The Myth of McCarthyism

[Flopper]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Yet as has been revealed for some time now McCarthy was correct.

Communism - McCarthy Was Right


Outrageously even to this day the democats/liberals/socialists/marxists/communists continue to villify and lie about him despite the fact they should know better and perhaps they do but as per sop they never let the truth get in the way of their narrative.


The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard



On This Day: McCarthy warns of communists in State Department

Well, lets see. Trump giving Russians classified information, and selling out the US to an ex Soviet KGB agent. Then sends love letters to North Korea. Then A plane load of Republican Senators fly to Russia on the 4th of July to sell out the US to the Russians. Now we have Republican Senators openly taking money from Russian oligarchs, and brazenly allowing the Kremlin to interfere in our elections. Then the Secretary of State gives Crimea away to the Russians, and tells our ally, sorry, thats just the way it is, and lets Belarus have all of the Ukraine oil they want.

Damn. You're right. the commies have infiltrated the government. And it's so complete, they have an asset in the White House, assets in the State Dept., and assets in the Senate. They have effectively co opted the entire Republican party.

AND trump pissed all over the Monroe Doctrine by letting putin and russia into Venezuela.

Now putin and russia have a military foothold on our door step.

Thanks to trump and the republicans.

?
What military assets do you think Russia has in Venezuela

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

 

[bripat9643]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

If you are a member of the communist party, you are taking orders from Stalin. You are a traitor. You sure as hell don't belong in any sensitive government positions. Getting scum that out of the government is all McCarthy was trying to do.

 

[MacTheKnife]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

 

[bripat9643]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

They never can because all the people he called before his committee were guilty.

 

[Flopper]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

 

[anynameyouwish]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

the problem with mccarthyism and todays modern conservative is that they BOTH are so extreme and deranged that they accuse ANYONE who isn't a diehard conservative christian of being a "commy".

 

[MacTheKnife]

It is time to examine the new evidence objectively and to reassess McCarthy, his activities, and Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government. In so doing we perform an act of justice to a wrongly maligned man, gain greater knowledge of the Cold War’s early days, and sound a warning regarding possible espionage within and against the U.S. government by current or future enemies.

To reassess McCarthy accurately requires knowledge of (1) the murderously evil nature of Communism, (2) the massive Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government, and (3) the specifics of numerous cases regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose that espionage.

Regarding the first of these, readers are encouraged to read my recent essay, “The Socialist Holocaust and its American Deniers,”5 and its sources, especially The Black Book of Communism, which provides data taken, in part, from the files of numerous former Communist regimes, including the Soviets. Suffice it to say here that, worldwide, Communism has been responsible for the murder of one hundred million innocent civilians.6 More, it has done so in strict adherence to its cardinal principle: Because members of the owning class cruelly exploit members of the working class, the former must be expunged in ruthless class warfare.

Items two and three—Soviet espionage penetration of the U.S. government and details regarding McCarthy’s efforts to expose it—are the focus of this essay.

Soviet Espionage Penetration of the U.S. Government
The Soviets targeted the Communists’ main ideological enemy, the capitalist United States, even during World War II, when the two nations were supposedly allied in a death struggle against fascism. Soviet agents achieved widespread penetration of the American government, spying, stealing secrets, ultimately supplying data enabling Stalin’s blood-drenched regime to develop an atomic weapon years earlier than otherwise.

The story reads like a spy thriller. . . .The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Yet as has been revealed for some time now McCarthy was correct.

Communism - McCarthy Was Right


Outrageously even to this day the democats/liberals/socialists/marxists/communists continue to villify and lie about him despite the fact they should know better and perhaps they do but as per sop they never let the truth get in the way of their narrative.


The Vindication of Joseph McCarthy - The Objective Standard



On This Day: McCarthy warns of communists in State Department

Well, lets see. Trump giving Russians classified information, and selling out the US to an ex Soviet KGB agent. Then sends love letters to North Korea. Then A plane load of Republican Senators fly to Russia on the 4th of July to sell out the US to the Russians. Now we have Republican Senators openly taking money from Russian oligarchs, and brazenly allowing the Kremlin to interfere in our elections. Then the Secretary of State gives Crimea away to the Russians, and tells our ally, sorry, thats just the way it is, and lets Belarus have all of the Ukraine oil they want.

Damn. You're right. the commies have infiltrated the government. And it's so complete, they have an asset in the White House, assets in the State Dept., and assets in the Senate. They have effectively co opted the entire Republican party.

AND trump pissed all over the Monroe Doctrine by letting putin and russia into Venezuela.

Now putin and russia have a military foothold on our door step.

Thanks to trump and the republicans.

?
What military assets do you think Russia has in Venezuela

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

 

[Flopper]

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. The daily broadcast of the hearings and interviews, created near panic conditions with people looking for communist everywhere which is exactly what McCarthy wanted. He set the stage for witch hunts across American. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Well, lets see. Trump giving Russians classified information, and selling out the US to an ex Soviet KGB agent. Then sends love letters to North Korea. Then A plane load of Republican Senators fly to Russia on the 4th of July to sell out the US to the Russians. Now we have Republican Senators openly taking money from Russian oligarchs, and brazenly allowing the Kremlin to interfere in our elections. Then the Secretary of State gives Crimea away to the Russians, and tells our ally, sorry, thats just the way it is, and lets Belarus have all of the Ukraine oil they want.

Damn. You're right. the commies have infiltrated the government. And it's so complete, they have an asset in the White House, assets in the State Dept., and assets in the Senate. They have effectively co opted the entire Republican party.

AND trump pissed all over the Monroe Doctrine by letting putin and russia into Venezuela.

Now putin and russia have a military foothold on our door step.

Thanks to trump and the republicans.

?
What military assets do you think Russia has in Venezuela

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

 

[anynameyouwish]

McCarthy didn't do diddly shit in catching spy. He was driven by a desire to expose people with ideas and opinions that could be interpreted as Communist. The FBI did the investigations and integrations that lead to convictions. Hoover did turn over results of investigations to McCarthy in order to conduct his inquisitions. Most of the people that McCarthy called to testify never did. They met with investigators and made deals, usually confessing their sins and often naming others avoiding testifying or any criminal charges. McCarthy wanted celebrities to testify in order to get public notice so most of the little fish were never in hot seat.

What brought McCarthy down was the Army herrings. By 1954 McCarthy, who was losing the support of many because of his bullying tactics and unsubstantiated charges, finally overreached himself when he accused several U.S. Army officers of Communist subversion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower was fed up and pushed for an investigation of his charges, and the televised hearings exposed McCarthy as a reckless and excessive tyrant who never produced proper documentation for any of his claims. By mid-year, McCarthy was himself being investigated by a republican controlled Senate in a resolution of censure.
Albert Einstein Typed Letter Signed McCarthy | The Raab Collection

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

Are there any conservatives who do NOT want to destroy the lives (or kill) of people simply because they are NOT right wing fascists?

 

[Flopper]

AND trump pissed all over the Monroe Doctrine by letting putin and russia into Venezuela.

Now putin and russia have a military foothold on our door step.

Thanks to trump and the republicans.

?
What military assets do you think Russia has in Venezuela

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

It's only bad if you belief the accused have right to defend themselves, that people have the right to free speech, and state their support for any ideology regardless of how unpopular it might be without being attacked and ridiculed by your government.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Bullshite.......like so many others you have absorbed the propaganda spread by the liberal media.





President Harry Truman’s Secretary of State at the time, Dean Acheson, was well known as a man sympathetic to Communism and Communists. As far back as the 1930s Acheson had worked as a lawyer on behalf of Stalin’s regime, prior to the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States, and recently he had ignored reports about the Communist Party connections of his protege at the State Department, Alger Hiss. Acheson also had been the chief U.S. advisor at the Yalta Conference, in February 1945, which consigned eastern Europe to Communist rule, and he presided over the drafting of the United Nations Charter. In the State Department Acheson fostered the careers of Communists and stifled the careers of anti-Communists.

Furthermore, as Ohio’s Republican Senator Robert Taft said at the time, “Pro-Communist policies of the State Department fully justify Joe McCarthy in his demand for an investigation.”

Grand Scale of Subversion


Franklin Delano Roosevelt (“FDR”)
Communist infiltration of the U.S. government had occurred on a grand scale during the reign of Franklin Roosevelt. Congressman Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas and chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities from its inception in 1938 until 1945, had warned Roosevelt in 1940 that there were thousands of Communists and pro-Communists on the government payroll, but FDR refused to take action, saying:

“I do not believe in Communism any more than you do, but there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of the best friends I have are Communists. . . .

“I do not regard the Communists as any present or future threat to our country; in fact, I look upon Russia as our strongest ally in the years to come. As I told you when you began your investigation, you should confine yourself to Nazis and Fascists. While I do not believe in Communism, Russia is far better off and the world is safer under Communism than under the Czars.”

Under the circumstances, McCarthy’s charge that there were 57 known Communists in the State Department seems very modest.

A Maverick for the Truth

McCarthy had been a maverick from the beginning. In 1949 he had dared champion the cause of German prisoners of war held in connection with the alleged “Malmédy massacre.” In truth, what had happened near the Belgian town of Malmédy in December 1944 was unclear at the time, part of what U.S. General Thomas T. Handy, who in 1949 was the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe, called “a confused, mobile, and desperate combat action.” It is known now that a number of American soldiers who had surrendered there to the Germans were shortly thereafter killed in cross fire when their captors, who were marching them to a rear area, were engaged by other U.S. units. When their bodies were found by U.S. forces afterward with their hands tied behind their backs, however, it appeared that they might have been deliberately killed.

After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for “interrogation.” The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a “confession,” the prosecutors were permitted to use as “evidence” the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Raymond Baldwin, Republican of Connecticut, was assigned to investigate the charges of torture, but whitewashed them instead. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy withdrew in disgust from the hearings and announced in a speech on the Senate floor that two members of the Committee, Senator Baldwin and Senator Estes Kefauver, Democrat of Tennessee, had law partners among the Army interrogators they were supposedly investigating. This was in several ways a preview of things to come.

The Jews showed instant hostility toward anyone who interfered with their campaign of vengeance against the conquered Germans, and so they began turning their big guns in the media against McCarthy: a December 1949 poll of news correspondents covering the United States Senate already had reporters branding McCarthy “the worst Senator” — a high honor indeed

James Forrestal: a patriot who fought subversion, and who died under mysterious circumstances.
When McCarthy had arrived in Washington as a freshman Senator in 1946, he had been invited to lunch by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. McCarthy writes:

“Before meeting Jim Forrestal I thought we were losing to international Communism because of incompetence and stupidity on the part of our planners. I mentioned that to Forrestal. I shall forever remember his answer. He said, ‘McCarthy, consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If they were merely stupid they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor.’ This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.”

Considering the destructive policies that thrived in Washington, McCarthy concluded that to fight Communism effectively it was not enough to denounce Communism in general; anyone — even a Communist — could claim to oppose Communism. The Senator decided that it was necessary to identify those responsible for treasonous policies and then accuse them on the basis of what they actually had done, not on the basis of the ideas to which they paid lip service.

A special investigating subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, Democrat of Maryland, was set up purportedly to investigate McCarthy’s claim that Communists and pro-Communists were being harbored in the State Department. In reality, as Tydings himself admitted, the purpose was to silence McCarthy. Tydings boasted, “Let me have McCarthy for three days in public hearings, and he will never show his face in the Senate again.” Tydings’ effort to discredit the upstart patriot would be heavily aided by the major media.

One of the reporters present at the hearings was Elmer Davis, a prominent radio commentator who had been head of the Office of War Information (OWI). McCarthy noted:

“Many of the [principals in the] cases I was about to present had once been employees in the OWI under Davis and then had moved into the State Department. As I glanced at Davis I recalled that Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, one of the anti-Communist leaders of Poland, had warned the State Department, while Davis was head of the OWI, that OWI broadcasts were ‘following the Communist line consistently,’ and that the broadcasts ‘might well have emanated from Moscow itself.’ There could be no doubt how Davis would report the story. . . .

“At one of the other tables I saw [left-wing, muckraking columnist] Drew Pearson’s men. I could not help but remember that Pearson had employed a member of the Communist Party, Andrew Older, to write Pearson’s stories on the House Committee on Un-American Activities and that another one of Pearson’s limited staff was David Karr, who had previously worked for the Communist Party’s official publication, the Daily Worker. No doubt about how Pearson would cover the story. . . .

“As I waited for the chairman to open the hearing I, of course, knew the left-wing elements of the press would twist and distort the story to protect every Communist whom I exposed, but frankly I had no conception of how far the dishonest news coverage would go.”

In the case of Owen Lattimore, the testimony of McCarthy’s chief witness, ex-Communist Louis Budenz, was widely misrepresented. Lattimore was a scholar on Far Eastern affairs employed by the State Department as a consultant; he had advised the State Department that Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-Tung was merely “a liberal agrarian reformer” at a time when Washington was still unsure how to react to Mao’s efforts to overthrow the Chinese government. In McCarthy’s words:

“[Budenz] . . . testified that . . . [Lattimore], who had been employed by the government, consulted for years by State Department officials on Far Eastern policy, and looked to by newspapermen and magazine editors for news on Far Eastern trends, had been a member of the Communist Party.”



McCarthy’s Methods


Joseph McCarthy speaks on KFAB. According to professor Revilo Oliver, a CIA officer told McCarthy in 1950 “Senator, you said there were 57 known Communists in the State Department. If you had access to the files of my agency, you would know that there is absolute proof that there are ten times that many. But Senator, you do not realize the magnitude and the power of the conspiracy you are attacking. They will destroy you — they will destroy you utterly.”


Make no mistake about it, McCarthy did cause considerable discomfort to some people: to the alien subversives and traitors whose ultimate goal was and still is the New World Order. It was these people who, in their effort to silence McCarthy, ironically characterized him as an enemy of free speech. The First Amendment, of course, had been drafted precisely to protect men like McCarthy, who dared to identify treason in high places.

There were undoubtedly, however, some sincere, patriotic Americans who agreed with McCarthy’s aim of removing Communists from government, but who found his method, with all of its sensationalism and public-relations gimmickry, distasteful. McCarthy’s method was, as he himself explained, a last resort:

“I have followed the method of publicly exposing the truth about men who, because of incompetence or treason, were betraying this nation. Another method would be to take the evidence to the President and ask him to discharge those who were serving the Communist cause. A third method would be to give the facts to the proper Senate committee which had the power to hire investigators and subpoena witnesses and records. The second and third methods . . . were tried without success. . . . The only method left to me was to present the truth to the American people. This I did.”

People who criticized McCarthy’s public accusations merely as being in poor taste clearly did not appreciate the gravity of the situation and the necessity for taking action. Also it should be noted that McCarthy had not wanted to read his original list of 57 subversives publicly, but the Tydings Committee required it of him. According to the Congressional Record of Feb 20, 1950, p. 2049, McCarthy protested on the Senate floor:

“I think . . . it would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate Committee can meet in executive session and get them. . . . It might leave a wrong impression.”

Unfortunately, “the wrong impression” was exactly what the Tydings Committee wished to promote. In other words, contrary to the reputation for “recklessness” that was applied to him, McCarthy exercised his First Amendment right with great care.



In the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no doubt that there was a conspiracy at work. We know this because men who were privy to the conspiracy later wrote books about it. The activities of the conspirators were, of course, necessarily subtle; Eisenhower himself studiously avoided even mentioning McCarthy’s name in public, and the media coverage was almost unbelievably biased. Thus, for the general public, the arrangements which brought down McCarthy were a mystery, though in essence they were very simple: McCarthy was maneuvered into an awkward position, the major media portrayed him as unfavorably as possible, and his colleagues deserted him......sound familiar? It should.

McCarthy was the one man in Washington, D.C., who bucked the bipartisan pressure to be polite to America’s enemies and to “get along by going along.” He was the one man who took anti-Communism seriously and was willing to do something about it.


The Destruction of Joe McCarthy

I don't think anyone questions the fact that there were many communist in the US as well as many people that believed in socialism. I have no problem pursuing those that commit treasonous acts against our nation. They should be treated as any criminal, apprehended, charged, tried, convicted, and punished. However, for government to destroy people lives because of their beliefs and opinions is wrong. It was just as wrong in the US as it was in Red China and Nazi Germany.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

Are there any conservatives who do NOT want to destroy the lives (or kill) of people simply because they are NOT right wing fascists?

Do you know how many Americans were executed during the so called red-scare era? Go ahead take a guess.

 

[MacTheKnife]

?
What military assets do you think Russia has in Venezuela

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

Name me on person whose life was unjustifiably destroyed by Joe McCarthy.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

It's only bad if you belief the accused have right to defend themselves, that people have the right to free speech, and state their support for any ideology regardless of how unpopular it might be without being attacked and ridiculed by your government.

What you and your ilk seem unable to grasp is the concept of National Security.

Let me try and explain it in a manner you might be able to understand......every person in America has a right to self defense aka if someone is trying to harm or kill you...by law you have the right to defend your life and limb.

Likewise....any Nation including America has a right to defend it's people ......during WWII would you have advocated that those with the nazi philosophy be protected and even allowed to work in our government? Do you think they(nazis and nazi sympathizers) should have been allowed to join up with our military forces?

Do you think the Rosenbergs should have been granted immunity instead of being executed?

 

[MacTheKnife]

Well, lets see. Trump giving Russians classified information, and selling out the US to an ex Soviet KGB agent. Then sends love letters to North Korea. Then A plane load of Republican Senators fly to Russia on the 4th of July to sell out the US to the Russians. Now we have Republican Senators openly taking money from Russian oligarchs, and brazenly allowing the Kremlin to interfere in our elections. Then the Secretary of State gives Crimea away to the Russians, and tells our ally, sorry, thats just the way it is, and lets Belarus have all of the Ukraine oil they want.

Damn. You're right. the commies have infiltrated the government. And it's so complete, they have an asset in the White House, assets in the State Dept., and assets in the Senate. They have effectively co opted the entire Republican party.

AND trump pissed all over the Monroe Doctrine by letting putin and russia into Venezuela.

Now putin and russia have a military foothold on our door step.

Thanks to trump and the republicans.

?
What military assets do you think Russia has in Venezuela

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

Russia poses no threat to America.......in fact we are going to need them to be our allies once again as they were during WII....China, N. Korea and muslim terrorists are the real threats to America.

Thus instead of complaining about Trump striving to improve our friendship with Russia.....everyone should be applauding it.

If China continues to expand their military capabilities....we will be fortunate if we can get Russia to ally with us.

The democrats/liberals/socialists are only interested in trying to conjure up a non-existent threat from Russia in order to try and use that against Trump..........beyond ridiculous.


It really is so outrageous......these morons go on and on about the red scare of the fifties but now they are trying to whip up fear of Russians....based on what? Oh my bad....hatred of Trump of course aka Trump Dysfunction Syndrome hereafter known as TDS

 

[Flopper]

are you playing checkers?

russia plays the long game....

MILITARY ASSETS;

1. being in venezuela so close to the southern US border
2. over the next few years we will read reports about them establishing those bases.
3. trump is an asset. He will let them do this and he won't care.

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

Most people would answer that question with the Hollywood Blacklist, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Many, people were fired from their jobs because of alleged associations with communists, or stating an opinion that indicated sympathy for communists.

I was a teenager when the McCarthy hearings and the red scare was going on in the 50's. My high school civics teacher, Mr. Jackson spoke out in class about the McCarthy hearings. Within a few days, the school board suspended him. A local newspaper editorial accused him of being a communist and called for the school board to clean our schools of communist sympathizers. The fact is Mr Jackson was no communist. He just believe what McCarthy was doing was wrong and spoke out against it. Many people in education were censored or fired. My mother was teaching at the time and her school principal warned the faculty to be careful what you say in class because you could be reported. For many people, it was Nazi Germany in America.
How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

It's only bad if you belief the accused have right to defend themselves, that people have the right to free speech, and state their support for any ideology regardless of how unpopular it might be without being attacked and ridiculed by your government.

What you and your ilk seem unable to grasp is the concept of National Security.

Let me try and explain it in a manner you might be able to understand......every person in America has a right to self defense aka if someone is trying to harm or kill you...by law you have the right to defend your life and limb.

Likewise....any Nation including America has a right to defend it's people ......during WWII would you have advocated that those with the nazi philosophy be protected and even allowed to work in our government? Do you think they(nazis and nazi sympathizers) should have been allowed to join up with our military forces?

Do you think the Rosenbergs should have been granted immunity instead of being executed?

I think what you can't grasp is that every American has rights guaranteed by the constitution which include the right to freedom of speech without censorship by government nor reprisal for exercising that right. Even more basic is the human right to believe in whatever ideology you chose. Only when your beliefs and opinions turn into actions that violate our laws should government intervene. We commonly refer to this our personal freedoms.

 

[MacTheKnife]

In other woids they have no military assets in Venezuela. thank-you

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

I axed for one name of any person whose life was destroyed by Joe McCarthy....instead you come up first with the hollywood blacklist....that was hollywood not Joe McCarthy that did that boyo. I and many others think that was justified...look at all the treason that is going on in hollywood now. If the crackdown on hollywood at that time had been harsher...hollywood might not be in the mess it is today.

Then you cite your high school civics teacher...and the fact the school board suspended him. For how long? Was his life destroyed by that?...and again...it was not Joe McCarthy that did that...it was the school board.

Then you say many people in education were censored or fired....did Joe McCarthy do that? Of course not....you have no stats and no names.

Then you ridiculously want to compare that with Nazi Germany??? I think you should talk to some folks who lived in Nazi Germany. You are merely going along with the liberal b.s. and the demonizing of Joe McCarthy.

You talk about the 'Red Scare'---what that really was---people across America understood that communist and communism was a matter of National Security....and the execution of the Rosenbergs was just one significant and justifiable episode of dealing with the communist threat.

What it all comes down to is that the media managed to demonize Joe and divert America's attention away from the threat posed by Communism and particuarly Stalinist Russia at that time.

If the left had not managed to intervene in the exposure of communists and convinced the public we had nothing to fear from communists....it is very likely the Korean War would not have happened...Stalin was the one who enabled that war and he did so knowing full well that the American People would not hold him or Russia accountable...in other words the media's success in convincing the public that we had nothing to fear played a big role in Stalin's decision to let their proxy N. Korea start a war.

The result of which thousands of American Soldiers died and even worse than that....the concept of 'limited war' was introduced by Truman which resulted in the stalemate in Korea and created the mess there that lingers to this day....a huge,huge problem and threat to America as we speak....a rogue nation in possession of Nuclear Weapons and the means to deliver them to America.

Bottom Line: America was right(at least the people)in perceiving the national threat of communism and particuarly the reality of the danger that Stalin represented.

Had not the media been able to destroy Joe McCarthy and mute his mission and more particuarly if the Republican Party had not been cowed by the media and instead had supported Joe's efforts to identify and remove from office all of scores of communists who had infiltrated into our political system...America would be much safer today.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

It's only bad if you belief the accused have right to defend themselves, that people have the right to free speech, and state their support for any ideology regardless of how unpopular it might be without being attacked and ridiculed by your government.

What you and your ilk seem unable to grasp is the concept of National Security.

Let me try and explain it in a manner you might be able to understand......every person in America has a right to self defense aka if someone is trying to harm or kill you...by law you have the right to defend your life and limb.

Likewise....any Nation including America has a right to defend it's people ......during WWII would you have advocated that those with the nazi philosophy be protected and even allowed to work in our government? Do you think they(nazis and nazi sympathizers) should have been allowed to join up with our military forces?

Do you think the Rosenbergs should have been granted immunity instead of being executed?

I think what you can't grasp is that every American has rights guaranteed by the constitution which include the right to freedom of speech without censorship by government nor reprisal for exercising that right. Even more basic is the human right to believe in whatever ideology you chose. Only when your beliefs and opinions turn into actions that violate our laws should government intervene. We commonly refer to this our personal freedoms.

What if my ideology is a conviction based on my interpetation of my religion that as soon as I can get into America I will kill as many Americans as I possibly can?

I have no record of crime, there is not any kind of proof whatsoever that I am a violent person. In fact I have many friends in America and we all have the same ideology....though most do not share my belief in committing violence in America yet many of them are willing to help me do what I must.

Thus according to your view...I should be allowed into America because I have not yet committed violations of your laws.

 

[Flopper]

1. they are there and they shouldn't be

2. trump is an asset because he SPITS ON THE MONROE DOCTRINE and lets putin into Venezuela

3. history tells us that now that the russians are IN Venezuela it will take a REAL American President to throw them out.

McCarthy became the spearhead of the movement backed up by Hoover. Government loyalty boards investigated millions of federal employees, asking what books and magazines they read, what unions and civic organizations they belonged to, and whether they went to church. Hundreds of screenwriters, actors, and directors were blacklisted because of their alleged political beliefs, while teachers, steelworkers, sailors, lawyers, and social workers lost their jobs for similar reasons. More than thirty-nine states required teachers and other public employees to take loyalty oaths. Meanwhile, some libraries pulled books that were considered too leftist from their shelves. The banned volumes included such classics as Robin Hood, Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Labor union strikes, civil rights demonstrations, anti-government articles and books, and even the introduction of the Bikini became part of of some communist plot.

Organizations such as the John Birch Society, Anti Zionist League, White Citizens Council, and dozens of anti-labor groups formed an informal network in which the McCarthy people and FBI passed lists of names of people, businesses, and organization that allegedly had ties to the communist party. Those who refused to cooperate ended up on list. So most people did cooperate, sometime naming names, agreeing to dismiss certain employees, or just have a talk with influential people in the community.

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

It's only bad if you belief the accused have right to defend themselves, that people have the right to free speech, and state their support for any ideology regardless of how unpopular it might be without being attacked and ridiculed by your government.

What you and your ilk seem unable to grasp is the concept of National Security.

Let me try and explain it in a manner you might be able to understand......every person in America has a right to self defense aka if someone is trying to harm or kill you...by law you have the right to defend your life and limb.

Likewise....any Nation including America has a right to defend it's people ......during WWII would you have advocated that those with the nazi philosophy be protected and even allowed to work in our government? Do you think they(nazis and nazi sympathizers) should have been allowed to join up with our military forces?

Do you think the Rosenbergs should have been granted immunity instead of being executed?

I think what you can't grasp is that every American has rights guaranteed by the constitution which include the right to freedom of speech without censorship by government nor reprisal for exercising that right. Even more basic is the human right to believe in whatever ideology you chose. Only when your beliefs and opinions turn into actions that violate our laws should government intervene. We commonly refer to this our personal freedoms.

What if my ideology is a conviction based on my interpetation of my religion that as soon as I can get into America I will kill as many Americans as I possibly can?

I have no record of crime, there is not any kind of proof whatsoever that I am a violent person. In fact I have many friends in America and we all have the same ideology....though most do not share my belief in committing violence in America yet many of them are willing to help me do what I must.

Thus according to your view...I should be allowed into America because I have not yet committed violations of your laws.

No. Our constitution grants very limited rights to foreigners, basally the 5th amendment. Our laws allow the government to decide who may and may not enter the country. Any foreigner judged to be a danger can be denied entrance.

 

[MacTheKnife]

You seem to think all that was a bad thing.....the real unfortunate thing about all that is the fact the movement to root out the reds was undermined and sabotaged by the media.

We would be much better off today had McCarthy and those who supported him been able to root out the reds.

It's only bad if you belief the accused have right to defend themselves, that people have the right to free speech, and state their support for any ideology regardless of how unpopular it might be without being attacked and ridiculed by your government.

What you and your ilk seem unable to grasp is the concept of National Security.

Let me try and explain it in a manner you might be able to understand......every person in America has a right to self defense aka if someone is trying to harm or kill you...by law you have the right to defend your life and limb.

Likewise....any Nation including America has a right to defend it's people ......during WWII would you have advocated that those with the nazi philosophy be protected and even allowed to work in our government? Do you think they(nazis and nazi sympathizers) should have been allowed to join up with our military forces?

Do you think the Rosenbergs should have been granted immunity instead of being executed?

I think what you can't grasp is that every American has rights guaranteed by the constitution which include the right to freedom of speech without censorship by government nor reprisal for exercising that right. Even more basic is the human right to believe in whatever ideology you chose. Only when your beliefs and opinions turn into actions that violate our laws should government intervene. We commonly refer to this our personal freedoms.

What if my ideology is a conviction based on my interpetation of my religion that as soon as I can get into America I will kill as many Americans as I possibly can?

I have no record of crime, there is not any kind of proof whatsoever that I am a violent person. In fact I have many friends in America and we all have the same ideology....though most do not share my belief in committing violence in America yet many of them are willing to help me do what I must.

Thus according to your view...I should be allowed into America because I have not yet committed violations of your laws.

No. Our constitution grants very limited rights to foreigners, basally the 5th amendment. Our laws allow the government to decide who may and may not enter the country. Any foreigner judged to be a danger can be denied entrance.

How would I be judged to be dangerous?.....I have no record and there is no kind of evidence that would show I was dangerous.