# Roosevelt, Stalin and The Elusive "Second Front"



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!

An earlier thread resulted in this unwarranted attack:

"I've accused you of being dishonest on one and an unqualified sloppy researcher on the other. Still you deflect, and refuse to respond on those topics, instead wanting to start a discussion on the old stand-by FDR was a communist tool of Stalin fantasy." Roosevelt s Great Depression Page 30 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum




What can I say? I'm left no course of action but to reveal* more facts about Franklin Roosevelt that his devotees would rather left hidden.*
Perhaps* a stiff dose of the truth* will prove to be a sort of shock therapy for these ....disciples.



Let's begin:

From well before his election,  the liar- it is well documented that he was a liar-* was a totalitarian aficionado: a dictator who adored other dictators.*


1. For proper context, it is important to remember that* the economic policies of Hitler, Mussolini, and Franklin Roosevelt were...sympatico.*
And, consdier that the policies and view of *Hitler and Stalin where, for the most part, identical.*...right down to* genocide* and concentration camps as government policy. Karl Marx had been the first political thinker to support same.

a. . "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung,  in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary."
George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.




2. *Hitler and Stalin were, essentially, clones. And, allies* until 'Operation Barbarossa,...22 June 1941,... was the code name for Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union during World War II."
Operation Barbarossa - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

a. Where does Franklin Roosevelt come in?  " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." 
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p. 48


Perhaps a closer look at Franklin Delano Roosevelt's intentions are long overdue.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

FDR save the county by pulling it out of the great depression and defeating Nazi Germany. Probably the best president since Washington, maybe even better.

He had no love of Hitler and Stalin.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

Oh boy, this thread, again, _it never rains, but man it pours..._


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

Perhaps you should look at the alliances of the past 300 years, Russia was around then also....


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

Stalin wanted a second front, he wanted Europe, but Roosevelt over ruled him and North Africa it twas, then Sicily, then Italy, Stalin protested and even put out propaganda posters showing the allies as snails, slowly making progress on the second front....


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> FDR save the county by pulling it out of the great depression and defeating Nazi Germany. Probably the best president since Washington, maybe even better.
> 
> He had no love of Hitler and Stalin.





I know that you are an open-minded truth-seeker, as I am....and after you read this entire thread and check the links and sources that I will and have provided, you will arrive at the very same conclusion about Franklin Delano Roosevelt that I have.


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

A few years after WW II many nations from E. Germany to N. Korea, 100s of millions of people, were subject to mass-murdering Communist dictators.  FDR deserves a lot of the blame.

For example FDR empowered this man: Harry Dexter White

Quote:


White was the real author of the Morgenthau plan to "turn Germany into a potato field," which when leaked, united non-Nazis with Nazis, stiffened resistance, and prolonged the war.

White used his position in the Treasury Department to develop a hostile U.S. policy toward Japan. The reason was to distract Japan from their plans to attack the Soviet Union and draw the U.S. into the war as an ally with the Soviet Union. White was the author of an extreme ultimatum that Japan could not comply with in the days just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

White delayed financial support mandated by law to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Chinese government causing the triumph of Mao Tse-Tung's Communist Chinese government.

White was instrumental in handing over the Allied Military mark printing plates to the Soviets. This caused a $250,000,000 deficit in the occupational government budget paid out by the U.S. Treasury. This in effect amounted to the US taxpayer paying the salaries of Soviet occupation troops at a time when US/Soviet relations were deteriorating precisely because of the presence and behavior of Soviet occupation forces in Eastern Europe.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PC makes no scholarly revelations about FDR.

She made herself look like a fool last time she tackled this subject.

Readers, understand that she is writing for a small online and podcast audience who are as delusional as is she.

Request that this be placed in the Conspiracy forum.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> Oh boy, this thread, again, _it never rains, but man it pours..._




Yet, here you are again, offering a non-informative post.

Care to dispute anything in the OP?

No?



From the OP:
'What can I say? I'm left no course of action but to reveal* more facts about Franklin Roosevelt that his devotees would rather left hidden.*
Perhaps* a stiff dose of the truth* will prove to be a sort of shock therapy for these ....disciples.'


So....one can only conclude that you are one of said 'disciples.'


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

The fact remain, PC, is that you are delusional on this subject.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC makes no scholarly revelations about FDR.
> 
> She made herself look like a fool last time she tackled this subject.
> 
> Readers, understand that she is writing for a small online and podcast audience who are as delusional as is she.




Another dunce scoots out from under a moss-covered rock....and, sure enough, unable to offer any response to the facts offered in the OP.

In fact, as is the default of every Liberal, an attack both on truth and on any who disagree: "...a small online and podcast audience who are as delusional as is she."


And, once again, readers of this thread will find that Jakal will be put where he belongs, last seat in the dumb row.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

> To that end, White also supported a $10 billion loan by the United States to aid the postwar reconstruction of the Soviet economy. He believed that such a loan, together with a loan to Britain, would promote economic vitality in war-torn Europe, address the acute dollar shortage in European nations, and help stimulate America’s domestic economy. In spite of all his efforts, in the end Stalin’s suspicions and the emergence of the Cold War insured the failure of White’s and other Rooseveltian internationalists’ vision of post-war American/Soviet cooperation.


Treasonable Doubt


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

All PC can do is attack personalities because she can't defend her OP.  And she cannot at all defend the stupidity of the default standard of liberals.  She is a small podcast hack, nothing more, to get money from stupid people.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Harry White's Creed, which PC hates

_"I believe in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of the press, freedom of criticism, and freedom of movement. I believe in the goal of equality of opportunity, and the right of each individual to follow the calling of his or her own choice, and the right of every individual to have an opportunity to develop his or her capacity to the fullest. . . . I consider these principles sacred. I regard them as the basic fabric of our American way of life, and I believe in them as living realities, and not mere words on paper. This is my creed."_


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> > To that end, White also supported a $10 billion loan by the United States to aid the postwar reconstruction of the Soviet economy. He believed that such a loan, together with a loan to Britain, would promote economic vitality in war-torn Europe, address the acute dollar shortage in European nations, and help stimulate America’s domestic economy. In spite of all his efforts, in the end Stalin’s suspicions and the emergence of the Cold War insured the failure of White’s and other Rooseveltian internationalists’ vision of post-war American/Soviet cooperation.
> 
> 
> Treasonable Doubt





> Only during the Hiss perjury investigation and in the years after White’s death did evidence emerge suggesting that White indeed was involved in espionage. The most suggestive evidence came to light in 1995 when the National Security Agency (NSA) released copies of the VENONA decrypts—intercepted Soviet transmissions cables from Moscow to "stations" throughout the world. The decrypts show that White met with a mysterious KGB agent, code-named KOL’TsOV whose identity is revealed in _Treasonable Doubt_. Craig argues that while the VENONA decrypts confirm White’s complicity with the Soviet underground, there is no evidence that White’s association with the Soviet underground affected White’s loyalty to the United States or the international institutions he helped found.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> > To that end, White also supported a $10 billion loan by the United States to aid the postwar reconstruction of the Soviet economy. He believed that such a loan, together with a loan to Britain, would promote economic vitality in war-torn Europe, address the acute dollar shortage in European nations, and help stimulate America’s domestic economy. In spite of all his efforts, in the end Stalin’s suspicions and the emergence of the Cold War insured the failure of White’s and other Rooseveltian internationalists’ vision of post-war American/Soviet cooperation.
> 
> 
> Treasonable Doubt




Just for clarity, you do realize that your link finds that Harry Dexter White was a spy, don't you?

If so, yours is both a substantive post, and correct.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> 
> _"I believe in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of the press, freedom of criticism, and freedom of movement. I believe in the goal of equality of opportunity, and the right of each individual to follow the calling of his or her own choice, and the right of every individual to have an opportunity to develop his or her capacity to the fullest. . . . I consider these principles sacred. I regard them as the basic fabric of our American way of life, and I believe in them as living realities, and not mere words on paper. This is my creed."_




Let's remind all that Harry Dexter White was a Soviet spy, and that you are both a liar and an imbecile.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> All PC can do is attack personalities because she can't defend her OP.  And she cannot at all defend the stupidity of the default standard of liberals.  She is a small podcast hack, nothing more, to get money from stupid people.





"... she can't defend her OP..."

Defend against what, you imbecile???

You haven't even quoted any part of it.



And, I haven't done as you claim, "attack personalities..."
I couldn't have, as you are bereft of any.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

Thunderbird said:


> A few years after WW II many nations from E. Germany to N. Korea, 100s of millions of people, were subject to mass-murdering Communist dictators.  FDR deserves a lot of the blame.
> 
> For example FDR empowered this man: Harry Dexter White
> 
> ...





> As the civil war gained strength from 1947 to 1949, eventual Communist victory seemed more and more likely. Although the Communists did not hold any major cities after World War II, they had strong grassroots support, superior military organization and morale, and large stocks of weapons seized from Japanese supplies in Manchuria. Years of corruption and mismanagement had eroded popular support for the Nationalist Government. Early in 1947, the ROC Government was already looking to the island province of Taiwan, off the coast of Fujian Province, as a potential point of retreat. Although officials in the Truman Administration were not convinced of the strategic importance to the United States of maintaining relations with Nationalist China, no one in the U.S. Government wanted to be charged with facilitating the “loss” of China to communism.* Military and financial aid to the floundering Nationalists continued, though not at the level that Chiang Kai-shek would have liked. *In October of 1949, after a string of military victories, Mao Zedong proclaimed the establishment of the PRC; Chiang and his forces fled to Taiwan to regroup and plan for their efforts to retake the mainland.


The Chinese Revolution of 1949 - 1945 1952 - Milestones - Office of the Historian


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> Thunderbird said:
> 
> 
> > A few years after WW II many nations from E. Germany to N. Korea, 100s of millions of people, were subject to mass-murdering Communist dictators.  FDR deserves a lot of the blame.
> ...





Please articulate a point so that I can eviscerate it.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > Thunderbird said:
> ...


Your shoe is untied,...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...





I can see that the strain of actually making a coherent point is stultifying for you....so let me help.

I assume that you were trying to find a way to mitigate the harm that Harry Dexter White and all the other Soviet spies that Franklin Roosevelt invited into his administration, accomplished.

In that, you'd be sadly mistaken.


Not only was White a spy, but he used his position to block the Chinese nationalists when he could and handed China to the communists.

Harry Truman, at least until he learned better, supported Stalin, White, and the communists ensconced in the Roosevelt administration.


I dare you to challenge the veracity of this post.
In fact, I double dog dare you.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Well that's a nice way of saying that when you side loses you have to make some excuses for the General......
It was proven after Whites death in 1948 that he was a spy, buy not a spy which subverted any policies...


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

And I would like to see Roosevelt's invitation....or did he call them on the phone?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...




Absolutely wrong.

I notice you didn't take me up on the challenge...."Well that's a nice way of saying" that you know that White did the damage that I just stated: he handed China to Mao, and that resulted in the Korean War...

It is important to connect the treachery with the impact of that treachery: the theft of the nuclear technology with 36,940 Americans killed, 91,134 wounded, and 8,176 still missing, and this does not include at least two million civilian lives claimed on both sides.
 Bruce Cumings, "The Korean War: A History.' 

Included were 1.3 million South Korean casualties, including 400,000 dead. North Korea, 2 million casualties, and 900,000 Chinese soldiers killed.

The blame goes to FDR, Harry White and other spies, as well as Stalin.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> And I would like to see Roosevelt's invitation....or did he call them on the phone?




The major player in the Alger Hiss saga was fellow Communist, Whitaker Chambers. In his book, _Witness_, Chambers explains is disillusionment as follows. In 1938, he determined not only to break with the Communist Party, but to inform on the Party when he could. The reason was that he was informed that Stalin was making efforts to align with Hitler, in 1939, and “from any human point of view, the pact was evil.”

 As Hitler marched into Poland, *Chambers arranged a private meeting with Adolf Berle, President Roosevelt’s assistant Sec’y of State. *Chambers detailed the Communist espionage network, naming at least two dozen Soviet spies in Roosevelt’s administration, including Alger Hiss. *Berle reported this to Roosevelt, who laughed, and told Berle to go f---  himself.* (Arthur Herman, Joseph McCarthy: Reexaming the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, p. 60) 

No action was taken, and *in fact, Roosevelt promoted Hiss.* Almost a decade later, Chambers was called before the HUAC and named Hiss as a Soviet agent. Hiss sued Chambers, at which time Chambers presented “… four notes in Alger Hiss's handwriting, sixty-five typewritten copies of State Department documents and five strips of microfilm, some of which contained photographs of State Department documents. The press came to call these the "Pumpkin Papers"(Whittaker Chambers - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia) 

And, of course, all doubt was removed in 1995, when the Venona Soviet cables were decrypted.


Still afraid to take up my challenge, drop-draws?
You should be.


----------



## midcan5 (Jan 22, 2015)

The public good FDR accomplished is still being fought by the corporatists of the right after eighty odd years. Amazing how hierarchy and corporate power fight the legacy of one man, one administration. We see that today with the same foes fighting the positive accomplishments of President Obama. The public good be damned when power loses to the little guy. 

 I welcome their hatred FDR US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
 I welcome their hatred FDR US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

3. Which brings us to the famed*"Second Front."*
The first front was created by the Nazi attack, "Operation Barbarossa," and the constant *demands by Stalin *that the Allies open another front to draw off the Germans from Russia. 
*The unspoken sentiment is that the Germans would defeat the Soviets*, and that they desperately needed that 'Second Front.' 

What proof of that 'fear' exists? Looking at the great tank battle of Kursk, or a study of Russia's 'three greatest generals, December, January, and February,' certainly don't support same.

No, the truth is that* FDR's affections for Stalin and Soviet Communism found it useful to claim that without American support.....the end was near for Uncle Joe,*




a. What does history tell us about similar attempts to conquer the Russian bear?

"Napoleon began his invasion 550 miles from Moscow and 420 miles from St. Petersburg. Hitler began his invasion from a similar distance." Why Russia Is Marching mdash and Eastern Europe Is Afraid - theTrumpet.com 
How did that turn out for the attackers?



4. But didn't *Stalin lose 20 million of his citizens*??

Yes....but not to Hitler.

"World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.*Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. 

*More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis*. Ask yourself this: why was it that only the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? *Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army."*
"The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.




The Soviet Union, that means Stalin,  killed more than twenty million men, women and children.....his own citizens!

Yet Roosevelt never wavered in his support for 'Uncle Joe"....and this began years before WWII.





5. So...*.what's all this about a dire need for a "Second Front"...*.and why did Stalin insist it had to be via the northwestern corner of the continent rather than the south, from Italy and the Adriatic?

And why forbid the allies to allow the surrender of Germany, which would have saved countless American lives?

More to the point....why did Roosevelt go along with this?
Starting to see the truth about Franklin Delano Roosevelt?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

midcan5 said:


> The public good FDR accomplished is still being fought by the corporatists of the right after eighty odd years. Amazing how hierarchy and corporate power fight the legacy of one man, one administration. We see that today with the same foes fighting the positive accomplishments of President Obama. The public good be damned when power loses to the little guy.
> 
> I welcome their hatred FDR US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
> I welcome their hatred FDR US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum





"The public good FDR accomplished is still being fought by the corporatists blah blah blah..."

Good little socialist!

But, the thread is very specific, and not about the corporatists....of whom FDR was numero uno!
He proudly copied Mussolini's corporatism.




As you have not said anything about FDR being a dictator in league with other dictators.....Stalin, Hitler, Mussolin....you must be unable to deny same.

So, you have served your purpose.


One more FDR apologist put in his place.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> 
> An earlier thread resulted in this unwarranted attack:
> 
> ...


.


You make showing you to be a hack way to easy. I criticized your sourcing as being a method used by conspiracy theorist instead of a historian with academic and scholarly standards. Your method is dishonest and misleading. In any cases that are not purposely dishonest, it is sloppy to say the least.

Lets begin by having you explain one of your sources. I have asked on many, many occasions for you to answer this question. What was Chesly Manly? You use that name and the 1954 book that fueled the Red Scare of the 50's, "The Twenty Year Revolution". It is one of your main sources and a prime example of how you use conspiracy source methods to present your your concepts. So, explain Manly, McCormick and the American Party.

Get past that one and we can move on to how you have bastardized Watson who actually lends support to the prewar and war policies of FDR towards Russia.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> ...






1. Let's take a flight of fancy and pretend you were anything more than a Roosevelt boot-licker.

If so, you might show that a statement wasn't true.
Instead, you pretend that who states the fact is the issue.


2. "....the 1954 book that fueled the Red Scare of the 50's,..."
No, you dunce.....the 'red scare' was fueled by the revelations that communists had been allowed to infiltrate our government and direct the policies of same.

And, by extension.....that Franklin Roosevelt and his lies about Joseph Stalin explain that infiltration.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

How about if you attempt to refrain from deflecting and answer the question? Explain your source by explaining Chesly Manly, Col. McCormick and the American Party.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> How about if you attempt to refrain from deflecting and answer the question? Explain your source by explaining Chesly Manly, Col. McCormick and the American Party.




How about you show any error in the statement.

If you cannot, admit that your sole mission is to shield Roosevelt from the contumely he so correctly deserves.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> 3. Which brings us to the famed*"Second Front."*
> The first front was created by the Nazi attack, "Operation Barbarossa," and the constant *demands by Stalin *that the Allies open another front to draw off the Germans from Russia.
> *The unspoken sentiment is that the Germans would defeat the Soviets*, and that they desperately needed that 'Second Front.'
> 
> ...


The surrender terms were agreed upon even before the US was at war...


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

Did you bitch this much through Russian history on all the sides they were on? Czarist Russia was just as brutal and controlling as the Soviets..They killed countess people of their own and had special progroms for the Jews.....Notice in the history books there is an Ivan the terrible, but not a Stalin the terrible..Ivan must have killed and drove off more than Stalin....


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> Did you bitch this much through Russian history on all the sides they were on? Czarist Russia was just as brutal and controlling as the Soviets..They killed countess people of their own and had special progroms for the Jews.....Notice in the history books there is an Ivan the terrible, but not a Stalin the terrible..Ivan must have killed and drove off more than Stalin....





1. So you've given up claiming that Harry Dexter White and the Roosevelt administration didn't give China to Mao and the communists?

Good.



2. "Russian history on all the sides they were on? *Czarist Russia was just as brutal and controlling as the Soviets."
Horsefeathers!*
So much for any claim you might have to knowledge about "Russian history."

You really sound like a dope.

Watch:

*a.  Before the Russian Revolution, the number of execution by the czarist government came to seventeen (17) per year, according to Solzhenitsyn. He pointed out that, in comparison, the Spanish Inquisition, at its height, destroyed 10 people per month.*

*b. But, during the revolutionary years 1918-1919, Lenin's Cheka executed, without trial, more than one thousand (1,000) people a month.*
*At the height of Stalin's terror, 1937-1938, tens of thousands of people were shot per month. *
*Solzhenitsyn, "Warning To The West."*


From Solzhenitsyn's "Warning To The West,"... "Here are the figures: 17 a year, 10 a month, more than 1 ,000 a month, *more than 40,000 a month! *
Full text of Solzhenitsyn The Voice of Freedom 


Ready to admit you know less than nothing?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 3. Which brings us to the famed*"Second Front."*
> ...




You simply make stuff up, huh?

1. "The *Morgenthau Plan*, first proposed by United States Secretary of the TreasuryHenry Morgenthau, Jr. in a memorandum entitled _Suggested Post-Surrender Program for Germany_, advocated that the Allied occupation ofGermany following World War II include measures to eliminate Germany's ability to wage war by eliminating its armament industry, and the removal or destruction of other key industries basic to military strength. This included the removal or destruction of all industrial plants and equipment in the Ruhr area.

At the Second Quebec Conference on *September 16, 1944,* U.S.PresidentFranklin D. Rooseveltand Henry Morgenthau, Jr. persuaded the initially very reluctant BritishPrime MinisterWinston Churchill to agree to the plan,..."
Morgenthau Plan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


2. The plan came from Stalin.

Elizabeth Bentley, a former operative of the Soviet underground testified before the Senate subcommittee on August 14, 1951, naming some 80 Soviet spies. Her testimony was summarized in an FBI report, dated* November 25, 1945.*

Glimpse the methods and purpose of the Soviet operation:

*Miss Bentley testified as follows about the Morgenthau plan for Germany:  *

 Senator Eastland: "Did you know who drew that plan?"

Miss Bentlcy: "Due to Mr.* [Harry Dexter] White's influence, to push the devastation of Germany, because that was what the Russians wanted."  *

 Senator Ferguson: "That was what the Communists wanted?" 

 Miss Bentley:* "Definitely Moscow wanted them completely razed because then they would be of no help to the allies."  *

 Senator Eastland: "What you say is that it was a Communist plot to destroy Germany and weaken her to where she could not help us?" 

Miss Bentley: "That is correct. She could no longer be a barrier to protect the western world."
Manly, 'The Twenty Year Revolution,' p.102-103


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> ...



He was not, I am not, and you are running dog of the far right social con wacko brigades.


----------



## Carla_Danger (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> 
> An earlier thread resulted in this unwarranted attack:
> 
> ...




Sounds like you got your ass handed to you on one thread, and now need it handed to you on this thread.

Wiki can be a good source for quick fun facts, but it seems if you were serious about your research, you'd be using other sources.

Now, what's brought on all this fuss about FDR?  I think the fuss is all about the wonderful documentary that came out a few months ago, reminding us all of how it takes a Democrat to come in and turn a financial collapse around, not unlike the 2007-08 collapse.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



You are a JBS stooge, and all of your silliness above has been disproven on this Board many times.

So, for intelligent and patriotic Americans, PoliticalChic does not get "just once more."


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PC is absolutely a conspiracy theorist, not an academic of any sort.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Let's not lose sight of the fact that this thread is about FDR following every order that Joseph Stalin gave.



" In retrospect,* the ascendancy of the Communists in the Roosevelt administration during the war *seems incredible. Aided by the direct intervention of the White House, they sabotaged the security system of the War and Navy Departments, received commissions in the army and navy, and were admitted to the most secret activities of the armed forces. 

 The War Department's Information and Education Division sent out so-called "Orientation Fact Sheets," for use in the indoctrination of all army personnel, which *denounced critics of the Soviet Union as "Fascists" and glorified the Stalin tyranny *as a "peace-loving democracy" with a constitution superior in some respects to that of the United States.
Manly, 'The Twenty Year Revolution,' p.106-109




I wonder how many know that Roosevelt demanded a communist be his vice president (Henry Wallace) after John Nance Garner....


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > FDR save the county by pulling it out of the great depression and defeating Nazi Germany. Probably the best president since Washington, maybe even better.
> ...



You are a close minded conspiracy theorist, and Ravi will come to no such conclusion.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...





Get lost, fool.

*You have been unable to deny any of the documented, linked, sourced, facts that I have provided.*

You remain a lying imbecile....and many know it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Thunderbird said:


> A few years after WW II many nations from E. Germany to N. Korea, 100s of millions of people, were subject to mass-murdering Communist dictators.  FDR deserves a lot of the blame.
> 
> For example FDR empowered this man: Harry Dexter White
> 
> ...


Try the above in actual academic program and your non-academic ass will be thrown into the corner.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



You don't get "just once more" after the ass kickings through the years you have taken on this topic.

You are front for the JBS groups, and you do a poor job.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

No objective scholar rests a case on Manly.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > How about if you attempt to refrain from deflecting and answer the question? Explain your source by explaining Chesly Manly, Col. McCormick and the American Party.
> ...


Easy. "Fascism did not aquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to the Soviet Union," Chesly Manly "The 20 Year Revolution" P. 48. Your quote used in your OP.

There was an attempt at a coup by fascist in 1933. It was called the Business Plot and exposed by Maj. General Smedley Butler the most highly decorated Marine in history at the time of his death. He was awarded two Medals of Honor. 
The Black Legion and Silver Legion were two fascist groups connected to the Klu Klux Klan of the 1930's, as was the American Bund.

Your quote by Manly is misleading. It suggest that Washington was not aware of the dangers or evilness of fascism. Clearly that was not the case.

So now answer the question that you keep deflecting from. Who should the readers believe, a highly decorated Marine Corps Major General and most highly decorated  combat veteran of his time, or whatever this Chesly Manly pen name was? Hint, McCormick and the Chicago Tribune and the American Party.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Germany was totally destroyed by war, you do know what that means, there was nothing to take away from the Germans...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




Lying imbecile....even drop-draws link claims he was a spy.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Carla_Danger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> ...




Let's see you find anything not true, you dope.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...




Nothing that I've posted has been 'proven untrue'.....especially when I revealed you to be a lying imbecile.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



And other evidence says you are full of it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

All of what you have posted here is untrue (oh, yeah, FDR was president) OK, almost all is untrue and so proven.


----------



## Syriusly (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> 
> .



I have yet to see any threads that contained any scholarly revelation about FDR- just your wingnuttery.


----------



## Carla_Danger (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




I think I've already made my point.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





Watch me eviscerate you:



English and French commentators routinely *depicted Roosevelt as akin to Mussolini. A more specific reason why, in 1933, the New Deal was often compared with Fascism* was that with the help of a massive propaganda campaign, Italy had transitioned from a liberal free-market system to a state-run corporatist one. And corporatism was considered by elitists and intellectuals as the perfect response to the collapse of the liberal free-market economy, as was the national self-sufficiency of the Stalinist Soviet Union. The National Recovery Administration was comparable to Mussolini’s corporatism as both had state control without actual expropriation of private property.
*Mussolini wrote a book review of Roosevelt’s “Looking Forward,” in which he said “…[as] Roosevelt here calls his readers to battle, is reminiscent of the ways and means by which Fascism awakened the Italian people.” Popolo d’Italia, July 7, 1933.*
In 1934, *Mussolini wrote a review of “New Frontiers,” by FDR’s Sec’y of Agriculture, later Vice-President, Henry Wallace: “Wallace’s answer to what America wants is as follows: anything but a return tyo the free-market, *i.e., anarchistic economy. Where is America headed? This book leaves no doubt that it is on the road to corporatism, the economic system of the current century.” Marco Sedda, Il politico, vol. 64, p. 263.
*“The similarities of the economics of the New Deal to the economics of Mussolini’s corporative state or Hitler’s totalitarian state *are both close and obvious.” Norman Thomas, head of the American Socialist Party.

1.  The Fascism of the 30’s was hardly new on the scene. In fact, by the 1920’s, American intellectuals, disappointed in what they perceived as the failures of classical liberalism allowed themselves to think that *Fascism was the path toward their ideals, and the same path allowed them to stumble into Stalinism some time later. *The jewels of the new thinking, according to these elites, was comprehensive state control, planning and direction, as long as the goals remained “a conscious, intelligent ordering of society,” as Columbia professor and disciple of John Dewey, Herbert W. Schneider stated.

a. * American progressives, pragmatists, viewed Fascism’s emphasis on political repression as a regrettable but entirely understandable corollary.*


Wow!

Did you just take a beating!

*When ever you’re ready just yell “check please.”*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Carla_Danger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Carla_Danger said:
> ...





Not one example of anything I've posted that isn't the truth.

That identifies you as a moron who specializes in "I hate you" posts.

Now...get back into your sewer.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Wow!  PC just wrote a lopsided, subjective, non-objective hit piece without any real rebuttal or modern scholarship.  Clearly, her claim that she graduated from a premier university (CU) is a lie, based on the above.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Wow!  PC just wrote a lopsided, subjective, non-objective hit piece without any real rebuttal or modern scholarship.  Clearly, her claim that she graduated from a premier university (CU) is a lie, based on the above.




You still can't find even one example to back up your lies???


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Wow!  PC just wrote a lopsided, subjective, non-objective hit piece without any real rebuttal or modern scholarship.  Clearly, her claim that she graduated from a premier university (CU) is a lie, based on the above.
> ...


----------



## regent (Jan 22, 2015)

FDR supporters, America's best historians, and


PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


I keep asking, now begging, for you to get this information to America's historians. Apparently you have sources and knowledge unavailable to them and so they keep rating FDR (since 1948) as one of the greatest American presidents. Please act before the historians rate presidents again, and above all, let us know how the historians respond to your valuable information.


----------



## Carla_Danger (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...





Oh Gawd, that means I'll have to read and sort through your garbage. Okay, I'll do it.

I'll do it as soon as I'm finished with my errands.  Right now I've got places to go and people to see!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Carla_Danger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Carla_Danger said:
> ...





Your jog around the psycho-path?



What's really telling is that you wrote "Sounds like you got your ass handed to you on one thread, and now need it handed to you on this thread"....

....and now you admit you didn't read it at all.

That pretty much entitles you to the appellation "lying imbecile."
Fight it out with Jakal for the title.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

regent said:


> FDR supporters, America's best historians, and
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> ...



That's a real knee-slapper, reggie....

...another moron who tries to sidestep the fact that he can find no errors in the thesis.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Your thesis is an example of entire error, PC.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Your thesis is an example of entire error, PC.




*I can almost believe that you invented stupidity- rather than just perfected it.*


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Um, no, only in your imagination. You don't even understand the butters and guns narrative.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Everything you have posted has been proven to be untrue. You are just on of those dopey people who close their eyes, cover their ears and blabber nah nah nah nah and make believe reality does not exist.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> 
> An earlier thread resulted in this unwarranted attack:
> 
> "I've accused you of being dishonest on one and an unqualified sloppy researcher on the other. Still you deflect, and refuse to respond on those topics, instead wanting to start a discussion on the old stand-by FDR was a communist tool of Stalin fantasy." Roosevelt s Great Depression Page 30 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum



This is how you started this thread. You still refuse to respond to the first question asked. My analysis and conclusions about your ability to source is correct.  You have not even attempted to challenge it.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





Oh, yeah.....I just ripped you a new one.


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> To that end, White also supported a $10 billion loan by the United States to aid the postwar reconstruction of the Soviet economy.


Why would we want to support a mass murderer?!

 Holodomor Ukrainian Famine Genocide of 1932-33


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...





"Everything you have posted has been proven to be untrue."

Such as?


I just gave you half a dozen quotes and links that show that 
*" Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." 



 punch sound


Oh....that was fun.
*


----------



## Carla_Danger (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




Nah, I knew this thread was bullshit just by looking at the title alone. However, that knowledge was reinforced when I got to the part saying FDR was a totalitarian, then went on to compare him to Hitler and Mussolini.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Carla_Danger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Carla_Danger said:
> ...





That's because you are a fool.

Pick up a copy of 
*Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939*
Nov 27, 2007
by Wolfgang Schivelbusch



....if you ever decide to educate yourself.


I'm never wrong......learn that.


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> 
> _"I believe in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of the press, freedom of criticism_...


Such pretty* words*.

Let's look at White's deeds: *Pearl Harbor 2.0 TIME.com*

He betrayed his country to serve one of history's worst dictators.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Thunderbird said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> ...






I suggested that drop-draws challenge me to prove that White was influential in turning China over to the communists, but he ran away and hid.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...


No you didn't.


----------



## regent (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > FDR supporters, America's best historians, and
> ...


So what's your thesis? Are you trying to say America caught soviet spies because they are inept, but the soviets could not catch our spies?  We must have good spies. I agree.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> *" Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
> until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
> 
> 
> ...


I've been waiting for you to convince me as you said you would without result.

How about proving the above quote?


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Carla_Danger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


You are such a stupid person. If a person wants to know why FDR supported Stalin one of the first series of history books they would need to read would be works by Wolfgang Shivelbusch.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Thunderbird said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> ...





So glad you brought up *Operation Snow*.....it gives an indication of how wide and deep Soviet infiltration was....

*In 1995,Kremlin agent Vitaly Pavlov revealed "Operation Snow,"the plan to manipulate Japan and America into war.

a.In "Sacred Secrets: How Soviet Intelligence Operations Changed American History," Leona Schecter and Jerrold Schecter make a very strong case forPearl Harbor being the most complex and successful KGB operation,designed to avert a Japanese attack on the USSR, and to force the United States to fight a two-front war, and be unable to stop Stalin from control of at least half of Europe. In 1995, former Kremlin agent Vitaly Pavlov revealed his role in this "Operation Snow."

b. Pavlov "was sent to the United States seven months before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harborto meet with Harry Dexter White, then director of Monetary Research for the Treasury.*
*Did "Snow" mean "White"? Yes,
Harry Dexter White had been a Soviet "asset" since the early 1930s, providing information to Whittaker Chambers, a courier for the communist underground. *

*By 1941 White was a top aide and adviser to Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Secretary of the Treasury. Pavlov wrote that the Soviets feared a Japanese attack from the east, and his mission was to discuss with White what could be done to keep the Japanese from joining forces with the Germans."*
*Sacred Secrets: How Soviet Intelligence Operations Changed American History*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > *" Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
> ...





Post #57 proved it.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


No, it just contained quotes from people that wished and hoped that fascism was supported by the USA.

Do you believe the crap terrorists say as well when it suits your agenda?

Try again.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

*Now back to that "Elusive Second Front"....*



*6. So.....did it really matter where the 'second front' is located? *
*Stalin was adamant about it forming via the northwestern edge of the continent rather than abide by Churchill's wish, Italy.*


*a. Consider the analysis of NYTimes Russia expert, Edwin James:*
 " ALLIED FRONT IN ITALY NOT SO FAR FROM REICH; In Other Words, It Is Just as Close to Germany From Any Peninsula Point As It Is From Dnieper THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE"
*By EDWIN L. JAMES
September 12, 1943
Pay Articles from September 1943 Part 4 - Site Map - The New York Times
*
So....why did Stalin insist on the Allies opening the front at Normandy rather than the bases already conquered in Italy?

Here's why: he wanted the Red Army to cut Europe in half , as he would be able to occupy same.

And Roosevelt agreed with him...*.Roosevelt wanted to give all of Eastern Europe over to this homicidal maniac who slaughtered and oppressed millions!*



b.Don't believe that that was the reason for Stalin's insistence on the "second front" being as far west as possible?

 "Any time or any place where German forces are engaged by the American and the British represents good luck for Stalin. That is true because* Hitler's strength is taxed just as much by fighting to the south as it would be fighting to the west."*
Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 266.
How can one argue with that?

Well.....only if "taxing Hitler's strength" wasn't the aim....*.gaining the territory of central Europe for the Red Army was.*



c. 'To withdraw from the European continent [Italy] to re-invade the European continent was simply crazy.'
Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p.195-196
Yet, Roosevelt sided with Stalin over Churchill, and over General Mark Clark, commander of the 5th US Army, in Italy.
Why?



Still care to deny that Stalin was in charge of Roosevelt's war efforts?
...and Stalin would get his way down to the last American casualty?

In the effort to install world-wide communism, any loss to either America, or to Germany, was a gain for Stalin.

Thank you, Franklin Roosevelt



Anyone know that Eisenhower agreed with Churchill that Italy was the correct attack point.....until he was bought off by George Marshall with a fifth star?


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


No it didn't. You can't just keep lying and expect no one will notice.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...





Post #57 quotes the words of Mussolini, and Columbia professor and disciple of John Dewey, Herbert W. Schneider.

FDR was a Mussolini disciple, clearly.

And, this: 
. "As an economic system, fascism is *socialism *with a capitalist veneer. ... In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful *competition*, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary *Marxism*, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.....

..*.. Mussolini praised the New Deal *as “boldly . . . interventionist in the field of economics,” and Roosevelt complimented Mussolini for his “honest purpose of restoring Italy” and acknowledged that he kept “in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman.” 

Also, Hugh Johnson, *head of the National Recovery Administration, was known to carry a copy of Raffaello Viglione’s pro-Mussolini book,The Corporate State,with him, presented a copy to Labor Secretary Frances Perkins, and, on retirement, paid tribute to the Italian dictator."* Fascism The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics Library of Economics and Liberty



All these years you have swallowed the propaganda, huh?
Do you recognize how stupid you are, now?


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> *Now back to that "Elusive Second Front"....*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey stupid, FDR didn't want to put American troops fighting beside, in unison and competition with the USSR. Our tactics and strategy of minimizing casualties did not coincide with Stalin's tactic of accepting massive casualties with massive frontal assaults.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...





Post #57 clearly proves that you are the liar.

And #87 drives home the stake in your heart.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


The italian gentlemen quote is sourced to an anonymous person and therefore bullshit.

As is the rest of what you've posted...all opinion.


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Shall I pour salt on the wound captain??


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...





I cannot be responsible for how oblivious you claim to be...but I do enjoy smashing these custard pies in your kisser:


1. It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists.* Roosevelt's economist, Rexford Tugwell* said: Any people who must be governed according to the written codes of an instrument which defines the spheres of individual and group, state and federal actions must expect to suffer from the constant maladjustment of progress. A life' which changes and a constitution for governance which does not must always raise questions which are difficult for solution."
Manly, Op.Cit., p. 63


2. Tugwell was *opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *General Hugh Johnson was working with Tugwell on a bill to create the NRA, and gave Francis Perkins the book by Rafaello Viglione, "The Corporate State," in which the neat Italian system of dictatorship for the benefit of the people was glowingly described."
Francis Perkins, "The Roosevelt I Knew." 
The NRA was copied from Mussolini's corporative system.

a. Perkins questioned whether Johnson 'really understood the democratic process..." *New Dealers had no problem with the fascist nature of their plans.


Recognize the name Rex Tugwell, and Francis Perkins?*


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

"Unhappy events abroad have retaught us the simple truths about the liberty of a democratic people. 

The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in essence, is Fascism..."    FDR, April 29, 1938 Address to Congress.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Now you've quoted other peoples' opinions. Priceless.


----------



## Valerie (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> Now you've quoted other peoples' opinions. Priceless.




and typical...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> [*Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939*
> Nov 27, 2007  by Wolfgang Schivelbusch....if you ever decide to educate yourself.
> I'm never wrong......learn that.



You are wrong about this, and Professor Schivelbush would curse you to your face for the misuse and corruption of his work for your evil purposes.  You are a little Nazi.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Thunderbird said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> ...



Because he stood up to Japanese imperialism in Asia does not make him a communist.  So did MacArthur.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Thunderbird said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



You need to prove this OP before you fail in the next.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > [*Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939*
> ...


Notice how she still refuses to answer the first question she was asked in the thread. What was Chesly Manly, Col McCormick and the American party. Ten pages and she still avoids having to answer the questions that are the basis of her thesis.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > [*Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939*
> ...




I quoted him directly.

So....you give up, and accept the title of 'lying imbecile'?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PC is stupid, simply.  It has little to do with IQ but with inability or unwillingness to learn, to confront one's confirmation bias, one's willingness to engage cognitive dissonance.

If she had stayed in North Korea, PC would have done well in an authoritarian state.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Thunderbird said:
> ...




Your refusing to accept the truth is a statement about your lack of honesty, certainly not that I fail.

I never do.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> 
> An earlier thread resulted in this unwarranted attack:
> 
> ...



Did you, PC, earn a certificate in Character Assassination at the Columbia Abnormal School?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC is stupid, simply.  It has little to do with IQ but with inability or unwillingness to learn, to confront one's confirmation bias, one's willingness to engage cognitive dissonance.
> 
> If she had stayed in North Korea, PC would have done well in an authoritarian state.






I love how I reduced you to making up lies about me, admitting that you cannot refute the OP.

After, what....some dozen or so posts....you still cannot find a single error.
Keep up the good work.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> ...





Oh, here comes another one.

What am I, a bug light for freaks???


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Now....how to explain Roosevelt's joined-at-the-hip relationship with the pathological murderer, Joseph Stalin.

Earlier, I noted how closely Roosevelt mirrored the policies of other totalitarian dictators....Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler.

But could there be other factors that pushed him to follow the communist leader?



7. Who could have had Roosevelt's ear? Certainly not *Harry Hopkins, FDR's live-in aide and adviser? *
Hopkins actually lived in the White House.


a. Harry Hopkins,- FDR's alter ego, co-president, or Rasputin, "...the closest and most influential adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, *was a Soviet agent." and “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.*”
The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins
The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins



b. According to Soviet records, in May of 1942, *Harry Hopkins privately coached Foreign Minister Molotov on what to say to FDR to overcome US military arguments against a 'second front' in France. 
Eduard Mark, " Venona's source 19 and the 'Trident' Conference of May 1943: diplomacy or espionage?," p.20
(see EBSEES Mark Eduard Venona s source 19 and the Trident Conference of May 1943 diplomacy or espionage *



c. And “Mr. Molotoff Came to Plead for a Second Front,”_New York Times,_June 13, 1942.
And, referring to Soviet records of the Hopkins/Molotov meetings:  Harry Hopkins A Glimpse into the Russian Records - DocumentsTalk.com


So....proof of FDR's leaning toward the communist homeland begins in 1933, he offers Stalin all the resources of the United States in 1940, and he gives room and board to a Soviet spy.

No problem for the Leftist simpletons who are still defending him.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

It is obvious PC will not answer the question I have asked so often about what was Chesly Manly, Col McCormick and the American Party. Manly was a pen name for Col McCormick, the notorious fascist owner of the Chicago Tribune that published the War Departments secret war contingency plans for recommended actions to be taken if war with Germany were to break out. They were called the Rainbow 5 documents and displayed on the front page of the Tribune on Dec. 4, 1941. Hitler used the revelation of the top secret documents in his Declaration of War against the United States.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> It is obvious PC will not answer the question I have asked so often about what was Chesly Manly, Col McCormick and the American Party. Manly was a pen name for Col McCormick, the notorious fascist owner of the Chicago Tribune that published the War Departments secret war contingency plans for recommended actions to be taken if war with Germany were to break out. They were called the Rainbow 5 documents and displayed on the front page of the Tribune on Dec. 4, 1941. Hitler used the revelation of the top secret documents in his Declaration of War against the United States.





That's your beef?

Not that the statement is the truth?


So.....you admit, at least, that every other single thing in the thread is true, correct, and accurate.

Great!
We're making headway.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > [*Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939*
> ...





Are you claiming to have read Schivelbusch's book????



Now....don't run off and hide......answer the question.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

Oh, I get it. PC thinks we should have fought the germans and the russians at the same time. Thankfully, saner heads prevailed.


----------



## Camp (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > It is obvious PC will not answer the question I have asked so often about what was Chesly Manly, Col McCormick and the American Party. Manly was a pen name for Col McCormick, the notorious fascist owner of the Chicago Tribune that published the War Departments secret war contingency plans for recommended actions to be taken if war with Germany were to break out. They were called the Rainbow 5 documents and displayed on the front page of the Tribune on Dec. 4, 1941. Hitler used the revelation of the top secret documents in his Declaration of War against the United States.
> ...


No stupid, I already showed you how the quote you used by Manly in this thread was garbage. I am giving the readers of this thread and other garbage threads where you use Manly quotes an opportunity to see for themselves that you are dependent on a very subjective and controversial source that can not be trusted. I trust nothing from the Manly cesspool of untraceable sources. It's all just propaganda and agenda driven misinformation.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> Oh, I get it. PC thinks we should have fought the germans and the russians at the same time. Thankfully, saner heads prevailed.





Actually, I believe you do get it....you just won't admit it.

Trust me.....tell the truth, even if it costs you your Liberal creds.

You'll feel better about yourself.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





Posts #57 and #87 showed you were lying.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, I get it. PC thinks we should have fought the germans and the russians at the same time. Thankfully, saner heads prevailed.
> ...


I get that you think the Americans could have defeated the Nazis and the Soviets in one fell swoop. It just wasn't possible.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

Oh, and you are mad that Korea became communist....but in the long run it would have been worse if Hitler had taken them over.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




1. My posts proved the similarities between the New Deal and the other dictatorships.

2. And, that Roosevelt followed Stalin's orders.

3. I haven't posted, here, about defeating the Nazis and the Soviets.
But...if you're asking, I agree with this:
. What could, should have happened?
When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...*no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!

"Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,*leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> Oh, and you are mad that Korea became communist....but in the long run it would have been worse if Hitler had taken them over.



I haven't said anything about Korea, merely that the Korean War occurred because Soviet spies gave the communists the atomic bomb.
And communist spies were welcomed in the Roosevelt administration.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

Dictatorships don't have democratic elections.

Total fail thread PC.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> Dictatorships don't have democratic elections.
> 
> Total fail thread PC.




I should get some sort of credit for educating you.

1.  The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

Looks like I caught Jakal in a lie....and he ran off with his tail between his legs.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


I know you have not because you could not have come to the conclusion that it supports your thesis.

Now show us how exactly the Professor's work supports your nonsense.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

So...*.where the heck is was that elusive "second front"???*
Depends how you define "second front."

Let's see how elusive that "second front" really was.


8. So....what, exactly, did Stalin want from American foreign policy? The call was for *an Anglo-American 'second front,' in Western Europe, to draw German forces away from their attack on mother Russia, the putative 'first front.' *

The astute should have noted that *the real 'first front' was Poland, which had been attacked in 1939 by both Hitler and Stalin.*
But, put that aside....


a. After Pearl Harbor, wasn't t*he South Pacific *a second front?


b. Ten thousand American and Filipino troops were killed, and 20,000 wounded, at *Bataan. *
How about a 'front' there?

 c. How about *North Africa*?
In June, 1942, Rommel accepted surrender of the British, Tobruk, Libya. Rommel took more than 30,000 prisoners, 2,000 vehicles, 2,000 tons of fuel, and 5,000 tons of rations.  Harry Hopkins and George Marshal 'vigorously opposed' any operation in North Africa, as it would delay the 'second front.'



Starting to get the picture?
The only "second front" that counted, according to Stalin and Roosevelt, was the one that Stalin named as the "second front."

Roosevelt: "I would rather lose New Zealand, Australia or anything else than have the Russian front collapse." 
Robert Dallek, "Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945," p. 338.


Yup! 
'Russia Uber Alles' 

What nation did Roosevelt represent, again?


----------



## regent (Jan 22, 2015)

Did FDR do a con-job on old Stalin about the second front? I mean all those excuses over the  years must have had an effect on old Joe. How long can you do "The second front Is in the mail" before it get old. But I also think of the America lives FDR saved with the delay. Wonder how that delay is written up in the Russian history books?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Looks like I caught Jakal in a lie....and he ran off with his tail between his legs.


You have gotten your ass booted all over the Board on this issue.  Yet again.  Here is your consolation prize.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...







Now, Jakal....answer the question.

You wrote "You are wrong about this, and Professor Schivelbush would curse you to your face for the misuse and corruption of his work for your evil purposes. You are a little Nazi."

*Did you read the book?*

You certainly tried to imply that you have/


Did you?

*Or were you intentionally lying?*

You can answer.....everyone knows you are a liar...I just like documenting it.

If you say you have....I'll ask you a question or two.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like I caught Jakal in a lie....and he ran off with his tail between his legs.
> ...





You're lying again.

I've won every round....a shut-out.

You haven't been able to even quote one fact that you could dispute.


*Did you read Schivelbusch's book *
*Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939*
Nov 27, 2007
by Wolfgang Schivelbusch


...or are you simply a blow-hard liar?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

regent said:


> Did FDR do a con-job on old Stalin about the second front? I mean all those excuses over the  years must have had an effect on old Joe. How long can you do "The second front Is in the mail" before it get old. But I also think of the America lives FDR saved with the delay. Wonder how that delay is written up in the Russian history books?




Talking out of your hat again?

What happened....your historians didn't tell you what to say?

*Stalin wanted Central and Eastern Europe left for Red Army occupation....so, naturally FDR put pressure on Churchill, and George Marshall, the same, on Eisenhower.

Basically...'I don't care if attack via Italy is the right course....if Uncle Joe wants us to go West, France it shall be!"




a. General Carl Spaatz, American World War II general and the firstChief of Staff of the United States Air Force, and top commander of strategic bombingin Europe, "didn't think OVERLORD [Normandy] was necessary or desirable.

He said it would be a much better investment to build up forces in Italy to push the Germans across the Po, taking and using airfields as we come to them, thus shortening the bombing run into Germany.
"My Three Years With Eisenhower: The Personal Diary of Captain Harry C. Butcher, USNR, Naval Aide to General Eisenhower...," p. 447-448, by Harry C. Butcher



b.General Ira Eaker, "of the United States Army Air Forcesduring World War II. Eaker, as second-in-command of the prospective Eighth Air Force, "Ira C. Eaker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediastated that it would be"easier to support a trans-Adriatic operation than the invasion of southern France.The bases, he pointed out, hadalready been established in Italy.....but the southern France operation would have to be supported from new bases in Corsica. After the meeting was over, General Marshall commented ....to General Eaker: "You've been too damned long with the British."
Hanson W. Baldwin, "Great Mistakes of the War," p. 38-39




c. "One of the few Americans to agree with Churchill and Alexander was Lt. Gen. Mark W. Clark, commander of US Fifth Army in Italy,who said in his 1951 autobiography that "the weakening of the campaign in Italy in order to invade southern France, instead of pushing on into the Balkans, wasone of the outstanding political mistakes of the war. The Italian campaign did have military value. It knocked Italy out of the war and it tied down more than 20 German divisions"*
*Churchill?s Southern Strategy



d.Eisenhower himself stated that the Adriatic-Italy attack made more sense:

"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO. In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....
One month later he was given his fifth star....and changed his mind.



Spaatz, Eaker, Clark, and Eisenhower.....and Churchill.....

....but not Stalin or Roosevelt.*

*After all....that might not have presented the Red Army with Eastern Europe, huh?*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

15 minutes....and *Jakal won't admit he lied *in implying he read the book....or even knows who Wolfgang Schivelbusch is......


I love it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Affirmation is yours, honey.  You quoted the prof and the title in support of your OP, but offered nothing from the book to evidence that affirmation.

We know you are lying that (1) you read the book and (2) that it supports your OP.

Go ahead and do so and I will ask you some questions to see if you are lying.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Affirmation is yours, honey.  You quoted the prof and the title in support of your OP, but offered nothing from the book to evidence that affirmation.
> 
> We know you are lying that (1) you read the book and (2) that it supports your OP.
> 
> Go ahead and do so and I will ask you some questions to see if you are lying.


In fact, once we expose PC's reply, we can move on.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

If any of this is a graduate work by PC for a graduate degree at a reputable university, she can kiss her chances good bye.


----------



## Dot Com (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> FDR save the county by pulling it out of the great depression and defeating Nazi Germany. Probably the best president since Washington, maybe even better.
> 
> He had no love of Hitler and Stalin.


^ that


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

PC, we are waiting for evidence from the Prof's book (accessible online page and verse) that supports your OP.

You have not even told us you read the book.

Come on, PC, we are waiting.


----------



## westwall (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The fact remain, PC, is that you are delusional on this subject.








Then argue the points she brings up, instead of repeating your mindless personal attacks on her.


----------



## westwall (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> FDR save the county by pulling it out of the great depression and defeating Nazi Germany. Probably the best president since Washington, maybe even better.
> 
> He had no love of Hitler and Stalin.







There is actually far more evidence that FDR's policies prolonged the depression.  Far more.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Affirmation is yours, honey.  You quoted the prof and the title in support of your OP, but offered nothing from the book to evidence that affirmation.
> ...




*You are a lying sack of offal...*

....you never read the book, you are clueless as to who Schivelbusch is, and now your dancing around.
You attempted to pretend that you have some expertise....and you've been caught.

No fear.

*Everyone already knows you are a lying imbecile....*


As I quoted the kinship section of the book, it is clear that I read the book....studied it actually, and quoted it correctly.


You remain a stinking pile of effluvia


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC, we are waiting for evidence from the Prof's book (accessible online page and verse) that supports your OP.
> 
> You have not even told us you read the book.
> 
> Come on, PC, we are waiting.





Did you read it or not, you excrement.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

westwall said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The fact remain, PC, is that you are delusional on this subject.
> ...


Read the whole string.  She won't post the evidence we are asking for.  She is mindlessly chattering.  I can't refute an affirmation for which she does not give the Professor's argument she cites.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

You cited the Professor as an expert, PC, but you have not read the book, and have not posted his material.  You get nothing until you do your due diligence.  Post the evidence.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The fact remain, PC, is that you are delusional on this subject.





JakeStarkey said:


> You cited the Professor as an expert, PC, but you have not read the book, and have not posted his material.  You get nothing until you do your due diligence.  Post the evidence.





Did you read the book, dirt-bag, or did I catch you in another lie.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

We caught you in a lie, PC.  You can't post any of the Professor's evidence that supports your OP, can you?

Have you read the book?  The answer is clearly no.

Your affirmation, kid, meet it.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 22, 2015)

9.* "This talk about a 'second front' is getting annoying,"* a letter to the editor dated February 23, 1943, begins.
 Listing assorted theaters of war including *China, The South Pacific, Burma, and North Africa,* the writer concludes "that when people talk about a second front what they mean is a ninth front" 
From "Our Indispensible Fronts," NYTimes, February 25, 1943. 
 Quoted in "American Betrayal," West, p.269.


10. *Somehow, only an Allied invasion via Normandy would count as an authentic 'second front.'* 
How to understand these decisions?   
"Washington (U.P.)- A highly reliable informant who has first hand information of events in the Soviet Union said tonight *the Russian people would not regard even a major Allied success in North Africa as the answer to their desire for the opening of a second front."* 
“Drive in North Africa Not Enough,” New York Times, October 28, 1942.


a. Give FDR credit: he sent over 100,000 Allied troops into North Africa in November. Yet he, Marshall, and Hopkins never waiverd from northern France as their 'second front.'

b.* "Stalin Still Insisting* On That Second Front...belittles fighting in Africa."   NYTimes, November 8, 1942

c. *"Soviet Renews Cry* For Second Front" 
NYTimes, March 12, 1943



11. And....surprise!....Stalin got exactly what he wanted from Franklin Roosevelt.

a. The attack at Normandy, instead of the Adriatic

b. Lend-Lease poured into Russia at the expense of Allied requirements (included uranium for a bomb).

c. An international socialist organ, the United Nations, where Russia got 3 votes to the US's single one. A Soviet agent as first sec'y general.

d. Hegemony and control of all of Eastern Europe

e. Crushing of Germany,which might have stood in Stalin's way, without allowing surrender years earlier.


BTW.....over 20,000 United States soldiers were captured and never returned by the USSR.
So.....who won WWII?


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

Here's an article that discusses Benn Steil’s _The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order: _*The Communist Agent Who Caused Pearl Harbor — and Global Economic Havoc*

Quote: Steil discusses White’s crucial role as a Soviet agent in the decisions and events that brought about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Steil writes:

“We sighed a deep sigh of relief,” recalled the head of the American desk of the NKVD Intelligence Directorate, Vitali Pavlov. Yet this was not merely cheerleading from the sidelines. Pavlov had, secretly, been part of the game.

The Japanese decision to attack Pearl Harbor was the culmination of a series of critical political developments and, clearly, no single event, no single action, and no single individual can be said to have triggered it. Nevertheless, the most proximate cause has the curious connection with Pavlov and his most important American contact, Harry Dexter White.

Steil notes that, as a result of White’s fierce lobbying, FDR “authorized [Secretary of State] Hull to present the Japanese with what became known as the Ten-Point Note. Hull summoned Nomura and Kurusu on November 26 to deliver the austere ultimatum, incorporating White’s demands on China, without concessions. An alarmed Kurusu told Hull that the Japanese government would ‘throw up its hands’ if presented with such a response to their truce proposal. Hull did not waiver. The collision course had been set.”

And Soviet agent Harry Dexter White had set that course. Steil comments:

*That White was the author of the key ultimatum demands is beyond dispute. That the Japanese government made the decision to move forward with the Pearl Harbor strike after receiving the ultimatum is also beyond dispute.*

Steil notes that “the Soviets, American allies in the European war, were anxious to ensure that such an attack did take place.” He quotes Soviet spymaster Vladimir Karpov in this regard:

*“The war in the Pacific could have been avoided,” wrote retired GRU military intelligence colonel and World War II “Hero of the Soviet Union” Vladimir Karpov in 2000, nearly sixty years after Pearl Harbor. “Stalin was the real initiator of the ultimatum to Japan,” he insisted.*

How was that possible? Steil allows Karpov to explain:

“Harry Dexter White was acting in accordance with a design initiated by [NKVD intelligence official Iskhak] Akhmerov and Pavlov,” Karpov argued. “[White] prepared the aide-memoire for signature by Morgenthau and President Roosevelt.” The Soviets had, according to Karpov, used White to provoke Japan to attack the United States. The scheme even had a name, “Operation Snow,” snow referring to White. “[T]he essence of ‘Operation Snow’ was to provoke the war between the Empire of the Rising Sun and the USA and to insure the interests of the Soviet Union in the Far East.... If Japan was engaged in a war against the USA it would have no resources to strike against the USSR."


----------



## Ravi (Jan 22, 2015)

regent said:


> Did FDR do a con-job on old Stalin about the second front? I mean all those excuses over the  years must have had an effect on old Joe. How long can you do "The second front Is in the mail" before it get old. But I also think of the America lives FDR saved with the delay. Wonder how that delay is written up in the Russian history books?


Mmmmmmm, that's basically it. And PC and Stalin were both conned. Which makes PC a Stalinist.


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

FDR deserves considerable blame for Communist infiltration into the U.S. government:

History News Network Hiss Was Guilty

McCarthyism Waging the Cold War in America Human Events

"Accomplishments" of Marxism-Leninism: The Black Book of Communism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

Stalin's engineered famine killed millions.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)

Still no objective evidence accepted by the great majority of politicians.  We have been through this at least six times in the last eighteen months.  It's tiring.

PC admits, obviously, she has not read the professor's book but is willing to suggest it supports her thesis.

I suggest next time the mods place it in the Conspiracy forum.


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

Silvermaster is such a perfect name for a traitor, reminiscent of thirty pieces of silver.

Nathan Gregory Silvermaster - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Thunderbird (Jan 22, 2015)

More "gifts" of Marxism-Leninism:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/opinion/16iht-eddikotter16.html?_r=0


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 22, 2015)




----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 22, 2015)

Ravi said:


> FDR save the county by pulling it out of the great depression and defeating Nazi Germany. Probably the best president since Washington, maybe even better.
> 
> He had no love of Hitler and Stalin.



When did FDR pull out of the Depression?

What year exactly?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC makes no scholarly revelations about FDR.
> 
> She made herself look like a fool last time she tackled this subject.
> 
> ...



Jake, defender of Progressives


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Harry White's Creed, which PC hates
> 
> _"I believe in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of the press, freedom of criticism, and freedom of movement. I believe in the goal of equality of opportunity, and the right of each individual to follow the calling of his or her own choice, and the right of every individual to have an opportunity to develop his or her capacity to the fullest. . . . I consider these principles sacred. I regard them as the basic fabric of our American way of life, and I believe in them as living realities, and not mere words on paper. This is my creed."_



Harry White, Communist Spy

Good work, Jake


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 22, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> *You have been unable to deny any of the documented, linked, sourced, facts that I have provided.*
> 
> You remain a lying imbecile....and many know it.



The country in 1933 was ready to hand FDR dictatorial powers, but he refused them.  That is the fact of that matter,

well described here:

 The Fireside Chat that Roosevelt Threw Away by Jonathan Alter


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > *You have been unable to deny any of the documented, linked, sourced, facts that I have provided.*
> ...






"The country in 1933 was ready to hand FDR dictatorial powers, but he refused them."
Utter nonsense.
He used them to shred the Constitution.


In 1933, Fascism was celebrating its eleventh year in power, in Italy, and the election of the National Socialists in Germany represented an unmitigated defeat for liberal democracy in Europe’s largest industrialized nation. Schivelbusch, Op.Cit.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   2. At the beginning of the same month, FDR was inaugurated as President. And before Congress went into recess it* granted powers to Roosevelt unprecedented in peacetime. From Congressional hearings, 1973: “Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.”                                      * Freedomsite.net


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



You should have read the article I posted.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Great link:

The domain freedomsite.net may be for sale. Click here for details.


----------



## Agit8r (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> 
> An earlier thread resulted in this unwarranted attack:
> 
> ...



How much does crack cost these days?


----------



## Moonglow (Jan 23, 2015)

Agit8r said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> ...


Depends who's crack it is...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Agit8r said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Seems that any *scholarly revelation about Franklin Roosevelt *produces the sort of ire that one would expect in response to a slur about one's dear, departed- and saintly-  mom!
> ...





You've implied that the post linked isn't true.....but, wisely, you didn't deny any of the facts.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...







I just showed you that he did no such thing.

Doing away with the guidance of the Constitution makes him exactly what I suggested: a dictator.


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> We caught you in a lie, PC.  You can't post any of the Professor's evidence that supports your OP, can you?
> 
> Have you read the book?  The answer is clearly no.
> 
> Your affirmation, kid, meet it.


Read it or not, she distorts it and insults Shivelbusch with her distortion of his thesis.

"To compare" Shivelbusch stesses, "is not the same as to equate. America during Roosevelt's New Deal did not become a one party state; it had no secret police; the constitution remained in force, and there were no concentration camps; the New Deal preserved the institutions of the liberal-democrat system that National Socialism abolished." Shivelbusch Three New Deals   Reason Magazine  Oct 2007


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



*'So panicked were the members of American's economic elite about the banking crisis that on FDR's first day in office more than a dozen of them--prominent bankers, congressional committee chairmen, members of the Federal Reserve Board, and the top Treasury officials of both administrations--met and seemed to emerge with a consensus that Roosevelt should assume dictatorial control. That afternoon Adolph Miller, a member of the Federal Reserve, suggested a single law that would put "the whole powers of the government in the hands of the President." He argued that "This is a war. Don't bother with the details. It isn't possible to formulate a plan of legislation." Fed Chairman Eugene Meyer agreed; FDR's Treasury Secretary William Woodin revealed that the idea had already carried farther than they knew. The governors of many of the 48 states were coming to Washington the next day, and Woodin told the group confidentially that a committee of them was set to endorse the idea of the president assuming full wartime powers.'

Is any of that untrue?*


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 23, 2015)

Once again, PC fails basic principles of scholarship.

To repeat from above:
_Read it or not, she distorts it and insults Shivelbusch with her distortion of his thesis.

"To compare" Shivelbusch stesses, "is not the same as to equate. America during Roosevelt's New Deal did not become a one party state; it had no secret police;the constitution remained in force, and there were no concentration camps; the New Deal preserved the institutions of the liberal-democrat system that National Socialism abolished." Shivelbusch Three New Deals Reason Magazine Oct 2007_


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > We caught you in a lie, PC.  You can't post any of the Professor's evidence that supports your OP, can you?
> ...





1. I have read and studied same....and quote it exactly as it was written.

The dirt-bag whose post you include pretended he read it.


2. ".... the emergence of a new type of state: bolstered by mass propaganda, led by a charismatic figure, and projecting stability and power. *He uncovers stunning similarities among the three regimes: *the symbolic importance of gigantic public works programs like the TVA dams and the German autobahn, which not only put people back to work but embodied the state's authority; the seductive persuasiveness of Roosevelt's fireside chats and Mussolini's radio talks; the vogue for monumental architecture stamped on Washington, as on Berlin; and the omnipresent banners enlisting citizens as loyal followers of the state."
Three New Deals Reflections on Roosevelt s America Mussolini s Italy and Hitler s Germany 1933-1939 by Wolfgang Schivelbusch Reviews Discussion Bookclubs Lists


"...*stunning similarities among the three regimes:" that would be Roosevelt, Mussolini, and Hitler.*



3. At least two of the claims in your link are clearly false:
"...the constitution remained in force, and there were no concentration camps;..."

As it the pattern,* you have been soundly thrashed.*
Don't ever change.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 23, 2015)

PC, I believe you had one of your minions research that for you.

Similarities?  There were similarities between the US, the UK, France, USSR, Germany, Italy, and so on.

They were nation states fighting the Great Depression.

One dissimilarity among Germany and the USSR and the USA was that one was a left wing communist dictatorship and the other a right wing dictatorship and America was a functioning constitutional democracy.  Another is that the USA still functions as such, Russia is a strong man state, and Germany has rejoined the respectable nations. Another is that Germany and USSR killed millions and millions of its own citizens.

Your suggestion that the USA should have continue to purse a course of isolation is (1) impracticable and (2) immoral.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...







You actually quote a Rooseveltian: *"This is a war. Don't bother with the details. It isn't possible to formulate a plan of legislation."*


Once again you have inadvertently reinforced the point that Franklin Roosevelt and Mussolini and Hitler ran similar operations.

Considering* the recent revelations about the dirt-bag liar, Jakal, *it would be remiss of me not to quote Wolfgang Schivelbusch.....


*The use of metaphors based on the military represent another link* between the three systems. For *Fascism and National Socialism* war was an act of creation in the construction of a national narrative. For example, WWI created the need for authoritarian governance, as it represented the death of liberal democracy. The war instilled a solidarity among its soldiers, and heroic, messianic movements incorporated this inspiration. Politics was warfare.                                                                                                                                                                          
Features of these movements reflecting the war experience include the ‘general,’ or strong leader, the uniforms, the ‘storm troopers,’ *a sense that life-and-death struggle rather than mannered debate, *and the word ‘battle’ for every major economic enterprise. Merchants had to be replaced with warriors!
Even after the Mussolini and Hitler regimes controlled their governments, war mythology continued to inform the changes from liberal-parliamentary state into an autocracy closely patterned on the military.                                                                                                                                                                                                        

But bellicose metaphors are *not only found among the Fascists! In his inaugural address, 1933, Roosevelt blamed the ‘money changers*’ for the economic crisis. Beyond economic and social steps against the Depression, *Roosevelt had to declare war on it, *‘else how could he demand the sacrifices, “the stern performance of duty by old and young alike” that he would propose?  Part of his address:
*He would ask Congress for “broad Executive power to wage a war *against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe” and be read  “to submit our lives and our property to such discipline,…” with “a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in times of armed strife.”

4.  Thus he speaks: “…if we are to go forward we must move as a trained and loyal *army willing to sacrifice* for the good of Bøê Coêine, because without such discipline, no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline because it makes possibly a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will hind upon us all as a sacred obligation with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife. With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people, dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.”                              FDR s 1933 Inaugural Address WyzAnt Resources


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > 3. At least two of the claims in your link are clearly false:
> ...


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


The quote comes from your source. It directly addresses your OP. You opened the thread with a statement about my criticism of your misuse of sources and quotes. This is an example of how you cherry pick and distort your sources and quotes. Now you are cherry picking and distorting specific segments of your sources quotes.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Thunderbird said:


> Here's an article that discusses Benn Steil’s _The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order: _*The Communist Agent Who Caused Pearl Harbor — and Global Economic Havoc*
> 
> Quote: Steil discusses White’s crucial role as a Soviet agent in the decisions and events that brought about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Steil writes:
> 
> ...



This is why FDR is a Hero to the American Left,


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > We caught you in a lie, PC.  You can't post any of the Professor's evidence that supports your OP, can you?
> ...



No concentration camps.... for non-Japanese


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...





None of the apologists seem ready to argue that Roosevelt didn't shred the Constitution.

That's good.....running government sans any restrictions is pretty much the textbook definition of a dictator.


Or the emperor...

"*Obama: 'The Problem Is ... I’m Not the Emperor of the United States'
Obama The Problem Is ... I m Not the Emperor of the United States The Weekly Standard*


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Oh shut the f up. F your insinuation that America operated any kind of camp that in any way resembled the concentration camps of WWII that murdered by starving, forced labor, gassing and execution. We interred Japanese in internment camps. Your statement is anti American and an insult based on a lie. That makes you a lying anti American POS.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 23, 2015)

Lookie here,to no surprise the troll is still at it with her obsession over FDR and the democrat party.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





Why do Liberals always want alternate voices to 'shut up'?
What are you afraid of?

Truth?
Sort of like this: 
*concentration camp*
_n._
*1. *A camp where persons are confined, usually without hearings and typically under  harsh conditions, often as a result of their membership in a group the government has identified as suspect.
concentration camp - definition of concentration camp by The Free Dictionary


Don't forget....
* " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Lookie here,to no surprise the troll is still at it with her obsession over FDR and the democrat party.






"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
John, 8:32


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 23, 2015)

someone farted in here^


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



Yet another great example of how this liar misleads by distorting quotes. Check out her link to The Free Dictionary definition of concentration camp. Why do you suppose she cherry picked one small portion of the definition supplied by Free Dictionary? Check out her link and see for yourself how she manipulates her links to misrepresent fact and truth.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



what I have noticed about her trolling in her obsession over FDR which is really scary,is how she always blatantly ignores how the republicans are as corrupt as well NEVER mentioning the pic I have posted a few times in the past of Eisenhower standing next to stalin while he has his soliders murder children. has she EVER once talked about any other president here before other than FDR? I sure as hell cant remember it if she ever did.


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Lookie here,to no surprise the troll is still at it with her obsession over FDR and the democrat party.
> ...


You can start by refraining from using quotes from the pen name fascist front Manly.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



FDR was anti-American


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Fascist and corporatist hate FDR. He proved beyond any doubt that New Deal policies could and did work. His policies end up being the most anti corporatist and anti fascist implemented in the 20th Century. Hate FDR or love him, his impact has had positive effects on the American way of life and his policies continue to be mimicked and to influence policies though every administration since his death as a sitting President in his fourth term in office. The impact of other Presidents pale in comparison to the impacts and legacy of FDR. 
Despite what brainwashed idiots like Crazy Frank say, FDR is generally viewed favorably by Americans, beloved by many, voted by historians to be one of the best Presidents in history, sharing a spot alongside Washington and Lincoln.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




Liar.

1. Fascists like Mussolini loved and supported Roosevelt.


Mussolini wrote a book review of Roosevelt’s “Looking Forward,” in which he said “…[as] Roosevelt here calls his readers to battle, is reminiscent of the ways and means by which Fascism awakened the Italian people.” Popolo d’Italia, July 7, 1933.
In 1934, Mussolini wrote a review of “New Frontiers,” by FDR’s Sec’y of Agriculture, later Vice-President, Henry Wallace: “Wallace’s answer to what America wants is as follows: anything but a return tyo the free-market, i.e., anarchistic economy. Where is America headed? This book leaves no doubt that it is on the road to corporatism, the economic system of the current century.” Marco Sedda, Il politico, vol. 64, p. 263.



“The similarities of the economics of the New Deal to the economics of Mussolini’s corporative state or Hitler’s totalitarian state are both close and obvious.” Norman Thomas, head of the American Socialist Party.



1.  The Fascism of the 30’s was hardly new on the scene. In fact, by the 1920’s, American intellectuals, disappointed in what they perceived as the failures of classical liberalism allowed themselves to think that Fascism was the path toward their ideals, and the same path allowed them to stumble into Stalinism some time later. The jewels of the new thinking, according to these elites, was comprehensive state control, planning and direction, as long as the goals remained “a conscious, intelligent ordering of society,” as Columbia professor and disciple of John Dewey, Herbert W. Schneider stated.

a.  American progressives, pragmatists, viewed Fascism’s emphasis on political repression as a regrettable but entirely understandable corollary.
From Schivelbusch, chapter one.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



No offense but you taken to school on this a long time ago how FDR betrayed americans and continued what Hoover started the same way Obama has continued what bush got started and of course he is voted by historians in the same class as them.

these historians are on our corrupt governments payroll so of course he will be up there in the likes of them.theses historians of course will hold back the facts how he deliberately allowed the japenese to murder American soliders knowing they were going to attack pearl harbor that day so he could jojn forces with churhhill to get approval from America to go to war with Germany and join England.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





"....corporatist hate FDR."

Again, you lie.


The  propaganda of the New Deal (“malefactors of great wealth”) to the contrary, *FDR simply endeavored to re-create the corporatism of the last war. *The New Dealers invited one industry after another to write the codes under which they would be regulated.  Even more aggressive, the National Recovery Administration forced industries to fix prices and in other ways to collude with one another: the NRA approved 557 basic and 189 supplementary codes, covering almost 95% of all industrial workers.
*The intention was for big business to get bigger, and the little guy to be squeezed out:* for example, the owners of the big chain movie houses wrote the codes that almost ran the independents out of business (even though 13,571 of the 18,321 movie theatres were independently owned). This in the name of ‘efficiency’ and ‘progress.’     Goldberg, "Liberal Fascism"                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
*New Deal bureaucrats studied Mussolini’s corporatism closely. From “Fortune” magazine: ‘The Corporate state is to Mussolini what the New Deal is to Roosevelt.’(July 1934)*



And this, just as FDR and the New Deal did:
Another early policy given high priority by* the Nazi government was the organizing of all German businesses into cartels*. The argument was that—in contrast to the disorderliness and egoism of free market capitalism—centralization and state control would increase efficiency and a sense of German unity. In July of 1933, membership in a cartel became compulsory for businesses, and by early 1934 the cartel structure was re-organized and placed firmly under the direction of the German government.  Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz Stephen Hicks Ph.D.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 23, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



I would actually enjoy this OP in fact if it was not created by a troll who has a scary obsession over FDR and has made so many multiple threads on him in the past and seldom ever makes any on any other presidents..


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


Ya, anyone and everyone who disagrees with your shallow and shortsighted agenda driven ideas and opinions is a liar. But while others answer your nonsense with academic and debate accepted methods using university level resource methods you continue to cut and paste selected out of context quotes that wouldn't be accepted at a community college. 19 pages of thread and you still have failed to answer the first question asked of you. All your boosting about your intellect and ability to present a thesis and you have yet to explain what Chesly Manly, Col McCormick or the American Party was. These are main sources of your thesis and used by other sources you use as sources. It is the foundation you use for many of your threads and particularly the ones about FDR. So, why do you have such a problem explaining to readers of your threads about FDR who your foundation source is? Of course you and I know the answer to that. Sources have to be sourced themselves. You can list a source, but you have to know where the source got the data. You have to be able to trace it back to it's origin for it to be of value in anything other than a poorly written conspiracy theory.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp's analysis above is spot on.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...







That's funny.

I just posted a ton of links and quotes* proving you to be a congenital liar..*..FDR was a corporatist par excellence, and that Mussolini love him and FDR mirrored his policies.

Good thing you have dirt-bag's enduring support.


----------



## G.T. (Jan 23, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...


Your mancrush had a mancrush on him and voted for him 4 times, even called him hero.

Yea, saint ronnie.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



what I love about this hypocrite   troll liar is how she evades facts on how her idol reagan was an evil corrupt mass murderer,and uses the INTERNET for her sources in her desperate attempts to try and save face when she is cornered on this.

talk about a lying hypocrite troll. she must be married to USMB's resident troll  reagan lover troll crusader retard.

Like him,she evades facts even if you show videos from the actual 80's taken back then of the media BACK THEN talking about how reagans policys ruined america and betrayed americans.somehow actual sources from the 80s themselves are not god enough for trolls like her and her husband crusader retard.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 23, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



^ HW's personal disinformation troll still steaming that Reagan survived the assassination attempt arranged by HW and his Establishment Pals


----------



## konradv (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Where does Franklin Roosevelt come in?  " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."


Perhaps you should do some actual research instead of simply parroting those that share your bias.  Roosevelt warned against fascism before WW II even started.
*
The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism—ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.*
 Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies- April 29, 1938

Franklin D. Roosevelt Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Where does Franklin Roosevelt come in?  " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
> ...





Really, you dunce?

When will you learn that reality, truth, is not based on words, it is defined by actions.

Roosevelt was of one mind with Mussolini, Hitler, and Stalin when it came to economic policy and actions that resulted from same.

But Stalin was his first love.
Thus..."Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."


When you come right down to it, the megalomaniac Roosevelt was of the same totalitarian mind as those named above.


----------



## konradv (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Really, you dunce?
> When will you learn that reality, truth, is not based on words, it is defined by actions.
> Roosevelt was of one mind with Mussolini, Hitler, and Stalin when it came to economic policy and actions that resulted from same.  But Stalin was his first love.  Thus..."Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."  When you come right down to it, the megalomaniac Roosevelt was of the same totalitarian mind as those named above.


I'd really be a dunce if I accepted your unsupported allegations.  I had the decency to provide a cite.  Shame you can't find the time to do the same.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Really, you dunce?
> ...




I'm responsible because you didn't do your homework?

Not.


Post #183


----------



## konradv (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> I'm responsible because you didn't do your homework?
> Not.
> Post #183


That was Mussolini's take on Roosevelt, NOT Roosevelt's take on Mussolini.  You've got to do better to fool me.


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...





Camp said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > We caught you in a lie, PC.  You can't post any of the Professor's evidence that supports your OP, can you?
> ...


We run in circles. When a PC quote is refuted she simple ignores it and waits a little while and brings up her out of context quote again when she needs to stick her finger in a hole in the dyke. She continues to use Shivelbusch even after a Shivelbusch quote is shown to show her distortion and misrepresentation, How hard is it to comprehend *"To compare is not the same as to equate" *


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > I'm responsible because you didn't do your homework?
> ...




Fool a fool???

Really?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...





Didn't I just reveal you to be a congenital liar???


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 23, 2015)

PC has had her arguments booted cleanly and squarely out of the field.

PC, if you are going to do simple comparisons, then you have to offer the comparisons that do not support your OP.

To only straight liar here is you.

Objective scholar you have yet to become.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > I'm responsible because you didn't do your homework?
> ...





WHEN will you learn to never....NEVER.....doubt me?


1.  It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists. *Roosevelt's economist, Rexford Tugwell *said: Any people who must be governed according to the written codes of an instrument which defines the spheres of individual and group, state and federal actions must expect to suffer from the constant maladjustment of progress. A life' which changes and a constitution for governance which does not must always raise questions which are difficult for solution." p.63


2. Tugwell was opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *General Hugh Johnson was working with Tugwell on a bill to create the NRA, and gave Francis Perkins the book by Rafaello Viglione, "The Corporate State,"* in which the neat Italian system of dictatorship for the benefit of the people was glowingly described."
Francis Perkins, "The Roosevelt I Knew."

The NRA was copied from Mussolini's corporative system. p.47

a. Perkins questioned whether Johnson 'really understood the democratic process..." New Dealers had no problem with the fascist nature of their plans.

*b. " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." 
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48


BTW....Did you know that Tugwell, Johnson, and Perkins were all Franklin Roosevelt hirees.


Richard Hofstadter noted that critics from the left believed, "that the NRA was a clear imitation of Mussolini's corporate state."
Richard Hofstadter, "The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.," . p. 327.*


----------



## Camp (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


No, and now you have become so pathetic that you make your debate opponents feel like bullies.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




What???

The congenital liar lying???

Shocker.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 23, 2015)

"It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists."  Tugwell gave only an opinion, one that does not comport with FDR's administrations.

Mussolini copied the NRA not the other way.

Any use of Manly gives away that the OP is neither balanced or objective.

*PC, did you know you got it wrong again?

*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 23, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> "It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists."  Tugwell gave only an opinion, one that does not comport with FDR's administrations.
> 
> Mussolini copied the NRA not the other way.
> 
> ...





You lying imbecile.....wrong again.

"*In 1933, Fascism was celebrating its eleventh year in power, in Italy*, and the election of the National Socialists in Germany represented an unmitigated defeat for liberal democracy in Europe’s largest industrialized nation."
Schivelbusch




Get lost, dirt-bag


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 23, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > "It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists."  Tugwell gave only an opinion, one that does not comport with FDR's administrations.
> ...



Your sweeping allegations misuse the Professor's work yet again.

Prove that Italy did not copy the NRA.  You can't.

PC your FDR material will be placed, I bet, in the Conspiracy Forum from now on.


----------



## Ravi (Jan 23, 2015)

Test


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 31, 2015)

FDR, SOTU, 1939:

"Dictatorship, however, involves costs which the American people will never pay: The cost of our spiritual values."


----------



## JakeStarkey (Jan 31, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Bump ^  PC got ran out of her own thread.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 31, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> a. Where does Franklin Roosevelt come in?  " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
> Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p. 48
> .



Franklin D. Roosevelt Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union

FDR's SOTU 1/41, well before the Nazis invaded the USSR.  The threat of Hitler to the US is made very clear.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 1, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> FDR, SOTU, 1939:
> 
> "Dictatorship, however, involves costs which the American people will never pay: The cost of our spiritual values."




*September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was freedom of religion in the USSR. "The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war." *
*"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow,"byDennis J. Dunn, p. 137*


----------



## NYcarbineer (Feb 1, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > FDR, SOTU, 1939:
> ...



That in no way refutes what I've posted.  FDR clearly spoke out against the threat of Hitler BEFORE the Nazis went to war against the Soviets...

...you claimed the opposite;  you are ignorant of history, among your many talents in the genre of ignorance.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Feb 1, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > FDR, SOTU, 1939:
> ...



Winston Churchill considered it a great failure that Great Britain did not form an alliance with the Soviets in the 30's.  Instead they allied with Poland, and let Hitler reach an accord with the Soviets.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 1, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...






You, being a known liar, quoted a liar.

I've revealed the truth about both of you.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 2, 2015)

PC has revealed the truth that she is more than willing "to lie for the Lord" with her false OP's and failed evidence.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC has revealed the truth that she is more than willing "to lie for the Lord" with her false OP's and failed evidence.





I've blistered you again,huh?

Great.


Now....back under your rock.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 2, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PC has revealed the truth that she is more than willing "to lie for the Lord" with her false OP's and failed evidence.
> ...


You express paranoia and delusion typical of most social cons.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 2, 2015)

Freedom of Religion and FDR re: the USSR

read Roosevelt-Litvinov  Clearly from 1933 on FDR insisted the Americans overseas in the USSR would maintain their right to freedom and worship of religion.

The exchange clearly expresses that FDR knew the communists did not have the same freedoms as Americans, as well as demonstrating that PC and the far right reactionary revisionists are failing in new OP.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 2, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Freedom of Religion and FDR re: the USSR
> 
> read Roosevelt-Litvinov  Clearly from 1933 on FDR insisted the Americans overseas in the USSR would maintain their right to freedom and worship of religion.
> 
> The exchange clearly expresses that FDR knew the communists did not have the same freedoms as Americans, as well as demonstrating that PC and the far right reactionary revisionists are failing in new OP.



Reactionary Democrats can never say a bad word against Uncle Joe Stalin


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Freedom of Religion and FDR re: the USSR
> 
> read Roosevelt-Litvinov  Clearly from 1933 on FDR insisted the Americans overseas in the USSR would maintain their right to freedom and worship of religion.
> 
> The exchange clearly expresses that FDR knew the communists did not have the same freedoms as Americans, as well as demonstrating that PC and the far right reactionary revisionists are failing in new OP.





You moron....

1. *Previous occupants of the office refused to recognize the sociopathic Soviet regime
.*Almost as soon as he was President, FDR recognized the Soviet Union.... He assumed office in March of 1933, and on November 16th, 1933, *signed a worthless agreement with Litvinov, recognizing the USSR.*



b. Did Roosevelt have any reason to*believe that Stalin would live up to his word*?
Roosevelt signed the recognition agreement: Litvinov "returned to the Soviet embassy.....all smiles....and said *'Well, it's all in the bag; we have it.'"* 

On September 23, 1939, Dr. D. H. Dombrowsky testified before the Dies committee.The Winona Republican-Herald on Newspapers.com

And Dombrowsky testified that Litvinov boasted that he pulled the wool over FDR's eyes:

"Well, it's all in the bag. They wanted us to recognize the debts we owed them and I promised we were going to negotiate. But they did not know we were going to negotiate until doomsday.* The next one was a corker; they wanted us to promise freedom of religion in the Soviet Union, and I promised that, too. I was very much prompted to offer that I would personally collect all the Bibles and ship them over."*
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.33.


So.....Roosevelt and you, Jakal.....Dumb and Dumber.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 2, 2015)

The moron PC is using conclusions not based on the evidence to come up with revisionists interpretations not supported by the evidence, as evidenced above.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The moron PC is using conclusions not based on the evidence to come up with revisionists interpretations not supported by the evidence, as evidenced above.






JakeStarkey said:


> The moron PC is using conclusions not based on the evidence to come up with revisionists interpretations not supported by the evidence, as evidenced above.





"...not based on the evidence..."

Testimony before the House of Representatives is evidence, you lying sack of offal.
And I provided same.


Notice how frequently I rip one who is one a new one.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 2, 2015)

Starkey can't bring himself to say anything bad about one of Progressives Founding Fathers, Uncle Joe Stalin


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 2, 2015)

Frank is frothing again, which he does when lies.  And then he tries to up the ante and always goes bust.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...





They lie, you imbecile!!!


1. In 1982, Ronald Reagan asked his arms control advisory committee to conduct a review of Soviet compliance in the 25 years of arms control treaties. It was the first such concerted review ever.* The answer to the question of Soviet arms controls compliance was that there was none.*
West, "American Betrayal," p. 198.

"The Soviet Union repeatedly violates treaties, and the rest of the world turns their heads and proceeds to enter into still more treaties, which *the Soviets violate with impunity." *
Joseph D. Douglass, Jr., "Why the Soviets Violate Arms Control Treaties," vii, 83.



2. The agreement that* Litvinov signed promised "To respect scrupulously the indisputable right of the United States to order its own life within its own jurisdiction in its own way and to refrain from interfering in any manner in the internal affairs of the United States, *its territories or possessions.... in particular,*from any act tending to incite or encourage armed intervention, or any agitation or propaganda *having as an aim, the violation of the territorial integrity of the United States, its territories or possessions, or the bringing about by force of a change in the political or social order of the whole or any part of the United States, its territories or possessions....

* Not to permit the formation or residence on its territory of any organization or group--*and to prevent the activity on its territory of any organization or group, or of representatives or officials of any organization or group--which makes claim to be the Government of,...

.*..prevent the activity on its territory of any organization or group, or of representatives or officials of any organization or group--which has as an aim the overthrow or the preparation for the overthrow of, or the bringing about by force of a change in, the political or social order of the whole or any part of the United States,..*.etc."
Roosevelt-Litvinov



Get it? They promised no espionage,* no Communist Party *of the United States of America (CPUSA)....


BTW.....

*New York State Communist Party*
235 W. 23rd St. 8th Fl.
New York, NY 10011
Tel: 212-924-0550
Email: ny@cpusa.org
Website
They own the building.

*Know who paid for the building?*
*Right.....the Soviets*


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 2, 2015)

Stop the deflection, PC.  Stay with your new OP

Those are conclusions not based on objective evidence, whereas I give you the communications between FDR and and the USSR foreign minister.

Since you cannot rebut with objective evidence, only skewed conclusions, just skip to the personal attack.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Stop the deflection, PC.  Stay with your new OP
> 
> Those are conclusions not based on objective evidence, whereas I give you the communications between FDR and and the USSR foreign minister.
> 
> Since you cannot rebut with objective evidence, only skewed conclusions, just skip to the personal attack.





You didn't have to come back to verify that you are a lying imbecile....
...it was made clear earlier.

Now I told you: get back under that rock and stay there.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 2, 2015)

Point out to Jake that his Uncle Joe starved million of people including 3MM Children right before FDR decided to recognize the USSR and Jake says, "You say he starved millions like it was a bad thing, those people needed killing"


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 2, 2015)

> 1. *Previous occupants of the office refused to recognize the sociopathic Soviet regime
> .*Almost as soon as he was President, FDR recognized the Soviet Union.... He assumed office in March of 1933, and on November 16th, 1933, *signed a worthless agreement with Litvinov, recognizing the USSR.*



They refused mainly over debts from the Tsarists regime..


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> > 1. *Previous occupants of the office refused to recognize the sociopathic Soviet regime
> > .*Almost as soon as he was President, FDR recognized the Soviet Union.... He assumed office in March of 1933, and on November 16th, 1933, *signed a worthless agreement with Litvinov, recognizing the USSR.*
> 
> 
> ...




Let's review the time period, and what was going on:

*1.Since FDR knew of Stalin's genocides, was Roosevelt a man without a moral compass?
... eight months earlier, journalist Gareth Jones had exposed Stalin's Terror Famine*

This is poignant:
"In the train a Communist denied to me that there was a famine. I flung a crust of bread which I had been eating from my own supply into a spittoon. A peasant fellow-passenger fished it out and ravenously ate it."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gareth_Jones_(journalist)



2. Malcolm Muggeridge "was the first writer to reveal the true nature of Stalin's regime when in 1933 he exposed the terror famine in the Ukraine. "



Time and Eternity: The Uncollected Writings of Malcolm Muggeridge: Malcolm Muggeridge, Nicholas Flynn: 9781570759055: Amazon.com: Books



3. For those who don't know, Stalin starved millions to death to gain control of their property, their farms.

"1932-1933 .... Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule. As a result, an estimated*7,000,000 persons perished..*."The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33


Roosevelt, the Democrat, no doubt used this as his mantra: "Millions slaughtered??? Heck, ya' hafta break a few eggs to make an omelette."

No wonder Democrats have so much in common with communists.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 2, 2015)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > > 1. *Previous occupants of the office refused to recognize the sociopathic Soviet regime
> ...



They share a mutual loathing for people


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 2, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Point out to Jake that his Uncle Joe starved million of people including 3MM Children right before FDR decided to recognize the USSR and Jake says, "You say he starved millions like it was a bad thing, those people needed killing"





PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > > 1. *Previous occupants of the office refused to recognize the sociopathic Soviet regime
> ...


Project much???


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 2, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


This thread shows loathing all right.....it extolls it...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Feb 2, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Point out to Jake that his Uncle Joe starved million of people including 3MM Children right before FDR decided to recognize the USSR and Jake says, "You say he starved millions like it was a bad thing, those people needed killing"
> ...




You have no answer to Roosevelt's acceptance of mass slaughter.

Shouldn't that teach you something?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 2, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Point out to Jake that his Uncle Joe starved million of people including 3MM Children right before FDR decided to recognize the USSR and Jake says, "You say he starved millions like it was a bad thing, those people needed killing"
> ...



You Hero FDR was Stalin's fuck buddy


----------



## regent (Feb 2, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Starkey can't bring himself to say anything bad about one of Progressives Founding Fathers, Uncle Joe Stalin


Some Republicans can't find anything bad to say about one of their progressives, even before Stalin: Theodore Roosevelt. Was Teddy the first progressive? Wonder what a Progressive means, so many labels and so changeable, all seemingly with flexible definitions, hard to keep up.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 2, 2015)

regent said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Starkey can't bring himself to say anything bad about one of Progressives Founding Fathers, Uncle Joe Stalin
> ...



Progressive is state control. Teddy was a crude prototype. Stalin, Mao and Hitler did Progressivism right and are the Founding Fathers of Modern Progressives


----------



## regent (Feb 2, 2015)

CrusaderFrank said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...


So if progressive is merely  state control, then it seems that all nations are progressive, right?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 6, 2015)

All modern nations are progressive, yes, with right, center, and left divisions.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 6, 2015)

regent said:


> [So if progressive is merely  state control, then it seems that all nations are progressive, right?


Yes, with modern Progressivism beginning in the USA.  Versions good and bad since then have emerged.


----------



## regent (Apr 6, 2015)

I know that many historians believe America's progressive period was between 1900 and 1915, but I suggest our progressive period began with the Constitution? A new nation based on the Age of Enlightenment, the purpose of government is to allow its citizens to pursue happiness.


----------

