1. Can you imagine an American President so gullible, so naïve, that he would believe lies that are revealed and obvious to everyone else???
No.....not Quid Pro Joe.
Who had the US President in his pocket?
2. That brings me to today's birthday boy:
Maksim Litvinov, in full Maksim Maksimovich Litvinov, original name Meir Henoch Mojszewicz Wallach-Finkelstein, (born July 17 [July 5, Old Style], 1876, Białystok, Poland—died December 31, 1951, Moscow, Russia, U.S.S.R.), Soviet diplomat and commissar of foreign affairs (1930–39) who was a prominent advocate of world disarmament and of collective security with the Western powers against Nazi Germany before World War II. He also served as ambassador to the United States (1941–43).
Having been influenced by Marxism while serving in the Imperial Russian Army, Litvinov joined the Russian Social-Democratic Workers’ Party in 1898. He was arrested for his revolutionary activity in 1901 but escaped and fled to Great Britain (1902). Aligned with the Bolshevik faction after 1903, Litvinov was involved in party activities throughout Europe."
Brittanica.com
3. FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. One of his first official acts was to recognize the USSR, November 16th, 1933. If this act, based on FDR's additional pro-Soviet endeavors, was rational....then these folks must have been irrational: "Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half held to this resolve," i.e., refusal to recognize the Soviet government. That was written by Herbert Hoover, one of those four Presidents. He wrote it in his Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath by George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011, pg 24-29.
5. Was Roosevelt really this dumb?
Here's what the architect of our foreign policy toward the Soviet Union said:
George Kennan’s view of Roosevelt’s performance during the war is considerably harsher than Harriman’s? After commenting bitterly on the “inexcusable body of ignorance about the Russian Communist movement, about the history of its diplomacy, about what had happened in the purges, and about what had been going on in Poland and the Baltic States,” Kennan turns more directly to FDR alone:
I also have in mind FDRs evident conviction that Stalin, while perhaps a somewhat difficult customer, was only, after all, a person like any other person; that the reason we hadn’t been able to get along with him in the past was that we had never really had anyone with the proper personality and the proper qualities of sympathy and imagination to deal with him, that he had been snubbed all along by the arrogant conservatives of the Western capitals; and that if only he could be exposed to the persuasive charms of someone like FDR himself, ideological preconceptions would melt and Russia’s cooperation with the West could be easily arranged.
For these assumptions there were no grounds whatsover; and they were of a puerility that was unworthy of a statesman of FDRs stature.
mmisi.org - Diese Website steht zum Verkauf! - Informationen zum Thema mmisi.
Of course, it is possible that the Democrats learned how to lie so well from these Soviets.
No.....not Quid Pro Joe.
Who had the US President in his pocket?
2. That brings me to today's birthday boy:
Maksim Litvinov, in full Maksim Maksimovich Litvinov, original name Meir Henoch Mojszewicz Wallach-Finkelstein, (born July 17 [July 5, Old Style], 1876, Białystok, Poland—died December 31, 1951, Moscow, Russia, U.S.S.R.), Soviet diplomat and commissar of foreign affairs (1930–39) who was a prominent advocate of world disarmament and of collective security with the Western powers against Nazi Germany before World War II. He also served as ambassador to the United States (1941–43).
Having been influenced by Marxism while serving in the Imperial Russian Army, Litvinov joined the Russian Social-Democratic Workers’ Party in 1898. He was arrested for his revolutionary activity in 1901 but escaped and fled to Great Britain (1902). Aligned with the Bolshevik faction after 1903, Litvinov was involved in party activities throughout Europe."
Brittanica.com
3. FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. One of his first official acts was to recognize the USSR, November 16th, 1933. If this act, based on FDR's additional pro-Soviet endeavors, was rational....then these folks must have been irrational: "Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half held to this resolve," i.e., refusal to recognize the Soviet government. That was written by Herbert Hoover, one of those four Presidents. He wrote it in his Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath by George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011, pg 24-29.
4. Roosevelt signed the recognition agreement: Litvinov "returned to the Soviet embassy.....all smiles....and said 'Well, it's all in the bag; we have it.'" On September 23, 1939, Dr. D. H. Dombrowsky testified before the Dies committee.
The Winona Republican-Herald from Winona, Minnesota on October 20, 1947 · Page 12
" "Well, it's all in the bag. They wanted us to recognize the debts we owed them and I promised we were going to negotiate. But they did not know we were going to negotiate until doomsday. The next one was a corker; they wanted us to promise freedom of religion in the Soviet Union, and I promised that, too. I was very much prompted to offer that I would personally collect all the Bibles and ship them over." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.33.
5. Was Roosevelt really this dumb?
Here's what the architect of our foreign policy toward the Soviet Union said:
George Kennan’s view of Roosevelt’s performance during the war is considerably harsher than Harriman’s? After commenting bitterly on the “inexcusable body of ignorance about the Russian Communist movement, about the history of its diplomacy, about what had happened in the purges, and about what had been going on in Poland and the Baltic States,” Kennan turns more directly to FDR alone:
I also have in mind FDRs evident conviction that Stalin, while perhaps a somewhat difficult customer, was only, after all, a person like any other person; that the reason we hadn’t been able to get along with him in the past was that we had never really had anyone with the proper personality and the proper qualities of sympathy and imagination to deal with him, that he had been snubbed all along by the arrogant conservatives of the Western capitals; and that if only he could be exposed to the persuasive charms of someone like FDR himself, ideological preconceptions would melt and Russia’s cooperation with the West could be easily arranged.
For these assumptions there were no grounds whatsover; and they were of a puerility that was unworthy of a statesman of FDRs stature.
mmisi.org - Diese Website steht zum Verkauf! - Informationen zum Thema mmisi.
Of course, it is possible that the Democrats learned how to lie so well from these Soviets.
