# Joseph McCarthy Was Right in Most Cases



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 19, 2020)

When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.

When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946, had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB. John Abt, the Chief Counsel of the Committee; Charles Kramer, who served on three other Congressional Committees; Allen Rosenberg, who also served on the National Labor Relations Board, Board of Economic Warfare (BEW), the Foreign Economic Administration (FEA), and later argued cases before the United States Supreme Court; and Charles Flato, who served on the BEW and FEA, were all members of the Communist Party USA and were associated with the Soviet-run Comintern.

No credible scholar now denies that Soviet agents and sympathizers penetrated into the highest levels of the U.S. government in the 1930s and 1940s, including the White House and the State Department. It has long been known that the Soviets were able to place agents into the top levels of the Manhattan Project, and that one of them, Klaus Fuchs, even attended the first nuke test in New Mexico and then sent a detailed report about it to Joseph Stalin. It has also been known for a long time that FDR's Secretary of the Treasury, Harry Dexter White, was a Soviet spy, and that one of the members of the team that FDR took to Yalta, Alger Hiss, was also a Soviet Spy. In 1944, Hiss became director of the State Department's Office of Special Political Affairs. We have also known for some time now that some American officials in China and/or who worked on China affairs were Communist agents or sympathizers, such as John Stewart Service, Solomon Adler, Owen Lattimore, and Lauchlin Currie--these men played an important role in feeding false information about the state of affairs in China back to Washington.

Time does not allow me to address all the myths and distortions that liberals have spun about Senator McCarthy, so I will deal with one of the main ones, an issue that is hammered on in every anti-McCarthy book and article: the number of names that McCarthy claimed to have of Communist agents and sympathizers/security risks.

Liberals have claimed that McCarthy couldn't even decide how many names he had of Communists and pro-Communists/security risks. Historian James Drummond explains the matter:

Q. Wasn't it reported that McCarthy used the number 205 in his Wheeling speech, lowered it to 57 later, and then raised it again to 81?​
A. Yes, this was reported, and here is the explanation: In the Wheeling speech, McCarthy referred to a letter that Secretary of State James Byrnes sent to Congressman Adolph Sabath in 1946. In that letter, Byrnes said that State Department security investigators had declared 284 persons unfit to hold jobs in the department because of Communist connections and other reasons, but that only 79 had been discharged, leaving 205 still on the State Department's payroll. McCarthy told his Wheeling audience that while he did not have the names of the 205 mentioned in the Byrnes letter, he did have the names of 57 who were either members of or loyal to the Communist Party. On February 20, 1950, McCarthy gave the Senate information about 81 individuals -- the 57 referred to at Wheeling and 24 others of less importance and about whom the evidence was less conclusive.​
The enemies of McCarthy have juggled these numbers around to make the Senator appear to be erratic and to distract attention from the paramount question: Were there still Alger Hisses in the State Department betraying this nation? McCarthy was not being inconsistent in his use of the numbers; the 57 and 81 were part of the 205 mentioned in the Byrnes letter. (The New American - McCarthyism - Forty questions and answers about Senator Joseph McCarthy - May 11, 1987)​
Sources for further study:

M. Stanton Evans' seminal book _Blacklisted By History: The Untold Story of Senator Joseph McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies_

M. Stanton Evans' Response to Ronald Radosh

Two Defenses of McCarthy by Two 1950s Conservatives

Conservapedia Article on Joseph McCarthy

Summary of Arthur Herman's Book on Joseph McCarthy

40 Questions and Answers About Senator McCarthy

Owen Lattiimore

Solomon Adler

Lauchlin Currie

The Venona Files

​


----------



## gipper (Jan 19, 2020)

Yes our government was infiltrated by Soviet communists, during FDR’s and Dirty Harry’s time. 

Now our government is infiltrated by transnational capitalists, that do the bidding of the billionaires. Our mainstream media is compromised too.


----------



## bullwinkle (Jan 19, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946, had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB. John Abt, the Chief Counsel of the Committee; Charles Kramer, who served on three other Congressional Committees; Allen Rosenberg, who also served on the National Labor Relations Board, Board of Economic Warfare (BEW), the Foreign Economic Administration (FEA), and later argued cases before the United States Supreme Court; and Charles Flato, who served on the BEW and FEA, were all members of the Communist Party USA and were associated with the Soviet-run Comintern.
> 
> ...


A lot of innocent lives were ruined by the McCarthy witch hunt.  

The difference between then and now is that the government wasn't encouraging communist intervention then as it does now.  Can you imagine our President's rage if today's government produced a McCarthy now while he tries so hard to please Vlad?


----------



## there4eyeM (Jan 19, 2020)

It is difficult to say that an open society with guaranteed free speech is 'infiltrated' by people who exercise it. The holding of heterodoxical views is part of the freedom (or, danger, if you will). 
That people with these views worked in government is a reality. The reality is also that those with other views be alert and active as well. In the end, there were also people on the "other" side who had views dissenting from those of a government much more repressive than America's. They contributed immensely to the fall of the Soviet Union (see especially the Farewell case (Farewell Dossier - Wikipedia).
McCarthy was merely another political hack with no originality who profited from pure fear mongering. His excesses caused much pain and served very little if anything to America; in fact, quite the contrary.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 19, 2020)

bullwinkle said:


> A lot of innocent lives were ruined by the McCarthy witch hunt.



Name one. 

What "witch hunt"? He mostly followed up on leads provided by the FBI, the War Department, and State Department security personnel. He had nothing to do with investigating Hollywood communists.  



bullwinkle said:


> The difference between then and now is that the government wasn't encouraging communist intervention then as it does now.  Can you imagine our President's rage if today's government produced a McCarthy now while he tries so hard to please Vlad?



Huh? Trump has been the most anti-Putin/anti-Russian president since Reagan. Trump has sold weapons to Georgia, something that Obama refused to do. Trump has slapped tariffs on Russian steel. Trump has publicly outed NATO nations for failing to spend their treaty-obligated amount on defense, which is hardly comforting to Russia. Trump has based the German-Russian natural gas pipeline. Trump has expelled dozens of Russian diplomats.  Trump has continued to impose sanctions on Russia. Etc., etc., etc.

By the way, if anyone cares to know, Senator McCarthy was pro-civil rights and very pro-Israel. He was also not as staunch in his opposition to New Deal programs as most other Republicans were.


----------



## bullwinkle (Jan 19, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Name one.


I will not, because it was the father of a person I went to high school with.  He was cleared, but it ruined him...and my friend.  They found out who their friends were real fast.  It was High Noon for them.  He lost his job and they had to leave town.  I have no idea what happened to them, but McCarthy AND his Roy Cohn (the corrupt SOB) never bothered to know the destruction they caused with their scatter-gun tactics.
The contempt I feel for Barr is simply a renewed disgust of Cohn.

"Trump has been the most anti-Putin/anti-Russian president since Reagan."

What planet are you from?  Who dropped the sanctions and ouster of diplomats kicked out for election tampering?  Who accepts Putin's lies (ala Helsinki) and disses American intel?  Who endorses Putin's diversion plans, such as blaming election hacking on Ukraine?  Sheesh!


----------



## Crepitus (Jan 19, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946, had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB. John Abt, the Chief Counsel of the Committee; Charles Kramer, who served on three other Congressional Committees; Allen Rosenberg, who also served on the National Labor Relations Board, Board of Economic Warfare (BEW), the Foreign Economic Administration (FEA), and later argued cases before the United States Supreme Court; and Charles Flato, who served on the BEW and FEA, were all members of the Communist Party USA and were associated with the Soviet-run Comintern.
> 
> ...


McCarthy was not only wrong, he was both dangerously insane and a national embarrassment.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 19, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Name one.





bullwinkle said:


> I will not, because it was the father of a person I went to high school with.  He was cleared, but it ruined him...and my friend.  They found out who their friends were real fast.  It was High Noon for them.  He lost his job and they had to leave town.  I have no idea what happened to them, but McCarthy AND his Roy Cohn (the corrupt SOB) never bothered to know the destruction they caused with their scatter-gun tactics. The contempt I feel for Barr is simply a renewed disgust of Cohn.



I don't believe you. You know nothing of what McCarthy did and did not do. He had no law enforcement authority, other than subpoena power, and he was careful to protect identities until there was sufficient evidence. Did you read a single one of the articles that I provide in the OP?  I'm guess no. 



bullwinkle said:


> "Trump has been the most anti-Putin/anti-Russian president since Reagan."





bullwinkle said:


> What planet are you from?



What planet do YOU live on? I notice you didn't deal with any of the anti-Russian actions that Trump has taken that I cited. Not one.



bullwinkle said:


> Who dropped the sanctions and ouster of diplomats kicked out for election tampering?  Who accepts Putin's lies (ala Helsinki) and disses American intel?  Who endorses Putin's diversion plans, such as blaming election hacking on Ukraine?  Sheesh!



"Sheesh" is right. Again, WHAT planet do YOU live on? Trump has imposed sanctions on Russia, as I pointed out. How can you not know this? What about Trump's selling of weapons to Georgia, which Obama was too chicken to do and which Putin bitterly condemned?  How about the dozens of Russian diplomats that Trump has expelled?  How about the tariffs that Trump has slapped on Russian steel?  How about Trump's push to get NATO nations to spend more on defense, which of course Russia opposes? 

Undo your brainwashing and deal with reality.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 19, 2020)

there4eyeM said:


> It is difficult to say that an open society with guaranteed free speech is 'infiltrated' by people who exercise it. The holding of heterodoxical views is part of the freedom (or, danger, if you will).
> That people with these views worked in government is a reality. The reality is also that those with other views be alert and active as well. In the end, there were also people on the "other" side who had views dissenting from those of a government much more repressive than America's. They contributed immensely to the fall of the Soviet Union (see especially the Farewell case (Farewell Dossier - Wikipedia).
> McCarthy was merely another political hack with no originality who profited from pure fear mongering. His excesses caused much pain and served very little if anything to America; in fact, quite the contrary.


They were communist spies, you fucking dumbass, and they were in sensitive government positions.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 19, 2020)

Crepitus said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> ...


Wrong and wrong.  He saved this country from communism.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 19, 2020)

bullwinkle said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> ...


It wasn’t just suspected Communists but suspected homosexuals that had their lives ruined

All on little evidence other than a Jewish name or rumors


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 19, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> bullwinkle said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...



That's complete bullshit.  The Venona papers proved they were all communist spies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2020)

I want to apologize to everyone. I bitch-slapped Axis Mikey on another thread by mocking his crazy talk about how there were commies everywhere in the 1940's. 







mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946,* had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB*.



Axis Mikey, how could that be possible when the KGB wasn't formed until 1954?  Did they have a fleet of Secret Tardises where they went back into time and corrupted people in the past?  







mikegriffith1 said:


> No credible scholar now denies that Soviet agents and sympathizers penetrated into the highest levels of the U.S. government in the 1930s and 1940s, including the White House and the State Department.



Um, yeah. So what?   The thing was, the Soviets were our ALLIES at the time.  This was the real problem with the evil of McCarthyism.  We relied on the Soviets to essentially fight the war in Europe for us, and then we all panicked when they refused to give the countries they conquered back.   Of course, the reason why we HAD a war in Europe to start with was because we kind of removed ourselves from World Affairs after WWI and ignored what Mikey's Axis Heroes were doing.. until THIS shit happened. 




This was totally justified according to Axis Mikey because we were a bunch of meany-heads to the Japanese and wouldn't sell them stuff because they were murdering the shit out of the rest of Asia. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> I don't believe you. You know nothing of what McCarthy did and did not do. He had no law enforcement authority, other than subpoena power, and he was careful to protect identities until there was sufficient evidence. Did you read a single one of the articles that I provide in the OP? I'm guess no.



Kind of no point to,  McCarthy was a guy who led a classic witch hunt, and then people figured out there weren't actually witches and we burned a lot of people who didn't have it coming.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2020)

The scary thing was that a Drunk like McCarthy, aided and abetted by a corrupt closeted homosexual like Roy Cohn, could have ruined as many lives as they did. 

Medical Mystery: What killed ‘Red Scare’ Sen. Joseph McCarthy?

_Sen. Joseph McCarthy was known for his excessive alcohol consumption, and numerous witnesses reported seeing him drunk on the Senate floor and hobbled by hangovers. It was also suggested that McCarthy had a personality disorder.

Some staff and observers grew to fear how McCarthy's verbal recklessness would get even worse in afternoon Senate hearings after his cocktail-soaked lunches.

McCarthy often interrupted proceedings and diverted the discussion entirely off-topic. One report described McCarthy’s behavior with words such as “inexcusable,” “reprehensible,” “vulgar,” and “insulting.” The legendary Edward R. Murrow’s See It Now reports on TV exposed and attacked his methods before millions, helping prompt the senator’s downfall.

Blood tests revealed elevated liver enzymes and abnormal liver function. The diagnosis was severe alcoholic hepatitis, inflammation of the liver due to excessive drinking. It usually is found in association with fatty liver (steatonecrosis), an early stage of disease that, if not controlled by medication and sobriety, leads to cirrhosis.

Signs of alcoholic hepatitis include fatigue, loss of appetite, fluid accumulation in the abdominal cavity, and edema of lower extremities. Severe liver inflammation may be associated with jaundice due to elevated bilirubin levels; blood coagulation is affected and can lead to severe hemorrhage._

Then again, I wonder how much Alcoholism affects Axis Mikey's posts.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 20, 2020)

McCarthy was a liar and a bully

History has him pegged correctly


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 20, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> It wasn’t just suspected Communists but suspected homosexuals that had their lives ruined. All on little evidence other than a Jewish name or rumors



Surely you can cite at least one example of this, right? Name one.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 20, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> I want to apologize to everyone. I bitch-slapped Axis Mikey on another thread by mocking his crazy talk about how there were commies everywhere in the 1940's.



Yes, folks, do go read that thread--the Nanking Massacre thread--and see what a nutjob this JoeB131 is. You'll see that he believes that Mao Tsetung brought prosperity and stability to China after he took over, that it's unfair to "demonize" Joseph Stalin, that the Communists merely got their "fair share" of Asia after the war. No, I'm not kidding. Go read the thread.



mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946,* had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB*.





JoeB131 said:


> Axis Mikey, how could that be possible when the KGB wasn't formed until 1954?  Did they have a fleet of Secret Tardises where they went back into time and corrupted people in the past?



Sigh. . . .  Yes, technically, I should have said "on behalf of Soviet intelligence agencies," as I did earlier in the paragraph. And, yes, the KGB was not formed until 1954--it was more a reorganization and renaming than a formation. But, you are correct here. Now, how about you deal with the fact that the Venona files show that over 300 people in our government were cooperating with working for/helping Soviet intelligence agencies?



mikegriffith1 said:


> No credible scholar now denies that Soviet agents and sympathizers penetrated into the highest levels of the U.S. government in the 1930s and 1940s, including the White House and the State Department.





JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah. So what?   The thing was, the Soviets were our ALLIES at the time.



LOL!  You see, folks, I was not kidding about this whack job. So because FDR chose to count the murderous Soviet regime as "allies," then "so what" if they were spying on us like crazy, stealing our secrets, raping Eastern Europe, murdering tens of thousands of their own citizens during the war, etc., etc. Yeah, "so what"?!



JoeB131 said:


> This was the real problem with the evil of McCarthyism.  We relied on the Soviets to essentially fight the war in Europe for us, and then we all panicked when they refused to give the countries they conquered back.   Of course, the reason why we HAD a war in Europe to start with was because we kind of removed ourselves from World Affairs after WWI and ignored what Mikey's Axis Heroes were doing.. until THIS stuff happened.



No, the "real problem" is that you're an ignorant, pro-Communist clown who has no clue what he's talking about. McCarthy did not say a word about Communist penetration into our government until 1948, so your mythical--and Soviet-like--version of WW II does not prove anything about the alleged "evil of McCarthyism."

Your nonsense here is a repeat of the same nonsense you posted in the Nanking Massacre thread. I refuted it point by point, but, as usual, you simply ignore refutations and just keep repeating your spurious claims.

And, I see you're still repeating your juvenile, obscene claim that I'm somehow pro-Axis, that the Axis nations are my heroes, blah, blah, blah. Do you keep repeating this lie--and you know it's a lie--in order to divert attention away from all the ugly, crude comments you have made about Jews and Israel on USMB?



JoeB131 said:


> This [the attack on Pearl Harbor] was totally justified according to Axis Mikey because we were a bunch of meany-heads to the Japanese and wouldn't sell them stuff because they were murdering the shit out of the rest of Asia.



Oh, heck, you have me beat by millions of deaths: About 3,000 Americans were killed in the Pearl Harbor attack, but you claim that Mao's murdering of over 30 million people and his hundreds of forced-labor camps brought prosperity and stability to China. You've said that it was a good thing that the Communists took over China, North Korea, and North Vietnam. You've said that, gee, those poor little ole innocent Communists merely got their "fair share" of Asia after the war. Yeah, you bet.



mikegriffith1 said:


> I don't believe you. You know nothing of what McCarthy did and did not do. He had no law enforcement authority, other than subpoena power, and he was careful to protect identities until there was sufficient evidence. Did you read a single one of the articles that I provide in the OP? I'm guessing no.





JoeB131 said:


> Kind of no point to,



LOL! Right, kind of "no point" in reading both sides on an issue so that you know what you're talking about, right?! Kind of "no point" in reading anything other than sources that you know agree with what you want to believe, right?! Yeah, of course. That's exactly the attitude of all uneducated clowns who troll Internet discussion forums and make fools of themselves in the process.



JoeB131 said:


> McCarthy was a guy who led a classic witch hunt, and then people figured out there weren't actually witches and we burned a lot of people who didn't have it coming.



Oh, you don't know what McCarthy did or did not do, because you've obviously read next to nothing on the subject. The sum total of your "research" on McCarthy probably consists of the movie _Good Night, and Good Luck_ and a few puff liberal propaganda articles on the Internet, at the most.

I know you've already said there's "no point" in reading any evidence that McCarthy was in fact correct most of the time, but if you ever grow up and decide to engage in some critical thinking and do some real research, you'll find plenty of such evidence in the links in my OP.

Perhaps you could name just one or two people whom McCarthy "burned . . . who didn't have it coming"? How about just two names of such people? You claim there were "a lot" of these people, so surely you can name two innocent people whom McCarthy "burned."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Sigh. . . . Yes, technically, I should have said "on behalf of Soviet intelligence agencies," as I did earlier in the paragraph. And, yes, the KGB was not formed until 1954--it was more a reorganization and renaming than a formation. But, you are correct here. Now, how about you deal with the fact that the Venona files show that over 300 people in our government were cooperating with working for/helping Soviet intelligence agencies?



I don't know.  I suspect the Time Lords were involved somehow. 

Seriously, though.  WHy do you think the Verona papers were accurate? Maybe they were a Russian disinformation campaign.   Maybe there was some low-level guy telling Stalin that they had guys on the inside because they were worried Stalin might replace them if they didn't show some progress of all the rubles being spent. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Oh, heck, you have me beat by millions of deaths: About 3,000 Americans were killed in the Pearl Harbor attack, but you claim that Mao's murdering of over 30 million people and his hundreds of forced-labor camps brought prosperity and stability to China. You've said that it was a good thing that the Communists took over China, North Korea, and North Vietnam. You've said that, gee, those poor little ole innocent Communists merely got their "fair share" of Asia after the war. Yeah, you bet.



Um, yeah, you bet.  You see, again- INTERNAL PROBLEM, not ours.  so let's say 30 million Chinese died of various causes under Mao's rule... Um.  Okay.  1.3 Billion Chinese today who live lives of prosperity their ancestors would never have dreamed of.  So you know there's that.  Should point out that 20 milllion Chinese died in the Taiping Rebellion, because some nut thought he was Jesus' brother.  

Not saying Communism is a good thing.  I'm saying - if that's what they picked, that's their choice.  I'm sorry this is unclear to you.  

If the Commies took over those places, it was because of the Nationalism caused by imperial excesses by Europe, America and finally, the worst of the worst, Japan. 

But, no, some government worker went to a Communist rally once in college.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> I know you've already said there's "no point" in reading any evidence that McCarthy was in fact correct most of the time, but if you ever grow up and decide to engage in some critical thinking and do some real research, you'll find plenty of such evidence in the links in my OP.



Guy, your critical thinking.

Joseph Smith was talking to God
OJ was innocent
The Japanese were swell guys in WWII and you don't know why all of Asia STILL hate them 80 years later. 
Slavery wasn't that bad and the South was in the right.
And now... McCarthy was just a misunderstood guys when he and Roy Cohn destroyed the lives of hundreds of people. 

Hey, Roy did make the AIDS quilt, though.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 20, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Sigh. . . . Yes, technically, I should have said "on behalf of Soviet intelligence agencies," as I did earlier in the paragraph. And, yes, the KGB was not formed until 1954--it was more a reorganization and renaming than a formation. But, you are correct here. Now, how about you deal with the fact that the Venona files show that over 300 people in our government were cooperating with working for/helping Soviet intelligence agencies?





JoeB131 said:


> I don't know.  I suspect the Time Lords were involved somehow.
> 
> Seriously, though.  WHy do you think the Verona papers were accurate? Maybe they were a Russian disinformation campaign.   Maybe there was some low-level guy telling Stalin that they had guys on the inside because they were worried Stalin might replace them if they didn't show some progress of all the rubles being spent.



Why do I think the Venona papers are accurate? Is that a serious question? Is there no end to your ignorant drivel? Do you know what the Venona decrypts are and how they were obtained?



mikegriffith1 said:


> Oh, heck, you have me beat by millions of deaths: About 3,000 Americans were killed in the Pearl Harbor attack, but you claim that Mao's murdering of over 30 million people and his hundreds of forced-labor camps brought prosperity and stability to China. You've said that it was a good thing that the Communists took over China, North Korea, and North Vietnam. You've said that, gee, those poor little ole innocent Communists merely got their "fair share" of Asia after the war. Yeah, you bet.





JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, you bet.  You see, again- INTERNAL PROBLEM, not ours.  so let's say 30 million Chinese died of various causes under Mao's rule... Um.  Okay.  1.3 Billion Chinese today who live lives of prosperity their ancestors would never have dreamed of.  So you know there's that.  Should point out that 20 milllion Chinese died in the Taiping Rebellion, because some nut thought he was Jesus' brother.
> 
> Not saying Communism is a good thing.



Oh, no, no, no, no, you lying dog. You have clearly said--in the Nanking Massacre forum--that Mao brought prosperity and stability to China, that Red China was better off than Free China on Taiwan, that it was a good thing that the Communists won and that the Nationalists lost, and that the Communists got their "fair share" of Asia. You said those things several times in the Nanking Massacre thread.



JoeB131 said:


> I'm saying - if that's what they picked, that's their choice.  I'm sorry this is unclear to you.
> 
> If the Commies took over those places, it was because of the Nationalism caused by imperial excesses by Europe, America and finally, the worst of the worst, Japan.



I've already corrected and debunked you on this PRC nonsense. As I've documented thoroughly for you--including two Senate reports on the loss of China--the Communists won (1) because Truman and Marshall cut off aid to the Nationalists at crucial times, (2) because Truman and Marshall imposed treasonous ceasefires that allowed the Communists to avoid destruction, (3) because Truman and Marshall insisted that the Nationalists include the Communists in the government, and (4) because the Soviets gave the Chinese Communists tons of weapons and ammo.



JoeB131 said:


> But, no, some government worker went to a Communist rally once in college.



Yeah, uh-huh. This is a standard talking point of the anti-McCarthy mythmakers. Can you name a single case where McCarthy recommended charges against someone merely for having once attended a Communist rally in college?



mikegriffith1 said:


> I know you've already said there's "no point" in reading any evidence that McCarthy was in fact correct most of the time, but if you ever grow up and decide to engage in some critical thinking and do some real research, you'll find plenty of such evidence in the links in my OP.





JoeB131 said:


> Guy, your critical thinking.
> 
> Joseph Smith was talking to God
> OJ was innocent
> ...



So I take it you're not going to provide the names of just two people whose lives were destroyed by false accusations by McCarthy? You just said above that McCarthy "destroyed the lives of hundreds of people." In my previous reply, I asked you to provide the names of just two people whose lives were unjustly wrecked by McCarthy. I notice you snipped out that request. Why was that? Because you can't name two such people?

As for your warped, PRC version of China's history, allow me to just note that you have once again made the obscene claim that the Chinese people were and are better off because of Mao's murderous, barbaric rule.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Why do I think the Venona papers are accurate? Is that a serious question? Is there no end to your ignorant drivel? Do you know what the Venona decrypts are and how they were obtained?



Don't care.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> Oh, no, no, no, no, you lying dog. You have clearly said--in the Nanking Massacre forum--that Mao brought prosperity and stability to China, that Red China was better off than Free China on Taiwan, that it was a good thing that the Communists won and that the Nationalists lost, and that the Communists got their "fair share" of Asia. You said those things several times in the Nanking Massacre thread.



"Free China"... Um, Taiwan was a military fascist dictatorship propped up by American dollars after Peanut fled there. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> I've already corrected and debunked you on this PRC nonsense. As I've documented thoroughly for you--including two Senate reports on the loss of China--the Communists won (1) because Truman and Marshall cut off aid to the Nationalists at crucial times, (2) because Truman and Marshall imposed treasonous ceasefires that allowed the Communists to avoid destruction, (3) because Truman and Marshall insisted that the Nationalists include the Communists in the government, and (4) because the Soviets gave the Chinese Communists tons of weapons and ammo.



Yes, you repeated your McCarthyist/Bircher nonsense. But here's the thing, which you'd never know because like most members of your cult, you've probably never put on a uniform.   You can give a man a gun, but you can't make him fight. The problem with the Nationalists during the war, is that 60% of their conscripts deserted at the first opportunity.  This is why Marshall and Truman had no confidence in Peanut.  They had watched him piss away American money for a decade. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> So I take it you're not going to provide the names of just two people whose lives were destroyed by false accusations by McCarthy? You just said above that McCarthy "destroyed the lives of hundreds of people." In my previous reply, I asked you to provide the names of just two people whose lives were unjustly wrecked by McCarthy. I notice you snipped out that request. Why was that? Because you can't name two such people?



Well, we could talk about all the people in Hollywood that were blacklisted... 

Hollywood blacklist - Wikipedia

Ten people convicted of contempt of Congress because they refused to name names. 

We can also talk about Schoolteacher Ann Hale. 

How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teacher - The Boston Globe

Fuck off and die, you Mormon Fascist (but I repeat myself) fuck.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> As for your warped, PRC version of China's history, allow me to just note that you have once again made the obscene claim that the Chinese people were and are better off because of Mao's murderous, barbaric rule.



Of course they were. They went from a shattered country ruled by warlords, living in abject poverty, being looted by foreigners, to a world power.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 21, 2020)

I wanted to come back to these howlers from JoeB131 because I didn't have time to do them justice in my reply yesterday.



JoeB131 said:


> _Not saying Communism is a good thing_. _I'm saying - if that's what they picked, that's their choice_.  I'm sorry this is unclear to you. _If the Commies took over those places, it was because of the Nationalism caused by imperial excesses_ by Europe, America and finally, the worst of the worst, Japan.



Oh, so the people of China, North Korea, and North Vietnam "picked" communism?!  Uh, well, this might be what your PRC handlers have taught you, but most of us here in the free world know that Communist rule was imposed on those populations by deception and coercion, and when those people began to realize that the Communists' promises were false, the Communists had to resort to vicious brutality to maintain control. 

-- That's why the Communists found it necessary to rule with an iron hand in the areas of China that they occupied before and during the war. 

-- That's why the vast majority of Chinese POWs chose to be sent to Taiwan, i.e., Free China, instead of staying in Red China after the war. 

-- That's why Mao had to murder tens of millions of Chinese and force millions of others to work in forced-labor camps after he came to power. 

-- That's why Mao and this thugs had to operate massive naval patrols along Red China's coast in the Taiwan Strait and in the waters between Red China and Hong Kong to try to keep their unfortunate subjects from trying to swim to Taiwan and Hong Kong. 

-- That's why the Communist thugs in North Korea had to quickly impose a police state on the country to maintain their control. 

-- That's why hundreds of thousands of North Koreans near the 38th Parallel risked their lives to try to flee to South Korea during the Korean War.

-- That's why North Vietnam had to use large numbers of troops on its southern border to keep its subjects from fleeing to South Vietnam during the war.

-- That's why some 800,000 Vietnamese fled Vietnam in all kinds of boats to escape to freedom after the Communists took over, and why about 1.2 million of Vietnamese fled the country by other means. Many more would have fled if they had been able to do so. 

Finally, to repeat what I've already documented for you--including two Senate reports on the loss of China--the Communists won in China (1) because Truman and Marshall cut off aid to the Nationalists at a crucial time, (2) because Truman and Marshall imposed treasonous ceasefires that allowed the Communists to avoid destruction, (3) because Truman and Marshall insisted that the Nationalists include the Communists in the government, and (4) because the Soviets gave the Chinese Communists tons of weapons and ammo.


----------



## whitehall (Jan 21, 2020)

McCarthy might have been a "reckless muckraker" but he was just a senator. Democrats were in charge and the Truman democrats logically thought that Communism was a threat to America. HUAC was a Truman democrat majority operation and at their peak they still had no power to blacklist anyone. Hollywood fired it's own when they thought they would lose money and (you almost gotta laugh) managed to blame the whole unfortunate era on a single republican senator.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 21, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> So I take it you're not going to provide the names of just two people whose lives were destroyed by false accusations by McCarthy? You just said above that McCarthy "destroyed the lives of hundreds of people." In my previous reply, I asked you to provide the names of just two people whose lives were unjustly wrecked by McCarthy. I notice you snipped out that request. Why was that? Because you can't name two such people?





JoeB131 said:


> Well, we could talk about all the people in Hollywood that were blacklisted...
> 
> Hollywood blacklist - Wikipedia
> 
> Ten people convicted of contempt of Congress because they refused to name names.



LOL!!!!!  If you had bothered to even read that article--the article that you cited--_you would have discovered that Joseph McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood blacklists!_ Nothing. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. The blacklists resulted from investigations by the House Un-American Activities Committee.

If you had bothered to read the articles I provide in the OP, you would have already known this.



JoeB131 said:


> We can also talk about Schoolteacher Ann Hale.
> 
> How the Red Scare destroyed a small-town teac433her - The Boston Globe



Yeah, let's talk about that: _McCarthy had nothing to do with Ann Hale's case! Nothing._ Do you even read articles before you cite them, or do you just go by the article titles and assume they support your position? Did they not teach basic research skills at the college where you supposedly got your history degree?

Furthermore, let's take a brief look at Hale's case. Hale's views caused concern among her friends and neighbors; they considered her views to be anti-American, and it was they who  contacted her school and expressed concern. The school committee then conducted an investigation and concluded that she had lied to them about key issues about which they had asked her.

So, I ask you again: Can you name two people whose lives were ruined by false charges made by Senator McCarthy?


----------



## Tax Man (Jan 21, 2020)

So joe the assclown had congressional hearings that I watched on TV and he was a real dipshit. All he ever did do was wrong for humanity.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 21, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946, had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB. John Abt, the Chief Counsel of the Committee; Charles Kramer, who served on three other Congressional Committees; Allen Rosenberg, who also served on the National Labor Relations Board, Board of Economic Warfare (BEW), the Foreign Economic Administration (FEA), and later argued cases before the United States Supreme Court; and Charles Flato, who served on the BEW and FEA, were all members of the Communist Party USA and were associated with the Soviet-run Comintern.
> 
> ...



You just never tire of posting shit that you and your RW radical pals dig out of your asses, do you?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Oh, so the people of China, North Korea, and North Vietnam "picked" communism?! Uh, well, this might be what your PRC handlers have taught you, but most of us here in the free world know that Communist rule was imposed on those populations by deception and coercion, and when those people began to realize that the Communists' promises were false, the Communists had to resort to vicious brutality to maintain control.



Or this "Brutality" often happened in countries that had undergone years of civil war/foreign invasion, and life was already cheapened.   

The reality, you stupid fascist fuck, is that the people we backed were corrupt and incompetent and often quislings for foreign invaders. THAT'S WHY THEY LOST.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> -- That's why the Communists



Oh, boy, more Bircher shit...  


mikegriffith1 said:


> -- That's why North Vietnam had to use large numbers of troops on its southern border to keep its subjects from fleeing to South Vietnam during the war.



Yeah, funny thing.  ONce we stopped propping Saigon up, they were gone in 55 days.   For Sale, 500,000 ARVN rifles.  Never fired, only dropped once.  

The problem you seem to have is you confuse why the Communists won.  It's not because the people of China or N. Vietnam (North Korea is a different case) suddenly loved them some Karl Marx. 

It was because the people who they were fighting against were seen as tools of the west or quislings...  



mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL!!!!! If you had bothered to even read that article--the article that you cited--_you would have discovered that Joseph McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood blacklists!_ Nothing. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. The blacklists resulted from investigations by the House Un-American Activities Committee.
> 
> If you had bothered to read the articles I provide in the OP, you would have already known this.



According to you, Drunken Joe was the Piano Player at the whorehouse who had no idea what was going on upstairs.  

There's a reason why the movement of the hysterical Red Scare of the 1950's is called "McCarthyism" today and not "Nixonism".  Because Tricky Dick knew there were sensible limits..


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 21, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn’t just suspected Communists but suspected homosexuals that had their lives ruined. All on little evidence other than a Jewish name or rumors
> ...



Here you go.....
And don’t call me Shirley

Lavender scare - Wikipedia


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 22, 2020)

By the way, regarding Ann Hale, whom liberals portray as an innocent victim of paranoid conservatives, and whom JoeB131 erroneously identified as a victim of McCarthy's allegedly false charges, let us consider what a what special commission established by the state of Massachusetts said about her. I’m not talking about the local school committee that concluded she was lying and that she deserved to be fired, after some of her friends and neighbors expressed concerns to the school about her views. I’m talking about a special commission set up by one of the most liberal states in the country. Here is what that commission had to say about poor little ole’ Miss Hale:

Miss Ann Hale is a native of Massachusetts. She has a long history of activity within the Communist Party. This fact was established during the course of our investigation by admissions of Miss Hale herself and by our own investigation.​
On March 31, 1954, Miss Hale appeared as a witness before this Commission in Executive Session. At that time she admitted that she had been a member of the Communist Party, that she joined it approximately in 1938 and had continued to be an active member of it until approximately 1951. She said that she never formally resigned from the Party, but just dropped out. She admitted that she had held various offices in branches of the Communist Party, had been chairman, secretary, treasurer, literary distributor of various branches at various times in New York State and in Massachusetts; that she had been a subscriber and had sold the “Daily Worker” and the “Sunday Worker”, had distributed various Marxist texts; had held the office of chairman, and also of literary director of the Harvard Square branch of the Communist Party; had led discussions as chairman of Communist meetings on the doctrines of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin; had been a member of the Rubber branch of the Communist Party in Cambridge; had frequented the headquarters of the Communist Party of Massachusetts when it was in the Little Building in Boston; and had attended classes there on Communist matters. She did not invoke the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution or the Twelfth Article of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights at the Executive Hearing, but she did invoke the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and refused to give the names of any one with whom she was associated in the Communist Party in Massachusetts, or disclose the place of the meetings.​
At the time of her appearance in the Executive Session, she was then a teacher in the second grade in the public schools at Wayland, Mass.​
At a public hearing before this Commission on January 7, 1955, Miss Hale again appeared as a witness, and at that time availed herself of the privileges of the Twelfth Article of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and refused to answer questions concerning any of her Communist affiliations, or association in other organizations.​
At the time of her second appearance before this Commission she gave her then temporary address at 35 Fayston Street, Dorchester. She testified that 35 Fayston Street, Dorchester, was the home of Daniel Boone Schirmer, but declined to answer whether or not she knew Daniel Boone Schirmer. Mr. Schirmer was formerly the head of the Communist Party in Massachusetts, whose address is now unknown and whom this Commission has been unable to locate. His wife, Peggy Schirmer, is at present maintaining the residence.​
Our investigators have observed Miss Hale during the years 1954 and 1955 as being very active in the Massachusetts Committee for the Bill of Rights, and in that organization co-operating with Nathaniel Mills, Herbert Zimmerman, Ann Burlak, Edith Abber, Frank Collier. Miss Hale is also active in the Progressive Party and in promoting efforts to win amnesty for the Smith Act “victims.”​
We have received creditable evidence that Miss Hale became a member of the Communist Party in New York City in 1938, and that in 1943 she attended the Communist Party training school in New York; that she was an officer of the Communist Party branch at Yorkville, New York; and that she also held office in the Communist Party Artists and Professional Group, New York City. In addition to the activities to which she testified herself in Massachusetts, we have also received creditable evidence that she has been a member of the Boston Freedom of the Press Committee, the Massachusetts Council of Arts and Sciences and Professions, and that she was a member of the Executive Board of the Liberal Citizens of Massachusetts. (_Interim Report of the Special Commission on Communism, Subversive Activities, and Related Matters Within the Commonwealth_, Commonwealth of Massachusetts: June 1955   pp. 111-113, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/146783256.pdf)​


----------



## bluzman61 (Jan 22, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> By the way, regarding Ann Hale, whom liberals portray as an innocent victim of paranoid conservatives, let us consider what a what special commission established by the state of Massachusetts said about her. I’m not talking about the local school committee that concluded she was lying and that she deserved to be fired, after some of her friends and neighbors expressed concerns to the school about her views. I’m talking about a special commission set up by one of the most liberal states in the country. Here is what that commission had to say about poor little ole’ Miss Hale:
> 
> Miss Ann Hale is a native of Massachusetts. She has a long history of activity within the Communist Party. This fact was established during the course of our investigation by admissions of Miss Hale herself and by our own investigation.​
> On March 31, 1954, Miss Hale appeared as a witness before this Commission in Executive Session. At that time she admitted that she had been a member of the Communist Party, that she joined it approximately in 1938 and had continued to be an active member of it until approximately 1951. She said that she never formally resigned from the Party, but just dropped out. She admitted that she had held various offices in branches of the Communist Party, had been chairman, secretary, treasurer, literary distributor of various branches at various times in New York State and in Massachusetts; that she had been a subscriber and had sold the “Daily Worker” and the “Sunday Worker”, had distributed various Marxist texts; had held the office of chairman, and also of literary director of the Harvard Square branch of the Communist Party; had led discussions as chairman of Communist meetings on the doctrines of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin; had been a member of the Rubber branch of the Communist Party in Cambridge; had frequented the headquarters of the Communist Party of Massachusetts when it was in the Little Building in Boston; and had attended classes there on Communist matters. She did not invoke the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution or the Twelfth Article of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights at the Executive Hearing, but she did invoke the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and refused to give the names of any one with whom she was associated in the Communist Party in Massachusetts, or disclose the place of the meetings.​
> ...


Thanks for the info.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 22, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Umm, I didn't see a single example in your linked article of anyone whom McCarthy falsely accused of being a homosexual and who then had their life ruined because of it. Did you read the article or just skim over it? 

Furthermore, the justified and verified fear that homosexuals were vulnerable to blackmail and compromise by foreign security services began long before McCarthy and continued long after him. Heck, when I joined the military and had to apply for a security clearance in 1982, one of the questions on the screening form involved homosexual conduct, and if you answered in the affirmative, you were disqualified from obtaining a clearance.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> By the way, regarding Ann Hale, whom liberals portray as an innocent victim of paranoid conservatives, and whom JoeB131 erroneously identified as a victim of McCarthy's allegedly false charges, let us consider what a what special commission established by the state of Massachusetts said about her. I’m not talking about the local school committee that concluded she was lying and that she deserved to be fired, after some of her friends and neighbors expressed concerns to the school about her views. I’m talking about a special commission set up by one of the most liberal states in the country. Here is what that commission had to say about poor little ole’ Miss Hale:



Uh, guy, when someone starts a riot, they are responsible for anyone who gets hurt.  Drunken Joe McCarthy instigated the riot that ruined the life of Ms. Hale. 

This is fucking America, dude.  People can belong to whatever political party they want.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Umm, I didn't see a single example in your linked article of anyone whom McCarthy falsely accused of being a homosexual and who then had their life ruined because of it. Did you read the article or just skim over it?
> 
> Furthermore, the justified and verified fear that homosexuals were vulnerable to blackmail and compromise by foreign security services began long before McCarthy and continued long after him. Heck, when I joined the military and had to apply for a security clearance in 1982, one of the questions on the screening form involved homosexual conduct, and if you answered in the affirmative, you were disqualified from obtaining a clearance.



So when they asked you about being a Nazi, you just lied on  your security clearance form?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 22, 2020)

bullwinkle said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> ...



Name three innocent people ruined by McCarthy


----------



## bullwinkle (Jan 22, 2020)

CrusaderFrank said:


> bullwinkle said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...


Frank, I only know one family and I will not name them or remind them of those sad days simply to satisfy your lust for Stalinistic power-grabbers.  But Dalton Trumbo and Larry Parks are a couple.  And as I recall, Gary Cooper played the stooge and named a co-worker or two, then got criticized by the rabid McCarthyites for his role in High noon.  They turn on you like sidewinders.

Remembering McCarthy is like deja vu of today's politics.  Your admiration of him explains to me why you are so adamant to not see Trump's corruption and vindictiveness.  And that is why we are polar opposites about the man...I remember the original...and Roy Cohn too.

Maybe this will help you understand an opposite view like mine:  https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/edwardrmurrowtomccarthy.htm


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 23, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> By the way, regarding Ann Hale, whom liberals portray as an innocent victim of paranoid conservatives, and whom JoeB131 erroneously identified as a victim of McCarthy's allegedly false charges, let us consider what a what special commission established by the state of Massachusetts said about her. I’m not talking about the local school committee that concluded she was lying and that she deserved to be fired, after some of her friends and neighbors expressed concerns to the school about her views. I’m talking about a special commission set up by one of the most liberal states in the country. Here is what that commission had to say about poor little ole’ Miss Hale:





JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, when someone starts a riot, they are responsible for anyone who gets hurt.  Drunken Joe McCarthy instigated the riot that ruined the life of Ms. Hale.



LOL!!!!  Ah!  Okay!  Uh-huh!  What "riot"?!  In other words, since you can't name a single person whom McCarthy ruined with false charges, you have to resort to guilt by an alleged indirect association. 

What "riot" "ruined the life of Ms. Hale"?!  Hey?  Even residents of a very liberal state who knew her became concerned enough about her views that they expressed their concerns to the school, and the school committee concluded she was lying and deserved to be fired. Then, a state commission--again, in one of the most liberal states in the Union--investigated her and found plenty of incriminating evidence against her. 



JoeB131 said:


> This is America, dude.  People can belong to whatever political party they want.



Uh, "dude," you have no clue what America is and is not. In America, you are not "free" to join a political party that advocates the overthrow of the U.S. Government and that is financed and controlled by a hostile foreign government. No, you have no "right" to belong to such a party, much less to belong to such a party and also to expect to continue to profit from our economic system. Nope. It doesn't work that way.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 23, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, regarding Ann Hale, whom liberals portray as an innocent victim of paranoid conservatives, and whom JoeB131 erroneously identified as a victim of McCarthy's allegedly false charges, let us consider what a what special commission established by the state of Massachusetts said about her. I’m not talking about the local school committee that concluded she was lying and that she deserved to be fired, after some of her friends and neighbors expressed concerns to the school about her views. I’m talking about a special commission set up by one of the most liberal states in the country. Here is what that commission had to say about poor little ole’ Miss Hale:
> ...


You do have a right to join such political parties, but you don't also have the right to work in sensitive government positions after you do.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 23, 2020)

bullwinkle said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > bullwinkle said:
> ...


Dalton Trumbo was subpoenaed by HUAC, not by McCarthy, moron.  he joined the communist party in 1943.

Larry Parks was blacklisted by HUAC, not Joseph McCarthy, and he admitted to joining the CPUSA.

So far you're batting 0.000


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Jan 23, 2020)

Isnt Macarthyism an assault on the first amendment ?


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 23, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Isnt Macarthyism an assault on the first amendment ?


Nope.  No one has a right to a government job in a sensitive position.


----------



## Tax Man (Jan 23, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...


So you lied!


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Jan 23, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Isnt Macarthyism an assault on the first amendment ?
> ...


So only people with approved political views can get jobs ?


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Jan 23, 2020)

What freedom do you have if you cant have political beliefs or join political parties ?


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 23, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


You can't be a member of the Communist Party and get a sensitive government job.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 23, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> What freedom do you have if you cant have political beliefs or join political parties ?


You can't have a sensitive government job if you join a party that advocates overthrowing the government.

Do you actually believe that should be allowed?


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Jan 23, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Where does it say that in your constitution ?


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 23, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


It doesn't say anything about driving under the influence in my Constitution either.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL!!!! Ah! Okay! Uh-huh! What "riot"?! In other words, since you can't name a single person whom McCarthy ruined with false charges, you have to resort to guilt by an alleged indirect association.
> 
> What "riot" "ruined the life of Ms. Hale"?! Hey? Even residents of a very liberal state who knew her became concerned enough about her views that they expressed their concerns to the school, and the school committee concluded she was lying and deserved to be fired. Then, a state commission--again, in one of the most liberal states in the Union--investigated her and found plenty of incriminating evidence against her.



"incriminating evidence" on her "views"?  Buddy, you better be careful.  When there is a post-Trump reckoning, they might go after the Alt-Right types for their "views" and you've left a lot of incriminating evidence with your pro-Axis postings about WWII. 

Shit, whatever Mormon Shithole you live in might decide to offer you up as sacrificial lamb. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Uh, "dude," you have no clue what America is and is not. In America, you are not "free" to join a political party that advocates the overthrow of the U.S. Government and that is financed and controlled by a hostile foreign government. No, you have no "right" to belong to such a party, much less to belong to such a party and also to expect to continue to profit from our economic system. Nope. It doesn't work that way.



Show me in the constitution where it says that?   Thanks.  

Sorry, man, there is a reason why McCarthyism is considered a pejorative to this very day, and why even Republicans turned on him.


----------



## sparky (Jan 24, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Did you *read a single one of the articles* that I provide in the OP? I'm guess no.





mikegriffith1 said:


> I know you've already said there's "no point" in reading any evidence that McCarthy was in fact correct most of the time, but if you ever grow up and decide to *engage in some critical thinking and do some real research*, you'll find plenty of such evidence in the links in my OP



Joe McCarthy would be *proud* of what we've become

The Patriot Act, TSA, Homeland Security, NSA, and the plain fact that our governance lacks _clarity _and _transparency_

We are far less '_free_' now, than we've ever been....

We have the _largest_ most_ intrusive_ governance in our _history _

Our 4th is a _joke_

Given our immense RW _love_ of fascism that's blossomed in recent times, i'd say Senator Joe McCarthy would have a _fair shot_ at the '20





New film shows how Trump and Joseph McCarthy exploited the same media weaknesses to gain power

~S~


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Jan 24, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


But it does mention freedom of speech. Macarthyism is against that.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 24, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


You can say whatever you like, but that doesn't mean you also get to work in sensitive government positions.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 24, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> You do have a right to join such political parties, but you don't also have the right to work in sensitive government positions after you do.



If you join a political party that advocates overthrowing the government and that is backed by a hostile foreign power, you could be prosecuted, and/or have your citizenship revoked, and/or deported.

Anyway, I certainly would not want my kids being taught by someone who joined such a party or even watered-down version of such a party.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 24, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> But it does mention freedom of speech. Macarthyism is against that.



You're just repeating what you were taught in our bankrupt public school system and what you've heard over the media and seen in Hollywood movies. 

McCarthy had no problem with freedom of speech. Can you cite an example where he ever tried to curb someone's legitimate First Amendment rights?


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 24, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Dalton Trumbo was subpoenaed by HUAC, not by McCarthy, moron.  he joined the communist party in 1943.
> 
> Larry Parks was blacklisted by HUAC, not Joseph McCarthy, and he admitted to joining the CPUSA.
> 
> So far you're batting 0.000



Yeap. The problem is that these liberals simply refuse, utterly refuse, to read the other side of the story, to read any scholarly work that debunks all the myths about McCarthy and what he did and did not do.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 24, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > But it does mention freedom of speech. Macarthyism is against that.
> ...


Tommy is a Brit, but I'm sure the schools he went to are just as fucked up as ours.


----------



## xyz (Jan 24, 2020)

Russia now has much more access to politicians than they did back then.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 24, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Dalton Trumbo was subpoenaed by HUAC, not by McCarthy, moron.  he joined the communist party in 1943.
> ...


McCarthy hates obtained all their knowledge from stuff that was published 50 years ago.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 24, 2020)

Here's a great interview in 2008 with the late M. Stanton Evans, who was arguably the foremost scholar on Joseph McCarthy in our history. Stanton wrote the massive defense of McCarthy titled_ Blacklisted By History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies_ (2007).
_
Documents Show Joe McCarthy Was Right, Author Says_


----------



## sparky (Jan 24, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> If you join a political party that advocates overthrowing the government and that is backed by a hostile foreign power, you could be prosecuted, and/or have your citizenship revoked, and/or deported.



really?  does that apply to our Congress, who are greased by globalists w/zero allegiance to America too?



mikegriffith1 said:


> Stanton wrote the massive defense of McCarthy titled_ Blacklisted By History: _



what comes around goes around.....





~S~


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 24, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> So only people with approved political views can get jobs?



Of course you go to this straw-man extreme. So, tell me, should an American who belongs to and/or totally agrees with ISIS or Al Qaeda or Hamas or Hezbollah get to live and work in America and even get to work sensitive jobs that handle classified information? 

There is a wide range of acceptable, non-treasonous political views. But if you stray outside that spectrum, then, no, you have no right to work and live here.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> If you join a political party that advocates overthrowing the government and that is backed by a hostile foreign power, you could be prosecuted, and/or have your citizenship revoked, and/or deported.



Says the guy who thinks the attack on Pearl Harbor was justified, and belongs to a cult that tried to form it's own country out of the US Territory in 1857.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> There is a wide range of acceptable, non-treasonous political views. But if you stray outside that spectrum, then, no, you have no right to work and live here.



I agree, let's deport all the Mormons...   They are clearly outside the spectrum of "acceptable" when they think a pedophile was talking to God. 

Do you know the difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh? 

Original and Extra-Crispy!!!!


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Here's a great interview in 2008 with the late M. Stanton Evans, who was arguably the foremost scholar on Joseph McCarthy in our history. Stanton wrote the massive defense of McCarthy titled_ Blacklisted By History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies_ (2007).



Good think this anti-American piece of shit is dead, then. 

Guy, you need to be really careful here.  There might be a point where the Evangelical Majority decides that Mormons are America's "Enemies".


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Oh, so the people of China, North Korea, and North Vietnam "picked" communism?! Uh, well, this might be what your PRC handlers have taught you, but most of us here in the free world know that Communist rule was imposed on those populations by deception and coercion, and when those people began to realize that the Communists' promises were false, the Communists had to resort to vicious brutality to maintain control.





JoeB131 said:


> Or this "Brutality" often happened in countries that had undergone years of civil war/foreign invasion, and life was already cheapened.
> 
> The problem you seem to have is you confuse why the Communists won.  It's not because the people of China or N. Vietnam (North Korea is a different case) suddenly loved them some Karl Marx.
> 
> ...



You can repeat this Communist tale a million times, but that won't make it magically come true. The Nationalists were beating the Communists in China until Truman and Marshall imposed ceasefires, undermined their currency by holding up promised loans, and then cut off their arms supply. The Communists took over North Korea because the Soviets invaded Korea at the end of WW II and set up Kim Ilsung in power to begin his monstrous regime. (Let me guess: You don't think Kim Ilsung was all that bad, right?) Soviet forces stayed in North Korea until 1948 to ensure that the Communist regime was firmly established. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> -- That's why the Communists





JoeB131 said:


> Oh, boy, more Bircher crap.



No, actually, you foul-mouthed pro-Communist piece of garbage, it's stuff that most educated people in the free world have known for decades and that has been documented in thousands of books and in dozens of documentaries that have been aired on American TV for years now. Your PRC handlers really should let you out of your room to watch some American TV and read some American books every now and then. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> -- That's why North Vietnam had to use large numbers of troops on its southern border to keep its subjects from fleeing to South Vietnam during the war.





JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, funny thing.  Once we stopped propping Saigon up, they were gone in 55 days.   For Sale, 500,000 ARVN rifles.  Never fired, only dropped once.



In other words, we can add the Vietnam War to the list of subjects about which you are ignorant and about which you parrot Communist/liberal propaganda (the Communist and liberal spins on the Vietnam War are virtually identical). 

Here's a free lesson in real history for you. While your buddies the Democrats were busy ensuring that we slashed our aid to South Vietnam, the Soviet Union and China massively re-armed North Vietnam, and when North Vietnam broke the peace agreement and began to invade South Vietnam, the Democrats refused to honor our promise to provide air support to keep South Vietnam free. Like you, the Democrats did not care that North Vietnam was getting massive supplies and weapons from Russia and Red China. 

Lauren Zanoli in a good article on the History News Network:

Historians have directly attributed the fall of Saigon in 1975 to the cessation of American aid. Without the necessary funds, South Vietnam found it logistically and financially impossible to defeat the North Vietnamese army. Moreover, the withdrawal of aid encouraged North Vietnam to begin an effective military offensive against South Vietnam. Given the monetary and military investment in Vietnam, former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Armitage compared the American withdrawal to “a pregnant lady, abandoned by her lover to face her fate." (2) Historian Lewis Fanning went so far as to say that “it was not the Hanoi communists who won the war, but rather the American Congress that lost it." (3). . . .​
In the fall of 1974, Nixon resigned under the pressure of the Watergate scandal and was succeeded by Gerald Ford. Congress cut funding to South Vietnam for the upcoming fiscal year from a proposed 1.26 billion to 700 million dollars. These two events prompted Hanoi to make an all-out effort to conquer the South. As the North Vietnamese Communist Party Secretary Le Duan observed in December 1974: “The Americans have withdrawn…this is what marks the opportune moment." (4)​
The NVA drew up a two-year plan for the “liberation” of South Vietnam. Owing to South Vietnam’s weakened state, this would only take fifty-five days. The drastic reduction of American aid to South Vietnam caused a sharp decline in morale, as well as an increase in governmental corruption and a crackdown on domestic political dissent. The South Vietnamese army was severely under-funded, greatly outnumbered, and lacked the support of the American allies with whom they were accustomed to fighting. (What Happened When Democrats in Congress Cut Off Funding for the Vietnam War? |  History News         Network)​
Chuck Morse:

By late 1972, North Vietnam and the Viet Cong were virtually defeated, American troops had been mostly withdrawn, and the war was winding down. America had at that point bombed North Vietnam into submission with B-52’s, with the mining Haiphong Harbor and by disabling the Ho Chi Minh Trail along with incursions into Cambodia. Indications were that South Vietnam was stepping up to the task of defending itself, was addressing its problems of corruption and was beginning to prosper.​
The Paris Peace Accords were signed January 27, 1973, officially ending hostilities between North and South Vietnam and leaving the cease fire border at the same DMZ that was originally established by the 1954 Geneva Agreement. North Vietnam had failed in its goal of conquering South Vietnam which was, in turn, guaranteed sovereign rights by the agreement. North Vietnam proceeded to withdraw and return American POW’s. The United States signed several separate side agreements with South Vietnam that insured American training, military, and material support and economic assistance. The war was over, the shooting had stopped, South Vietnam was free.​
Two months later, President Richard M. Nixon became embroiled in the Watergate scandal that consumed his presidency over the next year and a half leading to his resignation on August 8, 1974. This was followed two months later by the November 1974 mid-term election which resulted in a resounding victory for the Democrats who consolidated control over both the Senate and the House. Many left-wing Senators and congressmen were elected that year including Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Joe Biden of Delaware. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts emerged as the liberal Democratic ring-leader.​
In a complete betrayal of the letter and the spirit of the Paris Peace Accord, the most liberal congress in a generation proceeded to cut off virtually all military assistance to South Vietnam and Cambodia in March 1975. Historian Louis Fanning stated: *It was not the Hanoi communists who won the war, but rather the American Congress that lost it*. Within weeks of this infamous and disgraceful betrayal, North Vietnam, with the full military support of the Soviet Union and Communist China, launched a full-scale invasion of the south.​
Standing alone against the brutal onslaught, South Vietnam was forced to surrender, April 29, 1975. The result was the type of wholesale slaughter of the innocent that often accompanies a communist takeover. Simultaneously, Cambodia fell to the Khmer Rouge headed by Marxist doctrinaire leader Pol Pot. The subsequent Cambodian genocide resulted in an estimated million-plus dead. Hundreds of thousands of fleeing Vietnamese men, women, and children got on rickety boats in shark infested waters to escape from Ho Chi Minh’s left-wing progressive paradise. (The Vietnam War Was Lost by Liberal, Post-Nixon Congress)​
Some other free educational sources for you:

The Truth about the Vietnam War

Justifying Betrayal of Vietnam Emerges as the Raison d'être Of Ken Burns' Film on the War

Shining a spotlight on the consequences of U.S. betrayal​
Using your pro-Communist logic, we should have abandoned South Korea because it could not survive without our "propping up." We should have abandoned Greece because the Communists would have taken control without our "propping up."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> You can repeat this Communist tale a million times, but that won't make it magically come true. The Nationalists were beating the Communists in China until Truman and Marshall imposed ceasefires, undermined their currency by holding up promised loans, and then cut off their arms supply.



Again, if you are dependent on someone else arming you to get your people to fight... then you are a loser.  We had been propping up Peanut for a decade... someone had to say "no More".   



mikegriffith1 said:


> The Communists took over North Korea because the Soviets invaded Korea at the end of WW II and set up Kim Ilsung in power to begin his monstrous regime. (Let me guess: You don't think Kim Ilsung was all that bad, right?) Soviet forces stayed in North Korea until 1948 to ensure that the Communist regime was firmly established.



I already stated NK was a different case.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> No, actually, you foul-mouthed pro-Communist piece of garbage, it's stuff that most educated people in the free world have known for decades and that has been documented in thousands of books and in dozens of documentaries that have been aired on American TV for years now. Your PRC handlers really should let you out of your room to watch some American TV and read some American books every now and then.



Uh, guy, nobody looks at McCarthyism as a good thing.  We all shit our pants because a large part of the world was trying out communism...  and betrayed our core principles of freedom of thought and association.   Shame on us.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> n other words, we can add the Vietnam War to the list of subjects about which you are ignorant and about which you parrot Communist/liberal propaganda (the Communist and liberal spins on the Vietnam War are virtually identical).
> 
> Here's a free lesson in real history for you. While your buddies the Democrats were busy ensuring that we slashed our aid to South Vietnam, the Soviet Union and China massively re-armed North Vietnam, and when North Vietnam broke the peace agreement and began to invade South Vietnam, the Democrats refused to honor our promise to provide air support to keep South Vietnam free. Like you, the Democrats did not care that North Vietnam was getting massive supplies and weapons from Russia and Red China.



Hey, asshole...  sending thousands of boys to die and get maimed to prop up a corrupt regime was a terrible idea. 

We knew we were backing a loser from day one. This is why the Pentagon Papers were so devastating.  

We were shovelling money to the Kleptocrats in Saigon up until the day it fell... and that was the problem. Most of that ended up in Theiu and Ky's Swiss Bank accounts.  

For Sale- 500,000 ARVN rifles.  Never fired, only dropped once.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> In a complete betrayal of the letter and the spirit of the Paris Peace Accord, the most liberal congress in a generation proceeded to cut off virtually all military assistance to South Vietnam and Cambodia in March 1975. Historian Louis Fanning stated: *It was not the Hanoi communists who won the war, but rather the American Congress that lost it*. Within weeks of this infamous and disgraceful betrayal, North Vietnam, with the full military support of the Soviet Union and Communist China, launched a full-scale invasion of the south.



Um, yeah.. not really. We allocated $700 Million to propping up the Kleptocracy in Saigon.  The real problem was that when the Paris Accords were signed, we all knew that Saigon was doomed.  We didn't care.  We wanted out- both parties.  Nixon signed an agreement that he knew no one was going to honor, to get us out before the 1972 election.  

There's a reason why they called him "Tricky Dick", and it wasn't because he was popular with the ladies.


----------



## sparky (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> There is a wide range of acceptable, non-treasonous political views.



all allowed , _no_ argument

yet there are just as many _futile_ political views Mike

Subscribing to _fascism_ to mitigate _communism_ being high on that list

~S~


----------



## sparky (Jan 25, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> We wanted out- both parties. Nixon signed an agreement that he knew no one was going to honor, to get us out before the 1972 election.



we got 1/2 our POW's back, McCain being among them .....then watergate hit the news.....



JoeB131 said:


> There's a reason why they called him "Tricky Dick", and it wasn't because he was popular with the ladies.








~S~


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 25, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> If you join a political party that advocates overthrowing the government and that is backed by a hostile foreign power, you could be prosecuted, and/or have your citizenship revoked, and/or deported.
> 
> There is a wide range of acceptable, non-treasonous political views. But if you stray outside that spectrum, then, no, you have no right to work and live here.





JoeB131 said:


> I agree, let's deport all the Mormons...   They are clearly outside the spectrum of "acceptable" when they think a pedophile was talking to God.



This hateful, strange, and troubling polemic not only shows how rude and ignorant you are, but it shows how far out of the American mainstream you are, how extreme and fringe you are.

FYI, in 2012, a Mormon, Mitt Romney, won the Republican Party's presidential nomination and narrowly lost to the incumbent, Barack Obama. Romney won 24 states and received 60,933,000 votes. There are 10 Mormons serving in Congress as we speak. There are numerous Mormons who have been elected as state senators and representatives around the country. Dozens of Mormons have been, and continue to be, star athletes in the NFL, the NHL, the NBA, and MLB. There are dozens of Mormons serving as federal and state judges.

So apparently the overwhelming majority of Americans don't buy your sick, twisted view of Mormonism and Mormons.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> This hateful, strange, and troubling polemic not only shows how rude and ignorant you are, but it shows how far out of the American mainstream you are, how extreme and fringe you are.
> 
> FYI, in 2012, a Mormon, Mitt Romney, won the Republican Party's presidential nomination and narrowly lost to the incumbent, Barack Obama. Romney won 24 states and received 60,933,000 votes. There are 10 Mormons serving in Congress as we speak. There are numerous Mormons who have been elected as state senators and representatives around the country. Dozens of Mormons have been, and continue to be, star athletes in the NFL, the NHL, the NBA, and MLB. There are dozens of Mormons serving as federal and state judges.



Um, yeah, let's look at that. The Evangelicals didn't support Romney in 2008 because he was a Mormon.  

And then Barack Obama got elected and OH MY GOD THERE'S A NEGRO IN THE WHITE HOUSE. Romney could have been sacrificing virgins to C'Thulhu and the Evangelicals, racist fucks that they are, would have supported him.  

But your fucked up little cult was still started by a two-bit con man who was fucking little girls.   Deal with it.


----------



## gipper (Jan 26, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > This hateful, strange, and troubling polemic not only shows how rude and ignorant you are, but it shows how far out of the American mainstream you are, how extreme and fringe you are.
> ...


That’s a bit crazy Joe. Are you aware the OH MY GOD THERE'S A NEGRO IN THE WHITE HOUSE...had been in the White House for four years?  So, there goes your hateful bigoted opinion out the window. 

Don’t you find it informative that your girl Hillary couldn’t beat a two bit con man?


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 26, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> If you join a political party that advocates overthrowing the government and that is backed by a hostile foreign power, you could be prosecuted, and/or have your citizenship revoked, and/or deported.





JoeB131 said:


> Says the guy who thinks the attack on Pearl Harbor was justified. . . .



What does Pearl Harbor have to do with the fact that you have no right to belong to a subversive, enemy-controlled party in America?

Anyway, I think this is the fourth or fifth time you’ve made this statement. I’ve been ignoring it because clearly you’ve been making it to try to divert attention away from your pro-Communist sympathies and your repeated gaffes, and because it is another example of your grade-school-level, superficial polemic.

I’m guessing that you are confusing justified with provoked. When FDR announced the Pearl Harbor attack to the American people, he claimed it was “unprovoked,” when in fact it was a response to a long series of increasingly severe provocations and was done only after Japan’s leaders had exerted great effort to reach a peace agreement with FDR. Indeed, if three other nations had done to us what we, the British, and the Dutch did to the Japanese before Pearl Harbor, we probably would have responded with force much sooner than the Japanese did. 

An action can be justified in one way or another, or even in several ways, but can still be wrong and/or unwise. The British mission to collect hidden Patriot weapons caches in Lexington and Concord was justified under existing law, but it was a terrible mistake and arguably immoral. Jefferson Davis’s decision to bombard Fort Sumter in response to the pending arrival of a U.S. Navy supply convoy and the federal refusal to withdraw the garrison from the fort was justified by long-established laws of warfare and foreign relations among nations, but it was a horrible, senseless, and unnecessary blunder that made war inevitable.

If aliens had come down to Earth on December 8, 1941, and had held a trial of the U.S. and Japan to decide who should receive what punishment for the Pearl Harbor attack, Japan could have made a credible case that under long-established international laws of warfare and foreign relations, their attack on Pearl Harbor was a justified defensive response to numerous and severe American, Dutch, and British provocations.

And the aliens, assuming they were fair and moral, probably would have decided that there was blame on both sides. They might well have concluded that if the Japanese had limited their Pearl Harbor attack to an attack on the oil storage tanks, repair bays, weapons warehouses, and dry-dock facilities at Pearl Harbor, which would have caused minimal casualties, their attack would have been an appropriate, proportional response to the provocations, but that bombing the naval vessels and airfields, and killing 2400 American military personnel and wounding 1200 others in the process, was a disproportionate and overheated response.

Most casual students of the Pacific War are not aware that the Japanese hoped that the Pearl Harbor attack would cause American government to decide to avoid further entanglement in the Sino-Japanese War and in Asia as a whole, and that Japan and FDR could then reach some kind of non-aggression agreement. Obviously, this was one of the worst, most horrendous miscalculations in world history.

If the Japanese had limited their attack on Pearl Harbor to an attack on logistics and supplies, as suggested above, and had therefore caused far fewer casualties, this might have generated far less outrage in America. It certainly would have made it harder for FDR to demagogue the attack the way he did.

Of course, if aliens had come down to Earth to pass judgment on the Pearl Harbor attack, they would have revealed that FDR and certain other high officials not only provoked Japan to attack but knew Pearl Harbor would be targeted. The aliens would have revealed that FDR and other high officials believed that provoking Japan to attack Pearl Harbor was the only way to overcome the public’s opposition to entering the war, and that the price of a few thousand American deaths was an acceptable price to get America into the war.

The Pearl Harbor Conspiracy and the Minority Report of the 1946 Joint Congressional Committee

https://miketgriffith.com/files/magicadmission.pdf

Backdoor to War and Infamy - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Pearl Harbor Was No Surprise - Light from the Right

More Evidence FDR Knew About Pearl In Advance

Pearl Harbor: The Controversy Continues – The Future of Freedom Foundation


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2020)

gipper said:


> That’s a bit crazy Joe. Are you aware the OH MY GOD THERE'S A NEGRO IN THE WHITE HOUSE...had been in the White House for four years? So, there goes your hateful bigoted opinion out the window.
> 
> Don’t you find it informative that your girl Hillary couldn’t beat a two bit con man?



Okay, couple things.  I agree, he had been in the white house for four years... and it drove the Evangelical Nuts JUST CRAZY.   So crazy, they supported a guy they called a "cultist" four years earlier.    After 8 years, they were so crazy they supported a guy who pays Porn Stars for sex and brags about grabbing women by the pussy.   Good thing we have a 22nd Amendment, if Obama got a third Term, the Evangelicals would have supported the Satan/Cheney ticket.  

No, I am not surprised Hillary couldn't beat Obama.  The key issue in 2008 was the War in Iraq.  Hillary voted for it, Obama opposed it when it was still popular.   That's the thing about elections, being in the right place at the right time.  

I really think Hillary was an unlikable candidate.  If the GOP had run anyone OTHER than Trump, I'd have probably held my nose again and voted GOP. Well, maybe not Jeb Bush...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> What does Pearl Harbor have to do with the fact that you have no right to belong to a subversive, enemy-controlled party in America?
> 
> Anyway, I think this is the fourth or fifth time you’ve made this statement. I’ve been ignoring it because clearly you’ve been making it to try to divert attention away from your pro-Communist sympathies and your repeated gaffes, and because it is another example of your grade-school-level, superficial polemic.
> 
> I’m guessing that you are confusing justified with provoked. When FDR announced the Pearl Harbor attack to the American people, he claimed it was “unprovoked,” when in fact it was a response to a long series of increasingly severe provocations and was done only after Japan’s leaders had exerted great effort to reach a peace agreement with FDR. Indeed, if three other nations had done to us what we, the British, and the Dutch did to the Japanese before Pearl Harbor, we probably would have responded with force much sooner than the Japanese did.



GUy, it's a distinction without a difference.  Sanctions were a peaceful means to get Japan to cease and desist it's behavior. by your logic, you've just justified Iran launching a terrorist attack on the US.  We have been putting crushing sanctions on them for decades.   You've just justified 9/11.  We provoked the MIddle East by putting sanctions on Iraq for a decade that starved half a million people.  All FDR's sanctions did was hamper Japan's ability to make war on China.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> Most casual students of the Pacific War are not aware that the Japanese hoped that the Pearl Harbor attack would cause American government to decide to avoid further entanglement in the Sino-Japanese War and in Asia as a whole, and that Japan and FDR could then reach some kind of non-aggression agreement. Obviously, this was one of the worst, most horrendous miscalculations in world history.



Again, if there was a Jap who thought that, they were really kind of stupid. What would they have based that on. 

Japan's strategy was based on essentially repeating the playbook from their 1905 War with Russia.  Launch a dastardly sneak attack, then engage the enemy into a battle they would win, and hope they came to the peace table.  They failed to realize that the 1905 war wasn't the glorious victory they remember (by the end of it, both sides were exhausted) and that the US wasn't Tsarist Russia.  We didn't have a bunch of internal problems that exasperated the war effort.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> If the Japanese had limited their attack on Pearl Harbor to an attack on logistics and supplies, as suggested above, and had therefore caused far fewer casualties, this might have generated far less outrage in America. It certainly would have made it harder for FDR to demagogue the attack the way he did.



Yeah, not really.   The very fact they attacked us at all pissed us off, without a declaration of war when they were supposedly negotiating peace. It's too bad you aren't old enough to have known some WWII vets like my Dad. They STILL hated the Japanese 40 years later.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> Of course, if aliens had come down to Earth to pass judgment on the Pearl Harbor attack, they would have revealed that FDR and certain other high officials not only provoked Japan to attack but knew Pearl Harbor would be targeted. The aliens would have revealed that FDR and other high officials believed that provoking Japan to attack Pearl Harbor was the only way to overcome the public’s opposition to entering the war, and that the price of a few thousand American deaths was an acceptable price to get America into the war.



Um. No. Aliens would have looked at Japan's conduct in Asia and said, "Wow, America, you are being really restrained. We wiped out the Xlogs at Omnicron Gemini 2 when they pulled shit like that!"


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 26, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL!!!!! If you had bothered to even read that article--the article that you cited--_you would have discovered that Joseph McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood blacklists!_ Nothing. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. The blacklists resulted from investigations by the House Un-American Activities Committee.
> 
> If you had bothered to read the articles I provide in the OP, you would have already known this.





JoeB131 said:


> According to you, Drunken Joe was the Piano Player at the whorehouse who had no idea what was going on upstairs. There's a reason why the movement of the hysterical Red Scare of the 1950's is called "McCarthyism" today and not "Nixonism".  Because Tricky Dick knew there were sensible limits.



In other words, you can't admit when you're wrong, even when you're caught making a demonstrably erroneous statement. The Hollywood Blacklist began in the 1940s, not the 1950s. In fact, it began a year before McCarthy began serving in the U.S. Senate. And, again, McCarthy never got involved with investigating Hollywood, because this was being done by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC).

So, now, are you ever going to name someone whose life was ruined by false charges made by Senator McCarthy?  When I asked you this the first time, your answer was the people on the Hollywood Blacklist. Now that we've established that the blacklist began before McCarthy began serving in the Senate and that he had nothing to do with it, are you going to name one person whose life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> In other words, you can't admit when you're wrong, even when you're caught making a demonstrably erroneous statement. The Hollywood Blacklist began in the 1940s, not the 1950s. In fact, it began a year before McCarthy began serving in the U.S. Senate. And, again, McCarthy never got involved with investigating Hollywood, because this was being done by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC).



It shouldn't have been investigated at all.. and McCarthy was the one who instigated a lot of this bullshit.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> So, now, are you ever going to name someone whose life was ruined by false charges made by Senator McCarthy?



Sure. 

Fred Fisher (lawyer) - Wikipedia

Category:Victims of McCarthyism - Wikipedia

Dorothy Kenyon - Wikipedia

Of course, you'll claim all these people were "Communists" for some reason.


----------



## sparky (Jan 26, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Now that we've established that the blacklist began before McCarthy began serving in the Senate and that he had nothing to do with it, are you going to name one person whose life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy?


https://www.history.com/news/7-famous-victims-of-the-hollywood-blacklist

~S~


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 27, 2020)

sparky said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > Now that we've established that the blacklist began before McCarthy began serving in the Senate and that he had nothing to do with it, are you going to name one person whose life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy?
> ...



LOL!  Uh, did you miss the part, which you even quoted, that McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood Blacklist?

As for JoeB131's listing of Fred Fisher and Dorothy Kenyon as victims of false claims by McCarthy, these two bogus "victim" cases were addressed in the links I provided, which that clown clearly did not read (he's already said he sees in point in reading about the other side of the story on McCarthy). His inclusion of Kenyon is especially comical. But, let's start with Fisher:

(3) _The Fred Fisher Episode._ On June 9th, the 30th day of the hearings, Welch was engaged in baiting Roy Cohn, challenging him to get 130 Communists or subversives out of defense plants "before the sun goes down." The treatment of Cohn angered McCarthy and he said that if Welch were so concerned about persons aiding the Communist Party, he should check on a man in his Boston law office named Fred Fisher, who had once belonged to the National Lawyers Guild, which Attorney General Brownell had called "the legal mouthpiece of the Communist Party." Welch then delivered the most famous lines from the Army-McCarthy Hearings, accusing McCarthy of "reckless cruelty" and concluding: "Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?"​
The fact of the matter was that Fred Fisher's connection with the National Lawyers Guild had been widely publicized two months earlier. Page 12 of the April 16th _New York Times_ had carried a picture of Fisher and a story about his removal from Welch's team because of his past association with the NLG. If Mr. Welch was so worried that McCarthy's remarks might inflict a lifelong "scar" on Fisher's reputation, why did he dramatize the incident in such histrionic fashion? The reason, of course, was that McCarthy had fallen into a trap in raising the Fisher issue, and Welch, superb showman that he was, played the scene for all it was worth. Was Fred Fisher hurt by the incident? Not at all. He became a partner in Welch's Boston law firm, Hale & Dorr, and was elected president of the Massachusetts Bar Association in the mid-1970s.​
Dorothy Kenyon:

Evidence presented in the other six cases showed that two (Haldore Hanson and Gustavo Duran) had been identified as members of the Communist Party, that three (Dorothy Kenyon, Frederick Schuman, and Harlow Shapley) had extensive records of joining Communist fronts and supporting Communist causes, and that one (Esther Brunauer) had sufficient questionable associations to be dismissed from the State Department as a security risk in June 1952. For further details, see Chapter VII of _McCarthy and His Enemies_ by William Buckley and Brent Bozell.​And:

Despite the constant harassment, McCarthy's evidence included showing that Kenyon belonged to at least 24 Communist front organizations labeled as such in part by the United States Attorney General, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and other governmental committees. The documents presented by McCarthy included, official organization letterheads that listed Kenyon as a sponsor or as a member, official programs of organization sponsored dinners, and newspaper reports of open letters that Kenyon had signed that connected her with the organizations. Certainly, these were all documents that were easily accessible to the State Department should they have cared to look into Kenyon's political background.

When Kenyon was asked by the Tydings Committee whether she had ever been interviewed by the State Department as to her affiliation to any Communist front organizations, she responded that she had never been asked. According to the security evaluation procedure of the State Department, Kenyon should have been asked about these affiliations but failed to do so. McCarthy had easily demonstrated from this first case that the screening process of the State Department was certainly lax and quite possibly purposefully ignoring easily identifiable security risks. However, the Tydings Committee instead ignored this evidence and set the precedent for the hearings that anyone that came before the committee was going to be given a positive evaluation no matter how strongly the evidence indicated the witness was a security risk. ( Buckley, Jr., William F. and Bozell, L. Brent (1954, 1995 Printing). _McCarthy & His Enemies, The Record And Its Meaning_. Regnery Publishing Inc.. ISBN 0-89526-472-2.  Tydings Committee Hearings (1950). _Page 68_. U. S. Government Printing Office.  Congressional Record, (March 30, 1950). _Pages 4380-81_. U. S. Government Printing Office.  McCarthy, Joseph (1953). _Major Speeches and Debates of Senator Joe McCarthy Delivered in the United States Senate, 1950-1951_. U. S. Government Printing Office. ISBN 0-87968-308-2. )​


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 27, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL! Uh, did you miss the part, which you even quoted, that McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood Blacklist?
> 
> As for JoeB131's listing of Fred Fisher and Dorothy Kenyon as victims of false claims by McCarthy, these two bogus "victim" cases were addressed in the links I provided, which JoeB Mao and Me clearly did not read. His inclusion of Kenyon is especially comical. But, let's start with Fisher:



You mean a fine American who was slandered by his government because of his affiliations. 

Once again, might be a day in the future when Mormonism is declared a cult... then what would you do?  



mikegriffith1 said:


> Evidence presented in the other six cases showed that two (Haldore Hanson and Gustavo Duran) had been identified as members of the Communist Party, that three (Dorothy Kenyon, Frederick Schuman, and Harlow Shapley) had extensive records of joining Communist fronts and supporting Communist causes, and that one (Esther Brunauer) had sufficient questionable associations to be dismissed from the State Department as a security risk in June 1952. For further details, see Chapter VII of _McCarthy and His Enemies_ by William Buckley and Brent Bozell.



So what?  Hey, you claim to be a great American, did you check out the First Amendment?


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 27, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL! Uh, did you miss the part, which you even quoted, that McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood Blacklist?
> 
> As for JoeB131's listing of Fred Fisher and Dorothy Kenyon as victims of false claims by McCarthy, these two bogus "victim" cases were addressed in the links I provided, which JoeB Mao and Me clearly did not read. His inclusion of Kenyon is especially comical. But, let's start with Fisher:





JoeB131 said:


> You mean a fine American who was slandered by his government because of his affiliations.



In other words, you simply do not care about facts, much less honesty. I've asked you several times now to cite a single case to support your claim that some persons had their lives ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. Fisher doesn't qualify in either category: his life was not ruined, and McCarthy's claim was not false--in fact, McCarthy had nothing to do with Fisher's getting fired.



JoeB131 said:


> Once again, might be a day in the future when Mormonism is declared a cult... then what would you do?



If anti-religious bigots like you ever come to power in sufficient numbers, I'm sure people of faith will face many of the same threats and challenges that religious people in China and North Korea face.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> Evidence presented in the other six cases showed that two (Haldore Hanson and Gustavo Duran) had been identified as members of the Communist Party, that three (Dorothy Kenyon, Frederick Schuman, and Harlow Shapley) had extensive records of joining Communist fronts and supporting Communist causes, and that one (Esther Brunauer) had sufficient questionable associations to be dismissed from the State Department as a security risk in June 1952. For further details, see Chapter VII of _McCarthy and His Enemies_ by William Buckley and Brent Bozell.





JoeB131 said:


> So what?  Hey, you claim to be a great American, did you check out the First Amendment?



The "so what" is that I'm still waiting for you to cite a single case where a person's life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. McCarthy's charges against Kenyon were not only true but were supported by other government entities.

And, again, I know you don't know much about America's laws and government, but under the Constitution you do *not*--again, DO NOT--have the "right" to join a subversive party controlled by a foreign hostile nation, much less the right to join such a party and expect to be able to work in the U.S. Government.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 28, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> In other words, you simply do not care about facts, much less honesty. I've asked you several times now to cite a single case to support your claim that some persons had their lives ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. Fisher doesn't qualify in either category: his life was not ruined, and McCarthy's claim was not false--in fact, McCarthy had nothing to do with Fisher's getting fired.



No, but his reputation was publicly slandered by a drunk and closeted homosexual. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> If anti-religious bigots like you ever come to power in sufficient numbers, I'm sure people of faith will face many of the same threats and challenges that religious people in China and North Korea face.



Guy, you should be more worried about Evangelicals like Mike Huckabee who think you are a cult than anti-superstition types. 

The one thing history shows, you guys are really good at slaughtering each other.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> The "so what" is that I'm still waiting for you to cite a single case where a person's life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. McCarthy's charges against Kenyon were not only true but were supported by other government entities.



She had every right to believe whatever she wanted.  I mean, I would LOVE to throw a fence around Utah and turn it into a big Cult Deprogramming Camp for Mormons, but the First Amendment says that if you really want to believe that Child Molesting Con Man Joseph Smith was talking to the Imaginary Sky Fairy, you have every RIGHT to believe it, no matter how silly it is. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> And, again, I know you don't know much about America's laws and government, but under the Constitution you do *not*--again, DO NOT--have the "right" to join a subversive party controlled by a foreign hostile nation, much less the right to join such a party and expect to be able to work in the U.S. Government.



Where does it specifically say that?  

The terrible thing is we let a drunk ruin a lot of people's lives because we were scared.   That doesn't reflect well on us.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 28, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> In other words, you simply do not care about facts, much less honesty. I've asked you several times now to cite a single case to support your claim that some persons had their lives ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. Fisher doesn't qualify in either category: his life was not ruined, and McCarthy's claim was not false--in fact, McCarthy had nothing to do with Fisher's getting fired.





JoeB131 said:


> No, but his reputation was publicly slandered by a drunk and closeted homosexual.



Huh? I already refuted this nonsense. Fisher got fired before McCarthy ever said a word about him, and it's not "slander" if it happens to be true. You only skimmed over my reply and didn't read any of the evidence that I presented on Fisher, did you? 



mikegriffith1 said:


> If anti-religious bigots like you ever come to power in sufficient numbers, I'm sure people of faith will face many of the same threats and challenges that religious people in China and North Korea face.





JoeB131 said:


> Guy, you should be more worried about Evangelicals like Mike Huckabee who think you are a cult than anti-superstition types.



Mike Huckabee campaigned all over the country for Mitt Romney, who is Mormon. Huckabee is also good friends with Senator Mike Lee from Utah, who is also Mormon. 



JoeB131 said:


> The one thing history shows, you guys are really good at slaughtering each other.



Yes, I'm sure that's what your PRC handlers have told you.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> The "so what" is that I'm still waiting for you to cite a single case where a person's life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. McCarthy's charges against Kenyon were not only true but were supported by other government entities.





JoeB131 said:


> She had every right to believe whatever she wanted. . . . [Bizarre anti-Mormon drivel snipped]



If you belong to a bunch of groups that even the U.S. Attorney General and several government committees have identified as Communist front groups, you have no right to work for the federal government. We're not talking just about what she believed, but about her actions. Did you read the evidence on her Communist activities, or did your PRC handlers tell you to stop reading when you got that far into the reply?



mikegriffith1 said:


> And, again, I know you don't know much about America's laws and government, but under the Constitution you do *not*--again, DO NOT--have the "right" to join a subversive party controlled by a foreign hostile nation, much less the right to join such a party and expect to be able to work in the U.S. Government.





JoeB131 said:


> Where does it specifically say that?



Uh, you're the one who says someone has a "right" to belong to the Communist Party and still live and work in America, even work for the government. YOU need to show where the Constitution says you can belong to a subversive, foreign-funded political group and not only stay here and work but even work for the government. I'm saying that no such right exists in the Constitution.  



JoeB131 said:


> The terrible thing is we let a drunk ruin a lot of people's lives because we were scared.   That doesn't reflect well on us.



The terrible thing is that you are delusional and are unwilling to process facts that destroy your fictional version of American history. 

I ask you yet again to back up your claim that McCarthy ruined "a lot of people's lives because we were scared." _Name one person whose life McCarthy "ruined" with false charges._ If your version of McCarthyism really happened, why can't you name one person whose life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy? 

The only people who were "scared" were liberal Democrats and the Communists they had allowed to infiltrate into our government. The only "hysteria" came from liberal Democrats who could not admit that Communists had deeply penetrated our government while they, the Democrats, controlled the White House and Congress for over a decade. 

For those who want to read more on the evidence against Dorothy Kenyon, read pp. 346-349 of Evans' book_ Blacklisted By History,_ which is available for free online:

Blacklisted by History


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Huh? I already refuted this nonsense. Fisher got fired before McCarthy ever said a word about him, and it's not "slander" if it happens to be true. You only skimmed over my reply and didn't read any of the evidence that I presented on Fisher, did you?



Don't have to.  After the Army Hearing, Drunken Joe and Limp-wristed Cohn were done.  People realized they were frauds after that. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Mike Huckabee campaigned all over the country for Mitt Romney, who is Mormon. Huckabee is also good friends with Senator Mike Lee from Utah, who is also Mormon.



Yes, because the one thing that Evangelicals and Mormons have in common is that you are REALLY FUCKING RACIST and OH MY GOD, THERE WAS A NEGRO IN THE WHITE HOUSE in 2012.  But don't think for a moment the Evangelicals like you now.   Mitt Romney could have been sacrificing virgins to C'Thulhu to summon the Great Old Ones and Huckabee would have supported him.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> Yes, I'm sure that's what your PRC handlers have told you.



Crusades... Inquisitions, Witch burnings...The Thirty Years War... The Mountain Meadow Massacre... did they leave those parts out of history class at Mormon Cult U?  



mikegriffith1 said:


> If you belong to a bunch of groups that even the U.S. Attorney General and several government committees have identified as Communist front groups, you have no right to work for the federal government. We're not talking just about what she believed, but about her actions. Did you read the evidence on her Communist activities, or did your PRC handlers tell you to stop reading when you got that far into the reply?



Naw, guy, this was bullshit 70 years ago, when Drunken Joe said it, and it's bullshit now.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> The terrible thing is that you are delusional and are unwilling to process facts that destroy your fictional version of American history.
> 
> I ask you yet again to back up your claim that McCarthy ruined "a lot of people's lives because we were scared." _Name one person whose life McCarthy "ruined" with false charges._



I gave you a whole fucking list...   The problem is, you think they "Deserved It", because they don't bend over and take it in the ass from the One Percent like you do.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jan 30, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Huh? I already refuted this nonsense. Fisher got fired before McCarthy ever said a word about him, and it's not "slander" if it happens to be true. You only skimmed over my reply and didn't read any of the evidence that I presented on Fisher, did you?





JoeB131 said:


> Don't have to.  After the Army Hearing, Drunken Joe and Limp-wristed Cohn were done.  People realized they were frauds after that.



So we're back to your refusal to admit being wrong again. Let's just review a few facts. One, the fact that Fisher had belonged to a notorious Communist front organization had been made public by that vicious, right-wing rag named the _New York Times _before McCarthy ever uttered a word about him. Two, even the demagogue Joseph Welch was persuaded that Fisher needed to be dropped from his firm's team for the Army-McCarthy hearings and sent him back to Boston--once again, before McCarthy had uttered a word about him. Three, McCarthy only decided to bring up Fisher's case after Welch was rudely and dishonestly badgering Roy Cohn during the hearing.   



mikegriffith1 said:


> Mike Huckabee campaigned all over the country for Mitt Romney, who is Mormon. Huckabee is also good friends with Senator Mike Lee from Utah, who is also Mormon.





JoeB131 said:


> Yes, because the one thing that Evangelicals and Mormons have in common is that you are REALLY RACIST and OH MY GOD, THERE WAS A NEGRO IN THE WHITE HOUSE in 2012.  But don't think for a moment the Evangelicals like you now.   Mitt Romney could have been sacrificing virgins to C'Thulhu to summon the Great Old Ones and Huckabee would have supported him.



LOL! Uh, huh? Since you were wrong about Mike Huckabee, somehow that means that Mormons and Evangelicals are racists?! In other words, you don't want to admit that, unlike you, Mike Huckabee is not an anti-Mormon bigot. But rather than just admit you were wrong, you go off on a bizarre far-left rant about Mormons and Evangelicals supposedly being racists because most of them didn't vote for Obama.   



mikegriffith1 said:


> Yes, I'm sure that's what your PRC handlers have told you.





JoeB131 said:


> Crusades... Inquisitions, Witch burnings...The Thirty Years War... The Mountain Meadow Massacre... did they leave those parts out of history class at Mormon Cult U?



LOL and SMH! Leaving aside your ultra-liberal revisionist spin on those events, the death toll from all of those events is only a fraction of the death toll from your hero Mao Tsetung's murderous reign of terror in China.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> If you belong to a bunch of groups that even the U.S. Attorney General and several government committees have identified as Communist front groups, you have no right to work for the federal government. We're not talking just about what she believed, but about her actions. Did you read the evidence on her Communist activities, or did your PRC handlers tell you to stop reading when you got that far into the reply?





JoeB131 said:


> Naw, guy, this was crap 70 years ago, when Drunken Joe said it, and it's crap now.



Except that nobody disputes the fact that Fisher belonged to the NLG, that even Attorney General Brownell said the NLG was "the legal mouthpiece of the Communist Party," that Welch himself kicked Fisher off his Army-McCarthy team and sent him back to Boston before McCarthy said a word about him, and that the _New York Times_ reported on Fisher's NLG membership long before McCarthy said anything about him. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> The terrible thing is that you are delusional and are unwilling to process facts that destroy your fictional version of American history.
> 
> I ask you yet again to back up your claim that McCarthy ruined "a lot of people's lives because we were scared." _Name one person whose life McCarthy "ruined" with false charges._





JoeB131 said:


> I gave you a whole list...   The problem is, you think they "Deserved It", because they don't bend over and take it in the rear from the One Percent like you do.



Uh, no, it's just that your "whole list" was bogus. You named three people and then threw in the Hollywood Blacklist, the three people being Dorothy Kenyon, Fred Fisher, and Ann Hale. But, as I've already documented, (1) McCarthy had nothing to do with the Hollywood Blacklist (which started before he was in the Senate); (2) McCarthy had nothing to do with Ann Hale's case, which was handled strictly at the state and local level; (3) Kenyon belonged to a long list of Communist front organizations and was identified as a security risk long before McCarthy ever mentioned her; and (4) Fred Fisher, as mentioned, was not falsely accused by McCarthy, and his life was not ruined by being exposed as a former NLG member.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 30, 2020)

McCarthy was himself in contact with and heavily influenced by a Soviet agent, the Attorney for some of the Nazis at Nuremburg, who was later discovered to be a Soviet agent provocateur, spending his time trying to incite the right wingers to revolt and commit assorted atrocities and sabotage. Also curious is why Fred Koch was never named, noted for his support of such allegedly 'anti-Communist' groups as the John Birchers, after decades of being Stalin's right hand man in developing the Soviet Union's oil industry, which made him a very wealthy man. Considering how few actual Reds along with many innocent people old drunk Joe and his cronies actually named, it would be obvious old drunk Joe was probably a double agent himself, along with the John Birchers. It was a good day for the Right when William Buckley and Goldwater ran those cretins out of the GOP.

Do you loons seriously think Roy Cohn was anything remotely like a 'patriot'???? lol no wonder you're laughed at. And, let's not forget the Democrats' beloved Kennedy Brothers were right at old drunk Joe's side on his witchhunt committee. Kind of makes the far right loons look even stupider dolts than their usual run of drunken ravers.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> So we're back to your refusal to admit being wrong again. Let's just review a few facts. One, the fact that Fisher had belonged to a notorious Communist front organization



Uh, this is America..  You have every right to belong to any organization you want.  Personally, I'd like to throw a big fence around  Utah and turn it into a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but the First Amendment says we can't. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Two, even the demagogue Joseph Welch was persuaded that Fisher needed to be dropped from his firm's team for the Army-McCarthy hearings and sent him back to Boston--once again, before McCarthy had uttered a word about him. Three, McCarthy only decided to bring up Fisher's case after Welch was rudely and dishonestly badgering Roy Cohn during the hearing.



And that's when the whole country realized Drunken Joe was a fraud.   

Funny how that worked.  

Again, McCarthyism was a shameful period in our history.  We let fear rule us... good thing that never happened again 





I said, "Good thing that never happened again"...oh, shit... Something we are going to have to be apologizing to future generations of our multi-racial kids. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Except that nobody disputes the fact that Fisher belonged to the NLG,



Which again, he had every right to do.   This is America..  You can even belong to a whacky cult started by a kiddy-diddling Con man.  

Hey, you know the difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh?  Original and Extra Crispy!


----------



## Picaro (Jan 31, 2020)

Oh yes, and old drunk Joe was a former New Dealer, but kept losing elections, so he saw some right wing clown show that was winning votes and switched overnight to going for the raving loon vote, and made it to the Senate.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 1, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> So we're back to your refusal to admit being wrong again. Let's just review a few facts. One, the fact that Fisher had belonged to a notorious Communist front organization





JoeB131 said:


> Uh, this is America.  You have every right to belong to any organization you want.



We already covered this nonsense. Again, actually, in America, no, you do not have the right to belong to a subversive organization that is funded by a hostile foreign power and is dedicated to overthrowing the U.S. Government. No, you have no right to belong to such an organization and still expect to work for the government and/or to profit from the very economic system that you would destroy if your ilk came to power.

According to your ignorant understanding of America, you have the "right" to join an Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, or ISIS branch in America and still work for the government and still enjoy all the benefits of living in America.



JoeB131 said:


> Personally, I'd like to throw a big fence around  Utah and turn it into a Cult Deprogramming Camp, but the First Amendment says we can't.



Oh, I'm sorry you can't act on your fascist/communist/totalitarian desires here in America. Perhaps you should move to Red China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, or Iran, where Christian churches of all kinds are either banned or are subjected to persecution, imprisonment, and violence.



mikegriffith1 said:


> Two, even the demagogue Joseph Welch was persuaded that Fisher needed to be dropped from his firm's team for the Army-McCarthy hearings and sent him back to Boston--once again, before McCarthy had uttered a word about him. Three, McCarthy only decided to bring up Fisher's case after Welch was rudely and dishonestly badgering Roy Cohn during the hearing.





JoeB131 said:


> And that's when the whole country realized Drunken Joe was a fraud. Funny how that worked.



I know this myth is thoroughly burned into your brain, but it's simply false. Polls done at the time showed that even after the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy still enjoyed substantial public support.

I notice that you still have been unable to name a single person whose life was ruined by false charges made by McCarthy. The few cases you've named were cases where McCarthy either had no involvement or where there was clear evidence of membership in the Communist Party and/or in Communist front groups.



JoeB131 said:


> Again, McCarthyism was a shameful period in our history.  We let fear rule us... good thing that never happened again.



"Again," this is a left-wing myth. You seem to think that if you just keep repeating myths long enough, somehow that will make them come true.

When McCarthy began to raise concerns about cases of apparent security risks that had not been acted on, Americans were starting to grasp the horrors of communism because of what was happening in Red China, Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and Korea. Your North Korean and Red Chinese heroes were killing our soldiers in Korea and trying to impose communism on South Korea. The tens of millions of people in Eastern Europe were being brutalized by Soviet tyranny. Millions of people were being killed in Mao's China.

Americans looked at all these events and decided they did not want communism in America and did not think it was a good thing for Americans to join pro-Communist groups, much less the Communist Party itself. Americans decided they kind of liked free elections, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, etc., and they saw that under Communist rule none of those things were allowed.



mikegriffith1 said:


> Except that nobody disputes the fact that Fisher belonged to the NLG,





JoeB131 said:


> Which again, he had every right to do. This is America.



This is indeed America, but there would be no America today if the Communist agents and sympathizers whom you're defending and glorifying had succeeded in their goal of establishing a Soviet-like regime on our soil.

And, "again," no one had "every right" to join a subversive group that was acting as the mouthpiece for the Soviet-funded Communist Party USA, much less to join the Communist Party itself. You know nothing about the Constitution and the original intent of our founding fathers.

Again, using your un-American, alien ideology, you not only have the "right" to join ISIS, or Al Qaeda, or Hamas, or Hezbollah here in America, but you have the "right" to join those groups and still work for the government and still enjoy all the benefits of the very freedoms that those groups are trying to destroy.

Nope, sorry, JoeB Mao, that's not how America works, and it's never been how America works. The First Amendment does not mean you get to join groups that are trying to destroy the very freedoms that you hide behind when people complain about your totalitarian ideology. No one but an anti-American kook like you claims that the First Amendment means you have the right to join the Communist Party or Al Qaeda or Hamas or ISIS and still work for the government and still profit from the very freedoms that your ilk would destroy if they came to power. It doesn't work that way.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> We already covered this nonsense. Again, actually, in America, no, you do not have the right to belong to a subversive organization that is funded by a hostile foreign power and is dedicated to overthrowing the U.S. Government. No, you have no right to belong to such an organization and still expect to work for the government and/or to profit from the very economic system that you would destroy if your ilk came to power.



Sure you do.  When I was in the National Guard, we had some guys who were in the campus Radical organization at UIC.  So every weekend, they'd show up for drill and do their job, and during the week, they'd pretend to go to classes and hand out literature.   And when I asked Senior NCO's if they knew about this, they said, "Meh, they do their jobs."  



mikegriffith1 said:


> According to your ignorant understanding of America, you have the "right" to join an Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, or ISIS branch in America and still work for the government and still enjoy all the benefits of living in America.



Not really the same thing... but according to you, if we impose sanctions on people, they are perfectly justified in attacking us, so I don't see what your problem is, exactly.  Oh, wait, that only applies to FASCISTS.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> I know this myth is thoroughly burned into your brain, but it's simply false. Polls done at the time showed that even after the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy still enjoyed substantial public support.



Until people had a chance to think about it.   Then they realized what a shitty thing we were doing.  


A true American HERO!  Reminded us of who we were and what we SHOULD stand for. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Nope, sorry, JoeB Mao, that's not how America works, and it's never been how America works. The First Amendment does not mean you get to join groups that are trying to destroy the very freedoms that you hide behind when people complain about your totalitarian ideology. No one but an anti-American kook like you claims that the First Amendment means you have the right to join the Communist Party or Al Qaeda or Hamas or ISIS and still work for the government and still profit from the very freedoms that your ilk would destroy if they came to power. It doesn't work that way.



Uh, there's a difference between a political party, which has appeared on the US Ballot in elections since 1924, and a foreign terrorist organization. 

You are allowed to believe whatever you want.  You can even believe that Joseph Smith was taking to God and God told him to fuck those little girls.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > So we're back to your refusal to admit being wrong again. Let's just review a few facts. One, the fact that Fisher had belonged to a notorious Communist front organization
> ...




OOOPS, Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie.....


Manhattan Project: The Venona Intercepts


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > We already covered this nonsense. Again, actually, in America, no, you do not have the right to belong to a subversive organization that is funded by a hostile foreign power and is dedicated to overthrowing the U.S. Government. No, you have no right to belong to such an organization and still expect to work for the government and/or to profit from the very economic system that you would destroy if your ilk came to power.
> ...



https://www.nsa.gov/Portals/70/docu...cations/publications/coldwar/venona_story.pdf


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> OOOPS, Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie.....



Again. So what?  

We aren't talking about spies that they had in the Manhatten project (although the Soviets were perfectly capable of coming up with the bomb on their own and did)... we are talking about low level figures who had their lives ruined because some time in the 1930's, they went to a Communist meeting to listen.  

I suspect that if someone decided that conspiracy nutjobs who think that, oh, I don't know, that Sandy Hook was a false flag and we were going to ruin their lives, you'd be a lot of trouble.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 4, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...



Yes, he certainly seems like a real, live Communist. In the Nanking Massacre thread, he even said that Mao Tsetung brought prosperity, stability, and respect to China after he took over--this is the same Mao  who murdered over 30 million Chinese and sent over a million others to concentration camps. JoeB131 has also said that it's wrong to "demonize" Joseph Stalin. How do you "demonize" someone who is already a demon? And, as you have seen, he claims that you are entitled to work for the U.S. Government and enjoy the fruits of America even if you belong to a subversive organization, including identified Communist front groups and even the Communist Party USA itself.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 4, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > OOOPS, Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie.....
> ...




Under the land lease agreement, the USSR was allowed access to the patent office. I suggest you listen to this.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 5, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Yes, he certainly seems like a real, live Communist. In the Nanking Massacre thread, he even said that Mao Tsetung brought prosperity, stability, and respect to China after he took over--this is the same Mao who murdered over 30 million Chinese and sent over a million others to concentration camps. JoeB131 has also said that it's wrong to "demonize" Joseph Stalin. How do you "demonize" someone who is already a demon? And, as you have seen, he claims that you are entitled to work for the U.S. Government and enjoy the fruits of America even if you belong to a subversive organization, including identified Communist front groups and even the Communist Party USA itself.



Uh, guy, there are no Demons, Devils, Angels or Gods...  

Mao didn't murder anywhere near 30 million Chinese.  Other Chinese probably did murder Japanese and Nationalist collaborators, but sucks to be them, doesn't it?  

The point I tried to get across to you was from the Opium War to Mao, you had 100 years of the "Century of Humiliation" where China was abused by unequal treaties, pumped full of opium, and carved up into fiefdoms at the behest of imperial powers. 





This is why Mao is reverred by Chinese to this very day, even if they aren't quite so keen on "Communism".


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 5, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> Under the land lease agreement, the USSR was allowed access to the patent office. I suggest you listen to this.



Does it have Chem Trails and Crisis Actors?  Man, it's hilarious to watch you babble on about the most obscure agencies being in on the "Vast Lizard Man Trilateralist Conspiracy".


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 5, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Under the land lease agreement, the USSR was allowed access to the patent office. I suggest you listen to this.
> ...



As usual, I kick your ass, Joe Blowhard, card carrying commie.


(snicker)


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 5, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > OOOPS, Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie.....
> ...


Joe, you fucking dumbass, the Soviets did not come up with the bomb on their own.  The Rosenbergs gave them all the information needed.   That's why they were executed.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> As usual, I kick your ass, Joe Blowhard, card carrying commie.



Um, not really... YOu just come off as a crazy person... 



bripat9643 said:


> Joe, you fucking dumbass, the Soviets did not come up with the bomb on their own. The Rosenbergs gave them all the information needed. That's why they were executed.



Naw, they were executed because we went crazy for a few years out of fear.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > As usual, I kick your ass, Joe Blowhard, card carrying commie.
> ...


Nope.  They were Russian spies who gave the secrets of the atomic bomb to Stalin.   If anyone in this country ever deserved to be executed for treason, they did.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Nope. They were Russian spies who gave the secrets of the atomic bomb to Stalin. If anyone in this country ever deserved to be executed for treason, they did.



The Soviets had as many scientists working on the problem as we had, and after the war, they got most of the German Scientists.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. They were Russian spies who gave the secrets of the atomic bomb to Stalin. If anyone in this country ever deserved to be executed for treason, they did.
> ...


The didn't get the bomb until the Rosenbergs handed them the solution.  That's an irrefutable historical fact.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> The didn't get the bomb until the Rosenbergs handed them the solution. That's an irrefutable historical fact.



Not really. In fact there's a lot of doubt that Ethel was involved in espinoge at all.  

'Atom spy' Ethel Rosenberg's conviction in new doubt after testimony released


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > OOOPS, Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie.....
> ...


You keep confusing the McCarthy with the HUAC


----------



## Flash (Feb 6, 2020)

When you look at all those Left Wing Democrat assholes at the SOTU address and you see the attempted coupe of Trump by the Deep State Libtard turds then you know that McCarthy was right.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > The didn't get the bomb until the Rosenbergs handed them the solution. That's an irrefutable historical fact.
> ...


The Venona papers confirmed irrefutably that she was, moron.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 6, 2020)

CrusaderFrank said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


They all do.  They all claim to be experts on McCarthy, but they invariably demonstrate their ignorance.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> The Venona papers confirmed irrefutably that she was, moron.



The Verona Papers aren't reliable............ 



bripat9643 said:


> They all do. They all claim to be experts on McCarthy, but they invariably demonstrate their ignorance.



History has spoken on McCarthy, a cheap demogogue who disgraced the freedoms America stands for.  

Hopefully, he's saving Trump a seat in Hell.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > The Venona papers confirmed irrefutably that she was, moron.
> ...



ROFL!   Says who?



JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > They all do. They all claim to be experts on McCarthy, but they invariably demonstrate their ignorance.
> ...



The Venona papers say McCarthy was right.  When  you say "history" you mean your ignorant understanding of history.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > The Venona papers confirmed irrefutably that she was, moron.
> ...



McCarthy attacked the commie faction that started infiltrating every branch of government that George Racy Jordan was trying to expose it back in the late 40's and his record keeping of sending not only uranium but also printing plates and ink to print occupational money which could be exchanged for federal reserve notes.
 I am sure you are too gutless to listen to this talk given by Major Jordan......but to the others that have been bitchslapping you on this topic? They will listen to this and have further ammo to smack your commie ass around with.


Hope this helps!


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> McCarthy attacked the commie faction that started infiltrating every branch of government that George Racy Jordan was trying to expose it back in the late 40's and his record keeping of sending not only uranium but also printing plates and ink to print occupational money which could be exchanged for federal reserve notes.
> I am sure you are too gutless to listen to this talk given by Major Jordan......but to the others that have been bitchslapping you on this topic? They will listen to this and have further ammo to smack your commie ass around with.



Yawn, guy, you pulling some weird bircher nut who managed to get a commission because the Army threw him out is nothing to be impressed by. 

THis pretty much should tell you all you need to know. 

Jordan had already been active as a lecturer, and after his Congressional testimony [8] he was much in demand nationwide. He specialized in making anti-communist speeches and serving in several fringe and right-wing causes. In particular, Jordan, who had been puzzled by the wartime delivery of "vast quantities of sodium fluoride" to the USSR,* promoted the theory that fluoridation of public water supplies was a hidden Communist plot against America. He was quoted as follows: "I know fluoridation to be a very secret Russian revolutionary technique to deaden our minds, slow our reflexes, and gradually kill our will to resist aggression."[9]*

Yup, Flouridation is a communist plot.  Those commies wanted to make sure I still had my teeth at 58.


----------



## initforme (Feb 7, 2020)

Sensible people laughed off McCarthy...my dad used to talk about him and it wasn't real pretty.


----------



## 22lcidw (Feb 7, 2020)

We do not want to admit there was a strong communist influence in our nation. Hollywood was full of them or were communist sympathizers. The Great Depression was a breeding ground for it. And frankly if anyone had a hard time it may have sounded like a good alternative. The news from the then Soviet Union was that people were not living badly. medical care and work was plentiful. But the 30-40 million killed as dissenters and through collectivism was not reported. The brutality of Stalin eliminating anyone seen as a competitor to him was not reported. There is more. And that is what we are going to get in some way when the Progs take complete control of us.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

22lcidw said:


> We do not want to admit there was a strong communist influence in our nation. Hollywood was full of them or were communist sympathizers. The Great Depression was a breeding ground for it. And frankly if anyone had a hard time it may have sounded like a good alternative. The news from the then Soviet Union was that people were not living badly. medical care and work was plentiful.* But the 30-40 million killed as dissenters and through collectivism was not reported. *The brutality of Stalin eliminating anyone seen as a competitor to him was not reported. There is more. And that is what we are going to get in some way when the Progs take complete control of us.



It wasn't reported because it didn't happen.   

Uh, guy, the population of the USSR INCREASED From 1919 to 1952 despite the supposed 30 million Stalin killed on top of the 20 million killed in WWII.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 7, 2020)

initforme said:


> Sensible people laughed off McCarthy...my dad used to talk about him and it wasn't real pretty.


Your dad was a communist?


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 7, 2020)

22lcidw said:


> We do not want to admit there was a strong communist influence in our nation. Hollywood was full of them or were communist sympathizers. The Great Depression was a breeding ground for it. And frankly if anyone had a hard time it may have sounded like a good alternative. The news from the then Soviet Union was that people were not living badly. medical care and work was plentiful.* But the 30-40 million killed as dissenters and through collectivism was not reported. *The brutality of Stalin eliminating anyone seen as a competitor to him was not reported. There is more. And that is what we are going to get in some way when the Progs take complete control of us.





JoeB131 said:


> *It wasn't reported because it didn't happen*.



LOL!!! WHAAAAAT?????  "It didn't happen"?????  And you talk about "Holocaust denial"?!!! Stalin's holocaust was far worse than Hitler's holocaust. Both were horrific, but Stalin's claimed many more lives.

Stalin’s Genocides

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

USSR--Genocide and Mass Murder

The Communist holocaust and its lessons for the 21st Century - CapX

https://www.amazon.com/Blood-Letters-Untold-Story-Martyr/dp/1541644239&tag=ff0d01-20

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01GGCR76K/?tag=ff0d01-20

Who Killed More: Hitler, Stalin, or Mao?

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33

The Butchery of Hitler and Stalin

https://www.ushmm.org/confront-geno...al-perspective/ukraine-1933-the-terror-famine


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL!!! WHAAAAAT????? "It didn't happen"????? And you talk about "Holocaust denial"?!!! Stalin's holocaust was far worse than Hitler's holocaust. Both were horrific, but Stalin's claimed many more lives.



Yawn, guy no one is interested in your Bircher Propaganda...   

Again, if Stalin killed so many people, why did the population of the USSR increase 30% under his reign? 

From 120MM in 1920 to 182 million in 1951.  Even with about 20 million dying in World War II.  

Never mind, we know math isn't one of your strong points.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 8, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL!!! WHAAAAAT????? "It didn't happen"????? And you talk about "Holocaust denial"?!!! Stalin's holocaust was far worse than Hitler's holocaust. Both were horrific, but Stalin's claimed many more lives.





JoeB131 said:


> Yawn, guy no one is interested in your Bircher Propaganda...



What a chuckle.  Uh, which among the sources I cited are "Bircher" sources? I take it you didn't bother to actually read any of them, right? Otherwise, you would have known that none of them are "Bircher" sources. One of them was a _New York Times_ article.   



JoeB131 said:


> Again, if Stalin killed so many people, why did the population of the USSR increase 30% under his reign? From 120MM in 1920 to 182 million in 1951.  Even with about 20 million dying in World War II. Never mind, we know math isn't one of your strong points.



LOL!!!  Oh, boy. You are the gift that just keeps on giving!  Trigger alert: Logic and facts coming. Okay, you ready?

Did it ever occur to you that you can't trust Soviet statistics?! Did that thought every pop into your Communist-brainwashed mind? Did it occur to you that in order to try to cover up their years of mass murders, the Soviets would fiddle with their population statistics in the hope that useful idiots, or willing sympathizers, like you would gobble them up and said, "Gee, you see! The Soviets couldn't have killed all those millions of people!"

Now, are you going to deal with the evidence presented in the articles I cited that Stalin killed some 20 million people? Do you have any idea how many scholars--liberal and conservative alike--have discussed the evidence of the Soviet Holocaust? Do you know how many Soviet dissidents have written about the millions of Soviet subjects who were killed by Stalin and his thugs over the course of several decades?


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Feb 8, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946, had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB. John Abt, the Chief Counsel of the Committee; Charles Kramer, who served on three other Congressional Committees; Allen Rosenberg, who also served on the National Labor Relations Board, Board of Economic Warfare (BEW), the Foreign Economic Administration (FEA), and later argued cases before the United States Supreme Court; and Charles Flato, who served on the BEW and FEA, were all members of the Communist Party USA and were associated with the Soviet-run Comintern.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > McCarthy attacked the commie faction that started infiltrating every branch of government that George Racy Jordan was trying to expose it back in the late 40's and his record keeping of sending not only uranium but also printing plates and ink to print occupational money which could be exchanged for federal reserve notes.
> ...




Yawwwwwn, I get it....since Major Jordan was an anti-commie and you are an outright marxist? Of course you will lamely attempt to minimize what he recorded in his journal and all of what he stated has never been refuted and he testified under oath concerning the land lease program to the USSR.

BTW, sodium fluoride was used in the concentration camps in Nazi Germany and in the gulags in the USSR to keep the inmates "docile" and thanks to "Operation Keelhaul" by USA.INC via General Eisenhower, those gulags in Siberia were overflowing with anti-communists that weren't all about the collective. Sodium Fluoride is an industrial waste by-product of producing aluminum. Some asswipe from ALCOA paid off some douche from the Mellon Institute to tout the benefits of this industrial waste being put into the water supply. Look at the back of the toothpaste tube that states that if a child swallows even as much as a bead of toothpastes that "Poison Control" should be notified. Is sodium fluoride good in small doses but dangerous in higher doses? How can it possibly be regulated?

You are always "wrong", Joe Blowhard, the card carrying, cock-sucking commie.....you are, at the very least, "consistent".

(snicker)

BTW, not exactly what one would call a "right wing" or conspiratorial site....

Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Reduces Children's IQ


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 8, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > LOL!!! WHAAAAAT????? "It didn't happen"????? And you talk about "Holocaust denial"?!!! Stalin's holocaust was far worse than Hitler's holocaust. Both were horrific, but Stalin's claimed many more lives.
> ...



Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie also claimed that the people standing up for themselves in Tienanmen Square were "rabble rousers" that did not have the support of the people.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> What a chuckle. Uh, which among the sources I cited are "Bircher" sources? I take it you didn't bother to actually read any of them, right? Otherwise, you would have known that none of them are "Bircher" sources. One of them was a _New York Times_ article.



Again, I don't bother reading Bircher Propaganda.  I think the first one was from some Right Wing Source, the rest I ignored. d



mikegriffith1 said:


> Did it ever occur to you that you can't trust Soviet statistics?! Did that thought every pop into your Communist-brainwashed mind? Did it occur to you that in order to try to cover up their years of mass murders, the Soviets would fiddle with their population statistics in the hope that useful idiots, or willing sympathizers, like you would gobble them up and said, "Gee, you see! The Soviets couldn't have killed all those millions of people!"



Nope, that's actually.. kind of idiotic.  Most countries know they need accurate census statistics to function. The reality- Stalin probably killed a lot of people.  Just not that many. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Now, are you going to deal with the evidence presented in the articles I cited that Stalin killed some 20 million people?



Guy, you are the same person who claimed the Rape of Nanking wasn't that bad, the Chinese and Koreans were better off under Japanese Rule (even though they STILL hate the Japs today), and of course, my favorite, Joseph Smith was REALLY talking to God. 

Stalin killed nowhere near 20 million people, and the only way you even get into some of the more exotic numbers is if you count the civil war and famines..


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> Yawwwwwn, I get it....since Major Jordan was an anti-commie and you are an outright marxist? Of course you will lamely attempt to minimize what he recorded in his journal and all of what he stated has never been refuted and he testified under oath concerning the land lease program to the USSR.





Dale Smith said:


> BTW, sodium fluoride was used in the concentration camps in Nazi Germany and in the gulags in the USSR to keep the inmates "docile" and thanks to "Operation Keelhaul" by USA.INC via General Eisenhower, those gulags in Siberia were overflowing with anti-communists that weren't all about the collective. Sodium Fluoride is an industrial waste by-product of producing aluminum. Some asswipe from ALCOA paid off some douche from the Mellon Institute to tout the benefits of this industrial waste being put into the water supply. Look at the back of the toothpaste tube that states that if a child swallows even as much as a bead of toothpastes that "Poison Control" should be notified. Is sodium fluoride good in small doses but dangerous in higher doses? How can it possibly be regulated?



Wow... I love when you get into the high-octane crazy like this Dale.  I mean, do you say this crazy shit in public, and what do you do when people treat you like you're nuts? 

Community Water Fluoridation | Division of Oral Health | CDC



Dale Smith said:


> Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie also claimed that the people standing up for themselves in Tienanmen Square were "rabble rousers" that did not have the support of the people.



I don't think I've commented on Tianeman Square one way or the other.  They clearly didn't have the support of the people, though, as no one was all that upset about the crackdown in China. 

Now, what I consider a REAL conspiracy is how Hollywood makes movies so they can resell them in China.  LIke in the "Red Dawn" remake where the villains were changed from China to North Korea at the last minute (which made it laughable) or how they cut out any of that gay stuff in the new Star Wars movie.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Yawwwwwn, I get it....since Major Jordan was an anti-commie and you are an outright marxist? Of course you will lamely attempt to minimize what he recorded in his journal and all of what he stated has never been refuted and he testified under oath concerning the land lease program to the USSR.
> ...




Joe Blowhard, you do know that the CDC is incorporated and is engaged in a "for profit' venture, no?
They work at the behest of big pharma and can be found on the Dun and Bradstreet website. If you needed any other proof, just look at the mercury based preservatives in vaccines that the CDC signed off on after the big pharma lobbyists twisted their arms with hefty donations. Only an idiot would believe that a waste by-product (that would be expensive to dispose of otherwise) had it not been for the fact that they actually got PAID for the toxic waste that was dumped it into the water treatment centers  AND could POSSIBLY be beneficiary "health-wise" to the public. Read it and weep, Joe Blowhard...

Fluoride: Killing Us Softly - Global Research

Let's see what Joe Blowhard believes, shall we? Stalin didn't intentionally starve 20 plus million people in Ukraine, the Maosists didn't commit genocide in China and southeast Asia. Gulags were not as as bad as was reported and that hot pokers were not shoved up the asses of dissidents nor were they worked to death at all but rather it was a vacation type atmosphere where conjugal visits were allowed in Siberia. Furthermore, China doesn't persecute Christians and members of falon gong nor do they sell the organs of dissidents......believe Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie as he seeks serious validation.

Keep on drinking the tap water, Joe Blowhard, it can't do any further damage as far as your ability to "think" goes....that little dinghy sailed long ago.

(snicker)


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 10, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> Joe Blowhard, you do know that the CDC is incorporated and is engaged in a "for profit' venture, no?



Guy, who isn't in on the VAST CONSPIRACY.  How do we know you aren't in on the VAST CONSPIRACY.  We need to check to make sure you aren't a lizard person. 



Dale Smith said:


> They work at the behest of big pharma and can be found on the Dun and Bradstreet website. If you needed any other proof, just look at the mercury based preservatives in vaccines that the CDC signed off on after the big pharma lobbyists twisted their arms with hefty donations. Only an idiot would believe that a waste by-product (that would be expensive to dispose of otherwise) had it not been for the fact that they actually got PAID for the toxic waste that was dumped it into the water treatment centers AND could POSSIBLY be beneficiary "health-wise" to the public. Read it and weep, Joe Blowhard...



Wait, so let me get this straight.  Flouride (which is an element) is a waste byproduct, but Carbon Dioxide, which is produced by automobiles and is causing global warming isn't.  



Dale Smith said:


> Let's see what Joe Blowhard believes, shall we? Stalin didn't intentionally starve 20 plus million people in Ukraine,



No, he really didn't.  

First, most estimates of the Famine in the Ukraine puts the death toll at 3.5 million. Secondly, "We starved to death because we didn't want to work very hard if we weren't making a profit" is hardly a "genocide".   Third, there were environmental and economic factors that contributed, such as the West completely cutting the USSR off after WWI.  



Dale Smith said:


> China doesn't persecute Christians and members of falon gong nor do they sell the organs of dissidents.....



Oh, China totally does that shit.  So fucking what?  Not my problem.  The reality is, you'll still go to Walmart and your fat, stupid ass will still buy Chinese made goods.  

Again, if your crazy was just limited to Tap Water, you wouldn't be so offensive. It's when you start accusing the parents of murdered children of being crisis actors that you out yourself as a real cocksucker.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 10, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> What a chuckle. Uh, which among the sources I cited are "Bircher" sources? I take it you didn't bother to actually read any of them, right? Otherwise, you would have known that none of them are "Bircher" sources. One of them was a _New York Times_ article.





JoeB131 said:


> Again, I don't bother reading Bircher Propaganda.  I think the first one was from some Right Wing Source, the rest I ignored.



Oh, so in your mind any source that is conservative is "Bircher Propaganda." I see. What about the liberal and moderate sources that I cited? Oh, I forgot: You didn't bother to read any sources beyond the first one.



mikegriffith1 said:


> Did it ever occur to you that you can't trust Soviet statistics?! Did that thought every pop into your Communist-brainwashed mind? Did it occur to you that in order to try to cover up their years of mass murders, the Soviets would fiddle with their population statistics in the hope that useful idiots, or willing sympathizers, like you would gobble them up and said, "Gee, you see! The Soviets couldn't have killed all those millions of people!"





JoeB131 said:


> Nope, that's actually.. kind of idiotic.  Most countries know they need accurate census statistics to function.



Actually, your answer is "kind of idiotic." I'm guessing you have no clue about the fact that Western financial experts have pointed out that Red China has been inflating their GDP stats. But, gee, don't countries know they need accurate economic stats to function?

I guess it never dawned on you that lying tyrannical governments can release fake stats to the world and keep the real stats among themselves. Nah, that could never happen, right?



JoeB131 said:


> Stalin killed nowhere near 20 million people. . . .



In other words, once again, you have done no serious research and are just saying what you want to believe. You have no clue what you're talking about.

I notice you still have made no attempt to address the evidence that Stalin killed some 20 million people during his reign.



JoeB131 said:


> and the only way you even get into some of the more exotic numbers is if you count the civil war and famines.



LOL!  Oh, so when he was killing Russians who were trying to throw off Soviet tyranny, that doesn't count?!!!  And when he killed millions with deliberate famines and other famines due to incompetence, oh, those don't count either?!!!  What a joke you are. What an absolute Communist joke.



JoeB131 said:


> The reality- Stalin probably killed a lot of people.  Just not that many.



Oh, "not that many." Uh, well, most people would consider the killing of 20 million people to be a holocaust, and would consider 20 million people to be a lot of people.



mikegriffith1 said:


> Now, are you going to deal with the evidence presented in the articles I cited that Stalin killed some 20 million people?





JoeB131 said:


> Guy, you are the same person who claimed the Rape of Nanking wasn't that bad,



You're a lying piece of garbage. Quote me as saying that the rape of Nanking "wasn't that bad." Let's see it. Produce one quote where I said that the rape of Nanking was anything other than an atrocity, a war crime, horrendous, immoral, etc., etc.



JoeB131 said:


> the Chinese and Koreans were better off under Japanese Rule (even though they STILL hate the Japs today),



You're lying again. I said the Chinese and the Koreans would have been better off under Japanese rule _than under Communist rule_. You left out "than under Communist rule." Why was that? Because you wanted to give a false impression.

Are you seriously claiming that the North Koreans and the Chinese were worse off under Japanese rule than under Communist rule?  Would you care to compare North Korea's economic and educational advancement under Japanese rule to how they've been doing under Communist rule, not to mention the millions of Koreans who've died under North Korea's brutal tyranny? No responsible scholar claims that more than 10K to 20K Koreans died from maltreatment during Japan's entire 35-year reign. And not even you can be so ignorant as to believe that China was better off under Mao Tsetung than they were under the Japanese.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 11, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> View attachment 305835
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> ...



"Guy, who isn't in on the VAST CONSPIRACY.  How do we know you aren't in on the VAST CONSPIRACY.  We need to check to make sure you aren't a lizard person"

I simply stated fact that you could easily verify and validate....but you won't because you absolutely despise being proven wrong. What you can't refute, you deflect from and try the lame tactic of topic changing.

"Wait, so let me get this straight.  Flouride (which is an element) is a waste byproduct, but Carbon Dioxide, which is produced by automobiles and is causing global warming isn't."

Strontium is an element and it's not healthy for human consumption any more than sodium fluoride is, so what was your point??? Want to bitch about CO2? Bitch at the banking oligarchs that set up the Bretton Woods agreement after WWII and then reneged on it and then set up the creation of the petro-dollar with OPEC to keep this petroleum based economy under their control. Bitch at them for suppressing  technology that would use 100 percent of the gasoline instead of the 14 to 18 percent that powers an obsolete, technology wise combustion engine while the rest is emitted.

Hmmm? We have technology that can create a CPU chip small enough to fit into the dimple of a golf ball that can handle what is needed to run a laptop computer but yet? Technology to revolutionize the automotive industry doesn't "exist" because of "big oil" aka "big bankers"? Dumb fucks like you believe that by imposing a "carbon tax" where they can basically "double dip"? We could reverse the geo-engineered climate changing of the planet. I call it "extortion" while dumb fucks like you claim it's "environmentalism. The sheeple are only allowed access to obsolete technology that is at least 100 years behind compared to what the MIC has and that is a very conservative estimate? The use of depleted uranium weapons, ionospheric heaters (that are now portable after the "proof of concept" of the HAARP project in Alaska? How many atomic/nuclear weapons have been exploded for testing over the last 70 plus years? The intentional polluting of our ground water via fracking? But worry not! Our water test treatment plants will separate our shit and urine from city water supplies, filter it, add chemicals to it and drink a big ol' glass of it from the tap, Joe Blowhard....8 glasses a day!

Stalin didn't intentionally starve 20 to 30 million people to death in the Ukraine? He had no beef with the Ukrainians? In one year alone, 4 million died of starvation 1932 to 1933....other historians claim it was closer to eight million in that year alone.

https://www.history.com/news/ukrainian-famine-stalin

The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33


"The West completely cutting the USSR off after WWI"

There could have been no communist uprising in Russia if not for the financing of the Wall Street and European bankers. They viewed Russia as a huge vast of riches when it came to their natural resources but would profit better if they could rape, pillage and plunder this country if there were only two classes of people...the unarmed serfs and the leadership funded by western and European bankers.


Dale Smith :China doesn't persecute Christians and members of falon gong nor do they sell the organs of dissidents".....read Joe Blowhard's response.....kinda tells you all you need to know about Joe Blowhard, the card carrying commie

Joe Blowhard : "Oh, China totally does that shit.  So fucking what?  Not my problem.  The reality is, you'll still go to Walmart and your fat, stupid ass will still buy Chinese made goods."

WRONG, Joe Blowhard.......I don't shop at Wal-Mart whose founder was involved in military intelligence and supervised POW camps and has had a contract with DHS pretty much since 9/11/01 at the latest.

"Again, if your crazy was just limited to Tap Water, you wouldn't be so offensive. It's when you start accusing the parents of murdered children of being crisis actors that you out yourself as a real cocksucker"

#1 I don't give a flying fuck if what I post here "offends" you. Somewhere along the line of communication, you got the impression that I gave so much as a cow's fart as to how you perceive me. I must have made a strategical error somewhere along the way that gave you that impression. Allow me to set thew record straight...I don't .

#2 I find it extremely ironic while apropos that you can't answer very salient questions about Sandy Hoax and claim indignant outrage over a psy-op where no one died while supporting abortion up to nine months if the mother so chooses. You speak out of both sides of your mouth which makes you the quintessential leftard. 

Summation: Your ass gets kicked yet again.....

(snicker)


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 11, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Actually, your answer is "kind of idiotic." I'm guessing you have no clue about the fact that Western financial experts have pointed out that Red China has been inflating their GDP stats. But, gee, don't countries know they need accurate economic stats to function?



We aren't talking about GDP stats, we are talking about Census figures.  Nobody really disputed Soviet Census figures even during the Cold War, not even the CIA. So it goes back to the original point. How does the USSR have Stalin kill 20 Million people, and then lose another 20 million in the War, and STILL increased their population from 137MM in 1920 to 182MM in 1951.  This would mean they would have had to have had 85 million births to not only make up their losses BUT also increase their population. 

By comparison, the US Census in 1920 was 106 million and it increased to 150 million by 1950.  This is with the US having continued influxes of immigration, (My own family immigrated here in that time period), not really taking a lot of fatalities in either world war, and clearly not having any mass slaughters like the kind you claim Stalin was doing.  Oh, yeah, and the Baby Boom started in 1946. 

SOOOOO -  either 1) Them Russian Babes were fucking like rabbits or 2) The "Stalin Murdered 30 million people" is utter bullshit on it's face. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> In other words, once again, you have done no serious research and are just saying what you want to believe. You have no clue what you're talking about.



It took me all of five minutes to look up population stats and disprove that bullshit.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL! Oh, so when he was killing Russians who were trying to throw off Soviet tyranny, that doesn't count?!!! And when he killed millions with deliberate famines and other famines due to incompetence, oh, those don't count either?!!! What a joke you are. What an absolute Communist joke.



Um, yeah, Civil Wars, it takes two to Tango. Otherwise you'd have to blame Lincoln for all the deaths in our civil war even though the fucking South started it.  Oh, wait.  You probably already do. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> You're a lying piece of garbage. Quote me as saying that the rape of Nanking "wasn't that bad." Let's see it. Produce one quote where I said that the rape of Nanking was anything other than an atrocity, a war crime, horrendous, immoral, etc., etc.



Um, the part where you said it was only 20,000 people instead of the generally accepted 300,000 people, and that the people who were executed for perpetrating it were victims of a miscarriage of justice.  That's where you said it "wasn't that bad".  



mikegriffith1 said:


> You're lying again. I said the Chinese and the Koreans would have been better off under Japanese rule _than under Communist rule_. You left out "than under Communist rule." Why was that? Because you wanted to give a false impression.



because 1 )South Korea isn't under Communist rule, and YOU STILL tried to claim the Japanese were doing the Koreans a solid when they were shipping their women all over Asia to be serial raped.  2) You spent a lot of time criticizing Peanut compared to the Japanese as well.   As for the Communists... well, funny thing, in China, the Communist won.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 11, 2020)

Dale Smith said:


> Bretton Woods agreement after WWII and then reneged on it and then set up the creation of the petro-dollar with OPEC to keep this petroleum based economy under their control. Bitch at them for suppressing technology that would use 100 percent of the gasoline instead of the 14 to 18 percent that powers an obsolete, technology wise combustion engine while the rest is emitted.



Yes, it's all a lizard man conspiracy... because no one anywhere would come up with the magic engine that uses less gas.



Dale Smith said:


> Hmmm? We have technology that can create a CPU chip small enough to fit into the dimple of a golf ball that can handle what is needed to run a laptop computer but yet? Technology to revolutionize the automotive industry doesn't "exist" because of "big oil" aka "big bankers"?



I'm sure it does.  We just can't afford the cars...  



Dale Smith said:


> There could have been no communist uprising in Russia if not for the financing of the Wall Street and European bankers. They viewed Russia as a huge vast of riches when it came to their natural resources but would profit better if they could rape, pillage and plunder this country if there were only two classes of people...the unarmed serfs and the leadership funded by western and European bankers.



Um... yeah, did you forget about the part of World War I where most of the west was horrified that the Russian Revolution might spread to Germany and then Europe?  Or how the entire west tried to intervene in the Russian Civil War on the side of the Whites and failed?  



Dale Smith said:


> WRONG, Joe Blowhard.......I don't shop at Wal-Mart whose founder was involved in military intelligence and supervised POW camps and has had a contract with DHS pretty much since 9/11/01 at the latest.



Sam Walton died in 1992. How could he have a contract with DHS.  Did his Zombie show up to sign the papers.  Did they pay him in "Brains"? 



Dale Smith said:


> find it extremely ironic while apropos that you can't answer very salient questions about Sandy Hoax and claim indignant outrage over a psy-op where no one died while supporting abortion up to nine months if the mother so chooses. You speak out of both sides of your mouth which makes you the quintessential leftard.




Fetuses aren't people. 
No one has an abortion in the third trimester unless there's a DAMNED good medical reason. 
Anyone who talks about "Sandy Hoax" is an evil Cocksucker with no humanity. 
The good news, Jones and Halbig and Fetzner are going to be TAKEN TO THE CLEANERS for their awful lies, and a good thing, too.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 11, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Actually, your answer is "kind of idiotic." I'm guessing you have no clue about the fact that Western financial experts have pointed out that Red China has been inflating their GDP stats. But, gee, don't countries know they need accurate economic stats to function?





JoeB131 said:


> We aren't talking about GDP stats, we are talking about Census figures.  Nobody really disputed Soviet Census figures even during the Cold War, not even the CIA. So it goes back to the original point. How does the USSR have Stalin kill 20 Million people, and then lose another 20 million in the War, and STILL increased their population from 137MM in 1920 to 182MM in 1951.  This would mean they would have had to have had 85 million births to not only make up their losses BUT also increase their population.



IOW, you're going to keep hiding behind Soviet census data to avoid dealing with the massive evidence--disputed by no one except by ilk like Putin and Communist apologists like you--that Stalin killed some 20 million people during his reign of terror. Entire books have been written that present this evidence. Good grief, even the_ New York Times_ and the_ Washington Post_ do not deny this evidence.



mikegriffith1 said:


> LOL! Oh, so when he was killing Russians who were trying to throw off Soviet tyranny, that doesn't count?!!! And when he killed millions with deliberate famines and other famines due to incompetence, oh, those don't count either?!!! What a joke you are. What an absolute Communist joke.





JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, Civil Wars, it takes two to Tango.



Oh, because of course all civil war are the same and the Russians who were trying to throw off Soviet tyranny were the bad guys, right?



mikegriffith1 said:


> You're a lying piece of garbage. Quote me as saying that the rape of Nanking "wasn't that bad." Let's see it. Produce one quote where I said that the rape of Nanking was anything other than an atrocity, a war crime, horrendous, immoral, etc., etc.





JoeB131 said:


> Um, the part where you said it was only 20,000 people instead of the generally accepted 300,000 people, and that the people who were executed for perpetrating it were victims of a miscarriage of justice.  That's where you said it "wasn't that bad".



IOW, you got caught in another lie and won't admit it. By the way, the very same Wikipedia article that you cited in the Nanking Massacre thread says that the generally accepted range for the death toll is 40,000 to 200,000: "Currently, the most reliable and widely agreed upon figures place the total death toll of the massacre between the broad range of 40,000 to 200,000 massacre victims in the entire Nanking Special Administrative District."

I pointed this out to you in that thread, yet you still keep claiming the figure of 300,000 is "generally accepted." Not by scholars it's not. And you never were able to explain how the Japanese could have killed 300,000 people when every single primary source in Nanking said the population was around 200,000 when the Japanese took the city, and those sources included a population survey that was done with exclusively Chinese field workers just weeks after the massacre.

We both know that you can't find a single statement of mine in that thread or elsewhere that any rational, honest person would interpret as saying that the massacre "wasn't that bad." This is just one more example of your habit of sleazy lying.



mikegriffith1 said:


> You're lying again. I said the Chinese and the Koreans would have been better off under Japanese rule _than under Communist rule_. You left out "than under Communist rule." Why was that? Because you wanted to give a false impression.





JoeB131 said:


> because 1 )South Korea isn't under Communist rule,



I didn't say it was under Communist rule. Can you read?

However, as long as we're on the subject, South Korea was under Communist rule until we expended thousands of lives to drive the Communists back into North Korea. Thanks to your idol Mao Tsetung, thousands of American soldiers were killed after the Chinese entered the war and nearly drove us off the peninsula.



JoeB131 said:


> and YOU STILL tried to claim the Japanese were doing the Koreans a solid when they were shipping their women all over Asia to be serial raped.



Leaving aside the fact that your argument is based on a strongly disputed assumption about the comfort women, can you quote me as ever saying that I thought the Japanese were doing Korea a favor by supposedly "shipping their women all over Asia"? Do you have any idea how dumb you look when you make these absurd arguments?

And are you ever going to deal with any of the research that I presented to you that documents that Japanese rule in Korea was mild and very beneficial?



JoeB131 said:


> 2) You spent a lot of time criticizing Peanut compared to the Japanese as well.   As for the Communists... well, funny thing, in China, the Communist won.



You're a broken record. I've already dealt with this silly argument, at length. But you just keep ignoring the refutations and keep repeating your nonsense.

Why don't you go tell the tens of millions of Russians whose grandparents and great-grandparents were killed by the Soviets during Stalin's reign that they must be lying because of the census figures published by the Soviet government?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 12, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> IOW, you're going to keep hiding behind Soviet census data to avoid dealing with the massive evidence--disputed by no one except by ilk like Putin and Communist apologists like you--that Stalin killed some 20 million people during his reign of terror. Entire books have been written that present this evidence. Good grief, even the_ New York Times_ and the_ Washington Post_ do not deny this evidence.



But you still have the same problem.  The USSR would have had to have created 83 Million people to make up for their War Losses, population growth and these imaginary people Stalin killed.    The numbers just don't add up, no matter how many people lazily repeat Bircher propaganda from the 1950's.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> I pointed this out to you in that thread, yet you still keep claiming the figure of 300,000 is "generally accepted." Not by scholars it's not. And you never were able to explain how the Japanese could have killed 300,000 people when every single primary source in Nanking said the population was around 200,000 when the Japanese took the city, and those sources included a population survey that was done with exclusively Chinese field workers just weeks after the massacre.



I've explained that multiple times.   The population of Nanking was close to a million in 1937...  Iris Chang was a scholar. The Japanese were murdering bastards and not enough of them ended up at the end of nooses at the end of the war. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> However, as long as we're on the subject, South Korea was under Communist rule until we expended thousands of lives to drive the Communists back into North Korea. Thanks to your idol Mao Tsetung, thousands of American soldiers were killed after the Chinese entered the war and nearly drove us off the peninsula.



Uh, yeah, after McArthur disregarded his orders and threatened to invade China itself.  That's when Mao acted in self-defense. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Leaving aside the fact that your argument is based on a strongly disputed assumption about the comfort women, can you quote me as ever saying that I thought the Japanese were doing Korea a favor by supposedly "shipping their women all over Asia"? Do you have any idea how dumb you look when you make these absurd arguments?



Wait.. you just did it and then claimed you didn't do it.  BEING A COMFORT WOMAN IS BAD.  I mean, maybe we should force a bunch of Mormon chicks to be comfort women, but who'd want to fuck them? 



mikegriffith1 said:


> And are you ever going to deal with any of the research that I presented to you that documents that Japanese rule in Korea was mild and very beneficial?



The Japanese were cocksuckers in Korea, and even in SOUTH Korea, they are still hated. 

Shit, they asked us to replace our Ambassador because him Mom was Japanese and he had a Tojo Mustasche... THAT'S how much they still hate the Japanese. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> Why don't you go tell the tens of millions of Russians whose grandparents and great-grandparents were killed by the Soviets during Stalin's reign that they must be lying because of the census figures published by the Soviet government?



Here's the thing, buddy.  Even after "DeStalinization", Stalin is still highly regarded in Russia today. 

Stalin’s Approval Rating Among Russians Hits Record High – Poll - The Moscow Times


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 12, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > IOW, you're going to keep hiding behind Soviet census data to avoid dealing with the massive evidence--disputed by no one except by ilk like Putin and Communist apologists like you--that Stalin killed some 20 million people during his reign of terror. Entire books have been written that present this evidence. Good grief, even the_ New York Times_ and the_ Washington Post_ do not deny this evidence.
> ...




Such a good cocksucking commie apologist, eh, Joe Blowhard???


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 12, 2020)

To highlight the nuttiness of JoeB131's Soviet Holocaust denial, I refer interested readers to the U.S. Senate Internal Security Subcommittee's report titled_ The Human Cost of Soviet Communism._ The subcommittee published the report in 1970. The subcommittee was chaired by a Democrat, James Eastland, and its members included Ted Kennedy, Thomas Dodd, and Birch Bayh. The subcommittee voted unanimously to publish the report. The report documents that 20 million people died under Communist rule in the Soviet Union before WWII.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 13, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> To highlight the nuttiness of JoeB131's Soviet Holocaust denial, I refer interested readers to the U.S. Senate Internal Security Subcommittee's report titled_ The Human Cost of Soviet Communism._ The subcommittee published the report in 1970. The subcommittee was chaired by a Democrat, James Eastland, and its members included Ted Kennedy, Thomas Dodd, and Birch Bayh. The subcommittee voted unanimously to publish the report. The report documents that 20 million people died under Communist rule in the Soviet Union before WWII.



And so what?  Again, doesn't really jive with the facts that they Soviets would have had to have produced 83 million babies to make up for all the people who were supposedly killed AND population growth. 

Did the report also say Breshnev's Mom Wore Army Shoes?


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 14, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> To highlight the nuttiness of JoeB131's Soviet Holocaust denial, I refer interested readers to the U.S. Senate Internal Security Subcommittee's report titled_ The Human Cost of Soviet Communism._ The subcommittee published the report in 1970. The subcommittee was chaired by a Democrat, James Eastland, and its members included Ted Kennedy, Thomas Dodd, and Birch Bayh. The subcommittee voted unanimously to publish the report. The report documents that 20 million people died under Communist rule in the Soviet Union before WWII.





JoeB131 said:


> And so what?  Again, doesn't really jive with the facts that they Soviets would have had to have produced 83 million babies to make up for all the people who were supposedly killed AND population growth.



Yeah, never mind that Soviet statistics were notoriously unreliable, right? I'm guessing you have not allowed yourself to read a single study that documents that the Soviets killed tens of millions of people before and after WWII. The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee report only dealt with the pre-war years, but it still documented 20 million deaths.

So, let me guess: You're just going to keep citing the 1939 and 1959 Soviet censsuses as "proof" that 20 million people could not have been killed before the war, right?

When I pointed out that Soviet economic reports have long been recognized as having been inflated, your only reply was to say that those reports censuses. Well, gee, no kidding, but that's not the point. The point is that if the Soviets would put out false economic reports, they would be just as likely to doctor census data to cover up the fact that they had killed millions of people. But you acted like this obvious point flew right over your head and simply replied with the evasive Captain Obvious point that economic reports are not census reports.

This kind of nonsense is the reason you have no credibility.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 14, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> When you decide to do serious research on Senator Joseph McCarthy, you soon discover that McCarthy was right in most cases. Far from being the reckless muckraker that most of our history books have long claimed he was, if anything, we now know that McCarthy somewhat understated the severity of Communist penetration into the U.S. government.
> 
> When the Venona decrypts were released in 1995, we discovered that they identified at least 349 people who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. For example, the Venona files reveal that the Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, chaired by former Senator Robert LaFollette, whom McCarthy defeated in 1946, had at least four staff members working on behalf of the KGB. John Abt, the Chief Counsel of the Committee; Charles Kramer, who served on three other Congressional Committees; Allen Rosenberg, who also served on the National Labor Relations Board, Board of Economic Warfare (BEW), the Foreign Economic Administration (FEA), and later argued cases before the United States Supreme Court; and Charles Flato, who served on the BEW and FEA, were all members of the Communist Party USA and were associated with the Soviet-run Comintern.
> 
> ...


This old story takes on a new relevance, in light of the fact that there is a Russian asset in the white house.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 14, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> This old story takes on a new relevance, in light of the fact that there is a Russian asset in the white house.



Humm, then that Russian asset has gone rogue and has turned on his bosses because he has (1) sold weapons to Georgia and Ukraine, which Obama would never do and which Putin has always opposed; (2) pushed NATO nations to spend more on defense, something that Putin naturally does not want; (3) imposed substantial tariffs on Russian steel, much to the outrage of Putin and his fellow oligarchs; (4) expelled dozens of Russian diplomats from the U.S.; (5) shut down the Russian consulate in California; and (6) imposed eight sets of sanctions on Russia or on Putin cronies in Russia.

Needless to say, those are not the action of a "Russian asset." Trump has been far tougher on Russia than Obama was. Obama didn't have the guts to sell Ukraine, much less Georgia, weapons, but Trump has sold weapons to both.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 14, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Yeah, never mind that Soviet statistics were notoriously unreliable, right? I'm guessing you have not allowed yourself to read a single study that documents that the Soviets killed tens of millions of people before and after WWII. The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee report only dealt with the pre-war years, but it still documented 20 million deaths.



And how was this done, exactly?  It wasn't like we had a lot of people on the ground in the USSR in the interwar years...  

At best, they were doing statistical analysis, which when polluted by a bias, is kind of useless.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> When I pointed out that Soviet economic reports have long been recognized as having been inflated, your only reply was to say that those reports censuses. Well, gee, no kidding, but that's not the point. The point is that if the Soviets would put out false economic reports, they would be just as likely to doctor census data to cover up the fact that they had killed millions of people. But you acted like this obvious point flew right over your head and simply replied with the evasive Captain Obvious point that economic reports are not census reports.



Except at some point, they'd figure out they were short millions of people... and they never did.  

Census reports showed the population of the USSR grew by 40 million between 1920 and 1950.  That is WITH world War II having killed 20 million people, which no one disputes.  



mikegriffith1 said:


> This kind of nonsense is the reason you have no credibility.



A guy who thinks he's wearing Magic Underwear really has no business talking about Nonsense.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 14, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> he has (1) sold weapons to Georgia and Ukraine,


Dog and pony show. Russia has gained ground in Ukraine. Meanwhile, the child president maintains better relations we the the Russian sympathizers in Ukraine than he does with it's actual administration.



mikegriffith1 said:


> (2) pushed NATO nations to spend more on defense, something that Putin naturally does not want


The spending increase has very little to do with Trump. Trump's goal was to increase their spending and decrease ours.



mikegriffith1 said:


> (3) imposed substantial tariffs on Russian steel, much to the outrage of Putin and his fellow oligarchs


Actually, the tariffs on Russian steel were much softer than the ones put on our allies.



mikegriffith1 said:


> (4) expelled dozens of Russian diplomats from the U.S.


Actually, Trump was furious about that and pushed to expel fewer Russian diplomats.



mikegriffith1 said:


> (5) shut down the Russian consulate in California


Dog and pony show. The other consulates remain open. Also was not his idea.



mikegriffith1 said:


> 6) imposed eight sets of sanctions on Russia or on Putin cronies in Russia.


Nonsense. Trump opposed those sanctions, and our Congress had to pass a vote to keep Trump from lifting Russian sanctions.

You REALLY need to step outside the wingnut bubble for some fresh air, bro.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 14, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> he has (1) sold weapons to Georgia and Ukraine,





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dog and pony show. Russia has gained ground in Ukraine. Meanwhile, the child president maintains better relations we the the Russian sympathizers in Ukraine than he does with it's actual administration.



"Dog and pony show?!"  Putin howled and threw a fit when Congress was pushing Obama to sell weapons to Georgia and Ukraine, and Obama chickened out and refused to sell them weapons. 

Russia has gained no ground since Trump has been in office. The Russians have been held in check on the eastern border. But, under Obama, they seized Crimea.



mikegriffith1 said:


> (2) pushed NATO nations to spend more on defense, something that Putin naturally does not want





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> The spending increase has very little to do with Trump. Trump's goal was to increase their spending and decrease ours.



The spending increase had everything to do with Trump publicly calling them out for failing to meeting their obligations, and Trump has vastly increased our own defense spending. What planet do you live on? 



mikegriffith1 said:


> (3) imposed substantial tariffs on Russian steel, much to the outrage of Putin and his fellow oligarchs





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Actually, the tariffs on Russian steel were much softer than the ones put on our allies.



That's a dodge and an apples-to-oranges comparison. The point is that he imposed tariffs on Russian steel, much to Putin's outrage. He got tough with our "allies" because they were cleaning our clock on trade. And that toughness got us the USMCA, which is a huge improvement over NAFTA. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> (4) expelled dozens of Russian diplomats from the U.S.





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Actually, Trump was furious about that and pushed to expel fewer Russian diplomats.



Phew!  "Actually," you're either making up stuff or repeating far-left myths. The decision to expel foreign diplomats is solely up to the president. He decides how many stay and how many go. He not only expelled dozens of Russian diplomats, he shut down the Russian consulate in California. 



mikegriffith1 said:


> (5) shut down the Russian consulate in California





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dog and pony show. The other consulates remain open. Also was not his idea.



Wrong. Where are you getting these myths?



mikegriffith1 said:


> 6) imposed eight sets of sanctions on Russia or on Putin cronies in Russia.





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Nonsense. Trump opposed those sanctions, and our Congress had to pass a vote to keep Trump from lifting Russian sanctions.



Wrong again. You're swallowing fake news by the bucket full. Trump has disagreed with Congress about some of the targets of the sanctions, but to date he has imposed eight different sets of sanctions on Russia. 



Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You REALLY need to step outside the wingnut bubble for some fresh air, bro.



You're the one in the wingnut bubble. You are clearly getting your fake news from left-wing "news" sites. 

When Obama was in office, Congress kept trying to sell Georgia and Ukraine weapons, and Obama refused to do so because he said he feared it would "strain relations" with Russia. Trump has had no such fear.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 14, 2020)

mikegriffith1 said:


> "Dog and pony show?!"


Correct. Compared to taking Putin's side over his own intelligence agencies... Compared to pushing the idiotic theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered... Compared to congress having to pass a vote to keep Trump from lifting Russian sanctions .. compared to trying to give them back their spy bases in America...yes , dog and pony show.

Oh yeah, that's right, you didn't mention any of those things. Because you are a wingnut crazy...


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Feb 14, 2020)

Just to set the record straight about the liberal myth that Obama was tougher on Russia than Trump has been:

Yes, Trump is Tougher on Russia than Obama

Donald Trump's Russia Policy: Tougher Than Obama's | National Review

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e88a04-5194-11e9-88a1-ed346f0ec94f_story.html

President Trump is tougher on Russia in 18 months than Obama in eight years

https://aluminiuminsider.com/trump-...00-million-so-far-economic-minister-oreshkin/

It's 'crazy talk' to say the US isn't tough on Russia: Mike Pompeo

Trump administration rolls out new sanctions over Russian occupation of Crimea

Trump signs off sanctions on Russia gas pipeline

Work on Russia Pipeline May Grind to Halt on Trump Sanctions

Trump administration ups sanctions on Russia before Paris summit


----------

