Presstitutes: A Literary Toast


Poem and Narration by DC Dave Martin

A Literary Toast

Let’s hear it for our propagandists,
The people who bring us the news.
Unencumbered by troublesome scruples,
They’re proud of their compromised views.
There once was a time we admired them.
We thought they were principled fighters,
But what we see now is more worthy
Of the Union of Soviet Writers.
That they should be liberty’s guardians
Is truly a shame and a pity,
These shills and these flacks,
These stooges and hacks,
These sold-out scribes
Who report on the tribes
Who rule from our capital city.

Let’s hear it for news commentators,
Those masters of punditry,
Who share with us all their opinions,
Wide-ranging from A down to B.
Standing right there in the spotlight,
They could do some significant things,
But we’d sooner expect wooden puppets
To dance without handles or strings.
Impressing no one but their colleagues,
They’re not even learned or witty,
These shills and these flacks,
These stooges and hacks,
These sold-out scribes
Who report on the tribes
Who rule from our capital city.

Let’s hear it for all those reporters
Who learn how the contest is played.
If they will just write what’s expected
They can be handsomely paid,
But most garner practically nothing
And eventually fall off the ladder.
The losers depart mostly wiser,
While the winners grow gradually sadder.
Let’s hear it for all those survivors
Whose road to the top is not pretty,
These shills and these flacks,
These stooges and hacks,
These sold-out scribes
Who report on the tribes
Who rule from our capital city.

David Martin

Link for Union of Soviet Writers

Video by BuelahMan

Bro Kapner may not agree.

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

James Forrestal and John Kennedy

James Forrestal and John Kennedy

by DC Dave

james forrestal

James Forrestal, who was assistant secretary of the Navy and then secretary of the Navy for most of World War II was a severe critic of the foreign policy and the war policy of the government for which he worked. We will perhaps never know just how severe a critic he was because when he was sent off to Bethesda Naval Hospital the Truman White House confiscated his diaries and only a severely edited version was published. What is purported to be the entire work is available for examination at the Seeley Mudd Manuscript Library of Princeton University, but it is frankly unbelievable that the most revealing negative passages would not have been removed, considering the chain of custody of the document.

We can get some idea of the nature of Forrestal’s differences with the FDR and Truman administrations from a couple of published quotes. The first I have repeated in one form or another in several previous articles. It comes from page 7 of Senator Joe McCarthy’s book, The Fight for America, and it is the tail end of an account of a conversation the freshly elected Senator McCarthy had at a 1946 lunch meeting that Navy Secretary Forrestal had requested:

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 stuck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.

The second quote comes from an October 15, 1951, article in Life magazine entitled “The Forrestal Diaries.” It is not from the diaries themselves but from a letter that Forrestal wrote to a friend during the war:

I find that whenever any American suggests that we act in accordance with the needs of our own security he is apt to be called a [profane adjective deleted] fascist or imperialist, while if Uncle Joe suggests that he needs the Baltic Provinces, half of Poland, all of Bessarabia and access to the Mediterranean, all hands agree that his is a fine, frank, candid and generally delightful fellow who is very easy to deal with because he is so explicit in what he wants. (Cited in The Iron Curtain over America by John Beaty, 1958, p. 67)

Moreover, in my article, “Forrestal Ignored: China Lost to Reds, Korean War Fought,” I show that Forrestal worked on his own to effect an earlier end to the war with Japan than what actually occurred in order to head off Soviet ambitions in the Far East and was frustrated in his efforts by his superiors.

It should come as no surprise, then, that with views so different from the other advisers that President Harry Truman had inherited from Franklin Roosevelt, Forrestal was not a part of the official delegation to the Potsdam Conference shortly after the German surrender. What is more surprising—though perhaps not so much with a man like Forrestal—is that he went to the conference, held near devastated Berlin, on his own. * Most intriguingly, he took with him the 28-year-old Navy veteran son of a friend by the name of John F. Kennedy, “picking JFK up in Paris and taking him in his personal aircraft to Berlin, Bremen, Frankfurt, Salzburg, and Hitler’s aerie in Berchtesgarden.” The friend, of course, was Wall Street power and controversial former ambassador to the United Kingdom, Joseph Kennedy, and father Joe had used his influence with publisher William Randolph Hearst to arrange for young John to work as a journalist covering the conference.

If the knowledgeable and strong-willed anti-Communist Forrestal could have influenced his new acquaintance McCarthy as strongly as he did with that one lunch meeting, one can only imagine the education he might have imparted to the young family friend, Kennedy, in the time they spent together on that Europe trip. Actually, one doesn’t have to imagine it completely. The speech that JFK delivered as a Congressman in January of 1949 blistering the administration, which was run by his own Democratic party, for its actions contributing to the Communist takeover of China could have been written by Forrestal himself had he still been alive.

In all likelihood, young Kennedy hardly required a lot of information and influence from Forrestal to be aware of the alien and subversive forces at work within the United States. He was the son of Joseph P. Kennedy, after all. Consider this now famous passage from Forrestal’s diary that made it past the editing process:

27 December 1945

Played golf today with Joe Kennedy. I asked him about his conversations with Roosevelt and Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on. He said Chamberlain’s position in 1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she could not risk going to war with Hitler. Kennedy’s view: That Hitler would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it had not been for Bullitt’s [William C. Bullitt, then Ambassador to France] urging on Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had not been for the constant needling from Washington. Bullitt, he said, kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn’t fight, Kennedy that they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war. In his telephone conversation with Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 the President kept telling him to put some iron up Chamberlain’s backside. Kennedy’s response always was that putting iron up his backside did no good unless the British had some iron with which to fight, and they did not. (Walter Millis, The Forrestal Diaries, pp. 121-122, emphasis added.)

When Forrestal fell to his death from a 16th floor window of the Bethesda Naval Hospital on May 22, 1949, JFK, knowing what he knew, is highly unlikely to have been naïve enough to accept the suicide story. He knew the kind of man Forrestal was and he was well aware of the Zionist and Communist forces that opposed him. He very likely had heard of the Jewish Stern Gang’s letter bomb attempts on the life President Truman in 1947 and before that on British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin. He no doubt knew that both groups regarded Forrestal as American enemy number one and he knew what they were capable of.

JFKWHP-ST-C194-9-63editedIt is in this context that we must consider JFK’s decision on Memorial Day, 1963, to visit the Arlington Cemetery tomb of his friend and mentor, Forrestal. Memorial Day is often confused with Veterans Day. It is not for honoring everyone who has served in the United States armed forces. Its purpose is to honor those who have died while serving in the armed forces. Forrestal would appear not to qualify. He was a veteran, having trained as a Navy flyer but never making it overseas in World War I, and he had made a great contribution to the World War II effort in his various capacities. He was also the nation’s first secretary of defense. But when he died he was a civilian and the country was at peace.

Was it inappropriate, then, for JFK to honor Forrestal on Memorial Day as he did? I suggest that if one broadens—or perhaps narrows—the definition of the honorees of Memorial Day to those who died fighting for their country against its enemies the presidential visit to Forrestal’s grave could hardly have been more appropriate, and Kennedy more than likely knew it. Unfortunately, their common enemies would likely have known it, too, and they would have regarded it as just another strike against him.

Another Interpretation of the Tribute

Kennedy’s visit to Forrestal’s grave has also been noted by Catherine Austin Fitts on her web site, The Solari Report. Like Forrestal she is a former official at the Wall Street firm of Dillon, Read & Co. who later had a high position in Washington. In her case it was as Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in the George H.W. Bush administration. She mentions Forrestal’s opposition to the creation of the state of Israel and “controversy around the official explanation of his death,” but her conclusion can only be described as Delphic: “Presidents are busy people. They do not just take time off to visit graves over in Arlington after official ceremonies are over. It looks to me as though something was weighing on his mind. I can guess what it was. You can too.”

She seems to have missed the fact that it was Memorial Day, and I don’t think she gives readers enough information for them to guess what it was that was weighing on the president’s mind. She does link to my “Who Killed James Forrestal?”, though. Perhaps she expects that you will read that before you do your guessing.

Fitts also informs us that she learned of the Forrestal-JFK link from Michael Salla’s recent book, Kennedy’s Last Stand: Eisenhower, UFOs, MJ-12 & JFK’s Assassination. As the title of the book suggests, Salla is a complete UFO guy. A search of the Kindle version of his book for the words “Israel,” “Jew,” and “Jewish” all draw blanks. “Communist” turns up only this sentence with a comically misplaced modifier and a redundancy: “As a former communist defector, Angleton and the CIA could persuasively argue that Oswald’s involvement directly implicated the USSR.”

Salla’s argument, as I understand it, is that both Forrestal and Kennedy were assassinated because of what they knew and were in danger of revealing about our encounters with extraterrestrial beings. He recognizes that in order to make his case he must first show that Forrestal was, in fact, murdered and did not commit suicide as we have been told. In doing that, though, he seems to be employing the spook-writing technique of careful avoidance of writing anything that might actually change anyone’s mind.

No one can argue in the second decade of the 21st century that Forrestal was murdered without taking note of my work, which Salla duly does. He has four endnotes to my web site but the case he makes with it could hardly be weaker. The first is to the URL http://www.dcdave.com/article5/080429.htm, which he calls “Letter to former Virginia governor.” The article at the site is actually entitled “Lies about the Kennedy and Forrestal Deaths from the University of Virginia’s Miller Center,” which is a good deal stronger than the title Salla has chosen. Former Governor Gerald Baliles happens to be the center’s director. Salla references the letter, which is part of the article, for this short quote in his book:

Forrestal resigned because he was asked to resign by President Truman. He had not suffered a nervous breakdown. None of the doctors who treated him at Bethesda Naval Hospital described his condition as a nervous breakdown. What is more important, though, recently uncovered evidence greatly undermines the theory that Forrestal voluntarily jumped out of the window at Bethesda Naval Hospital.

Just as the quote is beginning to get really informative, Salla cuts it off. He never tells the reader what that new evidence is. Instead he jumps to UFOlogist Richard Dolan for observations from his 2001, thoroughly outdated “The Death of James Forrestal.” He then references Part 1 of my “Who Killed James Forrestal?” three times before getting back to Dolan, but he does that only for what I have passed on from Cornell Simpson’s 1966 book, also titled The Death of James Forrestal.

I have attempted to get Dolan to update his material on Forrestal’s death by incorporating information from the official investigation, known as the Willcutts Report, which I obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2004, but he has ignored me. Similarly, if one searches Salla’s book for “Willcutts Report” he draws a blank. A search for “broken glass,” which we discover from the Willcutts Report was tellingly found on Forrestal’s vacated bed, also turns up nothing.

We have also shown that the poem transcription that the press and historians have treated as a sort of suicide note was not in Forrestal’s handwriting. We do get some hits searching “handwriting” in Salla’s book, but none of them have anything to do with the Forrestal death case.

Note from James Forrestal to John O’Hara

Note from James Forrestal to John O’Hara

Note from James Forrestal to Harry Truman

Note from James Forrestal to Harry Truman

Note from James Forrestal to Harry Truman

Note from James Forrestal to Harry Truman

Willcutts Report poem

Willcutts Report poem

Since Salla’s purpose is to show that protectors of UFO secrets were behind both the Forrestal and Kennedy assassinations (A search of “UFO” turns up 72 pages of hits.) it is perhaps understandable that he would not mention those whom others regard as the top suspects. After all, searching “UFO” in my work on Forrestal’s death won’t turn up much of anything, either. His careful avoidance of the best evidence demonstrating that Forrestal was, in fact, murdered simply marks him as a disinformationist, however.

America’s Sad “Historians”

Taking stock, almost a decade after I made public the long secret report on Forrestal’s death, three books, to my knowledge, have now made explicit reference to my work. In addition to Salla’s book, we have two anti-Zionist books, Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel by Alison Weir and Part One of Alan Hart’s Zionism, the Real Enemy of the Jews entitled The False Messiah. Of these three, only Hart mentions the Willcutts Report, and he, like Weir, is a journalist, so the standard has not yet been met for the University of Virginia’s Miller Center to begin to modify its flat statement that Forrestal committed suicide:

The web site is an educational site for general users. As such, we see our responsibility as providing our users with a mainstream interpretation of history. We do not publish groundbreaking new scholarship or challenge the historical consensus that is derived from secondary sources written by established academics. If you can point us to secondary sources written by established historians that discuss the Willcutts report and cast doubt on whether Forrestal committed suicide, we would be very interested in reading them.

Nicholas Thompson in The Hawk and the Dove: Paul Nitze, George Kennan, and the History of the Cold War makes quite extensive but still very selective reference to the Willcutts Report. We show in Part 6 of “Who Killed James Forrestal” how thoroughly dishonest Thompson is in his treatment of the Willcutts material, though.

Thompson, too, is a journalist, so even if he had been honest with the Willcutts evidence it would not have been enough to get the Miller Center** to budge. They’re still waiting for “established academics” and “established historians” to weigh in. Considering the current sad state of the academic history community the wait is likely to be a long one. Reflecting the consensus of those academic historians, the Miller Center still says that all the shots that killed Kennedy and wounded Governor John Connally came from the Texas Schoolbook Depository and Lee Harvey Oswald remains the lone gunman. As for the Forrestal case, to date, the only person calling himself a historian who has taken note of the Willcutts Report is a young man by the name of Matthew McNiece, who teaches history at the obscure Howard Payne University in Texas. He did it in a puerile, semi-literate effort that passed muster as his doctoral dissertation at Texas Christian University.

In my poem, “A Literary Toast,” I compare America’s journalists to the late, unlamented Union of Soviet Writers. The Soviet similarity is at least as great if not greater, it would appear, with America’s academic historians.

 


 

 

* Here is how Elizabeth Churchill Brown in The Enemy at His Back explains Forrestal’s purpose:

Forrestal…had been fairly popular with the elite Washington conference group until his patriotism combined with his intelligence forced [Assistant Secretary of State] Joseph Grew to share his dog house with him. Forrestal had been reading reports, making personal inspections, and had started asking questions. Unlike Mr. Grew, the Secretary of the Navy was not only well acquainted with those “certain elements” but he also understood their aims. Naval intelligence was perhaps the best of our wartime intelligence agencies (excluding the FBI), and Forrestal was reading daily the many intercepted messages between Japan and Russia in which the former was attempting to negotiate a surrender. Moreover, Forrestal had recently made a complete tour of the Pacific war theater where he saw the war being fought and talked with the officers and men doing the fighting. He was “dangerous.”

Knowing the territorial loot that Truman was intent on giving the Russians at Potsdam, and realizing the tragic needlessness of such concessions, Forrestal came to the conclusion he must act, and quickly. He flew to the Conference in a desperate hope of being able to place a deterring hand on the President’s shoulder. But the day he arrived the conference came to an end and the damage was done. (pp. 139-140)

** It is of some interest that before Governor Baliles was given the job in 2005, the director of the Miller Center was Philip D. Zelikow, who was also the executive director of the 9/11 Commission. Zelikow, who also worked on George W. Bush’s transition team in 2001, is now Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at UVA and in 2011 President Obama appointed him to his Intelligence Advisory Board.

 

David Martin

August 6, 2014

 

 

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

The Cholesterol Myth

statins-killI recently went to the Doctor for back problems (all she did was give me pain meds and muscle relaxers). The pain did not go away, but it did help me sleep better. Three days later I went to a Chiropractor and he told me to take Advil to minimize the inflammation (and popped my back way down low) and I was over it in two days.

While I was at the Dr, she wanted to do a regular blood screening (1 year prostate, cholesterol, and other shit to make me buy more meds). She told me that my cholesterol was too high (within the normal ranges that were medically dictated just a few years ago, but now lowered even more to sell statins). She was going to write me a prescription and I told her not to bother because I would not take them (the look on her face was incredulous).

She asked why and I said because it isn’t proven and there are horrific side effects. She admitted so and didn’t push it, but did say she wanted me to lose weight and change my diet to lower the evil cholesterol on my own.

However, the more I look into this issue, the more problems I find with the meds, so it is near impossible for me to ever take one under any circumstance. Here are just a few reasons why:


So many people go to the doctor with high cholesterol and end up on a statin or cholesterol lowering drug for years, if not their entire lives. Dr. Peter Glidden says there is something fundamentally wrong with that and that prolonged statin use can lead to many more serious conditions.
http://www.ihealthtube.com http://www.facebook.com/ihealthtube

From Dr Mercola:

 

The cholesterol myth has suffered a bit of a triple whammy of late, making it harder and harder for heart specialists to uphold the company line. This information is just the latest in a long line of science disproving the need for the saturated fat phobia.

    1. In 2012, researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology examined the health and lifestyle habits of more than 52,000 adults ages 20 to 74, concluding that women with “high cholesterol” (greater than 270 mg/dl) had a 28 percent lower mortality risk than women with “low cholesterol” (less than 183 mg/dl).

Researchers also found that, if you’re a woman, your risk for heart disease, cardiac arrest, and stroke are higher with lower cholesterol levels.3

    1. In 2013, a prominent London cardiologist by the name of Aseem Malhotra argued in the British Medical Journal that you should ignore advice to reduce your saturated fat intake, because it’s actually increasing your risk for obesity and heart disease.4
    2. Then in March 2014, a new meta-analysis published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, using data from nearly 80 studies and more than a half million people, found that those who consume higher amounts of saturated fat have no more heart disease than those who consume less.

They also did not find less heart disease among those eating higher amounts of unsaturated fat, including both olive oil and corn oil.5, 6

By and large, medical and pharmaceutical companies exist to make profit. The profit incentive is the problem with our system. When I point out to many that a Single Payer system, initiated and run by a consortium effort, dedicated to the best care, BUT NOT PROFIT, people go crazy for some reason. People don’t understand the words “non-profit” which does NOT mean “make no money”. Many people make lots of money in non-profit environments. Its when a profit driven entity does not make PROFIT is when it is abandoned and considered a failure by investors.Statin Estimates put statin sales at $29Billion yearly, so don’t suggest that money and profit is not involved.

We need to stop allowing investors from dictating our care.

One of my favorite blogs in Video Rebel’s blog. He discusses all sorts of ways to improve banking and other issues by such consortium, but when I suggest putting healthcare under the same type system, all the sudden it won’t work.

Poppycock.

The reason these types of systems don’t work is the illusion of “profit must be guaranteed”.

His other points about improving food sources, eliminating contaminants, teaching true natural means of healing, etc, are all wonderful (and I agree totally), but we still need a system for the ailments and emergencies that will not cost more than double any other developed nation but at a fraction of the efficacy.

Single payer would do it, if done right, without the thieves getting involved.

Oh, and don’t bring out the canard that the medical system for Vets doesn’t work (very similar to a single payer, but has the government’s fingerprints… which means that Big Business has taken over… for that is what happens to a Fascist country). Big Business interests rule government for mega profits. THAT is what is tearing down that once great system.

Personally, I am going to avoid the push for any medicine from every Doctor because I do not believe that the motive from the drup companies is healthcare, but PROFIT. And from the way that natural medicine is demonized by the media and medical establishment, my bet is that the serious cures will be found there… not in PROFIT!

 

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

What Democracy Is All About

NYDemocracy

I wonder if William Bratton, the alcohol ravaged Commissioner of New York City (look at the veins in his face), really has a clue about what Democracy really is about? Oh, and is it worth mentioning that he has the quintessential hook nose? Or that his FOURTH wife is a Jewess (from Ukrainian Jewish parents)? Or that he is an admitted Freemason and worked for Kroll, Inc (known for their involvement in the 911 WTC security… aka involvement of the False Flag)?

h/t BlackListedNews

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Video of Labor Goon Slugging Union Man in NC

Video of Labor Goon Slugging Union Man in NC

by DC Dave

The very essence of the slave system of agriculture was that the owner of the land upon which the crops and animals were grown had all the power and the people who worked on the farms had none. After a long period of relative freedom for workers, that state of affairs has very nearly been restored in much of the United States with the blessings of the federal government through its H-2A foreign guest worker program.

Nowhere is the current imbalance of power better illustrated than in a video that was surreptitiously shot by a worker on July 9 in North Carolina and then posted on YouTube by the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC) of the AFL-CIO. You can watch as the landowner stands casually with his hands in his pockets in front of a group of foreign workers as a representative of Stan Eury’s North Carolina Growers Association (NCGA), who looks like the reincarnation of Simon Legree, himself, berates the workers.

About midway through the video, the NCGA rep, Paul Saffle, who is speaking in Spanish that is only faintly picked up by the video, begins to read the names of workers who have sought assistance from the FLOC. His purpose is clearly intimidation. Saffle takes exception to some words by the union rep, Oscar Sanchez, an older, smaller man who is standing about 20 feet to one side. To reinforce his demand for silence from Sanchez, Saffle strides over and punches him in the face.

punch

We learn from FLOC’s July 21 update of its earlier article that Saffle lost his job as a result of the incident. The episode, including the video, has also been reported on the left-liberal gatekeeper web site, Buzzfeed, and the web site of Democratic Socialists of America entitled Talking Union. The mainstream press has apparently blacked out news of the incident, however. We could find no mention of it on any of the web sites of North Carolina’s newspapers or television stations. Without any such media pressure, it’s a pretty good bet that Saffle will not be charged with assault by local law enforcement officials, when his guilt is patently obvious from the video.

 

Missing News

Not even the three web sites that we found who covered the incident raised the question of the criminality of Saffle’s actions, nor did they mention the complicity of the landowner standing at his side in apparent approval. Buzzfeed’s only contribution is to elaborate a bit further on what “provoked” Saffle to act. Like FLOC, they note that Sanchez corrected Saffle’s pronunciation of a name, but they note further that Sanchez asked, “What are you going to fix, man? What are you going to fix?” It was at that point that Saffle showed that what he was going to fix was Sanchez’s impertinence.

images

The biggest omission of all in the coverage given to the incident is the failure to give us any background information on Saffle’s employer, the NCGA. We would never know that the head of the organization is under federal indictment for abusing the H-2B system for non-farm workers and that, as I detail in “Has Obama Gone Bulworth on Alien Smuggling?”, the NCGA has been guilty of the same thing for years.

The FLOC coverage also conceals the connection between the NCGA abuses and the situation that led up to the incident on the video. The foreign workers had sought assistance from FLOC because there was insufficient work for them to make enough money even to feed themselves. FLOC says it is because of the weather, but, in fact, the weather in North Carolina’s tobacco regions has been excellent this year. The NCGA every year brings in far more laborers than there is work for. That is the very first item in the list supplied to me by an informant in North Carolina’s Employment Security Commission (ESC), “NCGA would always submit orders for the capacity of the farmer’s camp.  Many former cucumber growers would have camps with 20-40 person capacity.  The farmer would actually be requesting less than half the camp capacity, primarily for the highly mechanized tobacco crop.”

 

Par for the Course

If the surplus of workers and the hardship they suffer is no aberration, one can be fairly certain that the abusive behavior exhibited by Saffle—backed up by the landowner—is no aberration, either. The only aberration is that it happened to be filmed. Saffle acts like a man who is used to getting by with such things. And, in a sense, he has gotten by with it again. We are told by NCGA and FLOC that he has resigned, but we can be pretty sure that a man with his demonstrated talents will be able to find work in today’s farm and immigration environment, if, in fact, NCGA has not already just transferred him to Mexico.

Stan ncga

The worst thing that the episode tells us, if the reporters on it do not, is that the NCGA, in spite of the federal indictment of Stan Eury and his daughter in January, is continuing to get by with what it does. Just this past April, the Associated Press rewarded it with what we called an “Infomercial,” which praised the organization as the holder of the key to solve America’s (imaginary) farm labor problem. That widely distributed article, like the current website coverage of the slugging incident, made no mention of the Eury indictment. The NCGA is also continuing to get by with abusing foreign workers as shown by the complete blackout by the mainstream press of this recent documented assault of a union man that puts one in mind of scenes from Matewan, Norma Rae, or On the Waterfront.

The great continuing excuse for the abusive program—whose biggest abuse is its contribution to the illegal alien problem—is that the imported workers are brought here to do the jobs that Americans won’t do. To be sure, they won’t do them for the wages and slave-like conditions under which the imported workers are expected to labor. In case the bad conditions were not enough, one of the federal charges against Eury is that he instructed employers on tailoring their worker requests so that American workers would not apply for the jobs.

As contrary to the common good as Eury’s NCGA has proved to be, and with the federal indictment hanging over his head, job orders approved by the ESC for NCGA this year are at a record high, according to my ESC informants. That’s something else we won’t learn from the web sites covering the assault incident or from the mainstream media.

 

David Martin

July 29, 2014

 

See also “H-2A Kingpin Stumbles on H-2B.”

 

B’Man Note: As of this posting the NCGA website is offline.

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Forrestal, Skippy Creator Shared Similar Fate

Forrestal, Skippy Creator Shared Similar Fate

by DC Dave

Skippy_dissolve

The following is posted with permission of the correspondent:

Subj: Thanks for James Forrestal incisive story

Date: 9/26/03

For the last few hours I have been mesmerized by your story, “Who Killed James Forrestal?” I found this after reading your online book, “America’s Dreyfus Affair“, with which I was very impressed, and wanted to learn more about you.

percy1

Percy Crosby (www.skippy.com)

My father, Percy L. Crosby (1891-1964) also knew Forrestal, both of whom were clients of the formerly prestigious NY law firm, Lord, Day & Lord (disbanded 1994, over which former Atty. Gen. Herbert Brownell reigned, Tom Dewey’s close friend and campaign advisor in the Truman-Dewey campaign). Both Forrestal and my father met similar fates, and had made similar enemies who had them black-listed. Currently, my family and I are fighting for our lives (in an Emile Zola type battle you referred to in your book re America’s Dreyfus Affair), in a major fraud lawsuit, too controversial for media to cover, or expose the “truth buried underground”.

Some of the underlying facts of suit are revealed in my web site story of my father’s life (http://www.skippy.com) who was the creator of the famous “Skippy” character, among other literary pursuits (political cartoons, diatribes against the high and mighty, etc.). It may be of interest to you. If so, I would very much like to speak with you. You have done an amazing and splendid job of research and writing, and I’m very impressed.

Your analysis of the Israel-Palestine problem, and its effect on Forrestal is superb, and most timely for today—what Forrestal and others feared has come to pass despite those of us small citizens who tried to speak out and warn of the consequences. My late husband, Waldo Tibbetts, and I were stationed in Israel (1957-60) when he was director of C.A.R.E., a private relief agency, after which he spent 6 years in Saudi Arabia and Egypt as civilian consultant-economist, 1980-86. I have been vilified and labeled as anti-Semitic so often by the defendant Skippy pirates it no longer carries any pain, although I learned to read, write and speak Hebrew fairly well while in Israel, and could laugh (then) at the disparaging comments made to my husband and me as “goyim” (gentiles), done in friendly, joking manner.

My outlook changed after I learned of my father’s 16 years of confinement as a political prisoner in a mental hospital, and those who held him hostage. Like Henry Forrestal, I also am “damned bitter” about the disinformation, cover-up and became the target for the defendants’ relentless efforts to silence me, portraying me as mentally ill, like they did my father. So much for the goodness and popularity of the “famous” SKIPPY brand peanut butter, truly a story deserving of Dickens, where crime pays big and there is no honor among thieves.

Sincerely,

Joan Crosby Tibbetts, President

Skippy, Inc.

Administratrix, Percy Crosby Estate http://www.skippy.com

 

If you haven’t yet read the Skippy story on her site you should do so. It’s extremely shocking and revealing.

David Martin

September 29, 2003

 

Addendum

See also “Crime, Corruption, Copyright, and a Kids’ Comic: Skippy” by Michael Dooley and “A Tale of Two Cartoonists” by Hugh Turley. Additional information on Crosby from the present writer is to be found in “Roosevelt’s Revenge?” and “Percy Crosby on Franklin Roosevelt.”

 

David Martin

July 23, 2014

 

NOTE by BuelahMan: Research shows that Hormel purchased Skippy Peanut Butter from the Anglo-Dutch consumer goods company, Unilever in Jan 2013.

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Why Senator Joe McCarthy Had to Be Destroyed

Why Senator Joe McCarthy Had to Be Destroyed

by DC Dave

woodrowwilson-216x300The more I learn, particularly when it involves history over about the past two centuries, the more I discover that things are almost the opposite of what we have been led to believe they were. Historians, for instance, consistently rank Woodrow Wilson as one of America’s best presidents, but now we have a very well reasoned argument from David Stockman that almost everything bad that happened in the 20th century resulted from Wilson’s decision to involve us needlessly in what was known at the time as the Great War. And Stockman even omits any mention of the Balfour Declaration, whose promises Great Britain could not have made good upon without U.S. entry into the war, and the endlessly troublesome state of Israel would not have been created.

The Wilson administration also gave us the federal income tax and the Federal Reserve. But Wilson got a lot of his countrymen killed toiling on the winning side of a war, and that was good enough to merit a place in the presidential pantheon for the power worshippers of academia. Just look at the company he keeps there, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and George Washington.

Speaking of the Balfour Declaration, in which the British government promised a home to world Jewry in their ancestral land of Palestine, assuming the Brits could grab it from the Ottoman Empire, who were allies of the Germans in the Great War, the latest best evidence indicates that Palestine is not the ancient home of the Jews, after all. According to Shlomo Sand, a very diligent Cover_Shlomo_SandIsraeli history professor and author of The Invention of the Jewish People, virtually all of the so-called “Jewish diaspora” are descendants of converts to Judaism, products of the era in which it was a proselytizing religion almost as much as was Christianity. And if that were not bad enough for the conventional wisdom, Sand tells us that, in all likelihood, many if not most of today’s Arab Palestinians are the descendants of the Biblical Israelites (along with Philistines, Hittites, Samaritans, and offspring of various conquerors and local women) who were given a very strong incentive to convert by the conquering Arabs. Initially, the caliph taxed only non-believers in Islam.

 

Lied to about McCarthy

See what we mean by everything being the opposite of what we’ve been told? And that brings us back to Joe McCarthy. Has any American elected official ever been so completely vilified as has the junior Senator from Wisconsin? He is best known today for the term of opprobrium that A.Word.A.Day defines as, “The practice of making unfounded accusations against someone,” and backs up with this etymology: “After US senator Joseph McCarthy (1909-1957) known for making unsubstantiated claims accusing people of being Communists, spies, and disloyal.”

19460800_Joe_McCarthy_For_Senate

With his finger held carefully to the political winds an execrable young academic careerist by the name of Matthew A. McNiece could refer in his 2008 dissertation, without fear of contradiction, to “the burgeoning anticommunist hysteria that bred all manner of conspiracy theories–culminating most recognizably in McCarthy‘s unverified claim of widespread communist infiltration of the federal government.”

mccarthy-9

McCarthy with Lattimore

The fact of the matter is that McCarthy’s claims were “unsubstantiated” or “unverified” only to the extent that the Truman—and later the Eisenhower—administration, with the aid of allies in the Senate and the news media, put up all manner of obstacles to McCarthy’s attempt to show publicly what he had learned privately, mainly from the FBI. An example of how the obstacles were placed and the history of the period distorted is shown in my 2011 article, “M. Stanton Evans on Good Night and Good Luck.

What McCarthy was up against, and some appreciation of the degree of Communist and pro-Communist infiltration and, indeed, takeover of key levers of power by the end of the 1940s can be had by examining the 1952 report of the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which, McCarthy was never a member. These conclusions are completely supported by the testimony of the independent-minded private citizen, Alfred Kohlberg, who lays heavy blame upon the Institute for Pacific Relations (IPR) for the fall of China to the Communists in 1949. One of the key members of the IPR mentioned in the report was Owen Lattimore, who was also one of McCarthy’s main targets. The primary avenue of Lattimore’s influence upon government policy on China was through his close associate, Lauchlin Currie, who had been revealed to the White House as a Soviet agent by Communist defector Whittaker Chambers in 1939 at a time that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were allies.

 

INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS REPORT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY*

SECOND SESSION

JULY 2 (legislative day JUNE 27), 1952.—Ordered to be printed.

CONCLUSIONS

The Institute of Pacific Relations has not maintained the character of an objective scholarly and research organization.

*   *   *

The IPR has been considered by the American Communist Party and by Soviet officials as an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and military intelligence.

*   *   *

The IP disseminated and sought to popularize false information including information originating from Soviet and Communist sources.

*   *   *

A small core of officials and staff members carried the main burden of IPR activities and directed its administration and policies.

*   *   *

Members of the small core of officials and staff members who controlled IPR were either Communist or pro-Communist.

*   *   *

There is no evidence that the large majority of its members supported the IPR for any reason except to advance the professed research and scholarly purposes of the organization.

*   *   *

Most members of the IPR, and most members of the Board of Trustees, were inactive and obviously without any influence over the policies of the organization and the conduct of its affairs.

*   *   *

IPR activities were made possible largely through the financial support of American industrialists, corporations, and foundations, the majority of whom were not familiar with the inner workings of the organization. (Emphasis added)

*   *   *

The effective leadership of the IPR often sought to deceive IPR contributors and supporters as to the true character and activities of the organization.

Owen Lattimore was, from some time beginning in the 1930’s, a conscious articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.

Owen Lattimore testified falsely before the subcommittee with reference to at least five separate matters that were relevant to the inquiry and substantial in import.

Owen Lattimore and John Carter Vincent were influential in bringing about a change in United States policy in 1945 favorable to the Chinese Communists.

Many of the persons active in and around the IPR, and in particular though not exclusively Owen Lattimore, Edward C. Carter, Frederick V. Field, T.A. Bisson, Lawrence K. Rosinger, and Maxwell Stewart, knowingly and deliberately used the language of books and articles which they wrote or edited in an attempt to influence the American public by means of pro-Communist or pro-Soviet content of such writings.

*   *   *

The net effect of IPR activities on United States public opinion has been such as to serve international Communist interests and to affect [sic] adversely the interest of the United States.

Look again at the passage I have emphasized: “IPR activities were made possible largely through the financial support of American industrialists, corporations, and foundations, the majority of whom were not familiar with the inner workings of the organization.” The committee coyly leaves the reader with the impression that those providing the funding for the IPR were duped by the Communist staff members, just as IPR member Kohlberg had been duped before he began to take a more careful look at the organization.

 

Tune Callers Identified

But we all know that the old saying is usually valid that “he who pays the piper calls the tune.” Forget about the majority of contributors providing financing; what about the key minority of contributors who provided the majority of the financing? The committee is strategically silent on that absolutely crucial question. For that, we must turn to the pages of Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by the very well connected Georgetown University historian, Carroll Quigley:

51458BPRMWL

In 1951 the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the so-called McCarran Committee, sought to show that China had been lost to the Communists by the deliberate actions of a group of academic experts on the Far East and Communist fellow travelers whose work in that direction was controlled and coordinated by the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR). The influence of the Communists in IPR is well established, but the patronage of Wall Street is less well known.

The IPR was a private association of ten independent national councils in ten countries concerned with affairs in the Pacific. The headquarters of the IPR and of the American Council of IPR were both in New York and were closely associated on an interlocking basis. Each spent about $2.5 million dollars over the quarter-century from 1925 to 1950, of which about half, in each case, came from the Carnegie Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation (which were themselves interlocking groups controlled by an alliance of Morgan and Rockefeller interests in Wall Street). Much of the rest, especially of the American Council, came from firms closely allied to these two Wall Street interests, such as Standard Oil, International Telephone and Telegraph, International General Electric, the National City Bank, and the Chase National Bank. In each case, about 10 percent of income came from sales of publications and, of course, a certain amount came from ordinary members who paid $15 a year and received the periodicals of the IPR and its American Council, Pacific Affairs and Far Eastern Survey.

The financial deficits which occurred each year were picked up by financial angels, almost all with close Wall Street connections. The chief identifiable contributions here were about $60,000 from Frederick Vanderbilt Field over eighteen years, $14,700 from Thomas Lamont over fourteen years, $800 from Corliss Lamont (only after 1947), and $18,000 from a member of Lee, Higginson in Boston who seems to have been Jerome D. Greene. In addition, large sums of money each year were directed to private individuals for research and travel expenses from similar sources, chiefly the great financial foundations.

Most of these awards for work in the Far Eastern area required approval or recommendation from members of IPR. Moreover, access to publication and recommendations to academic positions in the handful of great American universities concerned with the Far East required similar sponsorship. And, finally, there can be little doubt that consultant jobs on Far Eastern matters in the State Department or other government agencies were largely restricted to IPR-approved people. The individuals who published, who had money, found jobs, were consulted, and who were appointed intermittently to government missions were those who were tolerant of the IPR line. The fact that all these lines of communication passed through the Ivy League universities or their scattered equivalents west of the Appalachians, such as Chicago, Stanford, or California, unquestionably went back to Morgan’s influence in handling large academic endowments.

It was this group of people, whose wealth and influence so exceeded their experience and understanding, who provided much of the frame-work of influence which the Communist sympathizers and fellow travelers took over in the United States in the 1930’s. It must be recognized that the power that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie, and, once the anger and suspicions of the American people were aroused, as they were by 1950, it was a fairly simple matter to get rid of the Red sympathizers. Before this could be done, however, a congressional committee, following backward to their source the threads which led from admitted Communists like Whittaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss, and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of the interlocking tax-exempt foundations. The Eighty-third Congress in July 1953 set up a Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations with Representative B. Carroll Reece, of Tennessee, as chairman. It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the “most respected” newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any relevations to make the publicity worth while, in terms of votes or campaign contributions. An interesting report showing the Left-wing associations of the interlocking nexus of tax-exempt foundations was issued in 1954 rather quietly. Four years later, the Reece committee’s general counsel, Rene A. Wormser, wrote a shocked, but not shocking, book on the subject called Foundations: Their Power and Influence. (Emphasis added)

So, the missing names from the Senate Committee reports were primarily the big Wall Street connected foundations of the Rockefellers and J.P. Morgan. The Senate Judiciary Committee knew how far they could go in belling the cat, but McCarthy didn’t know how far he could go. Quigley, himself, as a member of the established American academic history community, was also a lot like the Committee in his circumspection. My quotes are from pp. 945-956 of his book, which can be found on the Internet here. One can see there that in the midst of his shocking revelations Quigley creates a red herring and lets loose a blast at those who have drawn what would appear to be quite plausible conclusions:

carroll quigley

Carroll Quigley

The radical Right version of these events as written up by John T. Flynn, Freda Utley, and others, was even more remote from the truth than were [Communist defectors Louis] Budenz’s or [Elizabeth] Bentley’s versions, although it had a tremendous impact on American opinion and American relations with other countries in the years 1947-1955. This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements, operating from the White House itself and controlling all the chief avenues of publicity in the United States, to destroy the American way of life, based on private enterprise, laissez faire, and isolationism, in behalf of alien ideologies of Russian Socialism and British cosmopolitanism (or internationalism).

In the great mass of Quigley’s verbiage, though, is the simple truth that the heavy hitters of Wall Street knowingly funded a massive sell-out to the Communists in the Far East. One might speculate as to what their purposes were in doing so, but it would appear that the fact they did so is indisputable. Noticeably absent from the pages of his work is the name of Alfred Kohlberg, a businessman with no particular ideological axe to grind, whose description of the IPR as a thoroughly Communist and very influential outfit accords quite closely to what Quigley suggests is a “radical Right fairy tale.”

A View from Down Under

Fortunately, we don’t have to depend upon Quigley’s muddy and sometimes contradictory prose to see who destroyed Joe McCarthy and why they did it:

Ralph Edward Flanders

Ralph Edward Flanders

The deathblow to McCarthy’s campaign was instigated not by some Party hack at the Daily Worker, but by Sen. Ralph

Flanders, who introduced the resolution for Senate censure of McCarthy. This was backed by Sen. Herbert Lehman, son of Mayer Lehman, founder of Lehman Brothers international investment bank, of which Herbert was a partner.

Sen Herbert Lehman

Herbert Lehman

Lehman, like the Warburgs, Schiffs, et al., was one of those who intermarried among the banking dynasties, marrying Edith Louise Altschul, the daughter of the head of the New York branch of Lazard Frères, the Paris-based banking house. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his campaign against Sen. McCarthy, as was the anti-McCarthy cartoonist Herbert Block.

Sen. Flanders as the introducer of the Senate death blow to McCarthy himself had an interesting background, not as some “progressive” or liberal Democrat, but as a Republican, an industrialist and a banker.

McCarthy’s most dangerous enemies were, in this writer’s opinion, not the Soviet spies and American Communist Party functionaries he was exposing, but those whom he had not even yet got around to targeting, the power elite and their agents.

Flanders had been president of the Boston Federal Reserve Bank for two years prior to being elected Senator for Vermont. In 1_boston_seal1942 he was appointed to the Committee for Economic Development, which was established to formulate US post-war economic policy, including the role of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Keep in mind at this stage that both Flanders and Lehman were members of the Council on Foreign Relations, which CFR official historian Peter Grosse described as “the US foreign policy cfr-logoestablishment.” Flanders had been involved in a CFR study committee on post-war US foreign policy set up in 1940. Flanders was also a member of the Business Advisory Council, another association of significance that will be considered shortly.

Other CFR study group members included Lauchlin Currie and Benjamin V Cohen both from the US State Department, Asia expert Prof. Owen Lattimore, and economist Leo Pasvolsky, special assistant for post-war planning to the US Secretary of State. All of these CFR advisers were to come to the attention of Sen. McCarthy’s investigations into subversion.

This CFR connection is a primary key to understanding McCarthy’s political destruction….

All of these quotes (with links supplied by me) are from the well-documented November 2013 article, “Joe McCarthy & the Establishment Bolsheviks,” by New Zealand writer Kerry Bolton, and I commend it to readers in its entirety. Here is Bolton’s conclusion:

McCarthy was finished off by a coalition of Big Business, CFR, Business Advisory Council, US Administration, New York Times, Washington Post, CIA. He carried on as Senator for a further several years during which time he was ostracised and his speeches boycotted in the Senate. McCarthy was wrecked emotionally and physically by the campaign against him, Fred J Cook describing him as “a pale ghost of his former self”; he died in 1957 at the age of 48. E Merrill Root cogently described the situation with which McCarthy was probably unknowingly confronted: “. . . I do not think that the Senator ever quite saw the real nature of the enemy within, the full scope of the Conspiracy in New York and Washington . . ..”

A different perspective on Joe McCarthy: Mrs Jean McCarthy thanks the Marine Corps for the honours that were accorded to her late husband, showing a man of tolerance, bravery and humour. Note Mrs McCarthy’s references to the DCF and the Air Medal Four Stars, and the citation for bravery written by Admiral Nimitz. The letter is featured on the website of The 8th & I Reunion Association of the US Marine Corps. McCarthy, a Judge at the time of World War II, had volunteered for Service, despite his exemption. One of the major smears against McCarthy continues to be that he had not seen active service, that the image of “Tail Gunner Joe” was a myth, and that he had faked the Nimitz citation for bravery

Joe McCarthy might be a prophet without honor in his own land, but it’s good to see that that is not the case in at least one small corner of New Zealand.

To my mind, the biggest indicator of Senator McCarthy’s naiveté is that he allowed himself to be treated at Bethesda Naval Hospital, considering the fate that had befallen James Forrestal there. For evidence that McCarthy’s death may not have been any more natural than was Forrestal’s, see The Assassination of Joe McCarthyby Medford Evans and the section entitled “McCarthy’s Death at Bethesda” in my article “James Forrestal and Joe McCarthy.”

 


 

*This report is Appendix L of the very illuminating book, The China Lobby Man: The Story of Alfred Kohlberg by Joseph Keeley. The appendices alone are worth the price of the book. Kohlberg’s Senate testimony was also a Keeley appendix as was the JFK speech around which I built the article, “John F. Kennedy on the Loss of China.” There’s something very curious about this book, though. If you go to the Amazon.com page for the unbound version, what you will see there represented as an illustration of the cover is actually a picture of the cover of one of the most worthless books ever written, Quotations from Chairman Bill: the Best of William F. Buckley, Jr. I know that it is worthless because when I ordered the Keeley book from a used book company, what they sent me was the Buckley abomination instead. Naturally, I complained and requested that I get what I had ordered. The sellers told me not to bother even sending the Buckley book back and they then sent me the requested Keeley work.

What’s going on? To find out, go to BookFinder.com and search for the book using author and title. When the Keeley book comes up its ISBN will accompany it. Now go back and do the search again, but this time only by that ISBN. All you get is that lousy Buckley book. The two books have the same ISBN. The Keeley book came first, but the Buckley book has been given its ISBN and now seems to have been given priority. A more suspicious mind than mine might conclude that someone is steering us away from the story of the China Lobby Man and those valuable appendices.

 

David Martin

July 17, 2014

 

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com