool and a dupe.

Manly and the Twenty-Year Revolution again. Nothing in your link shows Hopkins to be a spy. You provide subjective data that indicates Hopkins may have been misled, a dupe, made mistakes, etc., but nothing to confirm your insistant claim that he was a spy, which would make him a traitor.

This is how PC evades answering refutations of what she claims are "facts". It should be noteworthy that after being supplied with a scholarly, detailed synopsis of the topic of Hopkins, published by a conservative news source, PC does not refute the article, but rather bypasses it and reverts to unreliable sources or worse, she does a cut a paste of litany of quotes that does not even address the article that refuted her claim. She is now using subjective criticisms that Hopkins was incompetent to paint him as a spy.

Back for another lesson???

Sure.....

Let's see, if Harry Hopkins were a spy for Stalin.....how would he behave if he found out that the FBI found out about another Stalinist?

This is how:

In May of 1943, J. Edgar Hoover sent a letter to Hopkins, ....we know that Hopkins knew that he was tipping off the Soviets to FBI surveillance of a known Soviet Agent seeking US military secrets. " When we read what Hoover told Hopkins in his confidential letter — that a Comintern agent posing as a senior Soviet diplomat in Washington was passing money to the American Communist underground to establish Comintern networks within the U.S war industry to steal military secrets — and see Hopkins immediately turn around and tell the Soviet Embassy, where that same “diplomat” was posted, that the FBI was onto them, we have to realize that we are looking at a traitor, acting with Soviet, not American interests at heart. I don’t see any other plausible conclusion — and this traitor was the closest advisor of the president of the Unites States. …


We wouldn’t know about this act of treason if a retired KGB archivist named Mitrokhin hadn’t bothered to copy, hide, and successfully smuggle his archives out of the former Soviet Union in 1992."

ANDREW BOSTOM: A REVIEW OF DIANA WEST’S “AMERICAN BETRAYAL” | RUTHFULLY YOURS( quoting Diana West)





There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin ......I've read it....have you?


Mitrokhin's documents showed that Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy. He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery.
http://seed-flame.blogspot.com/2012/02/16-venona-secrets.html



Now, then......

....which are you more of, a decrepit fool......or a dupe?

Both????

Your post regarding Mitrokhin, is directly addressed, explained and refuted in the link to the article by Haynes in Front Page which you refuse to address yourself. You are simply doing the same nonsense of using pre-Vassiliev Notebook data.
Other portions of your post(s) are just noise designed to make it look like you have compiled evidence, but it is a lame method of trickery. You list quotes of dubious relevance to the "fact" you are trying to establish knowing that most readers will not double check or question the worth of your cherry picked quotes. Unfortunately for you, a few here do check your sources.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Chic: soon the historians will be rating the presidents again and since they rated FDR number one; the greatest; best we've ever had, might you cut and paste a llttle something that will make them question their ratings? Apparently most of them know little of your efforts and just rely on the same old history, so at least send them your evidence as soon as possible. boy will they be stunned.

Cut and paste is a method of presenting material.
You use it as though it somehow disqualifies the material presented.

It doesn't .

But your use, as an attempt to hide your inability to deny what is presented, marks you as an indoctrinated dunce, either too ignorant or too cowardly to confront the facts.

That's the truth....isn't it.


Let's review:

Roosevelt followed Stalin's orders to the letter!

The Morgenthau Plan originated in Moscow, was brought to Washington by the spy Harry Dexter White, and implemented by Roosevelt under the direction of Harry Hopkins.

The cost in America lives meant less than nothing to Roosevelt.



Find anything in my posts that isn't true, documented, or sourced.

You can't .....can you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Go ahead.....show each of the proofs I have provided are inaccurate.


I especially like this:

1.Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days. The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):

a. Hopkins’s pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments are available for viewing. Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, he continued to ply his influence with FDR, who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.

After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of “reparations.” At this point, Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta. “Mr. President,” this said, “the Russians have given in so much at this conference I don’t think we should let them down. Let the British disagree if they want—and continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings]” (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).


b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had “given in” to FDR—the entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction.
http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm


Harry Hopkins.....Stalin's most highly placed spy: in the White House itself.

You....a decrepit fool and dupe.


True?

Your link from "dc dave" does exactly what I said. It relies on the pre-Vasiliev's Notebooks and the faulty assumption that Hopkins was Source 19. Like you, dc dave chooses to ignore the debunked notion of Hopkins being Source 19 because without that misinformation you a thesis based on a proven lie.

Even before the United States formally entered the war, Hopkins made it clear that he saw the struggle as a world revolution. In an article published in the American Magazine in July, 1941, he wrote:
"This is not only a fight for freedom of speech, religion and assembly. It is a fight for economic freedom for the people of the world, a fight to fulfill in this generation all that our fathers fought and strove for in the last 200 years. . . When a democratic victory is won, then the great wealth of the world must be shared with all people." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.95.

Now....does that sound like a communist?

You betcha'!!


Harry Hopkins.....Joseph Stalin's most highly placed spy.

You....a decrepit fool and a dupe.

Manly and the Twenty-Year Revolution again. Nothing in your link shows Hopkins to be a spy. You provide subjective data that indicates Hopkins may have been misled, a dupe, made mistakes, etc., but nothing to confirm your insistant claim that he was a spy, which would make him a traitor.

This is how PC evades answering refutations of what she claims are "facts". It should be noteworthy that after being supplied with a scholarly, detailed synopsis of the topic of Hopkins, published by a conservative news source, PC does not refute the article, but rather bypasses it and reverts to unreliable sources or worse, she does a cut a paste of litany of quotes that does not even address the article that refuted her claim. She is now using subjective criticisms that Hopkins was incompetent to paint him as a spy.

Back for another lesson???

Sure.....

Let's see, if Harry Hopkins were a spy for Stalin.....how would he behave if he found out that the FBI found out about another Stalinist?

This is how:

In May of 1943, J. Edgar Hoover sent a letter to Hopkins, ....we know that Hopkins knew that he was tipping off the Soviets to FBI surveillance of a known Soviet Agent seeking US military secrets. " When we read what Hoover told Hopkins in his confidential letter — that a Comintern agent posing as a senior Soviet diplomat in Washington was passing money to the American Communist underground to establish Comintern networks within the U.S war industry to steal military secrets — and see Hopkins immediately turn around and tell the Soviet Embassy, where that same “diplomat” was posted, that the FBI was onto them, we have to realize that we are looking at a traitor, acting with Soviet, not American interests at heart. I don’t see any other plausible conclusion — and this traitor was the closest advisor of the president of the Unites States. …


We wouldn’t know about this act of treason if a retired KGB archivist named Mitrokhin hadn’t bothered to copy, hide, and successfully smuggle his archives out of the former Soviet Union in 1992."

ANDREW BOSTOM: A REVIEW OF DIANA WEST’S “AMERICAN BETRAYAL” | RUTHFULLY YOURS( quoting Diana West)





There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin ......I've read it....have you?


Mitrokhin's documents showed that Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy. He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery.
http://seed-flame.blogspot.com/2012/02/16-venona-secrets.html



Now, then......

....which are you more of, a decrepit fool......or a dupe?

Both????

Your post regarding Mitrokhin, is directly addressed, explained and refuted in the link to the article by Haynes in Front Page which you refuse to address yourself. You are simply doing the same nonsense of using pre-Vassiliev Notebook data.
Other portions of your post(s) are just noise designed to make it look like you have compiled evidence, but it is a lame method of trickery. You list quotes of dubious relevance to the "fact" you are trying to establish knowing that most readers will not double check or question the worth of your cherry picked quotes. Unfortunately for you, a few here do check your sources.

"Nonsense"????


Clearly not.
"Harry Hopkins,- FDR's alter ego, co-president, or Rasputin, "...the closest and most influential adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, was a Soviet agent." and “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.”
The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins


The truth has been revealed.

Now, mind your betters.




And you didn't answer the question.....are you more of a decrepit fool, or more a dupe???
'Fess up!

 

[Camp]

For what it is worth, it does not take a genius to understand that the combined allies in World War ll learned a valuable lesson from the terms of surrender regarding Germany from World War l. Within twenty years Germany was ignoring and violating the terms and starting World War ll. It should not take a lot of imagination to figure out why the allies would not consider another such conditional surrender.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Stalin's policy was simple: the result of the war had to leave Germany a smoldering wreckage

Damn...works for me

Why does PC want to leave the Nazi Death Camps in place?

I'm not sure she would have actually favored leaving the Death Camps in place, her sympathy for the Hitlerians may not extend quite that far. Still, her dismay at the allies demanding unconditional surrender and not allowing Hitler and/or his cohorts negotiating the best deal possible might raise a few eyebrows around an American Legion luncheon table. Her humanity certainly shines through in her concern for the treatment of the Nazis post war. After the war in which about 42 million Europeans were killed (of which only about 14 million were soldiers) and every major city sustained horrific damage and much of the life-sustaining infrastructure, rural as well as urban, was destroyed, most of the rest of the World was baying for blood. P.C. seems to think the World should have been more loving, more forgiving toward the wild beast that was Hitler's Germany. What a noble soul she must be. The Morgenthau Plan was designed to curtail Germany's war making capability, dismantling or destroying or confiscating the steel making capacities and the factories and heavy industry and mines. Other measures were definitely designed to be punitive and did inflict harm on the German people who hadn't exactly rose in unison to protest the murderous Nazi policies. This was one of the main reasons Roosevelt approved the plan. As he said, "Too many people here and in England hold the view that the German people as a whole are not responsible for what has taken place – that only a few Nazis are responsible. That unfortunately is not based on fact. The German people must have it driven home to them that the whole nation has been engaged in a lawless conspiracy against the decencies of modern civilization". Actually considering the horrors inflicted on the World by the Nazi nation it might be surprising to some that the harshest of the measures were being rolled back by 1947 and eventually Germany would benefit from the policies of the Marshall plan along with the European nations that had actually been allies in the most destructive war in human history. As an aside, taking the historical record into account P.C. is giving Stalin significantly more credit for implementation of the Plan than any responsible historian would or could. He wasn't at the Quebec Conference where FDR and a reluctant Churchill initialled the plan.He had more homicidal plans for the Germans himself. And resistance to the plan in the U.S. Government was led by people like Secretary of State Hull and Henry L. Stimson, who if my memory serves me P.C. has in the past accused of being leading lights in the Communist infiltration of the FDR's administration. Sometimes her Machiavellian and imaginative versions of history are mind-numbingly paranoid and confused. Still, It's refreshing to see that she has a big heart, even if she reserves her sympathies for Humanity's rejects like Hitler, I guess.

It is the nature of Frau Braun to bemoan the Allied treatment of her beloved Adolf

Why did FDR have to be so hard on the poor Nazis?

Only about the 18th thread on it

Soooo....which is more of a lie, your attempt to associate me with the totalitarian Hitler....

....or your avi?

 

[PoliticalChic]

For what it is worth, it does not take a genius to understand that the combined allies in World War ll learned a valuable lesson from the terms of surrender regarding Germany from World War l. Within twenty years Germany was ignoring and violating the terms and starting World War ll. It should not take a lot of imagination to figure out why the allies would not consider another such conditional surrender.

How many US servicemen's lives did it cost Roosevelt to honor Stalin's orders for "unconditional surrender," when he could have achieved victory with surrender?

How many?

 

[rightwinger]

Stalin's policy was simple: the result of the war had to leave Germany a smoldering wreckage

Damn...works for me

Why does PC want to leave the Nazi Death Camps in place?

I'm not sure she would have actually favored leaving the Death Camps in place, her sympathy for the Hitlerians may not extend quite that far. Still, her dismay at the allies demanding unconditional surrender and not allowing Hitler and/or his cohorts negotiating the best deal possible might raise a few eyebrows around an American Legion luncheon table. Her humanity certainly shines through in her concern for the treatment of the Nazis post war. After the war in which about 42 million Europeans were killed (of which only about 14 million were soldiers) and every major city sustained horrific damage and much of the life-sustaining infrastructure, rural as well as urban, was destroyed, most of the rest of the World was baying for blood. P.C. seems to think the World should have been more loving, more forgiving toward the wild beast that was Hitler's Germany. What a noble soul she must be. The Morgenthau Plan was designed to curtail Germany's war making capability, dismantling or destroying or confiscating the steel making capacities and the factories and heavy industry and mines. Other measures were definitely designed to be punitive and did inflict harm on the German people who hadn't exactly rose in unison to protest the murderous Nazi policies. This was one of the main reasons Roosevelt approved the plan. As he said, "Too many people here and in England hold the view that the German people as a whole are not responsible for what has taken place – that only a few Nazis are responsible. That unfortunately is not based on fact. The German people must have it driven home to them that the whole nation has been engaged in a lawless conspiracy against the decencies of modern civilization". Actually considering the horrors inflicted on the World by the Nazi nation it might be surprising to some that the harshest of the measures were being rolled back by 1947 and eventually Germany would benefit from the policies of the Marshall plan along with the European nations that had actually been allies in the most destructive war in human history. As an aside, taking the historical record into account P.C. is giving Stalin significantly more credit for implementation of the Plan than any responsible historian would or could. He wasn't at the Quebec Conference where FDR and a reluctant Churchill initialled the plan.He had more homicidal plans for the Germans himself. And resistance to the plan in the U.S. Government was led by people like Secretary of State Hull and Henry L. Stimson, who if my memory serves me P.C. has in the past accused of being leading lights in the Communist infiltration of the FDR's administration. Sometimes her Machiavellian and imaginative versions of history are mind-numbingly paranoid and confused. Still, It's refreshing to see that she has a big heart, even if she reserves her sympathies for Humanity's rejects like Hitler, I guess.

It is the nature of Frau Braun to bemoan the Allied treatment of her beloved Adolf

Why did FDR have to be so hard on the poor Nazis?

Only about the 18th thread on it

Soooo....which is more of a lie, your attempt to associate me with the totalitarian Hitler....

....or your avi?

You still don't know what an avi is do you?

 

[rightwinger]

For what it is worth, it does not take a genius to understand that the combined allies in World War ll learned a valuable lesson from the terms of surrender regarding Germany from World War l. Within twenty years Germany was ignoring and violating the terms and starting World War ll. It should not take a lot of imagination to figure out why the allies would not consider another such conditional surrender.

How many US servicemen's lives did it cost Roosevelt to honor Stalin's orders for "unconditional surrender," when he could have achieved victory with surrender?

How many?

Good question

U.S. Servicemen. 200,0000
Soviet Servicemen. 8 million

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. Of course, Stalin didn't care about how many Russians were killed- most of the Russians who died were killed by Stalin himself....and certainly not about the numbers of American soldiers..

...but shouldn't Roosevelt had had a concern?


Once the Morgenthau Plan for 'unconditional surrender' was announced, [Stalin's spy] Harry Dexter White's plan to pastoralize, pulverize, Germany....destroy all German science, industry, technology as well as everything else...it provided high-octane propaganda for the Nazis.


Thomas Dewey stated this:
"Almost overnight, the morale of the German people seemed wholly changed....Now they are fighting with a frenzy of despair." Detroit Free Press from Detroit, Michigan · Page 6



"President Roosevelt's son-in-law Lt. Colonel John Boettiger who worked in the War Department explained to Morgenthau how the American troops who had had to fight for five weeks against fierce German resistance to capture the city of Aachen had complained to him that the Morgenthau Plan was "worth thirty divisions to the Germans."
Morgenthau Plan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Didn't 'the brilliant' FDR know this would be the result in Germany????

Or....didn't he care.

Did he feel that Stalin's smile was far more important?

 

[regent]

Chic: soon the historians will be rating the presidents again and since they rated FDR number one; the greatest; best we've ever had, might you cut and paste a llttle something that will make them question their ratings? Apparently most of them know little of your efforts and just rely on the same old history, so at least send them your evidence as soon as possible. boy will they be stunned.

Cut and paste is a method of presenting material.
You use it as though it somehow disqualifies the material presented.

It doesn't .

But your use, as an attempt to hide your inability to deny what is presented, marks you as an indoctrinated dunce, either too ignorant or too cowardly to confront the facts.

That's the truth....isn't it.


Let's review:

Roosevelt followed Stalin's orders to the letter!

The Morgenthau Plan originated in Moscow, was brought to Washington by the spy Harry Dexter White, and implemented by Roosevelt under the direction of Harry Hopkins.

The cost in America lives meant less than nothing to Roosevelt.



Find anything in my posts that isn't true, documented, or sourced.

You can't .....can you.

What is the evidence that the cost in American lives meant nothing to Roosevelt?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Stalin's policy was simple: the result of the war had to leave Germany a smoldering wreckage

Damn...works for me

Why does PC want to leave the Nazi Death Camps in place?

I'm not sure she would have actually favored leaving the Death Camps in place, her sympathy for the Hitlerians may not extend quite that far. Still, her dismay at the allies demanding unconditional surrender and not allowing Hitler and/or his cohorts negotiating the best deal possible might raise a few eyebrows around an American Legion luncheon table. Her humanity certainly shines through in her concern for the treatment of the Nazis post war. After the war in which about 42 million Europeans were killed (of which only about 14 million were soldiers) and every major city sustained horrific damage and much of the life-sustaining infrastructure, rural as well as urban, was destroyed, most of the rest of the World was baying for blood. P.C. seems to think the World should have been more loving, more forgiving toward the wild beast that was Hitler's Germany. What a noble soul she must be. The Morgenthau Plan was designed to curtail Germany's war making capability, dismantling or destroying or confiscating the steel making capacities and the factories and heavy industry and mines. Other measures were definitely designed to be punitive and did inflict harm on the German people who hadn't exactly rose in unison to protest the murderous Nazi policies. This was one of the main reasons Roosevelt approved the plan. As he said, "Too many people here and in England hold the view that the German people as a whole are not responsible for what has taken place – that only a few Nazis are responsible. That unfortunately is not based on fact. The German people must have it driven home to them that the whole nation has been engaged in a lawless conspiracy against the decencies of modern civilization". Actually considering the horrors inflicted on the World by the Nazi nation it might be surprising to some that the harshest of the measures were being rolled back by 1947 and eventually Germany would benefit from the policies of the Marshall plan along with the European nations that had actually been allies in the most destructive war in human history. As an aside, taking the historical record into account P.C. is giving Stalin significantly more credit for implementation of the Plan than any responsible historian would or could. He wasn't at the Quebec Conference where FDR and a reluctant Churchill initialled the plan.He had more homicidal plans for the Germans himself. And resistance to the plan in the U.S. Government was led by people like Secretary of State Hull and Henry L. Stimson, who if my memory serves me P.C. has in the past accused of being leading lights in the Communist infiltration of the FDR's administration. Sometimes her Machiavellian and imaginative versions of history are mind-numbingly paranoid and confused. Still, It's refreshing to see that she has a big heart, even if she reserves her sympathies for Humanity's rejects like Hitler, I guess.

It is the nature of Frau Braun to bemoan the Allied treatment of her beloved Adolf

Why did FDR have to be so hard on the poor Nazis?

Only about the 18th thread on it

Soooo....which is more of a lie, your attempt to associate me with the totalitarian Hitler....

....or your avi?

You still don't know what an avi is do you?

Ooooo..... a little sensitive about the lie?

Why?

You lie about so very many things.

You know I never endorsed the Nazis nor Hitler in any way.....yet hide behind the slander to attempt to shield every Leftist you can.


Now....that avi........
If lying were an opera, you'd be Pavarotti

 

[Camp]

Your link from "dc dave" does exactly what I said. It relies on the pre-Vasiliev's Notebooks and the faulty assumption that Hopkins was Source 19. Like you, dc dave chooses to ignore the debunked notion of Hopkins being Source 19 because without that misinformation you a thesis based on a proven lie.

Even before the United States formally entered the war, Hopkins made it clear that he saw the struggle as a world revolution. In an article published in the American Magazine in July, 1941, he wrote:
"This is not only a fight for freedom of speech, religion and assembly. It is a fight for economic freedom for the people of the world, a fight to fulfill in this generation all that our fathers fought and strove for in the last 200 years. . . When a democratic victory is won, then the great wealth of the world must be shared with all people." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.95.

Now....does that sound like a communist?

You betcha'!!


Harry Hopkins.....Joseph Stalin's most highly placed spy.

You....a decrepit fool and a dupe.

Manly and the Twenty-Year Revolution again. Nothing in your link shows Hopkins to be a spy. You provide subjective data that indicates Hopkins may have been misled, a dupe, made mistakes, etc., but nothing to confirm your insistant claim that he was a spy, which would make him a traitor.

This is how PC evades answering refutations of what she claims are "facts". It should be noteworthy that after being supplied with a scholarly, detailed synopsis of the topic of Hopkins, published by a conservative news source, PC does not refute the article, but rather bypasses it and reverts to unreliable sources or worse, she does a cut a paste of litany of quotes that does not even address the article that refuted her claim. She is now using subjective criticisms that Hopkins was incompetent to paint him as a spy.

Back for another lesson???

Sure.....

Let's see, if Harry Hopkins were a spy for Stalin.....how would he behave if he found out that the FBI found out about another Stalinist?

This is how:

In May of 1943, J. Edgar Hoover sent a letter to Hopkins, ....we know that Hopkins knew that he was tipping off the Soviets to FBI surveillance of a known Soviet Agent seeking US military secrets. " When we read what Hoover told Hopkins in his confidential letter — that a Comintern agent posing as a senior Soviet diplomat in Washington was passing money to the American Communist underground to establish Comintern networks within the U.S war industry to steal military secrets — and see Hopkins immediately turn around and tell the Soviet Embassy, where that same “diplomat” was posted, that the FBI was onto them, we have to realize that we are looking at a traitor, acting with Soviet, not American interests at heart. I don’t see any other plausible conclusion — and this traitor was the closest advisor of the president of the Unites States. …


We wouldn’t know about this act of treason if a retired KGB archivist named Mitrokhin hadn’t bothered to copy, hide, and successfully smuggle his archives out of the former Soviet Union in 1992."

ANDREW BOSTOM: A REVIEW OF DIANA WEST’S “AMERICAN BETRAYAL” | RUTHFULLY YOURS( quoting Diana West)





There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin ......I've read it....have you?


Mitrokhin's documents showed that Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy. He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery.
http://seed-flame.blogspot.com/2012/02/16-venona-secrets.html



Now, then......

....which are you more of, a decrepit fool......or a dupe?

Both????

Your post regarding Mitrokhin, is directly addressed, explained and refuted in the link to the article by Haynes in Front Page which you refuse to address yourself. You are simply doing the same nonsense of using pre-Vassiliev Notebook data.
Other portions of your post(s) are just noise designed to make it look like you have compiled evidence, but it is a lame method of trickery. You list quotes of dubious relevance to the "fact" you are trying to establish knowing that most readers will not double check or question the worth of your cherry picked quotes. Unfortunately for you, a few here do check your sources.

"Nonsense"????


Clearly not.
"Harry Hopkins,- FDR's alter ego, co-president, or Rasputin, "...the closest and most influential adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, was a Soviet agent." and “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.”
The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins


The truth has been revealed.

Now, mind your betters.




And you didn't answer the question.....are you more of a decrepit fool, or more a dupe???
'Fess up!

More nonsense, this time from a pair of genuine hacks. Your sources get worse and worse. Given a genuine source from established scholars, you choose to ignore them.
Simple questions. Do you deny that the Hopkins story was debunked with the discovery and release of the Vassiliev Notebooks and the analysis and conclusions of scholars Haynes and Klehr? Do you have any works by established scholars that are post Vassiliev Notebooks that support your claim that Hopkins was a spy? Not criticisms of his worth and intellect, but actual support for your claim of him being a spy and or traitor.

www.johnearlhaynes.org/page102.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

Chic: soon the historians will be rating the presidents again and since they rated FDR number one; the greatest; best we've ever had, might you cut and paste a llttle something that will make them question their ratings? Apparently most of them know little of your efforts and just rely on the same old history, so at least send them your evidence as soon as possible. boy will they be stunned.

Cut and paste is a method of presenting material.
You use it as though it somehow disqualifies the material presented.

It doesn't .

But your use, as an attempt to hide your inability to deny what is presented, marks you as an indoctrinated dunce, either too ignorant or too cowardly to confront the facts.

That's the truth....isn't it.


Let's review:

Roosevelt followed Stalin's orders to the letter!

The Morgenthau Plan originated in Moscow, was brought to Washington by the spy Harry Dexter White, and implemented by Roosevelt under the direction of Harry Hopkins.

The cost in America lives meant less than nothing to Roosevelt.



Find anything in my posts that isn't true, documented, or sourced.

You can't .....can you.

What is the evidence that the cost in American lives meant nothing to Roosevelt?

How many American servicemen's lives would have been spared had he ignored Stalin's demands for unconditional surrender, and accepted the surrender outright?


How many of your fellow American's lives would it have been worth to you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

For what it is worth, it does not take a genius to understand that the combined allies in World War ll learned a valuable lesson from the terms of surrender regarding Germany from World War l. Within twenty years Germany was ignoring and violating the terms and starting World War ll. It should not take a lot of imagination to figure out why the allies would not consider another such conditional surrender.

How many US servicemen's lives did it cost Roosevelt to honor Stalin's orders for "unconditional surrender," when he could have achieved victory with surrender?

How many?

Good question

U.S. Servicemen. 200,0000
Soviet Servicemen. 8 million

Excellent admission.


Why are you willing to give up 200,000 American lives?


Why?

After the war, America gave the same deal to Nazis that they could have given to anti-Nazis without those loses.

The blood of those 200,000 is on Roosevelt's hands.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Chic: soon the historians will be rating the presidents again and since they rated FDR number one; the greatest; best we've ever had, might you cut and paste a llttle something that will make them question their ratings? Apparently most of them know little of your efforts and just rely on the same old history, so at least send them your evidence as soon as possible. boy will they be stunned.

Cut and paste is a method of presenting material.
You use it as though it somehow disqualifies the material presented.

It doesn't .

But your use, as an attempt to hide your inability to deny what is presented, marks you as an indoctrinated dunce, either too ignorant or too cowardly to confront the facts.

That's the truth....isn't it.


Let's review:

Roosevelt followed Stalin's orders to the letter!

The Morgenthau Plan originated in Moscow, was brought to Washington by the spy Harry Dexter White, and implemented by Roosevelt under the direction of Harry Hopkins.

The cost in America lives meant less than nothing to Roosevelt.



Find anything in my posts that isn't true, documented, or sourced.

You can't .....can you.

What is the evidence that the cost in American lives meant nothing to Roosevelt?

Please....don't seek to be identified as even dumber than you already are.

He obeyed a foreign homicidal dictator.....clear "evidence that the cost in American lives meant nothing to Roosevelt."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Even before the United States formally entered the war, Hopkins made it clear that he saw the struggle as a world revolution. In an article published in the American Magazine in July, 1941, he wrote:
"This is not only a fight for freedom of speech, religion and assembly. It is a fight for economic freedom for the people of the world, a fight to fulfill in this generation all that our fathers fought and strove for in the last 200 years. . . When a democratic victory is won, then the great wealth of the world must be shared with all people." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.95.

Now....does that sound like a communist?

You betcha'!!


Harry Hopkins.....Joseph Stalin's most highly placed spy.

You....a decrepit fool and a dupe.

Manly and the Twenty-Year Revolution again. Nothing in your link shows Hopkins to be a spy. You provide subjective data that indicates Hopkins may have been misled, a dupe, made mistakes, etc., but nothing to confirm your insistant claim that he was a spy, which would make him a traitor.

This is how PC evades answering refutations of what she claims are "facts". It should be noteworthy that after being supplied with a scholarly, detailed synopsis of the topic of Hopkins, published by a conservative news source, PC does not refute the article, but rather bypasses it and reverts to unreliable sources or worse, she does a cut a paste of litany of quotes that does not even address the article that refuted her claim. She is now using subjective criticisms that Hopkins was incompetent to paint him as a spy.

Back for another lesson???

Sure.....

Let's see, if Harry Hopkins were a spy for Stalin.....how would he behave if he found out that the FBI found out about another Stalinist?

This is how:

In May of 1943, J. Edgar Hoover sent a letter to Hopkins, ....we know that Hopkins knew that he was tipping off the Soviets to FBI surveillance of a known Soviet Agent seeking US military secrets. " When we read what Hoover told Hopkins in his confidential letter — that a Comintern agent posing as a senior Soviet diplomat in Washington was passing money to the American Communist underground to establish Comintern networks within the U.S war industry to steal military secrets — and see Hopkins immediately turn around and tell the Soviet Embassy, where that same “diplomat” was posted, that the FBI was onto them, we have to realize that we are looking at a traitor, acting with Soviet, not American interests at heart. I don’t see any other plausible conclusion — and this traitor was the closest advisor of the president of the Unites States. …


We wouldn’t know about this act of treason if a retired KGB archivist named Mitrokhin hadn’t bothered to copy, hide, and successfully smuggle his archives out of the former Soviet Union in 1992."

ANDREW BOSTOM: A REVIEW OF DIANA WEST’S “AMERICAN BETRAYAL” | RUTHFULLY YOURS( quoting Diana West)





There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin ......I've read it....have you?


Mitrokhin's documents showed that Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy. He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery.
http://seed-flame.blogspot.com/2012/02/16-venona-secrets.html



Now, then......

....which are you more of, a decrepit fool......or a dupe?

Both????

Your post regarding Mitrokhin, is directly addressed, explained and refuted in the link to the article by Haynes in Front Page which you refuse to address yourself. You are simply doing the same nonsense of using pre-Vassiliev Notebook data.
Other portions of your post(s) are just noise designed to make it look like you have compiled evidence, but it is a lame method of trickery. You list quotes of dubious relevance to the "fact" you are trying to establish knowing that most readers will not double check or question the worth of your cherry picked quotes. Unfortunately for you, a few here do check your sources.

"Nonsense"????


Clearly not.
"Harry Hopkins,- FDR's alter ego, co-president, or Rasputin, "...the closest and most influential adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, was a Soviet agent." and “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.”
The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins


The truth has been revealed.

Now, mind your betters.




And you didn't answer the question.....are you more of a decrepit fool, or more a dupe???
'Fess up!

More nonsense, this time from a pair of genuine hacks. Your sources get worse and worse. Given a genuine source from established scholars, you choose to ignore them.
Simple questions. Do you deny that the Hopkins story was debunked with the discovery and release of the Vassiliev Notebooks and the analysis and conclusions of scholars Haynes and Klehr? Do you have any works by established scholars that are post Vassiliev Notebooks that support your claim that Hopkins was a spy? Not criticisms of his worth and intellect, but actual support for your claim of him being a spy and or traitor.

www.johnearlhaynes.org/page102.html

The only 'hack' here is you.

I've given a dozen examples of the words of experts.....and every one exposes Harry Hopkins as the Soviet agent he was.

You...."is not, issss noootttttttt!!!"


And the reason?
It reveals Roosevelt as the vassal of Stalin that he was.




Sooooo......are you simply a decrepit fool.....or a communist dupe?

Which one?

 

[Camp]

Chic: soon the historians will be rating the presidents again and since they rated FDR number one; the greatest; best we've ever had, might you cut and paste a llttle something that will make them question their ratings? Apparently most of them know little of your efforts and just rely on the same old history, so at least send them your evidence as soon as possible. boy will they be stunned.

Cut and paste is a method of presenting material.
You use it as though it somehow disqualifies the material presented.

It doesn't .

But your use, as an attempt to hide your inability to deny what is presented, marks you as an indoctrinated dunce, either too ignorant or too cowardly to confront the facts.

That's the truth....isn't it.


Let's review:

Roosevelt followed Stalin's orders to the letter!

The Morgenthau Plan originated in Moscow, was brought to Washington by the spy Harry Dexter White, and implemented by Roosevelt under the direction of Harry Hopkins.

The cost in America lives meant less than nothing to Roosevelt.



Find anything in my posts that isn't true, documented, or sourced.

You can't .....can you.

What is the evidence that the cost in American lives meant nothing to Roosevelt?

How many American servicemen's lives would have been spared had he ignored Stalin's demands for unconditional surrender, and accepted the surrender outright?


How many of your fellow American's lives would it have been worth to you?

There was never an actual viable and possible surrender offered by Germany, so you are just making stuff up to falsely promote your silly conspiracy theory.