Mc Carthyism another lie by the left.

[Redleg]

Not exactly uncommon. I suspect that it's because McCarthy made the red scare public (it seems so for me atleast), that caused the symbolisation.

And in this statement I believe you have identified the gist of how the term came about and why only McCarthy is identified. The sad thing about the whole time period is that McCarthy was not the worst of them.

[Slyspy]

Not the worst no, but the first so the name has stuck. If the witch hunts were his legacy then why try to whitewash him in the original article? It has very little relevance now and McCarthy seems to be nobody's hero (except to a certain confused individual who isn't aware that the US actually did "win" the Cold War.

[Adrian II]

It says a lot more to me about conservatives that they try to rewrite history on every scoundrel and scumbag who ever had conservative ideas.

Oh, Lefties too rewrite history all the time to suit some temporary interest. But as long as we use our debunking rubbers, we can have safe sex with people of all denominations.

Most rewriting is selective and serves a purpose. Same here.

McCarthy wasn't just any scumbag. He pioneered some of the 'fifth column' smear tactics that are used (or will probably be used soon) by the present administration in order to defend its terrible record on terrorism, its bungled Iraq war and its failing foreign policy.

I guess that's why some columnists and bloggers on the Right start to try and 'rehabilitate' McCarthy by means of doctored profiles like the one above.

It foreshadows some of the tactics we are probably going to see, including maybe official investigations into the integrity and reliability of prominent critics of this administration or 'rumor' campaigns of the kind already practiced by some U.S. Senators on British MP George Galloway.

Personally I think that dog won't run because American democracy won't allow it, but Conservatives are feeding it right now, just in case some convenient rabbit comes along and they feel they can give it a try.

McCarthy was a bum who lied about his war record, lied about all his political opponents during his campaigns, lied about his 'lists' of Communist subversives, and lied about just about everything else in his life, including his (homo)sexuality, his excessive drinking, his tax evasion, the money he took as a Senator from the Pepsi-Cola Company, etcetera, etcetera.

And oh yes, Joe McCarthy did conduct 'investigations' and smear campaigns for years, not as a member of the HUAC (which he wasn't), but as Chairman of the Government Committee on Operations of the Senate. His investigations were a travesty of justice and decency, and most of his them were directed against political opponents who had nothing to do whatsoever with Communism. He was fed a few names by Hoover who later dropped him when he outran his usefulness.

In the end the Senate, President Eisenhower and the US Army had enough of his shrill excesses; the Senate censured him and McCarthy quickly and conveniently drank himself to death, something he should have done many years earlier.

[Red Harvest]

AdrianII,

That view of the rewriting of history, particularly by this admin and its supporters, is one I share. The leftist stuff is fairly transparent and easy to reject, and less accepted. While I'm not fond of it either, I feel less threatened by it since I can't see it going anywhere or being accepted by sane people. There is a rather determined effort going on to rewrite history on the right at the moment and there is certainly an agenda. I've been completely shocked by a large number of links I've seen posted that simply are not true. I find the same when I do searches, the top hits are mostly propaganda. There is a lot of convenient, flawed respinning and reshaping of events. I'm getting an eery feeling like I'm sitting in Germany in the 30's or something. (Side note: creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security has bothered me from day one...something about that name makes me feel far less secure...I can't help but wonder if the original draft was "Fatherland" rather than "Homeland.")

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that there is a major effort to rewrite the history, since the thrust of the conservative movement at the moment is largely regressive in nature. To make that palatable there is a large cast of historical characters that is going to require image makeovers.

[KafirChobee]

For once I am totally speechless. That anyone is willing to defend Joe McCarthy or his committee is astounding. To re-shade the picture to make it sound like anything he did was for anyone but him? Astounding.

As I recall, after all was said and done, all he managed to do was destroy a number of innocent peoples lives.

Amazing, next we'll have them showing us how Adolf was just a misunderstood guy that only wanted to save the world from the Jews (and Communists).

[Adrian II]

I'm getting an eery feeling like I'm sitting in Germany in the 30's or something.

Whoah, brother Harvest, let's take history one step at a time.

Speaking of Fatherlands, I seemed to remember McCarthy had something with Hitler, but I didn't recall exactly what (in view of his character, it couldn't have been a deep commitment anyway). So I decided to Google and the machine came up with some newer info.

One blog says Harcourt will publish a book this fall by journalist Haynes Johnson, called The Age of Anxiety: McCarthyism to Terrorism, in which he traces 'the straight line that runs from McCarthy to Goldwater to Nixon to Reagan to Bush, which makes recasting McCarthyism in a noble, heroic light necessary to their program of creating a new, fake, right-wing history of the twentieth century'.

Oh well, apart from the hyperbole (it seems he even attributes America's 'culture wars' to McCarthy) there seems to be more than one reason why the Ann Coulters of this world insist on the man's posthumous make-over into a hero.

Oh, and the Hitler reference concerned Mein Kampf, which McCarthy apparently admired for its political tactics. Apparently the Johnson book quotes Greta van Susteren's father, McCarthy's lifelong friend judge Urban Van Susteren, as saying that Joe 'never read books with one exception: Hitler's Mein Kampf, which he regarded as a handbook of political tactics. Joe was fascinated by the strategy, that's all.'

Yeah, that's all. Joe must have been fascinated by what Hitler wrote about the way the masses could be made to swallow lies, big and small, if only you repeated them endlessly and emphatically.

[sharrukin]

However, by 1953 a seemingly out-of-control McCarthy was making many enemies. His investigation of the activities of an Army dentist, Maj. Irving Peress, eventually led to his downfall. In 1954, the Army launched its counterattack,

McCarthy subpoenaed him before the committee on January 30, 1954. Peress took the Fifth Amendment 20 times when asked about his membership in the Communist Party, his attendance at a Communist training school, and his efforts to recruit military personnel into the party. You would need to be a low grade moron to actually believe this guy should have had a security clearance!

On the witch-hunt. Check out the HUAC...
Another one of Redlegs sources. Both is on the first page.

Yes, Virginia, there really were Communist spies in the United States during the so-called “McCarthy era.”

The 'Dies Committee' AKA, House UnAmerican Activities Committee (HUAC) wasn't Mccarthy, and was founded as you indicate in 1938 to deal with the "un-American activities of Nazis, Fascists, Communists and White Russians." Now you may consider it a witch-hunt but IMO the Nazi's constituted a real threat which events in Germany would seem to vindicate. The activities of the German-American Bund were cause for concern to the American government.

The Fascists in Italy, and elsewhere also needed to be dealt with as well. Mosley's group in Britain for example was a standing joke but then Hitler had been a joke as well, but by 1938 no one was laughing anymore!

The Communist overthrow of Kerensky's democratic government in Russia had been followed by the troubles with Reds in the US just after the First World War. Leon Trotsky's Theory of Permanent Revolution within Marxism wasn't exactly a comforting image. The Comintern (Communist International) at this time believed in the idea of a world-wide revolutionary movement and they were intent on exporting revolution. The argument has often been that the being Communist Party of the 1930s opposed social and political injustice, and had no Stalinist agenda. There was in fact more than enough evidence to prove the reality of Soviet Communist spying to any objective person.

John Reed who represented the US Communist groups was friends with Lydia Stahl who was later arrested in France as a Russian spy. So the idea that Communists had little to do with Soviet espionage is patently false. They have been part and parcel from the beginning.

From the beginning Soviet leaders understood the necessity of underground activities, and foreign governments and labour movements were the key target for infiltration. The evidence for this from many diverse countries is overwhelming. Communists in government engaged in espionage and acted to influence policy in a pro-Soviet direction. Many of the individuals engaged in these activities were Communist Party members, or affiliated with it.

What was the situation that the US was facing in the late 1940's and 50's? Was the "Red Scare" real?

To put the whole thing in context consider what had come before;
Bela Kun and the "Red Terror" in Hungary 1919, Soviet encouragement of British and American worker’s strikes, and the Spanish Civil War of 1936. The Failed Putsch in Hamburg staged by German Communists in 1923, the Spartakist League revolt in Berlin and Ernst Toller's Soviet Republic in Bavaria. Many of these same Communists would later join the rising National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP), AKA 'the Nazi's'.

The murderous Purges of Stalin, the Soviet blockade of Berlin, formation of the Cominform, the Sino-Soviet Treaty of 1950, and finally the Communist inspired North Korean invasion of South Korea. Later Chinese Communists would cross the Yalu in support of this invasion.

Lastly, most of Eastern Europe was conquered by the armies of the USSR and incorporated in its ‘sphere of influence’ in the post-war carve-up of central Europe. Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Albania, Yugoslavia, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia had all fallen to the Soviets with no signs they would ever be free nations. Then, in 1947-8, these were transformed from the top down into more or less close replicas of Stalin’s Russia.

Reason for concern? I think so!

The Comintern parties continued to heap praise on Stalin’s brutal, savage dictatorship with always an explanation for every new brutality close at hand. The Comintern had become simply an instrument of the Soviet Union, pure and simple.

The various Communist parties were a conduit and a cover for the activities of many of the Soviet Union. To suggest that the international Communist parties had nothing to do with these events is revisionist history of the worst sort. The Comintern was being used as a tool of Soviet foreign policy.

The White House was aware of accusations against a substantial number of U.S. government employees, including such high officials as the State Department's Alger Hiss, White House aide Lauchlin Currie, OSS executive assistant Duncan Lee, and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Harry Dexter White. They were afraid of a public scandal that might discredit the Democratic Party and its policies and help their political Republican rivals. The 'Amerasia' case and the inactivity regarding Harry Dexter White are examples of this. After being told of his activities White was nominated in 1946, as American representative to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The Venona Project was the name given to the U. S. government top-secret program launched in 1943 to intercept and decipher communications between Moscow and its intelligence stations in the West. The National Security Agency (NSA) in 1995 began releasing the Venona documents to the public, and fewer than 3,000 partially or fully decrypted Venona messages have been declassified. This is only a tiny fraction of the over 200,000 intercepted messages. No evidence obtained from these intercepts were ever introduced in any court, or released to congress for security reasons. The evidence shows that most of those individuals accused of aiding the Soviets in the 1940s had actually done so. They also showed that Soviet spies had infiltrated every major agency of the U.S. government during the war years, from the State and Treasury departments to the Manhattan Project including the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The opening of some of the Soviet archives show conclusively that that the American Communist Party was tied in with the Soviet government, and engaged in extensive espionage against the United States. The American Communist movement assisted Soviet intelligence and placed loyalty to the Soviet Union ahead of loyalty to the United States and the Russian archives show exactly that.

Some of those ridiculing Mccarthy for his idea of Soviet spies in the government were actually Soviet agents. The journalist I. F. Stone for example was in the pay of the Soviet Union. Michael Straight, editor of the liberal journal, The New Republic later confessed to working for Soviet intelligence.

KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky revealed, and the Venona transcripts have confirmed that Harry Hopkins, President Roosevelt's close wartime White House adviser was also a Soviet agent.

Senator Millard Tydings of Maryland unambiguously cleared all of the individuals cited by McCarthy and branded his charges as "a fraud and a hoax” perpetrated on the American people despite the fact that ex-Communist Louis Budenz had testified at the Tydings Committee hearings that Lattimore was a Communist. Lattimore defended Stalin's show trials and referred to the Soviet Union as a democracy, during the Nazi-Soviet Pact he said there was little to choose between Great Britain and Nazi Germany, in 1949 he said he wanted "to let South Korea fall—but not to let it look as though we pushed it."

John Stewart Service, a career diplomat stationed in China during World War II, was caught transmitting classified documents to the editor of the pro-Communist journal, Amerasia.

McCarthy was entirely correct in wanting to remove such individuals from forging American policy.

To call this a witch-hunt suggests that it was looking for what didn't exist and that is clearly not the case. The "McCarthyite purges" and the witch-hunts he inspired removed from positions of influence a large number of individuals who were NOT loyal to the United States, though it missed as many as it found. Some individuals were not guilty of anything except being foolish enough to believe the Communist Party was something other than a Soviet tool. McCarthy and others like him effectively destroyed the Communist Party as an instrument of espionage. There was a real danger to American democracy, and McCarthy was one of many who helped to preserve it. His infringement of civil liberties such as freedom of speech and freedom of association were real, but mild in comparison to the threat.

McCarthy IMO went too far in some cases, but we smear him for using the same tactics that others of the day used, and for the same tactics that are still being used today by Democrats and Republicans. I just do not see a case for him being one of the Great American Villains of the 20th century.

[Adrian II]

Yes, Virginia, there really were Communist spies in the United States during the so-called “McCarthy era.”

What else is new? And the full list is a lot longer than your summary exposition. But doesn't it strike you as odd, to say the least, that McCarthy never got a single real or so-called Communist convicted?

The issue here is that McCarthy created and abused an atmosphere of hysterical excitement and hatred against political opponents, in particular Democrats. He came up with the issue of Communist infiltration in 1950 when his campaign for re-election threatened to turn sour. By that time Alger Hiss was already discredited; Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had already been arrested and put on trial. It was the liberal New-Dealer Truman who had, in 1947, established a comprehensive loyalty program to ferret out Communist influences in the U.S. government.

That's how someone on McCarthy's staff hit on the idea that this might be a great issue to revive Joe's campaign in the first place. McCarthy immediately said 'That's it. The government is full of Communists. We can hammer away at them.' And he did. McCarthy made 'history' by taking a genuine concern that was already being addressed and blowing it out of all proportion for his own political purposes.

His first so-called 'classified list of Soviet spies' was actually a public list of people who had been turned down by the State Department, some on suspicion of Communist sympathies, others for incompetence, still others merely for obsessive drinking of the kind McCarthy himself liked to indulge in. From that moment on, however, the money came in from all sides. And if Senator McCarthy was interested in anything at all at a personal level, apart from booze, it was money. That''s why he had no friends and everybody dropped him the moment the Senate censured him in 1957. He had no concept of loyalty except to himself.

[Red Harvest]

Might also want to add that McCarthy would also have been on that list...had he needed to go through the same screening.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

What happened to the assertions that it was a witch hunt and We are re writting history?

[sharrukin]

What else is new? And the full list is a lot longer than your summary exposition. But doesn't it strike you as odd, to say the least, that McCarthy never got a single real or so-called Communist convicted?

Not really!
So we have gone from listed Communists, to exposed Communists, to convicted Communists. Well, news flash! He wasn't a federal prosecutor, so how exactly was he supposed to get someone convicted as a Senator?

The issue here is that McCarthy created and abused an atmosphere of hysterical excitement and hatred against political opponents, in particular Democrats.

Yes, that is indeed the issue here!

He came up with the issue of Communist infiltration in 1950 when his campaign for re-election threatened to turn sour.

1946 actually!
He made communism an issue in his campaign against Howard McMurray in 1946, charging that McMurray had received the endorsement of the Daily Worker, the Communist Party newspaper. In April 1947, McCarthy told the Madison Capital Times that his top priority was "to stop the spread of communism." The Communist Party of Wisconsin had originally circulated petitions to place its own candidate on the ballot as an independent in the general election. When McCarthy scored his surprising victory over La Follette, the communists did not file the petitions for their candidate, but rallied instead behind McMurray.

By that time Alger Hiss was already discredited;

Actually even after it was discovered some number of liberals continued to defend him, but you are correct Alger Hiss wasn't uncovered by McCarthy.

Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had already been arrested and put on trial. It was the liberal New-Dealer Truman who had, in 1947, established a comprehensive loyalty program to ferret out Communist influences in the U.S. government.

That's how someone on McCarthy's staff hit on the idea that this might be a great issue to revive Joe's campaign in the first place. McCarthy immediately said 'That's it. The government is full of Communists. We can hammer away at them.' And he did. McCarthy made 'history' by taking a genuine concern that was already being addressed and blowing it out of all proportion for his own political purposes.

Not really that comprehensive and mostly under pressure from congress and guys like McCarthy.

In December 1945, the FBI sent President Truman a report showing that his Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Harry Dexter White, was a Soviet spy. Truman ignored the warning and, early in 1946, promoted White to executive director of the U.S. Mission to the International Monetary Fund. The FBI sent Truman a second report, but again he did nothing. White resigned from the government in 1947, and his communist ties were exposed by Elizabeth Bentley when she appeared before the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1948.

In June 1947, a Senate Appropriations subcommittee addressed a secret memorandum to Marshall, calling to his attention

"a condition that developed and still flourishes in the State Department under the administration of Dean Acheson. It is evident that there is a deliberate, calculated program being carried out not only to protect communist personnel in high places but to reduce security and intelligence protection to a nullity. On file in the department is a copy of a preliminary report of the FBI on Soviet espionage activities in the United States which involves a large number of State Department employees, some in high official positions. "

The memorandum listed the names of nine of these State Department officials and said that they were "only a few of the hundreds now employed in varying capacities who are protected and allowed to remain despite the fact that their presence is an obvious hazard to national security." On June 24, 1947, Assistant Secretary of State John Peurifoy notified the chairman of the Senate subcommittee that ten persons had been dismissed from the department, five of whom had been listed in the memorandum. But from June 1947 until McCarthy's Wheeling speech in February 1950, the State Department did not fire one person as a loyalty or security risk. In other branches of the government, however, more than 300 persons were discharged for loyalty reasons alone during the period from 1947 to 1951.

No, I think the "comprehensive loyalty program to ferret out Communist influences" was just a little dysfunctional.

His first so-called 'classified list of Soviet spies' was actually a public list of people who had been turned down by the State Department, some on suspicion of Communist sympathies, others for incompetence, still others merely for obsessive drinking of the kind McCarthy himself liked to indulge in. From that moment on, however, the money came in from all sides.

He never claimed otherwise. He only wanted something done about it. Nor was he the only one. A young congressman from Massachusetts deplored "the disasters befalling China and the United States," and declared that "it is of the utmost importance that we search out and spotlight those who must bear the responsibility for our present predicament." The congressman placed a major part of the blame on "a sick Roosevelt," General George Marshall, and "our diplomats and their advisers, the Lattimores and the Fairbanks," and he concluded: "This is the tragic story of China whose freedom we once fought to preserve. What our young men had saved, our diplomats and our President have frittered away." The congressman's name was John F. Kennedy.

And his brother Robert; "it just didn't make sense to anybody in this country that our major allies, whom we're aiding financially, should trade with the communists who are killing GIs".

Four times during McCarthy's February 20th speech, Senator Scott Lucas demanded that McCarthy make the 81 names public, but McCarthy refused to do so, responding that "if I were to give all the names involved, it might leave a wrong impression. If we should label one man a communist when he is not a communist, I think it would be too bad." What McCarthy did was to identify the individuals only by case numbers, not by their names. Oh, yes! He's clearly out of control!

That''s why he had no friends and everybody dropped him the moment the Senate censured him in 1957. He had no concept of loyalty except to himself.

He had some. One of his earliest supporters was Joseph Kennedy, the father of JFK. McCarthy attended the wedding of Joe's daughter Eunice Kennedy, and was Joe's guest at numerous other affairs, where Kennedy introduced him as his "valued friend."

In 1954, at the 15th reunion of his Harvard class, a McCarthy hater toasted Harvard College for never having produced an Alger Hiss or a Joe McCarthy.

John F. Kennedy stood up and walked out, roaring, "How dare you couple the name of a great American patriot with that of a traitor!" - the words of later president JFK judging the worth of Joe McCarthy. John F. Kennedy was also the only democrat not to vote to condemn McCarthy, back problems I hear. Of course a lot of democrats at the time thought that was kind of convenient.

So he had some friends!

The average American did not fear McCarthy; in fact, the Gallup Poll reported in 1954 that the senator was fourth on its list of most admired men. And he had some admirers too!

And if Senator McCarthy was interested in anything at all at a personal level, apart from booze, it was money.

I wonder why such an evil and wretched man was asked to be the godfather for Robert Kennedy's daughter Kathleen? And why in 1953 was Robert Kennedy working with Senator McCarthy? Maybe he was spying on him trying to save us all from his evil! No, it seems he said; "Joe McCarthy's methods may be a little rough," he told reporters, "but, after all, his goal is to expose Communists in government, and that's a worthy goal. So why are you reporters so critical of his methods?" GOOD QUESTION!

Some 653 persons were called by the McCarthy Committee during 1953-54. These individuals first appeared in executive session and were told of the evidence against them. If they were able to offer satisfactory explanations - and most of them were - they were dismissed and nobody ever knew they had been summoned. Those who appeared in public sessions had taken Fifth Amendment refusing to answer questions, or there was good reason to presume their guilt. Only 83 refused to answer questions about communist or espionage activities on constitutional grounds and their names were made public. Nine additional witnesses invoked the Fifth Amendment in executive session, but their names were not made public.

Charles E. Ford, an attorney for Edward Rothschild in the Government Printing Office hearings, was so impressed with McCarthy's fairness toward his client that he declared: "I think the committee session at this day and in this place is most admirable and most American." Peter Gragis, who appeared before the McCarthy Committee on March 10, 1954, said that he had come to the hearing terrified because the press "had pointed out that you were very abusive, that you were crucifying people.... My experience has been quite the contrary. I have, I think, been very understandingly treated. I have been, I think, highly respected despite the fact that for some 20 years I had been more or less an active communist."

The man was clearly a monster!
He drank too much.
He was mean.
He embarrassed democrats AND the army!
I mean what kind of sicko does that!

[PanzerJaeger]

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that there is a major effort to rewrite the history, since the thrust of the conservative movement at the moment is largely regressive in nature. To make that palatable there is a large cast of historical characters that is going to require image makeovers.

What history is being re-written? You see one article that was favorable about McCarthy and now a right wing conspiracy is trying to change history? Can you give any examples of this?

Frankly, most people in America know very little about McCarthy and dont care. Articles such as this only resonate in the small minority of people who actually pay attention to both history and politics..

Really Im interested to hear your explanation on this one..

[Ice]

I'm about as anti-communist as you can get, so I really admire what McCarty did by exposing all those communists.

[Red Harvest]

There have been alot of Republicans lately trying to Justify Nixon, if you need examples of history being re-written.

In addition I'll add some things I've seen related to States Rights and the ACW, as well as Supply Side Economics, Kosovo, trust busting, and other historical events. Most of it is very selective use of the data/facts combined with very creative interpretations.

I think they need to soften Nixon's image, because the current administration is staring some abuse of power issues square in the face at the moment. The admin has developed some rather considerable credibility problems. They haven't snowballed yet to the point that their power base has lost faith, but the potential is there.

[Ironside]

On the HUAC in hollywood

HUAC and Censorship Changes

Same author defending the first round in Hollywood

Wiki

Certainly very little propaganda made it into their films. Only one film, Mission to Moscow (1943), was ever found to have any traces of such influence, and it was produced as much out of enthusiasm for the Soviet Union's role as an ally in World War II as out of Communist influence.

The point here was? Especially after the "Hollywood Ten" 1947.

From 1951 to 1954, HUAC, now directed by John S. Wood, again focused on Hollywood, compiling a list of 324 present and former Hollywood workers who supposedly were or had been members of the Communist Party. Whether or not these people admitted membership, they ended up on an unofficial blacklist.

The issue isn't the detection of Soviet spies, but the method's used.

That they didn't investigate the KKK as

The HUCA originally investigated both left-wing and right wing political groups. Some called for the leaders of the Ku Klux Klan to be interrogated by the HUAC. Martin Dies however was a supporter of the Klan and had spoken at several of its rallies. Other members of the HUAC such as John Rankin and John S. Wood were also Klan sympathizers. Wood defended the Klan by arguing that: "The threats and intimidations of the Klan are an old American custom, like illegal whisky-making."

Eventually Ernest Adamson, the HUAC's chief counsel, announced that: "The committee has decided that it lacks sufficient data on which to base a probe." John Rankin added: After all, the KKK is an old American institution."

Link

doesn't exactly shine well on this organisation either, as it's a failure to do thier job.

[sharrukin]

In addition I'll add some things I've seen related to States Rights and the ACW, as well as Supply Side Economics, Kosovo, trust busting, and other historical events. Most of it is very selective use of the data/facts combined with very creative interpretations.

I think they need to soften Nixon's image, because the current administration is staring some abuse of power issues square in the face at the moment. The admin has developed some rather considerable credibility problems. They haven't snowballed yet to the point that their power base has lost faith, but the potential is there.

Just a question.
As someone who thinks Bush is a moron, thinks Karl Rove should go to prison, and dislikes the Neocon movement, where do I fit into the conspiracy?

[sharrukin]

Quote:
Certainly very little propaganda made it into their films. Only one film, Mission to Moscow (1943), was ever found to have any traces of such influence, and it was produced as much out of enthusiasm for the Soviet Union's role as an ally in World War II as out of Communist influence.

The point here was? Especially after the "Hollywood Ten" 1947.

That isn't what those making the films have to say.

The issue isn't the detection of Soviet spies, but the method's used.

That they didn't investigate the KKK as

doesn't exactly shine well on this organisation either, as it's a failure to do thier job.

IMO the KKK should have been dealt with, but an expansion of HUAC isn't what most would argue for.

Since as has been pointed out the Communists of the 1950's are not like the Communists of today I fail to see the point here. Do nothing and leave the film industry in the influence of those who are hostile to democracy? Communism was never just another political party; it was the only one directed from a foreign country, and that nation was hostile to the United States and the values of democracy.

From your link;
"These ten witnesses knew they had three options. They could claim they were not and never had been members of the Communist Party (this would have meant perjuring themselves)"

"A number of Hollywood directors, screenwriters, and actors had joined the Communist Party or contributed funds to its activities during the Depression of the 1930s. It was to these especially strident participants that HUAC was most mindful."

One former Communist screenwriter noted that there were a number of "awful writers" who managed to get jobs only because they belonged to the party.

Alvah Bessie
seved with the International Brigades in spain, backing the communist side.

Dmytryk testified how people such as John Howard Lawson, Adrian Scott and Albert Maltz had put him under pressure to make sure his films expressed the views of the Communist Party. "John Howard Lawson settled all questions. If there was a switch in the Party line, he explained it. If there were any decisions to be made, they went to John Howard Lawson. If there was any conflict within the Communist Party, he was the one who settled it." -" Albert Maltz had been concerned about the lack of freedom of thought in the Communist Party for some time...So he wrote the article which he later had to repudiate or get out of the Party, and he chose to repudiate it."

Budd Schulberg; " These people (those he named), if they had it in them, could have written books and plays. There was not a blacklist in publishing. There was not a blacklist in the theatre. They could have written about the forces that drove them into the Communist Party. They were practically nothing written. Nor have I seen these people interested in social problems in the decades since. They're interested in their own problems and in the protection of the Party."

Walter Bernstein, screenwriter for The Front—the first Hollywood movie about the blacklist, well he shows up in the Venona decrypts of Soviet cables as a willing collaborator with the KGB.

Boris Morros, producer of such movies as Flying Deuces, with Laurel and Hardy, and Second Chorus, with Paulette Goddard and Fred Astaire, also worked for Soviet intelligence.

Cedric Belfrage, a Hollywood journalist and friend of Hollywood Ten Lester Cole also shows up in the Venona decrypts.

These are the few who actually show up as paid agents in the few Venona documents (3,000) that have been released. There are ten of thousands (200,000) more waiting with more little surprises!

"Controversy surrounded the honoring of director Elia Kazan at this year's Academy Awards. Kazan had done the unthinkable. He'd actually named names."

His wife, Molly, has written about what many in Hollywood still characterize as witch-hunts: "Those witches did not exist. Communists do. Here, and everywhere in the world. It's a false parallel. The phrase would indicate that there are no Communists in the government, none in the trade unions, none in the press, none in the arts, none sending money from Hollywood to Twelfth Street. No one who was in the Party and left uses that phrase. They know better."

[Adrian II]

I wonder why such an evil and wretched man was asked to be the godfather for Robert Kennedy's daughter Kathleen? And why in 1953 was Robert Kennedy working with Senator McCarthy?

Because Robert was a fanatic in his youth and only later, gradually, realised some of his major mistakes, as he acknowledged in 1953 when he resigned from McCarthy's Committee because of 'the way that the Committee was being run'. And in those days both Robert and John were heavily dependent on their crook father Joe Kennedy who shared, shall we say, certain interests with Joe McCarthy, ranging from illegal money making schemes to flings with fascism.

Charles E. Ford, an attorney for Edward Rothschild in the Government Printing Office hearings, was so impressed with McCarthy's fairness (..)

A lot of people grovelled to McCarthy in those days, and the words of the lawyer of someone who made a narrow escape have little to no weight.

[sharrukin]

Because Robert was a fanatic in his youth and only later, gradually, realised some of his major mistakes, as he acknowledged in 1953 when he resigned from McCarthy's Committee because of 'the way that the Committee was being run'. And in those days both Robert and John were heavily dependent on their crook father Joe Kennedy who shared, shall we say, certain interests with Joe McCarthy, ranging from illegal money making schemes to flings with fascism.

A lot of people grovelled to McCarthy in those days, and the words of the lawyer of someone who made a narrow escape have little to no weight.

I see, so anyone who had anything good to say about McCarthy must be a bad person or misguided? Or a groveller. Or a crawler, lackey, sycophant, toady, etc.

Which would make JFK a crook or a fool, or was he a groveller too? What was it he said..."a great American patriot"

He's a bad man!
Anyone who say's anything good about him is also bad (or misguided if we like them!)
All evidence, regardless of accuracy will be accepted to prove he is bad!
No evidence, regardless of accuracy will be accepted to prove he is not a villain!
Lastly, Liberals are open minded and always willing to give everyone a fair shake!

Seriously, does the evidence really show that he was the 1950's version of Darth Vader? I mean...is this it?

[Kanamori]

Well, I think this means that, officially now, Wisconsin has only produced wonderful Senators

[Ironside]

IMO the KKK should have been dealt with, but an expansion of HUAC isn't what most would argue for.

It's hardly an expansion, it's more in style of letting Homeland Security only investigate Wahabbism Muslisms. It's a failure to do thier job properly.

The problem with the blacklist is that for whatever reason you were on it (and that doesn't seem to be to hard), it was impossible to get away from it, and you had a hole lot of problems afterwards. A more proper way would be to investigate them to see if there's anything to convict them for, not banned any suspect from thier job and then hardly doing anything checking them out afterwards (they don't seem to have convicted anyone on the blacklist).

The Hollywood ten is more understandable from the way it developed.

[Redleg]

So now the consevative right is just trying to make Nixon look good -

Someone needs to get some tin foil and more duct tape - conspiracy abounds to rewrite history in the neo-con image of things.

Yea right - get real. One first must understand history before they complain of re-writes.