# Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy



## PoliticalChic

Wow! I seem to have hit a nerve in a post about Franklin Roosevelt's co-President, Harry Hopkins!

My new pal, Smugly Backside,...something like that...... was enraged, just because, in showing that FDR was held in thrall by Stalin....and Hopkins was actually an agent of Stalin's.


So Smugly wrote this:

*"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."*

As I am not really that good at boot-licking, I suppose I should remediate Smugly, and show that Hopkins was a Soviet spy, an agent of the psychopath, Joseph Stalin. 
Let's investigate the charge.






 It's very difficult to get feeling for Harry Hopkins, he manages to do well what really good spies do: remain unnoticed. But there is scholarship on Hopkins....and you can draw your own conclusions.




1. First...who was Hopkins? 
Life magazine ran a spread on Hopkins on September 22, 1941, calling his a *one-man cabinet to Roosevelt.* In fact, he lived at the White House, in the Lincoln Bedroom, from May 1940 to December 1943. LIFE - Google Books, p. 93.

Background? A social worker who flattered his way into Roosevelt's confidence.

a. "As *boss of the Lend-Lease program,* his control of the destiny of empire is second only to Mr. Roosevelt's own....In the kind of personalized one-man government that war has made of the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt, that man has the greatest influence who has *easiest access to the Chief-of-State's ear*." Ibid.

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






3. "The leading evidence that Hopkins was a spy for Joseph Stalin is presented by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."

a. Their evidence is, first, that Soviet KGB defector, Oleg Gordievsky, said that Hopkins was in regular communication with top Soviet covert operative, Iskhak Akhmerov, in New York City. This was more than just a "back channel" for communication between Roosevelt and Stalin because Hopkins had existing back channels at the Soviet embassy that he used, and Akhmerov's identity as an operative was not supposed to be known to the U.S. government.

b.Second, the Venona project decrypts of Soviet communications with its spies, which came to light only in the 1990s, reveal a report on a Washington discussion between Roosevelt and Winston Churchill by an *"agent 19." Only Harry Hopkins among suspected Soviet agents would have been privy to that conversation. *

c. Third, former Communist Whittaker *Chambers testified to Congress in 1948 about the formation of Communist "study groups"* within the U.S. government from which espionage agents were recruited. One of those groups, led by Lee Pressman, was established within the Department of Agriculture in late 1933, and *Hopkins was a member *of that group. 

d. Fourth, his policies were strongly pro-Soviet, particularly in his work as head of the Lend-Lease program." 
http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm

As time went by, and Roosevelt became more and more ill, he relied on Hopkins to make the policy decisions: each and every effort of Hopkins were designed for Stalin's benefit.


Almost as though Stalin was whispering in Hopkins' ear....

Coincidence?







4. "Now, corroborating and entirely independent evidence of Hopkins likely treason has come to light in the pages of an obscure book by Emanuel M. Josephson.  The title is "The Strange Death of Franklin D. Roosevelt," and while it does have a very intriguing chapter on FDRs demise, the main subject of the book is better captured by the subtitle, A History of the Roosevelt-Delano Dynasty, Americas Royal Family.  
The following passage is on pp. 145-146:

a. 'In later years, Murray Garsson, the munitions manufacturer who was convicted for bribery and irregularities in connection with war contracts, reported that *Harry Hopkins had been very helpful to him* in securing and handling those contracts.  In return for his help, Hopkins had demanded and received liberal payment for his influence.  Garsson regularly paid Hopkinss numerous losses on bets on the horse races.  But *one form of payment demanded by Hopkins stood out as most odd, *Garsson said.

b. Garsson maintained quarters at the Wardman Park Hotel in Washington in connection with his war contracts.  But he spent his weekends in New York with his family.   Harry *Hopkins demanded of Garsson that he permit him and his friends* to use the quarters during the weekends, and that he defray the cost of refreshments and entertainment.  Garsson permitted Hopkins and his guests to charge their expenses to his account.

c. In looking over his bills, Garsson noted the names of the persons who had signed the tabs charged to him.  *Among Harry Hopkinss associates who had signed tabs were Carl Aldo Marzani and the whole array of the members of what was later proved to be the Hal Ware (Communist) cell that operated in the Government.  *Garsson stated that he did not become aware of the fact that he was acting as involuntary host to Hopkinss Communist cell until after Marzani had been convicted and sent to jail for perjury in swearing in his State Department application that he was not, and never had been, a member of the Communist Party.

5. Josephson, who was hardly an admirer of Roosevelt and his New Deal, lacks references for his allegations, but many factors militate in favor of their basic accuracy.  The strongest of these is that they dovetail perfectly with the other Soviet-agent charges against Hopkins and, coming much earlier, they could not have been influenced by them.  In combination, the charges are much stronger than any one of them is alone.  http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm

How am I doing so far?


Doesn't seem to me to fit with "Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America...."


----------



## PoliticalChic

Harold Ware founded this group. Ware was a Communist Party (CP) official working for the federal government in Washington, D.C.. By 1934, the group had grown to some 75 members, divided into cells. Members initially joined Marxist study groups and then into activities on behalf of the Party. They shared a belief that Marxist ideologies were the correct way to approach the problems of the ongoing Great Depression. Whittaker Chambers also stated that Ware could have been acting "pursuant to orders from the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the United States."
Ware Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Harold Maskell "Hal" Ware (1889-1935) was an American Marxist regarded as one of the Communist Party's top experts on agriculture.
Whittaker Chambers alleged that during the early 1930s he was a member of the so-called "Ware Group," a covert group of operatives within the United States government which aided Soviet intelligence agents.
Chambers further wrote that "by 1938, the Soviet espionage apparatus in Washington had penetrated the US State Department, the US Treasury Department, the Bureau of Standards and the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland.[28] These individuals "supplied the Soviet espionage apparatus with secret or confidential information, usually in the form of official United States Government documents for microfilming," Chambers stated.
Chambers further wrote that "by 1938, the Soviet espionage apparatus in Washington had penetrated the US State Department, the US Treasury Department, the Bureau of Standards and the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland.[28] These individuals "supplied the Soviet espionage apparatus with secret or confidential information, usually in the form of official United States Government documents for microfilming," Chambers stated.
Harold Ware - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Camp

Gosh, how could anyone agrue with your position when you have a major source like "The Home Page of DC Dave" to back up what otherwise appears to be ridiculous nonsense? Surely, with DC Dave backing you up your case is made.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Gosh, how could anyone agrue with your position when you have a major source like "The Home Page of DC Dave" to back up what otherwise appears to be ridiculous nonsense? Surely, with DC Dave backing you up your case is made.





Once again, the most stupid of posters attempt to challenge the messenger when they realize that they can't challenge the message.


In short.....which item can you counter?
Are any untrue?

None, huh?


Oh...wait...you're the dunce who denied that he posted that calling Obama the messiah was a 'right wing ploy'....until I presented your post saying so, and I gave a dozen sources of Leftists and Liberals praising Obama as such.


In short, it's ironic you suggesting that the source isn't credible.....when you have been proven not to be credible......

Funny, huh?


----------



## Camp

You gave a dozen distorted out of context anectdotal examples of people who viewed Obama with spiritual feelings. I think only two of them mentioned messiah and some were purposefully sarcastic. After listing your cut and paste avalanche you did as you usualy do, you declared victory. Who cares? 
Now defend the use of THE HOMEPAGE OF DC DAVE as a legitimate source for use in a debate about FDR, STALIN AND WWII.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Hopkins was a tireless worker...for Stalin and Communism.

That's why the Left loves and defends him


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> You gave a dozen distorted out of context anectdotal examples of people who viewed Obama with spiritual feelings. I think only two of them mentioned messiah and some were purposefully sarcastic. After listing your cut and paste avalanche you did as you usualy do, you declared victory. Who cares?
> Now defend the use of THE HOMEPAGE OF DC DAVE as a legitimate source for use in a debate about FDR, STALIN AND WWII.






"...distorted out of context anectdotal examples..."


You lying pile of garbage.....


I gave you a dozen.....here's some more:


1. 12/17/13 "On CNNs Piers Morgan Live Tuesday, in a brief discussion about President Obama, Barbara Walters actually said, We thought that he was going to be - I shouldn't say this at Christmastime, but - the next messiah

Read more: Barbara Walters on Obama: ?We Thought He Was Going To Be The Next Messiah? | NewsBusters


2.	And this brings us to Barack *Obamas liberal support during the campaign,* which was decidedly different from the regular media bias that conservatives often complain about. I havent seen a politician get this kind of *walk-on-water coverage* since Colin Powell a dozen years ago flirted with making a run for the White House, said Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz on Meet the Press in February 2007, a day after Obama announced his candidacy. I mean, it is amazing . . . a guy with all of two years experience in the United States Senate getting coverage that ranges from positive to glowing to even gushing.

a.	Samantha Fennell, formerly an associate publisher of Elle, wrote on the magazines website a month later:  When I attended my second Obama Live fund-raiser last week at New York Citys Grand Hyatt, . . . I was on my feet as Senator Obama entered the room. Fate had blessed me in this moment. . . . In a moment of* divine intervention,* he saw me,

b.	Evan Thomas, a Newsweek editor, on the show Hardball with Chris Matthews last June:  Obama is standing above the country, above the world.* Hes sort of God.*



3.	*The deifications and hagiologies *were particularly overt in the remarks of prominent black figures. Filmmaker Spike Lee, predicting an Obama victory,* implicitly compared the candidate with Christ:* Youll have to measure time by Before Obama and After Obama. . . .

a.	Jesse Jackson, Jr. called Obamas securing the Democratic nomination so extraordinary that *another chapter could be added to the Bible* to chronicle its significance.

b.	Louis Farrakhan went one better, according to the website WorldNetDaily: Barack has captured the youth. . . . Thats a sign. When* the Messiah speaks,* the youth will hear, and the Messiah is absolutely speaking.

c.	*The website ObamaMessiah.blogspot.com *has diligently chronicled many more instances of such talk, which seems positively cringe-making in 2010.

d.	To this day, BarackObama.com displays at the top of its homepage the following words (attributed to Obama, though nobody seems to have been able to pinpoint the speech): IM ASKING YOU TO BELIEVE.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De_1aIrkfXI]Barbara Walters On Obama: 'We Thought He Was Going To Be The Next Messiah' - YouTube[/ame]






Apologize, you moron!

I demand nothing less than penitential prostration!


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> You gave a dozen distorted out of context anectdotal examples of people who viewed Obama with spiritual feelings. I think only two of them mentioned messiah and some were purposefully sarcastic. After listing your cut and paste avalanche you did as you usualy do, you declared victory. Who cares?
> Now defend the use of THE HOMEPAGE OF DC DAVE as a legitimate source for use in a debate about FDR, STALIN AND WWII.



What....you don't like the facts from DC Dave???

Well.....how about refuting any of 'em?



And take a crack at this:

6. "Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days.  The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of 'Stalins Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelts Government,' by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):

a. Hopkinss pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display *in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments *are available for viewing.  Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, he continued to ply *his influence with FDR,* who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.  

After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of reparations.  At this point, *Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta.  *Mr. President, this said, the Russians have given in so much at this conference I dont think we should let them down.  Let the British disagree if they wantand continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings] (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).


b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had given in to FDRthe entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm



Hey.....Smugly.....where are ya'?
"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but *tirelessly for America *...."

Seems not.


How ya' like that, boyyyeeeee??


----------



## whitehall

Don't forget the Soviet Union was an ally during WW2.  Stalin was a robust leader and FDR was a frail shell of a president who may have had a few minor strokes that the democrat party and the media kept secret. Hopkins had a strange relationship with FDR and probably thought he was doing the right thing when he confided in Stalin. Truman's relationship with Russia turned on a dime after the war but he was stuck with the well entrenched communist party. It's amazing how the media managed to support FDR's relationship with Stalin and the new anti-communist attitude of the democrat party that created HUAC. When the Truman administration was found to be a conglomeration of spies, inept leadership and and nut cases the media managed to blame a republican senator and call it McCarthyism.


----------



## Camp

Camp said:


> You gave a dozen distorted out of context anectdotal examples of people who viewed Obama with spiritual feelings. I think only two of them mentioned messiah and some were purposefully sarcastic. After listing your cut and paste avalanche you did as you usualy do, you declared victory. Who cares?
> Now defend the use of THE HOMEPAGE OF DC DAVE as a legitimate source for use in a debate about FDR, STALIN AND WWII.



That's my story and I'm sticking to it. If you don't understand "taking out of context", "distortion", "anecdotal" and "sarcasim" that is your problem.


----------



## Bfgrn

Time Magazine - Monday, Aug. 08, 1927


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> You gave a dozen distorted out of context anectdotal examples of people who viewed Obama with spiritual feelings. I think only two of them mentioned messiah and some were purposefully sarcastic. After listing your cut and paste avalanche you did as you usualy do, you declared victory. Who cares?
> Now defend the use of THE HOMEPAGE OF DC DAVE as a legitimate source for use in a debate about FDR, STALIN AND WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's my story and I'm sticking to it. If you don't understand "taking out of context", "distortion", "anecdotal" and "sarcasim" that is your problem.
Click to expand...




You've been identified as a liar, an now you've doubled down on that reputation.

Neither unexpected, nor a problem.

Live with it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Bfgrn said:


> Time Magazine - Monday, Aug. 08, 1927








BoringFriendlessGuy.....whenever the conversation gets around to calling someone a "moron" or such, you needn't leap to embrace the appellation.


----------



## PoliticalChic

CrusaderFrank said:


> Hopkins was a tireless worker...for Stalin and Communism.
> 
> That's why the Left loves and defends him






Who do they love most,....Alger Hiss, Harry Hopkins.....

...or the traitor who offered to work with the Soviet Union against the President of the United States....that guy Ted 'killer' Kennedy?


----------



## Bfgrn

*A Peoples History of Koch Industries: How Stalin Funded the Tea Party Movement*






The Roots of Stalin in the Tea Party Movement | Alternet


----------



## Camp

Hopkins was misidentified as a spy by a former KGB agent who defected and was promoting a book. The agent "suspected" Hopkins was a spy based on a lecture he had heard 20 years before his defection by an agent who was making recollections over 20 years after WWII had ended. Oleg Gordievsky, the defecting agent, had no direct or empirical knowledge of Hopkin's or what the Verona documents designated as "Agent 19". He was a small child during WWII. The reference to Agent 19 which appeared in the declassified (1995) documents led to further claims that Hopkins was a spy.
Later indisputable evidence surfaced that cleared Hopkins and identified Laurence Duggan as "Agent 19.
These facts do not fit well with the conspiracy theory that Hopkins, the trusted aid to FDR, was a commie spy. 
Interestingly, Gen. George C. Marshall commented that Hopkins would never be recognized for the invaluable service he provided the nation during WWII.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Hopkins was misidentified as a spy by a former KGB agent who defected and was promoting a book. The agent "suspected" Hopkins was a spy based on a lecture he had heard 20 years before his defection by an agent who was making recollections over 20 years after WWII had ended. Oleg Gordievsky, the defecting agent, had no direct or empirical knowledge of Hopkin's or what the Verona documents designated as "Agent 19". He was a small child during WWII. The reference to Agent 19 which appeared in the declassified (1995) documents led to further claims that Hopkins was a spy.
> Later indisputable evidence surfaced that cleared Hopkins and identified Laurence Duggan as "Agent 19.
> These facts do not fit well with the conspiracy theory that Hopkins, the trusted aid to FDR, was a commie spy.
> Interestingly, Gen. George C. Marshall commented that Hopkins would never be recognized for the invaluable service he provided the nation during WWII.






Let's put aside for the moment that you have revealed yourself to be a liar, and one who denies clear evidence to the contrary of his beliefs.....

....and deal with this current post.

Bloviation from a simpleton like you vs. actual scholarly research......

...gee.....which to belive?

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

and...

Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."


and....

Venona project decrypts of Soviet communications with its spies, which came to light only in the 1990s, reveal a report on a Washington discussion between Roosevelt and Winston Churchill by an "agent 19." Only Harry Hopkins among suspected Soviet agents would have been privy to that conversation. 


and...

Venona project decrypts of Soviet communications with its spies, which came to light only in the 1990s, reveal a report on a Washington discussion between Roosevelt and Winston Churchill by an "agent 19." Only Harry Hopkins among suspected Soviet agents would have been privy to that conversation. 


and....


...Murray Garsson noted the names of the persons who had signed the tabs charged to him. Among Harry Hopkinss associates who had signed tabs were Carl Aldo Marzani and the whole array of the members of what was later proved to be the Hal Ware (Communist) cell that operated in the Government.


and....

"Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days. The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of 'Stalins Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelts Government,' by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein, showing Hopkins pro-Stalin intervention at Yalta....




And.....the most dispositive evidence that you are totally and irrevocably incorrect: BoringFriendlessGuy agrees with you.


And, of course, this from Smugly Backside.....
"Harry Hopkins was *a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America*......"

NOT.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Hopkins was misidentified as a spy by a former KGB agent who defected and was promoting a book. The agent "suspected" Hopkins was a spy based on a lecture he had heard 20 years before his defection by an agent who was making recollections over 20 years after WWII had ended. Oleg Gordievsky, the defecting agent, had no direct or empirical knowledge of Hopkin's or what the Verona documents designated as "Agent 19". He was a small child during WWII. The reference to Agent 19 which appeared in the declassified (1995) documents led to further claims that Hopkins was a spy.
> Later indisputable evidence surfaced that cleared Hopkins and identified Laurence Duggan as "Agent 19.
> These facts do not fit well with the conspiracy theory that Hopkins, the trusted aid to FDR, was a commie spy.
> Interestingly, Gen. George C. Marshall commented that Hopkins would never be recognized for the invaluable service he provided the nation during WWII.






7. Isn't it interesting that you and the cadre of chumps believe all of the Liberal propaganda, in the face of mountains of evidence.


There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin 

......I've read it....have you?


 Mitrokhin's documents showed that *Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug *it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy.  He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that *Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery. *
seed-flame: 16 Venona Secrets, etc.



Here's the deal: if you are finally convinced of Hopkins' duplicity......you can run away and hide.
That's the pro forma of Liberals when they are embarrassed.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopkins was misidentified as a spy by a former KGB agent who defected and was promoting a book. The agent "suspected" Hopkins was a spy based on a lecture he had heard 20 years before his defection by an agent who was making recollections over 20 years after WWII had ended. Oleg Gordievsky, the defecting agent, had no direct or empirical knowledge of Hopkin's or what the Verona documents designated as "Agent 19". He was a small child during WWII. The reference to Agent 19 which appeared in the declassified (1995) documents led to further claims that Hopkins was a spy.
> Later indisputable evidence surfaced that cleared Hopkins and identified Laurence Duggan as "Agent 19.
> These facts do not fit well with the conspiracy theory that Hopkins, the trusted aid to FDR, was a commie spy.
> Interestingly, Gen. George C. Marshall commented that Hopkins would never be recognized for the invaluable service he provided the nation during WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's put aside for the moment that you have revealed yourself to be a liar, and one who denies clear evidence to the contrary of his beliefs.....
> 
> ....and deal with this current post.
> 
> Bloviation from a simpleton like you vs. actual *scholarly research......*
> ...gee.....which to belive?
> 
> Harry Hopkins,- FDR's alter ego, co-president, or Rasputin, "...the closest and most influential adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, was a Soviet agent." and the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.
> The Treachery Of Harry Hopkins
> 
> and...
> 
> Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."
> 
> 
> and....
> 
> Venona project decrypts of Soviet communications with its spies, which came to light only in the 1990s, reveal a report on a Washington discussion between Roosevelt and Winston Churchill by an "agent 19." Only Harry Hopkins among suspected Soviet agents would have been privy to that conversation.
> 
> 
> and...
> 
> Venona project decrypts of Soviet communications with its spies, which came to light only in the 1990s, reveal a report on a Washington discussion between Roosevelt and Winston Churchill by an "agent 19." Only Harry Hopkins among suspected Soviet agents would have been privy to that conversation.
> 
> 
> and....
> 
> 
> ...Murray Garsson noted the names of the persons who had signed the tabs charged to him. Among Harry Hopkinss associates who had signed tabs were Carl Aldo Marzani and the whole array of the members of what was later proved to be the Hal Ware (Communist) cell that operated in the Government.
> 
> 
> and....
> 
> "Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days. The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of 'Stalins Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelts Government,' by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein, showing Hopkins pro-Stalin intervention at Yalta....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And.....the most dispositive evidence that you are totally and irrevocably incorrect: BoringFriendlessGuy agrees with you.
> 
> 
> And, of course, this from Smugly Backside.....
> "Harry Hopkins was *a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America*......"
> 
> NOT.
Click to expand...


*Scholarly research*?
The Treachery of Harry Hopkins??? Are you talking about a friggin book review by pundits Reed Irvin and Cliff Kincaid? Please tell me there is a book or something besides a book review being used as a scholarly source.
You used a couple of books by Herb Romerstein, an investigator for the House on UnAmerican Activities back in the Joe McCarthy days and Eric Breindel, a former executive for News Corp. and conservative pundit. 
Be as nasty as you wish. I just happen to respect reliable sources and think bull shit ones suck and are only good for misinforming folks. You seem to enjoy misinforming folks. It is what it is.


----------



## JakeStarkey

*Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy *deserves an answer, which is "nope."


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopkins was misidentified as a spy by a former KGB agent who defected and was promoting a book. The agent "suspected" Hopkins was a spy based on a lecture he had heard 20 years before his defection by an agent who was making recollections over 20 years after WWII had ended. Oleg Gordievsky, the defecting agent, had no direct or empirical knowledge of Hopkin's or what the Verona documents designated as "Agent 19". He was a small child during WWII. The reference to Agent 19 which appeared in the declassified (1995) documents led to further claims that Hopkins was a spy.
> Later indisputable evidence surfaced that cleared Hopkins and identified Laurence Duggan as "Agent 19.
> These facts do not fit well with the conspiracy theory that Hopkins, the trusted aid to FDR, was a commie spy.
> Interestingly, Gen. George C. Marshall commented that Hopkins would never be recognized for the invaluable service he provided the nation during WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Isn't it interesting that you and the cadre of chumps believe all of the Liberal propaganda, in the face of mountains of evidence.
> 
> 
> There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin
> 
> ......I've read it....have you?
> 
> 
> Mitrokhin's documents showed that *Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug *it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy.  He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that *Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery. *
> seed-flame: 16 Venona Secrets, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the deal: if you are finally convinced of Hopkins' duplicity......you can run away and hide.
> That's the pro forma of Liberals when they are embarrassed.
Click to expand...


Mitrokhin had a specialty? Do you know what it was?


----------



## PoliticalChic

JakeStarkey said:


> *Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy *deserves an answer, which is "nope."




Good to see that you haven't eschewed your usual level of depth and insight.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopkins was misidentified as a spy by a former KGB agent who defected and was promoting a book. The agent "suspected" Hopkins was a spy based on a lecture he had heard 20 years before his defection by an agent who was making recollections over 20 years after WWII had ended. Oleg Gordievsky, the defecting agent, had no direct or empirical knowledge of Hopkin's or what the Verona documents designated as "Agent 19". He was a small child during WWII. The reference to Agent 19 which appeared in the declassified (1995) documents led to further claims that Hopkins was a spy.
> Later indisputable evidence surfaced that cleared Hopkins and identified Laurence Duggan as "Agent 19.
> These facts do not fit well with the conspiracy theory that Hopkins, the trusted aid to FDR, was a commie spy.
> Interestingly, Gen. George C. Marshall commented that Hopkins would never be recognized for the invaluable service he provided the nation during WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Isn't it interesting that you and the cadre of chumps believe all of the Liberal propaganda, in the face of mountains of evidence.
> 
> 
> There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin
> 
> ......I've read it....have you?
> 
> 
> Mitrokhin's documents showed that *Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug *it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy.  He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that *Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery. *
> seed-flame: 16 Venona Secrets, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the deal: if you are finally convinced of Hopkins' duplicity......you can run away and hide.
> That's the pro forma of Liberals when they are embarrassed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mitrokhin had a specialty? Do you know what it was?
Click to expand...




I know exactly what Mitrokhin was, and who he is.


The question was, have you read his book?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JakeStarkey said:


> *Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy *deserves an answer, which is "nope."



Jake Starkey, history buff deserves an answer, which is "dope"

More people in FDR White House reported to Stalin than to FDR


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Isn't it interesting that you and the cadre of chumps believe all of the Liberal propaganda, in the face of mountains of evidence.
> 
> 
> There is a fascinating book about the KGB, "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB," by Christopher Andrew and, Vasili Mitrokhin
> 
> ......I've read it....have you?
> 
> 
> Mitrokhin's documents showed that *Hopkins had warned the Soviet ambassador that the FBI had learned through a bug *it had placed in the home of Steve Nelson, a Soviet illegal agent, that Nelson was getting money from the embassy.  He met (KGB head in USA) Ahkmerov from time to time, giving him information to send to Moscow and receiving secret messages from Stalin....Ray Wannall, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, says he always suspected that *Hopkins was a Soviet agent and that this is proof of his treachery. *
> seed-flame: 16 Venona Secrets, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the deal: if you are finally convinced of Hopkins' duplicity......you can run away and hide.
> That's the pro forma of Liberals when they are embarrassed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mitrokhin had a specialty? Do you know what it was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know exactly what Mitrokhin was, and who he is.
> 
> 
> The question was, have you read his book?
Click to expand...


I don't think you know what Mitrokhin's specialty was. I didn't ask what he was or who he was. Yes, I read much of it when it was first published. I didn't want to fill my head with uncalled for disinformation so I put it down.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Expecting a 100% Correlation between Venona cables, McCarthy List and the complete list of Stalin's American spies is like expecting John Gotti to have kept meticulous records of all the people he had whacked and all the crimes his guys committed.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mitrokhin had a specialty? Do you know what it was?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know exactly what Mitrokhin was, and who he is.
> 
> 
> The question was, have you read his book?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think you know what Mitrokhin's specialty was. I didn't ask what he was or who he was. Yes, I read much of it when it was first published. I didn't want to fill my head with uncalled for disinformation so I put it down.
Click to expand...




Two patterns have been established...

1. You have a problem with telling the truth.

2. You have strong opinions with no expertise to back them up.
When it comes to reading works covering the issues at hand, you have more excises as to why you haven't read them than the Kennedys have cousins.



In short, you are a waste of entirely good bytes.



You're dismissed.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know exactly what Mitrokhin was, and who he is.
> 
> 
> The question was, have you read his book?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you know what Mitrokhin's specialty was. I didn't ask what he was or who he was. Yes, I read much of it when it was first published. I didn't want to fill my head with uncalled for disinformation so I put it down.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two patterns have been established...
> 
> 1. You have a problem with telling the truth.
> 
> 2. You have strong opinions with no expertise to back them up.
> When it comes to reading works covering the issues at hand, you have more excises as to why you haven't read them than the Kennedys have cousins.
> 
> 
> 
> In short, you are a waste of entirely good bytes.
> 
> 
> 
> You're dismissed.
Click to expand...


The patterns that were established long ago:

1. You are unable to make your case with normal historical sources used by scholars and historians and rely on propaganda put out by pundits and political commentators or distorted and twisted rhetorical interpretations of sources.

2. When challanged about alleged facts you resort to attacking the person asking the questions and hide from answering the question.


----------



## SmedlyButler

First I'll answer a question you pose towards the end of this poorly conceived and executed continuation of an attack on this quintessentially American political master. (Churchill called him "Lord Root of the Matter". In one of the volumes of his autobiography he said ths of Hopkins;
"There he sat, slim, frail, ill, but absolutely glowing with refined comprehension of the Cause. It was to be the defeat, ruin, and slaughter of Hitler, to the exclusion of all other purposes, loyalties, or aims. In the history of the United States few brighter flames have burned.
Harry Hopkins always went to the root of the matter. I have been present at several great international conferences, where twenty or more of the most important executive personages were gathered together. When the discussion flagged and all seemed baffled, it was on these occasions he would rap out the deadly question, "Surely, Mr. President, here is the point we have got to settle. Are we going to face it or not?" Faced it always was, and, being faced, was conquered. He was a true leader of men, and alike in ardour and in wisdom in times of crisis he has rarely been excelled. His love for the causes of the weak and poor was matched by his passion against tyranny, especially when tyranny was, for the time, triumphant."

The answer to your query  "How am I doing so far"? would be a resounding, room rattling guffaw if it wasn't for the fact that your attack, a pathetically manufactured web of conspiracy and lies though it may be, is on a great American 68 years dead who is not here to throw truth back into your face.

To start with, your short bio does Hopkins a disservice. His influence and participation in the events of the mid 20th century are way broader and deeper than your short outline suggests, but that's not really the heart of the matter, this is;
. "The leading evidence that Hopkins was a spy for Joseph Stalin is presented by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."

Every serious scholar since the revelations of the Vassiliev notebooks do not give any credence to their "evidence". I pointed this out in a previous post; 
  "These notebooks put a case closed end to the mystery of 19.  Source no. 19 was Laurence Duggan.  Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 193537, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions).  In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America.  He left the State Department in 1944.  He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department". LINK:Hopkins was not Agent 19

I don't know why you keep repeating this disccredited slander.

Next: Where did you come up with this?  "One of those groups, led by Lee Pressman, was established within the Department of Agriculture in late 1933, and Hopkins was a member" 

Pressmen's own testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee is clear;

Mr. PRESSMAN. I was asked to join [the Communist Party] by a man named Harold Ware. For the reasons which I have already indicated, I assented, and I joined with the group which had, in addition to myself, three other persons, all of whom at that time were in the Department of Agriculture.
.........
Mr. NIXON. .... Just so there will be absolute clarity of the record, as I understand, the records of this committee show that the three members of the group who were in the Department of Agriculture were John Abt, Nathan Witt, and Henry Collins?
_Some back and forth about whether Collins was a member...._
Mr. WOOD. I will ask you to name the other employee of the Department of Agriculture who was a member of the group.
Mr. PRESSMAN. The third person among the individuals who have been named as members of this group who was an employee of the Department of Agriculture when I was in 1934 was Charles Kramer.

Pressmen named Abt, Nathan Witt, and Kramer as the three other members of his group. LINK: HUAC Testimony

You seem to see some machiavellian  nature in Hopkins relationship with FDR, really it's pretty simple;

Churchill again,  "As FDR's point man or unofficial emissary, Winston Churchill held Hopkins in high esteem, once remarking, "He was the most faithful and perfect channel of communication between the president and me." Or, "Beloved by some--such as Churchill, who believed that Hopkins "always went to the root of the matter"--and was trusted by most--including the paranoid Stalin--there were nevertheless those who resented the influence of "the White House Rasputin."-David Roll

And then you really enter the twighlight zone. Emanuel M. Josephson? Really? The "paranoid's paranoid". e.g.;

"Josephson argues that almost half of all US presidents were drawn from the Roosevelt - Adams -Delano "dynasty" and the dynasty acquired ambitions to return the US to some kind of elected monarchy. FDR had absorbed from Germany the "Bismarxist ideology" and during his administration had entered alliance with the Rockefeller empire. This alliance, along with the long established naval interests of the Roosevelt-Delano branch of the dynasty, that accounts for US participation in the world wars and cold war."

Josephson is the archetype for the History as Conspiracy school. Check out his bibliography.
 Maybe you should edit your copy and pastes a little better, leaving this out... 5. "Josephson, who was hardly an admirer of Roosevelt and his New Deal, lacks references for his allegations" might have been a good idea.

And Murray Garsson makes a fine star witness; God only knows what manipulation of reality went on between him and Josephson.

"After his release from prison, Murray Garsson was impoverished and subsisted on the charity of friends. For the last three weeks of his life, Garsson, destitute, lived in the reception room of Dr. Emanuel Josephson, 230 East 61st Street. Dr. Josephson prescribed barbiturates for Garsson. On March 7, 1957, Garsson was found unconscious at the foot of a staircase in the 61st Street building. He was taken to Bellevue Hospital, where he died a few days later. Milton Helpern, the chief medical examiner, performed an autopsy and determined the cause of death was brain hemorrhage, the result of a fall down a flight of stairs." LINK: Murray Garrson's pathetic life, and death

No human being is perfect, you can find fault in the most saintly among us. You have failed miserably even at this simple task. You should have followed my hint;

"And there's only one path that I've left open for you to take in your feverish desire to actually hang something out there that might negatively reflect on Hopkin's brilliant and honorable career. So find this minor footnote and exploit it to the best abilities of those you will C&P." 

You didn't, and you've produced nothing except more impotent clawing at a great man's reputation.


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> First I'll answer a question you pose towards the end of this poorly conceived and executed continuation of an attack on this quintessentially American political master. (Churchill called him "Lord Root of the Matter". In one of the volumes of his autobiography he said ths of Hopkins;
> "There he sat, slim, frail, ill, but absolutely glowing with refined comprehension of the Cause. It was to be the defeat, ruin, and slaughter of Hitler, to the exclusion of all other purposes, loyalties, or aims. In the history of the United States few brighter flames have burned.
> Harry Hopkins always went to the root of the matter. I have been present at several great international conferences, where twenty or more of the most important executive personages were gathered together. When the discussion flagged and all seemed baffled, it was on these occasions he would rap out the deadly question, "Surely, Mr. President, here is the point we have got to settle. Are we going to face it or not?" Faced it always was, and, being faced, was conquered. He was a true leader of men, and alike in ardour and in wisdom in times of crisis he has rarely been excelled. His love for the causes of the weak and poor was matched by his passion against tyranny, especially when tyranny was, for the time, triumphant."
> 
> The answer to your query  "How am I doing so far"? would be a resounding, room rattling guffaw if it wasn't for the fact that your attack, a pathetically manufactured web of conspiracy and lies though it may be, is on a great American 68 years dead who is not here to throw truth back into your face.
> 
> To start with, your short bio does Hopkins a disservice. His influence and participation in the events of the mid 20th century are way broader and deeper than your short outline suggests, but that's not really the heart of the matter, this is;
> . "The leading evidence that Hopkins was a spy for Joseph Stalin is presented by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."
> 
> Every serious scholar since the revelations of the Vassiliev notebooks do not give any credence to their "evidence". I pointed this out in a previous post;
> "These notebooks put a &#8220;case closed&#8221; end to the mystery of &#8220;19.&#8221;  Source no. &#8220;19&#8221; was Laurence Duggan.  Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 1935&#8211;37, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions).  In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America.  He left the State Department in 1944.  He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department". LINK:Hopkins was not Agent 19
> 
> I don't know why you keep repeating this disccredited slander.
> 
> Next: Where did you come up with this?  "One of those groups, led by Lee Pressman, was established within the Department of Agriculture in late 1933, and Hopkins was a member"
> 
> Pressmen's own testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee is clear;
> 
> Mr. PRESSMAN. I was asked to join [the Communist Party] by a man named Harold Ware. For the reasons which I have already indicated, I assented, and I joined with the group which had, in addition to myself, three other persons, all of whom at that time were in the Department of Agriculture.
> .........
> Mr. NIXON. .... Just so there will be absolute clarity of the record, as I understand, the records of this committee show that the three members of the group who were in the Department of Agriculture were John Abt, Nathan Witt, and Henry Collins?
> _Some back and forth about whether Collins was a member...._
> Mr. WOOD. I will ask you to name the other employee of the Department of Agriculture who was a member of the group.
> Mr. PRESSMAN. The third person among the individuals who have been named as members of this group who was an employee of the Department of Agriculture when I was in 1934 was Charles Kramer.
> 
> Pressmen named Abt, Nathan Witt, and Kramer as the three other members of his group. LINK: HUAC Testimony
> 
> You seem to see some machiavellian  nature in Hopkins relationship with FDR, really it's pretty simple;
> 
> Churchill again,  "As FDR's point man or unofficial emissary, Winston Churchill held Hopkins in high esteem, once remarking, "He was the most faithful and perfect channel of communication between the president and me." Or, "Beloved by some--such as Churchill, who believed that Hopkins "always went to the root of the matter"--and was trusted by most--including the paranoid Stalin--there were nevertheless those who resented the influence of "the White House Rasputin."-David Roll
> 
> And then you really enter the twighlight zone. Emanuel M. Josephson? Really? The "paranoid's paranoid". e.g.;
> 
> "Josephson argues that almost half of all US presidents were drawn from the Roosevelt - Adams -Delano "dynasty" and the dynasty acquired ambitions to return the US to some kind of elected monarchy. FDR had absorbed from Germany the "Bismarxist ideology" and during his administration had entered alliance with the Rockefeller empire. This alliance, along with the long established naval interests of the Roosevelt-Delano branch of the dynasty, that accounts for US participation in the world wars and cold war."
> 
> Josephson is the archetype for the History as Conspiracy school. Check out his bibliography.
> Maybe you should edit your copy and pastes a little better, leaving this out... 5. "Josephson, who was hardly an admirer of Roosevelt and his New Deal, lacks references for his allegations" might have been a good idea.
> 
> And Murray Garsson makes a fine star witness; God only knows what manipulation of reality went on between him and Josephson.
> 
> "After his release from prison, Murray Garsson was impoverished and subsisted on the charity of friends. For the last three weeks of his life, Garsson, destitute, lived in the reception room of Dr. Emanuel Josephson, 230 East 61st Street. Dr. Josephson prescribed barbiturates for Garsson. On March 7, 1957, Garsson was found unconscious at the foot of a staircase in the 61st Street building. He was taken to Bellevue Hospital, where he died a few days later. Milton Helpern, the chief medical examiner, performed an autopsy and determined the cause of death was brain hemorrhage, the result of a fall down a flight of stairs." LINK: Murray Garrson's pathetic life, and death
> 
> No human being is perfect, you can find fault in the most saintly among us. You have failed miserably even at this simple task. You should have followed my hint;
> 
> "And there's only one path that I've left open for you to take in your feverish desire to actually hang something out there that might negatively reflect on Hopkin's brilliant and honorable career. So find this minor footnote and exploit it to the best abilities of those you will C&P."
> 
> You didn't, and you've produced nothing except more impotent clawing at a great man's reputation.





I didn't read your post yet, Smugly, but look forward to doing so shortly.

I just came back to the thread to post another significant piece of the puzzle in exposing Harry Hopkins.


Serendipity....I generally spend time between posting in reading and studying...and, as luck would have it I went to chapter seven of Chesly Manly's " The Twenty Year Revolution."

*The following gives insight into the motives of Soviet agent, Harry Hopkins.*


 "Harry Hopkins, Roosevelt's alter ego, was the most powerful individual in the government because of his singular, almost hypnotic influence upon the President. 

Even before the United States formally entered the war, Hopkins made it clear that he saw the struggle as a world revolution. In an article published in the American Magazine in July, 1941, he wrote:

 "This is not only a fight for freedom of speech, religion and assembly. It is a fight for economic freedom for the people of the world, a fight to fulfill in this generation all that our fathers fought and strove for in the last 200 years. . . When a democratic victory is won, then the great wealth of the world must be shared with all people." 

Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.95.




You wrote this:
"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World."

Yes...but the world he fought for was a Soviet world, and a Soviet America, complete with gulags and genocide.

Every communist from Marx on has the deepest of beliefs that no number of executions, slaughters, genocides must stand in the way of world domination.
This applies to Harry Hopkins, as well.

This is your icon?


Not mine.


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> First I'll answer a question you pose towards the end of this poorly conceived and executed continuation of an attack on this quintessentially American political master. (Churchill called him "Lord Root of the Matter". In one of the volumes of his autobiography he said ths of Hopkins;
> "There he sat, slim, frail, ill, but absolutely glowing with refined comprehension of the Cause. It was to be the defeat, ruin, and slaughter of Hitler, to the exclusion of all other purposes, loyalties, or aims. In the history of the United States few brighter flames have burned.
> Harry Hopkins always went to the root of the matter. I have been present at several great international conferences, where twenty or more of the most important executive personages were gathered together. When the discussion flagged and all seemed baffled, it was on these occasions he would rap out the deadly question, "Surely, Mr. President, here is the point we have got to settle. Are we going to face it or not?" Faced it always was, and, being faced, was conquered. He was a true leader of men, and alike in ardour and in wisdom in times of crisis he has rarely been excelled. His love for the causes of the weak and poor was matched by his passion against tyranny, especially when tyranny was, for the time, triumphant."
> 
> The answer to your query  "How am I doing so far"? would be a resounding, room rattling guffaw if it wasn't for the fact that your attack, a pathetically manufactured web of conspiracy and lies though it may be, is on a great American 68 years dead who is not here to throw truth back into your face.
> 
> To start with, your short bio does Hopkins a disservice. His influence and participation in the events of the mid 20th century are way broader and deeper than your short outline suggests, but that's not really the heart of the matter, this is;
> . "The leading evidence that Hopkins was a spy for Joseph Stalin is presented by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."
> 
> Every serious scholar since the revelations of the Vassiliev notebooks do not give any credence to their "evidence". I pointed this out in a previous post;
> "These notebooks put a case closed end to the mystery of 19.  Source no. 19 was Laurence Duggan.  Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 193537, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions).  In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America.  He left the State Department in 1944.  He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department". LINK:Hopkins was not Agent 19
> 
> I don't know why you keep repeating this disccredited slander.
> 
> Next: Where did you come up with this?  "One of those groups, led by Lee Pressman, was established within the Department of Agriculture in late 1933, and Hopkins was a member"
> 
> Pressmen's own testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee is clear;
> 
> Mr. PRESSMAN. I was asked to join [the Communist Party] by a man named Harold Ware. For the reasons which I have already indicated, I assented, and I joined with the group which had, in addition to myself, three other persons, all of whom at that time were in the Department of Agriculture.
> .........
> Mr. NIXON. .... Just so there will be absolute clarity of the record, as I understand, the records of this committee show that the three members of the group who were in the Department of Agriculture were John Abt, Nathan Witt, and Henry Collins?
> _Some back and forth about whether Collins was a member...._
> Mr. WOOD. I will ask you to name the other employee of the Department of Agriculture who was a member of the group.
> Mr. PRESSMAN. The third person among the individuals who have been named as members of this group who was an employee of the Department of Agriculture when I was in 1934 was Charles Kramer.
> 
> Pressmen named Abt, Nathan Witt, and Kramer as the three other members of his group. LINK: HUAC Testimony
> 
> You seem to see some machiavellian  nature in Hopkins relationship with FDR, really it's pretty simple;
> 
> Churchill again,  "As FDR's point man or unofficial emissary, Winston Churchill held Hopkins in high esteem, once remarking, "He was the most faithful and perfect channel of communication between the president and me." Or, "Beloved by some--such as Churchill, who believed that Hopkins "always went to the root of the matter"--and was trusted by most--including the paranoid Stalin--there were nevertheless those who resented the influence of "the White House Rasputin."-David Roll
> 
> And then you really enter the twighlight zone. Emanuel M. Josephson? Really? The "paranoid's paranoid". e.g.;
> 
> "Josephson argues that almost half of all US presidents were drawn from the Roosevelt - Adams -Delano "dynasty" and the dynasty acquired ambitions to return the US to some kind of elected monarchy. FDR had absorbed from Germany the "Bismarxist ideology" and during his administration had entered alliance with the Rockefeller empire. This alliance, along with the long established naval interests of the Roosevelt-Delano branch of the dynasty, that accounts for US participation in the world wars and cold war."
> 
> Josephson is the archetype for the History as Conspiracy school. Check out his bibliography.
> Maybe you should edit your copy and pastes a little better, leaving this out... 5. "Josephson, who was hardly an admirer of Roosevelt and his New Deal, lacks references for his allegations" might have been a good idea.
> 
> And Murray Garsson makes a fine star witness; God only knows what manipulation of reality went on between him and Josephson.
> 
> "After his release from prison, Murray Garsson was impoverished and subsisted on the charity of friends. For the last three weeks of his life, Garsson, destitute, lived in the reception room of Dr. Emanuel Josephson, 230 East 61st Street. Dr. Josephson prescribed barbiturates for Garsson. On March 7, 1957, Garsson was found unconscious at the foot of a staircase in the 61st Street building. He was taken to Bellevue Hospital, where he died a few days later. Milton Helpern, the chief medical examiner, performed an autopsy and determined the cause of death was brain hemorrhage, the result of a fall down a flight of stairs." LINK: Murray Garrson's pathetic life, and death
> 
> No human being is perfect, you can find fault in the most saintly among us. You have failed miserably even at this simple task. You should have followed my hint;
> 
> "And there's only one path that I've left open for you to take in your feverish desire to actually hang something out there that might negatively reflect on Hopkin's brilliant and honorable career. So find this minor footnote and exploit it to the best abilities of those you will C&P."
> 
> You didn't, and you've produced nothing except more impotent clawing at a great man's reputation.






Rather than deny testimony, as Garsson's, you write this: "After his release from prison, Murray Garsson was impoverished and subsisted on the charity of friends."

So?


"You have failed miserably even at this simple task."
Wishful thinking, Smugly?

I'm not even half finished with either you or Hopkins.




8. . "...the New Yorker described Hopkins as an articulate propagandist for all-out aid to the Russians. 

Yet the presidential aides influence became the subject of controversy in 1949, when a U.S. Army officer who had worked in the Lend-Lease program, *Maj. George R. Jordan, testified to Congress that wartime shipments to Russia approved by Hopkins included uranium and other materials necessary to the development of atomic weapons. *

Jordan testified that the Soviets also used Lend-Lease shipments to smuggle back to Moscow *classified U.S. documents about the top-secret Manhattan Project. Much of Jordans testimony about the flow of stolen secrets to Moscow was corroborated by Victor Kravchenko, a Soviet official who defected in 1944  and whom Hopkins unsuccessfully sought to have handed back over to the Russians. *ViralRead » Top FDR Aide Hopkins Was Soviet Agent; Book Examines ?Betrayal?


BTW....have you read any of Kravchenko's "I Chose Freedom"? He was known as 'the first defector.'



 an articulate propagandist for all-out aid to the Russians. 


What was it you claimed in your uninformed post....

" "Harry Hopkins was *a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but *tirelessly for America *and the World. He actually worked himself to death *for America.* You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."



Beginning to appear as though you are the boot-liker....and you appear to enjoy Hopkins' boots, eh?


----------



## Moonglow

CrusaderFrank said:


> Hopkins was a tireless worker...for Stalin and Communism.
> 
> That's why the Left loves and defends him



Do you masturbate to fantasies like this?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Let's return to this bit of nonsense:

"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."



Unless one considers giving Stalin planes that would have saved American lives, and sending supplies to the USSR that would have better served our armed forces, and making certain that the USSR got the atomic bomb, and allowing Stalin to plan D-day, as 'working tirelessly for America,' ....

...unless you believe the above, then Hopkins did his tireless work for the Soviets.


9. There is absolutely no evidence of Hopkins's patriotism outside of the fact that he worked in the White House. None. All that there is an assumption, a faith based in wishful thinking. 

It provides for Hopkins the kind of benefit of the doubt that the Liberals never give to an opponents, as in Goldwater's vote against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, or Trent Lott joking that Strom Thurmond had been elected.


 In 1998, the late US Air Force historian Eduard Mark published a break-through Hopkins analysis, a meticulous examination of what appears to be the first damning document to emerge from the Venona record against Hopkins. It was a partly decrypted Venona cable, authored by Akhmerov, in which a very senior Roosevelt administration official, code named "Source 19," conveyed the content of a private, top secret conversation between Roosevelt and Churchill in late May 1943 about the invasion of Normandy, which, at the time, was a year away. By a process of elimination, this is what Mark concludes: "it is probable virtually to the point of certainty" that Harry Hopkins is Source 19. 
 Eduard Mark, "Venona's Source 19 and the 'Trident' Conference of May 1943; Diplomacy or Espionage?" From "Intelligence and National Security 113, no. 2, April 1998, p. 1-31.

a.  See http://65.54.113.26/Publication/57558173


----------



## SmedlyButler

If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?

This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;

.... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999

*Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author.* Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?

BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. *Smugly Backside*. It's almost as if you're subconsciously  channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (_I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what *they* say.)_


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> *Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author.* Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?
> 
> BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. *Smugly Backside*. It's almost as if you're subconsciously  channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (_I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what *they* say.)_





I can see where the idea of conflating the study of Harry Hopkins with your backside originates.....having a nickname in common.


Perhaps we will get back to the charms of your backside at a later date.

I'm certain that many will find an OP of your creation nothing less than fascinating.





As soon as I have a chance I'll continue with my endeavor, and you can continue playing "woodsman, spare this tree!!!"


----------



## SmedlyButler

If you keep using these nutbars as sources and "evidence" people are going to suspect you are a nutbar yourself...whoops, too late.


....together with tthe absense of any corroboration from millions of documents released from Soviet and U.S. archives in the decades since the 1940's leads to the conclusion that Jordan either lied for publicity and profit or was delusional. Jordans own testimony before the House was fraught with condradictions, the most blatant of which was his statement that in the spring of 1944 Hopkins called him from Washington and ordered him to expedite shipents of Uranium to the Russians. When Jordan was informed that this was highly unlikely because Hopkins was flat on his back at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, he changed his testimony....LINK

Eduard Mark (Your E. Mark BTW, more of him later), an Air Force historian said "The truth bears little resemblence to all the allegations of the psychopathic Mr. Jordan."

In the 1960's Jordan publicly "condemned fluoridation as a secret Russian revolutionary technique to deaden" the minds of Americans. Hmmm....


----------



## SmedlyButler

Camp said:


> You gave a dozen distorted out of context anectdotal examples of people who viewed Obama with spiritual feelings. I think only two of them mentioned messiah and some were purposefully sarcastic. After listing your cut and paste avalanche you did as you usualy do, you declared victory. Who cares?
> Now defend the use of THE HOMEPAGE OF DC DAVE as a legitimate source for use in a debate about FDR, STALIN AND WWII.



I hate to miss out on entertainment, I just love a good fantasy.


----------



## SmedlyButler

You mentioned the Sword and the Shield (intimating I presume that it provided further "evidence" of your Hopkins as spy theory) and I pointed out that the author himself said it was a lie, he categorized it as;

"...far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort. 

And you have no comment. Typical

And stop trying to lure me into discussing my "backside". Is there such a thing as sexual harassment on an Internet political junkie Forum? Anybody?


----------



## Bfgrn

During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: *People dont eat in the long run. They eat every day.*

Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.

Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
President Harry S. Truman


----------



## SmedlyButler

This is from an article by two Conservative scholars from the Conservative FrontPageMag. They prove that Harry Hopkins was not Agent 19 and describe how and why Edourd Mark came to the wrong conclusion. (They were friends and colleagues of Mark) I've given you the bottom line from this article before. You continue to assert HH was agent 19. Was West that hypnotic? Repeating a lie or misconception over and over will not make it true.

I hate to C&P so much of this but maybe you don't have time to follow the LINK I've also edited it to shorten, hopefully without losing impact and in no way changing conclusions.

".... But while hundreds of cover names were identified, there remained hundreds that were not due to the paucity of the information provided about the persons activities.  One of those unidentified cover names was a Soviet source with the cover name 19.
Source 19 appears in a single Venona message numbered 812, dated 29 May 1943, and sent to Moscow from the New York station of the NKGB (predecessor to the Cold War era KGB).  The NKGB station operated out of the Soviet diplomatic consulate in New York City.  The National Security Agency declassified the decrypted Venona messages in 1995-96 and has made them public on the web".[3]

"In 1999 we published Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, a book that explored what could be learned from the Venona decryptions about Soviet intelligence operations in the United States. We discussed the mysterious 19 at length,....."

".... Unfortunately, the deciphered parts of the message do not give the exact date of Source no. 19s conversation with Roosevelt and Churchill.[5]  Additionally, we noted that even the identity of Zamestitel was not clear.  Since in Russian it means deputy, Venona project analysts at first though it referred to Vice President Henry Wallace but later suggested that it might be Harry Hopkins.  We thought the original Wallace designation the more likely."

"....While we judged 19 to be unidentifiable, a colleague had reached a different conclusion.  The late Eduard Mark published an essay in 1998 entitled Venonas Source 19 and the Trident Conference of May 1943: Diplomacy or Espionage?[6]  We knew and respected Marks scholarly ability.  We discussed the agent 19 issue with him as he was preparing his essay (and we were then preparing our Venona book) and, at his request, commented on early drafts of his essay.  Marks argument was essentially a last man standing one.  He meticulously went over records of who was known to have been at various Trident-related events to narrow down the list of who was present simultaneously with Roosevelt, Churchill, and Wallace and could plausibly have discussed the second front issue.  (Mark also considered the possibility of Zamestitel being Hopkins but, as we had, thought Wallace more likely.)  Mark came down to seeing only four plausible candidates for 19: Harry Hopkins, Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King, London-based Lend-Lease coordinator W. Averill Harriman, and Britains Lord Beaverbrook.  He then considered each in turn and finally concluded, the fact remains that there is no plausible candidate for 19 but Hopkins.[7]

"....We disagreed and told him so when his essay was still in draft form.  In our view a last man standing argument is indirect and circumstantial and is only convincing when one can definitely identify all of the possible candidates and eliminate all but one.  While the records of who attended formal Trident conference events were largely reliable, those of Trident-related events, particularly less formal social events, were not.  Record keeping in that era of social functions were simply too casual to be regarded as definitive.  Not everyone on an invitation list showed up, and those that did would, particularly if they were of senior standing, bring a guest.  Mark was of the view that most social events could be ignored because something as sensitive as the second front would not be discussed.  Our view was that senior officials in that era were notorious for gossiping about such matters among themselves even at such events and those venues could not be ruled out.  Consequently, one could not be confident of knowing all of the possible candidates for 19 and a last man standing argument could not be viewed with certainty due to the fragility of the scaffolding of evidence.

Mark, however, was confident of his argument and proceeded with publication.  We made note of his argument that 19 was Hopkins in our Venona book which was published subsequent to Marks essay and noted that he also concluded that the readable portions of the message do not allow a clear determination of whether Hopkins/19 was a Soviet covert source or as a benign back channel diplomatic contact between Roosevelt and the Soviets.  We agree that the partial decryption and ambiguity of the message does not allow a confident judgment on Source no. 19s relationship to the Soviets; while impressed by Marks analysis, we view the evidence as too slim to enable us to reach a judgment about Source No. 19s identity."

Their final conclusion in this matter came some time later, and I've given this to you before with the link;Again the LINK

We did not, in fact, give any more thought to the identity of 19 until we gained access to the Vassiliev notebooks.  These notebooks put a case closed end to the mystery of 19.  Source no. 19 was Laurence Duggan.  Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 193537, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions).  In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America.  He left the State Department in 1944.  He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department. 

Agent 19 was Duggan Repeat after me Agent 19 was Duggan. I think CAMP gave you this before and maybe others. Do you ever admit you're wrong? Are you afraid removing one of the cards will cause the whole structure to fall?


----------



## SmedlyButler

Bfgrn said:


> During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: *People dont eat in the long run. They eat every day.*
> 
> Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.
> 
> Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:
> 
> "Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
> President Harry S. Truman



I was going to work it in somewhere. So terse yet so eloquent.


----------



## Camp

If the discussion were to turn to Hopkins role as a back channel contact between FDR and Stalin, as an intelligence operative and gatherer as the main American with access to the Soviet dictator and his abilities as a master manipulator, heads may explode. Could be the reason Gen. Marshall spoke so highly of Hopkins and said Hopkins would never get the credit he so much deserved.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> *A Peoples History of Koch Industries: How Stalin Funded the Tea Party Movement*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Roots of Stalin in the Tea Party Movement | Alternet



Wow, PC Laid the butthurt on you that badly.


----------



## regent

If there is a gene for creating conspiracies I think conservatives are blessed with the larger gene. There should be an olympic award for best conspiracy creation and if so, my nomination would be the Birch water fluoridation conspiracy, The conspiracy went something like this: The commies want to put fluoride in the water not to prevent kids from tooth getting tooth decay, but because fluoride softened people's brains and made them turn communistic. Well something like that, but if there was an olymic award I would submit the fluoride charge for the gold. I understand Texans stopped brushing their teeth.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: *People dont eat in the long run. They eat every day.*
> 
> Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.
> 
> Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:
> 
> "Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
> President Harry S. Truman



Conservatives were against FDR Programs because they sucked and failed.

FDR averaged 20% unemployed during his first two terms.

That's a fail

FDR can go fuck himself


----------



## CrusaderFrank

A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.

FDR: 20% unemployment

Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment


----------



## SmedlyButler

Jordan, one of PC's "sources" was a prime purveyor of this myth. I posted this earlier;

"In the 1960's Jordan publicly "condemned fluoridation as a secret Russian revolutionary technique to deaden" the minds of Americans."


----------



## Bfgrn

CrusaderFrank said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: *People dont eat in the long run. They eat every day.*
> 
> Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.
> 
> Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:
> 
> "Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
> President Harry S. Truman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives were against FDR Programs because they sucked and failed.
> 
> FDR averaged 20% unemployed during his first two terms.
> 
> That's a fail
> 
> FDR can go fuck himself
Click to expand...


That '20%' is bullshit Frank. It is dishonest right wing manipulation by right wing revisionist Amity Shlaes' discredited book "The Forgotten Man"

Shlaes both wholly omits some relevant data and deviously manipulates other numbers:

Shlaes makes a different argument about numbers, because she uses different numbers. She starts each chapter with a rat-a-tat of just-the-facts, but instead of GDP, which represents the overall economy, she quotes the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which represents the maybe 10 percent of Americans who owned stock...Let's look at a figure Shlaes gives twice in her book and again in her Wall Street Journal editorial: She has unemployment at 20 percent in the 1937-38 recession. That's appallingalmost as bad as 23 percent in 1932. Based on such a statistic, you could think the New Deal wasn't alleviating the Great Depression. But that number hides something: A third of the people Shlaes counts as unemployed had a job that the New Deal gave them through its relief programs.

By this measure, government jobs don't count as jobs, and therefore their estimates of unemployment are far higher. To understand how manipulative this is, imagine the howls of protest conservatives would be airing if, in criticizing George W. Bush, Democrats took today's unemployment data and then inflated it by counting the millions of people who work for federal, state and local governments as unemployed.

Shlaes is backed up by other conservatives, who are slightly more honest than her in acknowledging unemployment may have decreased during the New Deal. But these right-wingers then inevitably claim that unemployment only decreased a little bit in the New Deal, and only significantly dropped when World War II and the subsequent defense buildup started.

So to end this historical revisionism once and for all - to compare apples to apples, rather than apples to conservatives' fuzzy math - let's go to the great equalizer, the Census Data, and specifically Census document HS-29 (available in PDF or Excel formats). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression: 

Census document HS-29 (available in PDF). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

    ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
    1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
    1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
    Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%

    ROOSEVELT WWII
    1941 Unemployment Rate: 9.9% (5.5 million total unemployed)
    1944 Unemployment Rate: 1.2% (670,000 total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: -8.7
    Total unemployment percentage change: -87.9%

    TRUMAN
    1945 Unemployment Rate: 1.9% (1.0 million total unemployed)
    1952 Unemployment Rate: 3.0% (1.8 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: +1.1
    Total unemployment percentage change: +81.0%

    EISENHOWER
    1953 Unemployment Rate: 2.9% (1.8 million total unemployed)
    1960 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (3.8 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: +2.6%
    Total unemployment percentage change: +110.03%

    KENNEDY
    1961 Unemployment Rate: 6.7% (4.7 million total unemployed)
    1963 Unemployment Rate: 5.7% (4.0 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: -1.0%
    Total unemployment percentage change: -13.6%

    JOHNSON
    1964 Unemployment Rate: 5.2% (3.7 million total unemployed)
    1968 Unemployment Rate: 3.6% (2.8 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: -1.6%
    Total unemployment percentage change: -25.6%

    NIXON
    1969 Unemployment Rate: 3.5% (2.8 million total unemployed)
    1974 Unemployment Rate: 5.6% (5.1 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: +2.1%
    Total unemployment percentage change: +82.0%

    FORD
    1975 Unemployment Rate: 8.5% (7.9 million total unemployed)
    1976 Unemployment Rate: 7.7% (7.4 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: -0.8%
    Total unemployment percentage change: -6.6%

    CARTER
    1977 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (6.9 million total unemployed)
    1980 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (7.6 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: 0.0
    Total unemployment percentage change: +9.24%

    REAGAN
    1981 Unemployment Rate: 7.6% (8.2 million total unemployed)
    1988 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (6.7 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: -2.1%
    Total unemployment percentage change: -19.0%

    BUSH I
    1989 Unemployment Rate: 5.3% (6.5 million total unemployed)
    1992 Unemployment Rate: 7.5% (9.6 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change: +2.2
    Total unemployment percentage change: +47.2%

    CLINTON
    1993 Unemployment Rate: 6.9% (8.9 million total unemployed)
    2000 Unemployment Rate: 4.0% (5.6 million total unemployed)
    Unemployment Rate Change -2.9
    Total unemployment percentage change: -36.3%

As you can see, in terms of the unemployment rate - that is, the percentage of the total workforce not working - the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the single largest drop in American history. Yes, I'll say that again for conservatives, just to make sure they get it: The PRE-WWII New Deal era from 1933-1940 - not the WWII era - saw the largest drop in the unemployment rate in American history. And by the way, that even includes the recession of 1937-1938.

Now, it is certainly true that the percentage drop of total unemployed was bigger in WWII than it was in the pre-WWII New Deal era. But as the data show, even by that metric, the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the second largest percentage drop in total unemployed in the 20th century, going from 12.8 million unemployed in Roosevelt's first year in office to 8.1 million unemployed at the end of his second term in 1940. That's a 36.7 percent drop - larger than the Clinton era (36.3%) and, yes conservatives, larger than the Reagan era (a mere 19%). At the absolute minimum, that would suggests the New Deal was a positive - not negative - economic force (and empirically more positive than, say, Reagan's free-market agenda). 

These are the hard and fast numbers conservatives would like us all to forget with their claim that history proves massive spending packages like the New Deal will supposedly harm our economy.

The Forgotten Math: Pre-WWII New Deal Saw Biggest Drop In Unemployment Rate in American History

And you keep forgetting that your right wing austerity approach doesn't work. FDR found that out. FDR had his own right wing regressives to contend with, HERE is where that led.

The Recession of 19371938 was a temporary reversal of the pre-war 1933 to 1941 economic recovery from the Great Depression in the United States. Economists disagree about the causes of this downturn, but agree that *government austerity reversed the recovery*. wiki


The greatest yearly increase in GDP occurred during the New Deal, *AND, the LARGEST DROP IN UNEMPLOYMENT in America history occurred during the New Deal...*


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.s programs that conservatives today raise about Obama's. Conservatives during the Great Depression said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: *People dont eat in the long run. They eat every day.*
> 
> Harry Hopkins was a great American, not a traitorous piece of shit like PC and her right wing ilk.
> 
> Another great 'Harry' said it best way back in 1948:
> 
> "Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
> President Harry S. Truman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives were against FDR Programs because they sucked and failed.
> 
> FDR averaged 20% unemployed during his first two terms.
> 
> That's a fail
> 
> FDR can go fuck himself
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That '20%' is bullshit Frank. It is dishonest right wing manipulation by right wing revisionist Amity Shlaes' discredited book "The Forgotten Man"
> 
> Shlaes both wholly omits some relevant data and deviously manipulates other numbers:
> 
> Shlaes makes a different argument about numbers, because she uses different numbers. She starts each chapter with a rat-a-tat of just-the-facts, but instead of GDP, which represents the overall economy, she quotes the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which represents the maybe 10 percent of Americans who owned stock...Let's look at a figure Shlaes gives twice in her book and again in her Wall Street Journal editorial: She has unemployment at 20 percent in the 1937-38 recession. That's appallingalmost as bad as 23 percent in 1932. Based on such a statistic, you could think the New Deal wasn't alleviating the Great Depression. But that number hides something: A third of the people Shlaes counts as unemployed had a job that the New Deal gave them through its relief programs.
> 
> By this measure, government jobs don't count as jobs, and therefore their estimates of unemployment are far higher. To understand how manipulative this is, imagine the howls of protest conservatives would be airing if, in criticizing George W. Bush, Democrats took today's unemployment data and then inflated it by counting the millions of people who work for federal, state and local governments as unemployed.
> 
> Shlaes is backed up by other conservatives, who are slightly more honest than her in acknowledging unemployment may have decreased during the New Deal. But these right-wingers then inevitably claim that unemployment only decreased a little bit in the New Deal, and only significantly dropped when World War II and the subsequent defense buildup started.
> 
> So to end this historical revisionism once and for all - to compare apples to apples, rather than apples to conservatives' fuzzy math - let's go to the great equalizer, the Census Data, and specifically Census document HS-29 (available in PDF or Excel formats). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:
> 
> Census document HS-29 (available in PDF). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:
> 
> ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
> 1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
> 1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
> Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%
> 
> ROOSEVELT WWII
> 1941 Unemployment Rate: 9.9% (5.5 million total unemployed)
> 1944 Unemployment Rate: 1.2% (670,000 total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: -8.7
> Total unemployment percentage change: -87.9%
> 
> TRUMAN
> 1945 Unemployment Rate: 1.9% (1.0 million total unemployed)
> 1952 Unemployment Rate: 3.0% (1.8 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: +1.1
> Total unemployment percentage change: +81.0%
> 
> EISENHOWER
> 1953 Unemployment Rate: 2.9% (1.8 million total unemployed)
> 1960 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (3.8 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: +2.6%
> Total unemployment percentage change: +110.03%
> 
> KENNEDY
> 1961 Unemployment Rate: 6.7% (4.7 million total unemployed)
> 1963 Unemployment Rate: 5.7% (4.0 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: -1.0%
> Total unemployment percentage change: -13.6%
> 
> JOHNSON
> 1964 Unemployment Rate: 5.2% (3.7 million total unemployed)
> 1968 Unemployment Rate: 3.6% (2.8 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: -1.6%
> Total unemployment percentage change: -25.6%
> 
> NIXON
> 1969 Unemployment Rate: 3.5% (2.8 million total unemployed)
> 1974 Unemployment Rate: 5.6% (5.1 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: +2.1%
> Total unemployment percentage change: +82.0%
> 
> FORD
> 1975 Unemployment Rate: 8.5% (7.9 million total unemployed)
> 1976 Unemployment Rate: 7.7% (7.4 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: -0.8%
> Total unemployment percentage change: -6.6%
> 
> CARTER
> 1977 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (6.9 million total unemployed)
> 1980 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (7.6 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: 0.0
> Total unemployment percentage change: +9.24%
> 
> REAGAN
> 1981 Unemployment Rate: 7.6% (8.2 million total unemployed)
> 1988 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (6.7 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: -2.1%
> Total unemployment percentage change: -19.0%
> 
> BUSH I
> 1989 Unemployment Rate: 5.3% (6.5 million total unemployed)
> 1992 Unemployment Rate: 7.5% (9.6 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change: +2.2
> Total unemployment percentage change: +47.2%
> 
> CLINTON
> 1993 Unemployment Rate: 6.9% (8.9 million total unemployed)
> 2000 Unemployment Rate: 4.0% (5.6 million total unemployed)
> Unemployment Rate Change -2.9
> Total unemployment percentage change: -36.3%
> 
> As you can see, in terms of the unemployment rate - that is, the percentage of the total workforce not working - the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the single largest drop in American history. Yes, I'll say that again for conservatives, just to make sure they get it: The PRE-WWII New Deal era from 1933-1940 - not the WWII era - saw the largest drop in the unemployment rate in American history. And by the way, that even includes the recession of 1937-1938.
> 
> Now, it is certainly true that the percentage drop of total unemployed was bigger in WWII than it was in the pre-WWII New Deal era. But as the data show, even by that metric, the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the second largest percentage drop in total unemployed in the 20th century, going from 12.8 million unemployed in Roosevelt's first year in office to 8.1 million unemployed at the end of his second term in 1940. That's a 36.7 percent drop - larger than the Clinton era (36.3%) and, yes conservatives, larger than the Reagan era (a mere 19%). At the absolute minimum, that would suggests the New Deal was a positive - not negative - economic force (and empirically more positive than, say, Reagan's free-market agenda).
> 
> These are the hard and fast numbers conservatives would like us all to forget with their claim that history proves massive spending packages like the New Deal will supposedly harm our economy.
> 
> The Forgotten Math: Pre-WWII New Deal Saw Biggest Drop In Unemployment Rate in American History
> 
> And you keep forgetting that your right wing austerity approach doesn't work. FDR found that out. FDR had his own right wing regressives to contend with, HERE is where that led.
> 
> The Recession of 19371938 was a temporary reversal of the pre-war 1933 to 1941 economic recovery from the Great Depression in the United States. Economists disagree about the causes of this downturn, but agree that *government austerity reversed the recovery*. wiki
> 
> 
> The greatest yearly increase in GDP occurred during the New Deal, *AND, the LARGEST DROP IN UNEMPLOYMENT in America history occurred during the New Deal...*
Click to expand...


You should read what you post

"ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)"

Unemployment averaged 20% Unemployment during FDR's first 2 terms


----------



## Camp

CrusaderFrank said:


> A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.
> 
> FDR: 20% unemployment
> 
> Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment



Typical deflection and attempt at thread kill. What the heck does unemployment or economics  during the depression have to do with the slanderous accusation that the great American, Harry Hopkins was a spy for Stalin during WWII?


----------



## Camp

SmedlyButler said:


> First I'll answer a question you pose towards the end of this poorly conceived and executed continuation of an attack on this quintessentially American political master. (Churchill called him "Lord Root of the Matter". In one of the volumes of his autobiography he said ths of Hopkins;
> "There he sat, slim, frail, ill, but absolutely glowing with refined comprehension of the Cause. It was to be the defeat, ruin, and slaughter of Hitler, to the exclusion of all other purposes, loyalties, or aims. In the history of the United States few brighter flames have burned.
> Harry Hopkins always went to the root of the matter. I have been present at several great international conferences, where twenty or more of the most important executive personages were gathered together. When the discussion flagged and all seemed baffled, it was on these occasions he would rap out the deadly question, "Surely, Mr. President, here is the point we have got to settle. Are we going to face it or not?" Faced it always was, and, being faced, was conquered. He was a true leader of men, and alike in ardour and in wisdom in times of crisis he has rarely been excelled. His love for the causes of the weak and poor was matched by his passion against tyranny, especially when tyranny was, for the time, triumphant."
> 
> The answer to your query  "How am I doing so far"? would be a resounding, room rattling guffaw if it wasn't for the fact that your attack, a pathetically manufactured web of conspiracy and lies though it may be, is on a great American 68 years dead who is not here to throw truth back into your face.
> 
> To start with, your short bio does Hopkins a disservice. His influence and participation in the events of the mid 20th century are way broader and deeper than your short outline suggests, but that's not really the heart of the matter, this is;
> . "The leading evidence that Hopkins was a spy for Joseph Stalin is presented by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel in their 2000 book, "The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitor."
> 
> Every serious scholar since the revelations of the Vassiliev notebooks do not give any credence to their "evidence". I pointed this out in a previous post;
> "These notebooks put a case closed end to the mystery of 19.  Source no. 19 was Laurence Duggan.  Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 193537, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions).  In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America.  He left the State Department in 1944.  He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department". LINK:Hopkins was not Agent 19
> 
> I don't know why you keep repeating this disccredited slander.
> 
> Next: Where did you come up with this?  "One of those groups, led by Lee Pressman, was established within the Department of Agriculture in late 1933, and Hopkins was a member"
> 
> Pressmen's own testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee is clear;
> 
> Mr. PRESSMAN. I was asked to join [the Communist Party] by a man named Harold Ware. For the reasons which I have already indicated, I assented, and I joined with the group which had, in addition to myself, three other persons, all of whom at that time were in the Department of Agriculture.
> .........
> Mr. NIXON. .... Just so there will be absolute clarity of the record, as I understand, the records of this committee show that the three members of the group who were in the Department of Agriculture were John Abt, Nathan Witt, and Henry Collins?
> _Some back and forth about whether Collins was a member...._
> Mr. WOOD. I will ask you to name the other employee of the Department of Agriculture who was a member of the group.
> Mr. PRESSMAN. The third person among the individuals who have been named as members of this group who was an employee of the Department of Agriculture when I was in 1934 was Charles Kramer.
> 
> Pressmen named Abt, Nathan Witt, and Kramer as the three other members of his group. LINK: HUAC Testimony
> 
> You seem to see some machiavellian  nature in Hopkins relationship with FDR, really it's pretty simple;
> 
> Churchill again,  "As FDR's point man or unofficial emissary, Winston Churchill held Hopkins in high esteem, once remarking, "He was the most faithful and perfect channel of communication between the president and me." Or, "Beloved by some--such as Churchill, who believed that Hopkins "always went to the root of the matter"--and was trusted by most--including the paranoid Stalin--there were nevertheless those who resented the influence of "the White House Rasputin."-David Roll
> 
> And then you really enter the twighlight zone. Emanuel M. Josephson? Really? The "paranoid's paranoid". e.g.;
> 
> "Josephson argues that almost half of all US presidents were drawn from the Roosevelt - Adams -Delano "dynasty" and the dynasty acquired ambitions to return the US to some kind of elected monarchy. FDR had absorbed from Germany the "Bismarxist ideology" and during his administration had entered alliance with the Rockefeller empire. This alliance, along with the long established naval interests of the Roosevelt-Delano branch of the dynasty, that accounts for US participation in the world wars and cold war."
> 
> Josephson is the archetype for the History as Conspiracy school. Check out his bibliography.
> Maybe you should edit your copy and pastes a little better, leaving this out... 5. "Josephson, who was hardly an admirer of Roosevelt and his New Deal, lacks references for his allegations" might have been a good idea.
> 
> And Murray Garsson makes a fine star witness; God only knows what manipulation of reality went on between him and Josephson.
> 
> "After his release from prison, Murray Garsson was impoverished and subsisted on the charity of friends. For the last three weeks of his life, Garsson, destitute, lived in the reception room of Dr. Emanuel Josephson, 230 East 61st Street. Dr. Josephson prescribed barbiturates for Garsson. On March 7, 1957, Garsson was found unconscious at the foot of a staircase in the 61st Street building. He was taken to Bellevue Hospital, where he died a few days later. Milton Helpern, the chief medical examiner, performed an autopsy and determined the cause of death was brain hemorrhage, the result of a fall down a flight of stairs." LINK: Murray Garrson's pathetic life, and death
> 
> No human being is perfect, you can find fault in the most saintly among us. You have failed miserably even at this simple task. You should have followed my hint;
> 
> "And there's only one path that I've left open for you to take in your feverish desire to actually hang something out there that might negatively reflect on Hopkin's brilliant and honorable career. So find this minor footnote and exploit it to the best abilities of those you will C&P."
> 
> You didn't, and you've produced nothing except more impotent clawing at a great man's reputation.



Back on topic.


----------



## Camp

SmedlyButler said:


> This is from an article by two Conservative scholars from the Conservative FrontPageMag. They prove that Harry Hopkins was not Agent 19 and describe how and why Edourd Mark came to the wrong conclusion. (They were friends and colleagues of Mark) I've given you the bottom line from this article before. You continue to assert HH was agent 19. Was West that hypnotic? Repeating a lie or misconception over and over will not make it true.
> 
> I hate to C&P so much of this but maybe you don't have time to follow the LINK I've also edited it to shorten, hopefully without losing impact and in no way changing conclusions.
> 
> ".... But while hundreds of cover names were identified, there remained hundreds that were not due to the paucity of the information provided about the persons activities.  One of those unidentified cover names was a Soviet source with the cover name 19.
> Source 19 appears in a single Venona message numbered 812, dated 29 May 1943, and sent to Moscow from the New York station of the NKGB (predecessor to the Cold War era KGB).  The NKGB station operated out of the Soviet diplomatic consulate in New York City.  The National Security Agency declassified the decrypted Venona messages in 1995-96 and has made them public on the web".[3]
> 
> "In 1999 we published Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, a book that explored what could be learned from the Venona decryptions about Soviet intelligence operations in the United States. We discussed the mysterious 19 at length,....."
> 
> ".... Unfortunately, the deciphered parts of the message do not give the exact date of Source no. 19s conversation with Roosevelt and Churchill.[5]  Additionally, we noted that even the identity of Zamestitel was not clear.  Since in Russian it means deputy, Venona project analysts at first though it referred to Vice President Henry Wallace but later suggested that it might be Harry Hopkins.  We thought the original Wallace designation the more likely."
> 
> "....While we judged 19 to be unidentifiable, a colleague had reached a different conclusion.  The late Eduard Mark published an essay in 1998 entitled Venonas Source 19 and the Trident Conference of May 1943: Diplomacy or Espionage?[6]  We knew and respected Marks scholarly ability.  We discussed the agent 19 issue with him as he was preparing his essay (and we were then preparing our Venona book) and, at his request, commented on early drafts of his essay.  Marks argument was essentially a last man standing one.  He meticulously went over records of who was known to have been at various Trident-related events to narrow down the list of who was present simultaneously with Roosevelt, Churchill, and Wallace and could plausibly have discussed the second front issue.  (Mark also considered the possibility of Zamestitel being Hopkins but, as we had, thought Wallace more likely.)  Mark came down to seeing only four plausible candidates for 19: Harry Hopkins, Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King, London-based Lend-Lease coordinator W. Averill Harriman, and Britains Lord Beaverbrook.  He then considered each in turn and finally concluded, the fact remains that there is no plausible candidate for 19 but Hopkins.[7]
> 
> "....We disagreed and told him so when his essay was still in draft form.  In our view a last man standing argument is indirect and circumstantial and is only convincing when one can definitely identify all of the possible candidates and eliminate all but one.  While the records of who attended formal Trident conference events were largely reliable, those of Trident-related events, particularly less formal social events, were not.  Record keeping in that era of social functions were simply too casual to be regarded as definitive.  Not everyone on an invitation list showed up, and those that did would, particularly if they were of senior standing, bring a guest.  Mark was of the view that most social events could be ignored because something as sensitive as the second front would not be discussed.  Our view was that senior officials in that era were notorious for gossiping about such matters among themselves even at such events and those venues could not be ruled out.  Consequently, one could not be confident of knowing all of the possible candidates for 19 and a last man standing argument could not be viewed with certainty due to the fragility of the scaffolding of evidence.
> 
> Mark, however, was confident of his argument and proceeded with publication.  We made note of his argument that 19 was Hopkins in our Venona book which was published subsequent to Marks essay and noted that he also concluded that the readable portions of the message do not allow a clear determination of whether Hopkins/19 was a Soviet covert source or as a benign back channel diplomatic contact between Roosevelt and the Soviets.  We agree that the partial decryption and ambiguity of the message does not allow a confident judgment on Source no. 19s relationship to the Soviets; while impressed by Marks analysis, we view the evidence as too slim to enable us to reach a judgment about Source No. 19s identity."
> 
> Their final conclusion in this matter came some time later, and I've given this to you before with the link;Again the LINK
> 
> We did not, in fact, give any more thought to the identity of 19 until we gained access to the Vassiliev notebooks.  These notebooks put a case closed end to the mystery of 19.  Source no. 19 was Laurence Duggan.  Duggan had joined the State Department in 1930 and served as Latin American Division chief, 193537, and then chief of the Division of the American Republics (merger of the Latin American and Mexican Divisions).  In 1940 he became a senior advisor to the Secretary of State on Latin America.  He left the State Department in 1944.  He was recruited as a Soviet spy in 1935 and remained an active source until he left the State Department.
> 
> Agent 19 was Duggan Repeat after me Agent 19 was Duggan. I think CAMP gave you this before and maybe others. Do you ever admit you're wrong? Are you afraid removing one of the cards will cause the whole structure to fall?



And lets give this a bump.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Thanks to the clandestine services on both sides, the US and USSR never had a hot or nuclear war. That being the case, condemning any operative is to try and rewrite history with unknown outcomes.


----------



## Camp

Sad that clandestine operators don't get credit for their sacrifices. Takes a special kind of individual to dedicate themselves knowing they will not be recognized by their fellow citizens and family for their efforts and patriotism. Makes it worse and so much sadder when political operatives, novice or professional, besmirch them long after they are dead and gone.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.
> 
> FDR: 20% unemployment
> 
> Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Typical deflection and attempt at thread kill. What the heck does unemployment or economics  during the depression have to do with the slanderous accusation that the great American, Harry Hopkins was a spy for Stalin during WWII?
Click to expand...


Yes, you're right. Hopkins was one of Stalin's best assets, let's stay with that


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> *Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author.* Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?
> 
> BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. *Smugly Backside*. It's almost as if you're subconsciously  channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (_I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what *they* say.)_









If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?

This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;

.... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999




If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly....*.on the very same page that you quote above:*

 "Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately *warned the Soviet embassy *in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."


*Stalin loved him*....and with good reason.

Again....you said:
"Harry Hopkins was* a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America *and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."


Pretty good tireless work for America?

Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?


----------



## Camp

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> A generation before FDR, Conservatives inherited a depression and ended it in under 2 years. Unemployment dropped from 12% down to 4% and at the end of Coolidge's second term you couldn't find an unemployed person.
> 
> FDR: 20% unemployment
> 
> Coolidge: less that 4% unemployment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Typical deflection and attempt at thread kill. What the heck does unemployment or economics  during the depression have to do with the slanderous accusation that the great American, Harry Hopkins was a spy for Stalin during WWII?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, you're right. Hopkins was one of Stalin's best assets, let's stay with that
Click to expand...


If you could just provide some academic or scholarly data to back up that claim it would be great. So far, all the information that has been provided to support your assertion, posted  by another poster, has been shown to be obsolete due to the release of more accurate and reliable documents and data. The original allegations on Hopkins were based on speculation about the identity of an agent referred to as Agent 19. The situation is explained in great detail in one of the above post. So why do you persist? What do you know that others that have looked into this topic don't know? Are you just refusing to adjust your opinion because you are just stuck and stubbornly holding on to a belief even after it has been debunked or do you have pertinent information to support the allegations you repeatedly make? Are you a bullshiting liar who thinks it is OK to bare false witness  against a dead patriot to promote your political agenda or something else? Maybe you think the data posted by myself and others that dispute you claims are wrong. That would be fine. Maybe you could show us how it is wrong. Just sayin', if you are going to call a dead patriot a traitor you should be able to back it up to some degree or on some level.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> *Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author.* Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?
> 
> BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. *Smugly Backside*. It's almost as if you're subconsciously  channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (_I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what *they* say.)_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly....*.on the very same page that you quote above:*
> 
> "Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately *warned the Soviet embassy *in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."
> 
> 
> *Stalin loved him*....and with good reason.
> 
> Again....you said:
> "Harry Hopkins was* a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America *and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."
> 
> 
> Pretty good tireless work for America?
> 
> Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?
Click to expand...


Just like today, and even more so back during Hoover's hay days of blackmailing and running his own little private secret police force, the FBI was not always trusted with certain types of information. Other government agencies did not want Hoover or the FBI in on their operations and secrets, just like other government agencies don't want the FBI in on operations and secrets today.
Ofcourse Stalin was happy whenever Hopkins was in the picture. It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. That is what a back channel operative does. He or she becomes somewhat of a trusted friend and creates an atmosphere whereby opponents can communicate in ways outside of normal diplomatic and leader to leader protocals and restraints.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

We all owe a debt to both sides for averting nuclear war. Especially, and in particular notable Soviets like

Oleg Gordievsky,
Oleg Gordievsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Two of Gordievsky's most important contributions were averting a potential nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union when NATO exercise Able Archer 83 was misinterpreted by the Soviets as a potential first strike..."

Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov,
Stanislav Petrov - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"On September 26, 1983, he was the duty officer at the command center for the Oko nuclear early-warning system when the system reported that a missile was being launched from the United States. Petrov judged the report to be a false alarm,[1] and his decision is credited with having prevented an erroneous retaliatory nuclear attack on the United States and its NATO allies that could have resulted in large-scale nuclear war. Investigation later confirmed that the satellite warning system had indeed malfunctioned.[2]"

And President Putin,
The World Was Never Closer To Nuclear War Than On Jan. 25, 1995 - Business Insider
"The World Was Never Closer To Nuclear War Than On Jan. 25, 1995"

"Boris Yeltsin was alerted, and immediately given the Cheget, the "nuclear briefcase" that connects senior officials while they decide whether or not to launch Russia's nuclear weapons. Nuclear submarine commanders were ordered to full battle alert and told to stand by.

Apparently Yeltsin doubted the U.S. would launch a surreptitious attack and within five minutes, Russian radar came back confirming the missile was heading harmlessly out to sea.

Russian citizens didn't find about about the incident for weeks, and of course it's been reported in the U.S. news since. But the event never achieved the renown of the Cuban Missile Crisis, though it seems to have brought us even closer to the brink of nuclear war. "


----------



## Delta4Embassy

How close we've come to nuclear war is truly disturbing and reminds me of the bit from "Men In Black" that's never been more true and applicable:

"There's always an alien battle cruiser, or a Korilian death ray...or an intergalactic plague about to wipe out life on this planet. The only way people get on with their happy lives...is they do not know about it!"


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> *Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author.* Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?
> 
> BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. *Smugly Backside*. It's almost as if you're subconsciously  channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (_I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what *they* say.)_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly....*.on the very same page that you quote above:*
> 
> "Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately *warned the Soviet embassy *in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."
> 
> 
> *Stalin loved him*....and with good reason.
> 
> Again....you said:
> "Harry Hopkins was* a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America *and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."
> 
> 
> Pretty good tireless work for America?
> 
> Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just like today, and even more so back during Hoover's hay days of blackmailing and running his own little private secret police force, the FBI was not always trusted with certain types of information. Other government agencies did not want Hoover or the FBI in on their operations and secrets, just like other government agencies don't want the FBI in on operations and secrets today.
> Ofcourse Stalin was happy whenever Hopkins was in the picture. It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. That is what a back channel operative does. He or she becomes somewhat of a trusted friend and creates an atmosphere whereby opponents can communicate in ways outside of normal diplomatic and leader to leader protocals and restraints.
Click to expand...




" It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. "


Why not?.....birds of a feather and all.....


----------



## Bfgrn

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly....*.on the very same page that you quote above:*
> 
> "Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately *warned the Soviet embassy *in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."
> 
> 
> *Stalin loved him*....and with good reason.
> 
> Again....you said:
> "Harry Hopkins was* a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America *and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."
> 
> 
> Pretty good tireless work for America?
> 
> Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like today, and even more so back during Hoover's hay days of blackmailing and running his own little private secret police force, the FBI was not always trusted with certain types of information. Other government agencies did not want Hoover or the FBI in on their operations and secrets, just like other government agencies don't want the FBI in on operations and secrets today.
> Ofcourse Stalin was happy whenever Hopkins was in the picture. It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. That is what a back channel operative does. He or she becomes somewhat of a trusted friend and creates an atmosphere whereby opponents can communicate in ways outside of normal diplomatic and leader to leader protocals and restraints.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. "
> 
> 
> Why not?.....birds of a feather and all.....
Click to expand...


----------



## whitehall

Another thing to consider is that there was no American "intelligence" network during FDR's time. The Country was pretty much run by a virtual king who would not step down until he died. The fawning media was pretty much a part of the administration and anything the king decided including the incarceration of American citizens without due process was fine. The Supreme Court was either in FDR's back pocket or they were afraid of the administration. The US was so grossly unprepared for war in the Pacific that it bordered on criminal negligence. Wild Bill Donovan's fledgling OSS  was a laughable attempt at espionage and counter espionage by a bunch of rank amateurs and the scant information they gleaned had nowhere to go. J. Edgar Hoover's G Men were too busy delving into the sex lives of politicians to worry about international intrigue. FDR could have joined the communist party and it would not have resonated in government or the media and if it did the media would have no doubt justified it so Hopkins' relationship with the USSR is pretty much a moot point.


----------



## SmedlyButler

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> *Repeat this is the opinion of the friggin author.* Are you going to try to rewrite his book as well as history?
> 
> BTW...I like your cute little nickname for me. *Smugly Backside*. It's almost as if you're subconsciously  channeling those many members of the fairer sex who have insisted I have "a very nice butt." You naughty girl. (_I'm not claiming that description myself, I'm just sayin' that's what *they* say.)_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this?
> 
> This statement by the author himself, Christopher Andrew regarding the braggadocio of the Russian defectors and informants;
> 
> .... these boasts were far from the truth. Hopkins was an American patriot with little sympathy for the Soviet system. But he was deeply impressed by the Soviet war effort.  The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, 1999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've read "The Sword and the Shield" how did you miss this, Smugly....*.on the very same page that you quote above:*
> 
> "Stalin must also have welcomed the fact that Roosevelt was bringing to Tehran his closest wartime adviser, Harry Hopkins....Hopkins had established a remarkable reputation in Moscow for taking the Russians into his confidence. Earlier in the year he had privately *warned the Soviet embassy *in Washington that the FBI had bugged a secret meeting...."
> 
> 
> *Stalin loved him*....and with good reason.
> 
> Again....you said:
> "Harry Hopkins was* a true patriot *who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but* tirelessly for America *and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America..."
> 
> 
> Pretty good tireless work for America?
> 
> Bet you want to take that back now, huh, Backside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just like today, and even more so back during Hoover's hay days of blackmailing and running his own little private secret police force, the FBI was not always trusted with certain types of information. Other government agencies did not want Hoover or the FBI in on their operations and secrets, just like other government agencies don't want the FBI in on operations and secrets today.
> Ofcourse Stalin was happy whenever Hopkins was in the picture. It was Hopkins job to be friends and gain the trust of Stalin. That is what a back channel operative does. He or she becomes somewhat of a trusted friend and creates an atmosphere whereby opponents can communicate in ways outside of normal diplomatic and leader to leader protocals and restraints.
Click to expand...


International diplomacy at the highest levels (where Hopkins definitely resided) can be ugly at times...Much like that proverbial sausage that you wouldn't eat if you saw what went into it.


----------



## SmedlyButler

You're probably one of the least equipped people in the world to make value judgments on the thousands of decisions Hopkins made while in the stratosphere of International Politics and Diplomacy. The subtle give and take at that level is way beyond your monochromatic, prejudiced, simple-minded intellect. If only you could remove the blinders of your hyper-reactionary world view.

But hey, you've finally hit on the line of attack I suggested many posts ago. Good for you, now if you could only stick to the truth. Sadly I doubt you are capable of embracing truth  when it conflicts with your ends-justifies-the means tactics. Destruction of the nebulous "Left" you hate so much leads you to hate the real America, as I've said before. Hate is your stock in trade.


----------



## PoliticalChic

whitehall said:


> Another thing to consider is that there was no American "intelligence" network during FDR's time. The Country was pretty much run by a virtual king who would not step down until he died. The fawning media was pretty much a part of the administration and anything the king decided including the incarceration of American citizens without due process was fine. The Supreme Court was either in FDR's back pocket or they were afraid of the administration. The US was so grossly unprepared for war in the Pacific that it bordered on criminal negligence. Wild Bill Donovan's fledgling OSS  was a laughable attempt at espionage and counter espionage by a bunch of rank amateurs and the scant information they gleaned had nowhere to go. J. Edgar Hoover's G Men were too busy delving into the sex lives of politicians to worry about international intrigue. FDR could have joined the communist party and it would not have resonated in government or the media and if it did the media would have no doubt justified it so Hopkins' relationship with the USSR is pretty much a moot point.





"...there was no American "intelligence" network during FDR's time."

1. "The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was a United States intelligence agency formed during World War II. It was the wartime intelligence agency, and it was a predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The OSS was formed in order to coordinate espionage activities behind enemy lines for the branches of the United States Armed Forces."
Office of Strategic Services - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Formed in 1942.


2. In November of 1944, according to Elizabeth Bentley, there came an urgent warning from an agent in the White House, Roosevelts administrative assistant Lauchlin Currie. Currie reported that the Americans were on the verge of breaking the Soviet code. The alarm appears to have subsided when it was discovered that Currie had wrongly concluded that a fire-damaged NKGB codebook obtained by OSS from the Finns would enable Soviet communications (which went through a further, theoretically impenetrable, encipherment by one-time pad) to be decrypted.
 The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archives, the History of the  KGB, by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin.p.130

3. "...in late 1944 the U.S. Office of Strategic Services (predecessor to the Central Intelligence Agency) obtained from Finnish intelligence officers a Soviet code book (or a collection of Soviet code and cipher material, the record is not entirely clear).  Secretary of State Stettinius learned of the matter, and in what is in retrospect a remarkably naive act, successfully urged President Roosevelt to order the OSS to hand the material over to the Soviets as a gesture of good will.  So far as is known, the OSS did not even keep a copy."
Edward Stettinius, Jr., memorandum for the President, Soviet Codes, 27 December 1944, Presidents Secretarys Files, Russia  1944, box 49, Franklin D. Roosevelt Library.
Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? | FrontPage Magazine


....not much of an intelligence network, it seems....


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> You're probably one of the least equipped people in the world to make value judgments on the thousands of decisions Hopkins made while in the stratosphere of International Politics and Diplomacy. The subtle give and take at that level is way beyond your monochromatic, prejudiced, simple-minded intellect. If only you could remove the blinders of your hyper-reactionary world view.
> 
> But hey, you've finally hit on the line of attack I suggested many posts ago. Good for you, now if you could only stick to the truth. Sadly I doubt you are capable of embracing truth  when it conflicts with your ends-justifies-the means tactics. Destruction of the nebulous "Left" you hate so much leads you to hate the real America, as I've said before. Hate is your stock in trade.






Now, then.....speaking of the truth about the Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins....


10.  Due to the Lend-Lease program, Russian presence in wartime America was so large that they had to set up a corporate headquarters on Sixteenth Street in Washington. One of the executives in th huge staff was Victor Kravchenko, metallurgist, engineer, executive, and captain in the Red Army. And the first Soviet defector. 
Fleming, "The Anti-Communist Manifestoes," p. 182-183.

a. Stalin went into a rage! He demanded that Kravchenko be sent back. *Guess Hopkin's position. Yup- he tried to convince FDR to send Kravchenko back.* But FDR understood that he would be shot, and the publicity would be terrible (1945 was an election year, and the Senate was considering the UN). 

BTW- Kravchenko received asylum on April 12, 1945....right after FDR died.

b.  *Hopkins spoke of Kravchenko as a "deserter," exactly as the Soviets did. Sound like a devotee of liberty and freedom? Or more like a Marxist?*



One more example of Harry Hopkins, Stalin's envoy to the United States, "..."Harry Hopkins ... who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America ... for America."

You said that, didn't you, Backside-boy?

Which is more of a joke,....that quote......or you?


----------



## PoliticalChic

whitehall said:


> Another thing to consider is that there was no American "intelligence" network during FDR's time. The Country was pretty much run by a virtual king who would not step down until he died. The fawning media was pretty much a part of the administration and anything the king decided including the incarceration of American citizens without due process was fine. The Supreme Court was either in FDR's back pocket or they were afraid of the administration. The US was so grossly unprepared for war in the Pacific that it bordered on criminal negligence. Wild Bill Donovan's fledgling OSS  was a laughable attempt at espionage and counter espionage by a bunch of rank amateurs and the scant information they gleaned had nowhere to go. J. Edgar Hoover's G Men were too busy delving into the sex lives of politicians to worry about international intrigue. FDR could have joined the communist party and it would not have resonated in government or the media and if it did the media would have no doubt justified it so Hopkins' relationship with the USSR is pretty much a moot point.






"The Supreme Court was either in FDR's back pocket or they were afraid of the administration."

You hit it out of the park with that one, whitey......


By cowing the Supreme Court, King Franklin the First ended this nation as we knew it.

No longer would there be checks and balances.....just the Imperial Presidency.


On April 12, 1937, the United States ceased to be a republic of limited constitutional government. The Supreme Court upheld the Wagner Labor Relations Act.* No longer would the enumerated powers of the Constitution apply...*.now we would be a European model welfare state, in which the national legislature has power to regulate industry, agriculture, and virtually all the activities of the citizens. The coda came when the court upheld the Social Security Act on May 24, 1937, and, then, the compulsory marketing quotas of the new AAA, on April 17, 1936. 
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p. 68-69


We're basking in the afterglow of the late, great United States of America.


----------



## HenryBHough

At the end of the day, the jig was up for FDR when God said:  "Enough of this shit".  Not in words, of course......

Open question as to whether He referred to stuff being done or to one particular turd.

Either way.......


----------



## Bfgrn

HenryBHough said:


> At the end of the day, the jig was up for FDR when God said:  "Enough of this shit".  Not in words, of course......
> 
> Open question as to whether He referred to stuff being done or to one particular turd.
> 
> Either way.......



You are a low life piece of shit. God would have approved of what FDR tried to do, not condemn it.


----------



## Camp

whitehall said:


> Another thing to consider is that there was no American "intelligence" network during FDR's time. The Country was pretty much run by a virtual king who would not step down until he died. The fawning media was pretty much a part of the administration and anything the king decided including the incarceration of American citizens without due process was fine. The Supreme Court was either in FDR's back pocket or they were afraid of the administration. The US was so grossly unprepared for war in the Pacific that it bordered on criminal negligence. Wild Bill Donovan's fledgling OSS  was a laughable attempt at espionage and counter espionage by a bunch of rank amateurs and the scant information they gleaned had nowhere to go. J. Edgar Hoover's G Men were too busy delving into the sex lives of politicians to worry about international intrigue. FDR could have joined the communist party and it would not have resonated in government or the media and if it did the media would have no doubt justified it so Hopkins' relationship with the USSR is pretty much a moot point.



You are wrong about just about everything due to you lack of knowledge about the subjects you are attempting to address. Your evaluation of the OSS is totally off base. It is obvious you have little if any knowledge about the functions and history the OSS carried out during WWII. A real and genuine insult to those who served and those who gave their lives in the defense of our nation. All due to your lack of understanding and knowledge about how espionage and intelligence gathering were conducted by various units, both civilian and military during this period of our history. 
The Bureau of Navel Intelligence became operational in 1882. Military Intelligence Division (MID-US ARMY) has been operational  since the same time. In addition joint operations between the military and othe US agencyies like the State Department, Secret Service, Dept. of Justice, etc.  have been created at various times. This would include "Black Chamber" aka US Cipher Bureau which was the forerunner of NSA and shared intel with various other agencies and groups as needed. 
It may have been a poorly organized system, but it certainly wasn't non-existent.


----------



## HenryBHough

Bfgrn said:


> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> At the end of the day, the jig was up for FDR when God said:  "Enough of this shit".  Not in words, of course......
> 
> Open question as to whether He referred to stuff being done or to one particular turd.
> 
> Either way.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a low life piece of shit. God would have approved of what FDR tried to do, not condemn it.
Click to expand...


Were Your New Messiah an actual God, yeah, you DO have a point.


----------



## Camp

henrybhough said:


> bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> henrybhough said:
> 
> 
> 
> at the end of the day, the jig was up for fdr when god said:  "enough of this shit".  Not in words, of course......
> 
> Open question as to whether he referred to stuff being done or to one particular turd.
> 
> Either way.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you are a low life piece of shit. God would have approved of what fdr tried to do, not condemn it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> were your new messiah an actual god, yeah, you do have a point.
Click to expand...


*benghazi*


----------



## SmedlyButler

Have you heard this Churchill quote, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons".

Have you heard this? ... Churchill said, No one has been a more consistent opponent of Communism for the last twenty-five years. I will unsay no word I have spoken about it. But all this fades away before the spectacle which is now unfolding. The past, with its crimes, its follies, its tragedies, flashes away. The Russian danger is therefore our danger, and the danger of the United States, just as the cause of any Russian fighting for hearth and house is the cause of free men and free peoples in every quarter of the globe. Churchill then said that Britain would provide all possible military aid to the Soviet Union in its battle against Germany. It was a testament to the desperate situation confronting both nations that Churchill, a champion of democracy, would agree to an alliance with a tyrannical regime at least as bad as that of Nazi Germany.

Do they at least stir some thought of the impossible decisions, the political equivalents of "Sophie's Choice" that had to be made at every stage of this apocalyptic battle between good and evil?


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> Have you heard this Churchill quote, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons".
> 
> Have you heard this? ... Churchill said, No one has been a more consistent opponent of Communism for the last twenty-five years. I will unsay no word I have spoken about it. But all this fades away before the spectacle which is now unfolding. The past, with its crimes, its follies, its tragedies, flashes away. The Russian danger is therefore our danger, and the danger of the United States, just as the cause of any Russian fighting for hearth and house is the cause of free men and free peoples in every quarter of the globe. Churchill then said that Britain would provide all possible military aid to the Soviet Union in its battle against Germany. It was a testament to the desperate situation confronting both nations that Churchill, a champion of democracy, would agree to an alliance with a tyrannical regime at least as bad as that of Nazi Germany.
> 
> Do they at least stir some thought of the impossible decisions, the political equivalents of "Sophie's Choice" that had to be made at every stage of this apocalyptic battle between good and evil?





So....you don't know about Kravchenko, huh?


Figures.....you don't know enough about the Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins, either.


*Starting to regret that quote, Smugly?*
This one: "Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."



BTW....
I'm planning to construct a post explaining the real relationship between Churchill, Stalin....and Hopkins.

Watch for it....you'll learn a lot.


----------



## SmedlyButler

PoliticalChic said:


> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have you heard this Churchill quote, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons".
> 
> Have you heard this? ... Churchill said, No one has been a more consistent opponent of Communism for the last twenty-five years. I will unsay no word I have spoken about it. But all this fades away before the spectacle which is now unfolding. The past, with its crimes, its follies, its tragedies, flashes away. The Russian danger is therefore our danger, and the danger of the United States, just as the cause of any Russian fighting for hearth and house is the cause of free men and free peoples in every quarter of the globe. Churchill then said that Britain would provide all possible military aid to the Soviet Union in its battle against Germany. It was a testament to the desperate situation confronting both nations that Churchill, a champion of democracy, would agree to an alliance with a tyrannical regime at least as bad as that of Nazi Germany.
> 
> Do they at least stir some thought of the impossible decisions, the political equivalents of "Sophie's Choice" that had to be made at every stage of this apocalyptic battle between good and evil?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....you don't know about Kravchenko, huh?
> 
> 
> Figures.....you don't know enough about the Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins, either.
> 
> 
> *Starting to regret that quote, Smugly?*
> This one: "Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....
> I'm planning to construct a post explaining the real relationship between Churchill, Stalin....and Hopkins.
> 
> Watch for it....you'll learn a lot.
Click to expand...


It amazes me how you completely ignore everybody elses questions and expect them to snap to attention at yours. Shows a not minor trend to egocentrism I think. 

I'm sorry, explain to me again how Kravchenko is the least bit relevant to the topic.  

And I look forward to you attempting to trash Churchill, he's one of my favorites if you haven't noticed.


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have you heard this Churchill quote, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons".
> 
> Have you heard this? ... Churchill said, No one has been a more consistent opponent of Communism for the last twenty-five years. I will unsay no word I have spoken about it. But all this fades away before the spectacle which is now unfolding. The past, with its crimes, its follies, its tragedies, flashes away. The Russian danger is therefore our danger, and the danger of the United States, just as the cause of any Russian fighting for hearth and house is the cause of free men and free peoples in every quarter of the globe. Churchill then said that Britain would provide all possible military aid to the Soviet Union in its battle against Germany. It was a testament to the desperate situation confronting both nations that Churchill, a champion of democracy, would agree to an alliance with a tyrannical regime at least as bad as that of Nazi Germany.
> 
> Do they at least stir some thought of the impossible decisions, the political equivalents of "Sophie's Choice" that had to be made at every stage of this apocalyptic battle between good and evil?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....you don't know about Kravchenko, huh?
> 
> 
> Figures.....you don't know enough about the Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins, either.
> 
> 
> *Starting to regret that quote, Smugly?*
> This one: "Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....
> I'm planning to construct a post explaining the real relationship between Churchill, Stalin....and Hopkins.
> 
> Watch for it....you'll learn a lot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It amazes me how you completely ignore everybody elses questions and expect them to snap to attention at yours. Shows a not minor trend to egocentrism I think.
> 
> I'm sorry, explain to me again how Kravchenko is the least bit relevant to the topic.
> 
> And I look forward to you attempting to trash Churchill, he's one of my favorites if you haven't noticed.
Click to expand...







1. "I'm sorry, explain to me again how Kravchenko is the least bit relevant to the topic."
See post #67.


2. "And I look forward to you attempting to trash Churchill,..."

In addition to making up the nonsense about Harry Hopkins being an American patriot, are you now lying in suggesting that I am "attempting to trash Churchill"?
Or...are you simply attempting to conflate Churchill with the spy, Hopkins?


Handling the truth carelessly seems to be a pattern with you.



Speaking of Harry Hopkins, Soviet spy....

11. Representative Martin Dies  formed a committed to investigate communism, but found that *government archives of communist records and correspondence had been destroyed.* 

He wrote: "I was informed, confidentially, by a man well placed in the Department of Justice, that they were destroyed after it was learned that the Dies Committee was determined to conduct a full-scale investigation of Communism." 

*It was Harry Hopkins who turned down Dies' request of assistance from Roosevelt to help furnish the nascent committee with a staff of lawyers, investigators and stenographers.* 
Dies, "Martin Dies' Story," p. 64.



Now....why would the archives of communist records and correspondence had been destroyed....and who would be high enough in government to have ordered that?

And why would "tireless American patriot" Harry Hopkins have gone out of his way to impede Dies investigation of communism in America?



I need to see it again....what was your claim?

Oh....right:

"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."


Tell me....are you still licking Harry Hopkins' boots?


----------



## Camp

Ha, Ha, Martin Dies started a committee to investigate communist. Ya, it was the Committee on Un-American Activities. The idiot couldn't be trusted, and he was for sure an idiot. He put Shirley Temple on one of his list of potential communist or at the very least a communist supporter. Shirley had sent a greeting card to a newspaper in France. The newspaper happened to be owned by communist. Shirley probably didn't know about the newspapers communist connection. Most 10 year old children don't think about those kinds of things. That is right, this asshole Congressman Dies put 10 year old Shirley Temple on a list of potential enemies of the USA because she sent a newspaper a hello card as part of a promotion for one of her films. So when Congressman Dies came to the FDR administration for assistance to further investigate alleged potential enemies of the USA, Harry Hopkins told him to go fuck himself.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Ha, Ha, Martin Dies started a committee to investigate communist. Ya, it was the Committee on Un-American Activities. The idiot couldn't be trusted, and he was for sure an idiot. He put Shirley Temple on one of his list of potential communist or at the very least a communist supporter. Shirley had sent a greeting card to a newspaper in France. The newspaper happened to be owned by communist. Shirley probably didn't know about the newspapers communist connection. Most 10 year old children don't think about those kinds of things. That is right, this asshole Congressman Dies put 10 year old Shirley Temple on a list of potential enemies of the USA because she sent a newspaper a hello card as part of a promotion for one of her films. So when Congressman Dies came to the FDR administration for assistance to further investigate alleged potential enemies of the USA, Harry Hopkins told him to go fuck himself.





You're pedaling faster than Ed Begley, Jr., trying to make himself a piece of toast!
I can see why you're attempting to change the subject.
Because it is dispositive.


Hopkins tried to prevent the hearings.


Why? 

Because there was no communist influence that was damaging the nation?


----------



## SmedlyButler

"I'm planning to construct a post explaining the real relationship between Churchill, Stalin....and Hopkins".

I don't think I can be faulted for assuming you were about to turn your peripatetic, malevolent gaze upon Churchill. Assaulting another great man with churlish, wanton abandon would not surprise any of us who know your loathsome script so well.

I fully expected you to start with the "Coventry story" which you could attack with the same venom you applied to FDR's and HH's wartime calculus. Whether the story was true or not would not enter into your odious conscience. _Although you having a conscience of any sort does enter into my thoughts._

Anyway, listen, I want to thank you for the last few days, I've taken the opportunity to go back and look at some history I haven't visited for quite a while and that's a definite plus. Dealing with your incorrigible and obstinate disregard for the truth has only been a minor inconvenience, like the buzzing of a gnat just out of reach.

I love debate. However debating an unarmed, ill-prepared opponent does soon become tiresome. I have revealed the real Harry Hopkins as was my goal. You have revealed your historical buffoonery which I don't imagine was your goal. So although at times it's been fun toying with your inflated ego, until you come up with something other than your standard lightweight drivel I'll leave you with "Don't call me, I'll call you."


----------



## Camp

o





PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ha, Ha, Martin Dies started a committee to investigate communist. Ya, it was the Committee on Un-American Activities. The idiot couldn't be trusted, and he was for sure an idiot. He put Shirley Temple on one of his list of potential communist or at the very least a communist supporter. Shirley had sent a greeting card to a newspaper in France. The newspaper happened to be owned by communist. Shirley probably didn't know about the newspapers communist connection. Most 10 year old children don't think about those kinds of things. That is right, this asshole Congressman Dies put 10 year old Shirley Temple on a list of potential enemies of the USA because she sent a newspaper a hello card as part of a promotion for one of her films. So when Congressman Dies came to the FDR administration for assistance to further investigate alleged potential enemies of the USA, Harry Hopkins told him to go fuck himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're pedaling faster than Ed Begley, Jr., trying to make himself a piece of toast!
> I can see why you're attempting to change the subject.
> Because it is dispositive.
> 
> 
> Hopkins tried to prevent the hearings.
> 
> 
> Why?
> 
> Because there was no communist influence that was damaging the nation?
Click to expand...


Why? You want to know why Harry Hopkins told a politician willing to interfere and jeapordize the secrets and strategies of the nation to fuck off? You think Martin Dies committee was anything but a witch hunt? You think a guy who put a 10 year old kid on a "need to be investigated list" because she sent a newspaper a greeting card should be trusted to investigate and have access to top secret classified information? The guy was on a publicity seeking witch hunt. Harry Hopkins stood up to him and told him to fuck off. 
Harry Hopkins was dealing with saving the world in the real sense of the term. FDR and guys like Hopkins were dealing with threats that could put an end to the United States. Guys like Dies were insignificant pest looking for a piece of the action in the form of political power at the exspense of the security of the nation. Dies was a Democrat, a member of FDR's party, but that didn't prevent Hopkins from kicking him to the curb.


----------



## whitehall

Camp said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another thing to consider is that there was no American "intelligence" network during FDR's time. The Country was pretty much run by a virtual king who would not step down until he died. The fawning media was pretty much a part of the administration and anything the king decided including the incarceration of American citizens without due process was fine. The Supreme Court was either in FDR's back pocket or they were afraid of the administration. The US was so grossly unprepared for war in the Pacific that it bordered on criminal negligence. Wild Bill Donovan's fledgling OSS  was a laughable attempt at espionage and counter espionage by a bunch of rank amateurs and the scant information they gleaned had nowhere to go. J. Edgar Hoover's G Men were too busy delving into the sex lives of politicians to worry about international intrigue. FDR could have joined the communist party and it would not have resonated in government or the media and if it did the media would have no doubt justified it so Hopkins' relationship with the USSR is pretty much a moot point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are wrong about just about everything due to you lack of knowledge about the subjects you are attempting to address. Your evaluation of the OSS is totally off base. It is obvious you have little if any knowledge about the functions and history the OSS carried out during WWII. A real and genuine insult to those who served and those who gave their lives in the defense of our nation. All due to your lack of understanding and knowledge about how espionage and intelligence gathering were conducted by various units, both civilian and military during this period of our history.
> The Bureau of Navel Intelligence became operational in 1882. Military Intelligence Division (MID-US ARMY) has been operational  since the same time. In addition joint operations between the military and othe US agencyies like the State Department, Secret Service, Dept. of Justice, etc.  have been created at various times. This would include "Black Chamber" aka US Cipher Bureau which was the forerunner of NSA and shared intel with various other agencies and groups as needed.
> It may have been a poorly organized system, but it certainly wasn't non-existent.
Click to expand...


I said no "American intelligence system". I should have said no "National Intelligence system". The sad state of affairs was that the fragmented "intelligence" systems were competing against each other and the fledgling OSS. The Brits were horrified that American "intelligence" was such a mess. The courts had to finally decide which agency would take the lead in espionage and counter espionage and they decided on the FBI but the FBI had little or no experience in international affairs and when they caught a spy they tried and executed him without trying to turn him around. When the freaking head of the German navy, Admiral Canaris tried to contact the Americans late in the war he was ignored.


----------



## PoliticalChic

SmedlyButler said:


> "I'm planning to construct a post explaining the real relationship between Churchill, Stalin....and Hopkins".
> 
> I don't think I can be faulted for assuming you were about to turn your peripatetic, malevolent gaze upon Churchill. Assaulting another great man with churlish, wanton abandon would not surprise any of us who know your loathsome script so well.
> 
> I fully expected you to start with the "Coventry story" which you could attack with the same venom you applied to FDR's and HH's wartime calculus. Whether the story was true or not would not enter into your odious conscience. _Although you having a conscience of any sort does enter into my thoughts._
> 
> Anyway, listen, I want to thank you for the last few days, I've taken the opportunity to go back and look at some history I haven't visited for quite a while and that's a definite plus. Dealing with your incorrigible and obstinate disregard for the truth has only been a minor inconvenience, like the buzzing of a gnat just out of reach.
> 
> I love debate. However debating an unarmed, ill-prepared opponent does soon become tiresome. I have revealed the real Harry Hopkins as was my goal. You have revealed your historical buffoonery which I don't imagine was your goal. So although at times it's been fun toying with your inflated ego, until you come up with something other than your standard lightweight drivel I'll leave you with "Don't call me, I'll call you."





Be honest....I've ripped your absurd support for the Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins, to shreds.


And it ain't over.....



12. . Averell Harriman was special envoy of FDR.

 "At the Tehran Conference in late 1943 Harriman was tasked with placating a suspicious Churchill while Roosevelt attempted to gain the confidence of Stalin." 
W. Averell Harriman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Harriman made this interesting observation: "When Stalin saw him [Hopkins] enter the conference room [Tehran]he got up, walked across the room and shook hands with him. *I never saw him do that to anybody, even Roosevelt. He was the only man I ever saw Stalin show personal emotion for." *
Encounter Magazine interview, 1981. 



"Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."

Did you write that....or did Joseph Stalin?


Smugly....you can run but you can't hide.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ha, Ha, Martin Dies started a committee to investigate communist. Ya, it was the Committee on Un-American Activities. The idiot couldn't be trusted, and he was for sure an idiot. He put Shirley Temple on one of his list of potential communist or at the very least a communist supporter. Shirley had sent a greeting card to a newspaper in France. The newspaper happened to be owned by communist. Shirley probably didn't know about the newspapers communist connection. Most 10 year old children don't think about those kinds of things. That is right, this asshole Congressman Dies put 10 year old Shirley Temple on a list of potential enemies of the USA because she sent a newspaper a hello card as part of a promotion for one of her films. So when Congressman Dies came to the FDR administration for assistance to further investigate alleged potential enemies of the USA, Harry Hopkins told him to go fuck himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're pedaling faster than Ed Begley, Jr., trying to make himself a piece of toast!
> I can see why you're attempting to change the subject.
> Because it is dispositive.
> 
> 
> Hopkins tried to prevent the hearings.
> 
> 
> Why?
> 
> Because there was no communist influence that was damaging the nation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why? You want to know why Harry Hopkins told a politician willing to interfere and jeapordize the secrets and strategies of the nation to fuck off? You think Martin Dies committee was anything but a witch hunt? You think a guy who put a 10 year old kid on a "need to be investigated list" because she sent a newspaper a greeting card should be trusted to investigate and have access to top secret classified information? The guy was on a publicity seeking witch hunt. Harry Hopkins stood up to him and told him to fuck off.
> Harry Hopkins was dealing with saving the world in the real sense of the term. FDR and guys like Hopkins were dealing with threats that could put an end to the United States. Guys like Dies were insignificant pest looking for a piece of the action in the form of political power at the exspense of the security of the nation. Dies was a Democrat, a member of FDR's party, but that didn't prevent Hopkins from kicking him to the curb.
Click to expand...




So.....Hopkins, Roosevelt....and you.....wanted to put every roadblock possible in front of those who wanted to investigate Soviet communist influence?

That says it all, doesn't it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Never having been as wrong a Smugly and his pals, never having been raised, as they say, like 'mushrooms: kept in the dark and fed...garbage'....it is hard for me to be empathetic.

But, truth is truth....and that is what I provide.



So...here's but one more of the dozen indicia I've provided to show that Harry Hopkins was far from a 'patriotic American'.....he was a dyed-in-the-wool Soviet collaborator.



13. General Philip Faymonville was the US Lend-Lease officer in Moscow. Not only was* his position provided by Harry Hopkins, *but, prior to his Hopkins-secured promotion to general, he was known as the *pro-Soviet "Red Colonel."* Army intelligence had tagged him as a security risk. 
West, "American Betrayal," p.183.


a. "Brigadier General Philip Faymonville is a controversial figure in the history of World War II. His services were highly valued by Roosevelt and Harry Hopkins ... but he was still the target of accusations of communist sympathy and even working for the Soviets as their agent." https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/4183/THOMPSON-THESIS.pdf?sequence=1


b. In 1939, the Army had seen to a recall of Faymonville from Moscow. What was FDR's response? He rebuffed Army intelligence by "publicly receiving Faymonville at the White House and going on a private fishing trip with him..."
 Dennis Dunn, " Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," p. 93.

 Hopkins's response? He got Faymonville right back as administrator of Lend-Lease, in Moscow, over War Department and State Department objections!


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Never having been as wrong a Smugly and his pals, never having been raised, as they say, like 'mushrooms: kept in the dark and fed...garbage'....it is hard for me to be empathetic.
> 
> But, truth is truth....and that is what I provide.
> 
> 
> 
> So...here's but one more of the dozen indicia I've provided to show that Harry Hopkins was far from a 'patriotic American'.....he was a dyed-in-the-wool Soviet collaborator.
> 
> 
> 
> 13. General Philip Faymonville was the US Lend-Lease officer in Moscow. Not only was* his position provided by Harry Hopkins, *but, prior to his Hopkins-secured promotion to general, he was known as the *pro-Soviet "Red Colonel."* Army intelligence had tagged him as a security risk.
> West, "American Betrayal," p.183.
> 
> 
> a. "Brigadier General Philip Faymonville is a controversial figure in the history of World War II. His services were highly valued by Roosevelt and Harry Hopkins ... but he was still the target of accusations of communist sympathy and even working for the Soviets as their agent." https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/4183/THOMPSON-THESIS.pdf?sequence=1



Maybe I am wrong about my interpretation of sources being misused, distorted, unreliable and unable to stand up to accepted standards.
In this case the root source is a Thesis presented by a Steven Thompson, B.A. for a master of arts degree at Texas State-San Marcos, May 2012. This is PC's source for making her point.

Here are some quotes by the source in his conlusions in regards to Faymonville's service and dedication to fullfilling the orders he was given:

"Additionally, this seems to have been such obsessive devotion for him that everything else became secondary: he felt he had to go out of his way to personally cultivate good relations with the Soviet Union on the basis that the United States would need relations some day."

Now look at what the author of the thesis, the source being used to revise and distort history had to say at the conclusion of his thesis:

"Phillip Faymonville was not by any stretch of imagination a spy for the Soviets nor a member of the communist party."

Don't take my word. Download the Thesis like I did and read page 81 in the guys conclusion of his thesis.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

PoliticalChic said:


> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> 
> "I'm planning to construct a post explaining the real relationship between Churchill, Stalin....and Hopkins".
> 
> I don't think I can be faulted for assuming you were about to turn your peripatetic, malevolent gaze upon Churchill. Assaulting another great man with churlish, wanton abandon would not surprise any of us who know your loathsome script so well.
> 
> I fully expected you to start with the "Coventry story" which you could attack with the same venom you applied to FDR's and HH's wartime calculus. Whether the story was true or not would not enter into your odious conscience. _Although you having a conscience of any sort does enter into my thoughts._
> 
> Anyway, listen, I want to thank you for the last few days, I've taken the opportunity to go back and look at some history I haven't visited for quite a while and that's a definite plus. Dealing with your incorrigible and obstinate disregard for the truth has only been a minor inconvenience, like the buzzing of a gnat just out of reach.
> 
> I love debate. However debating an unarmed, ill-prepared opponent does soon become tiresome. I have revealed the real Harry Hopkins as was my goal. You have revealed your historical buffoonery which I don't imagine was your goal. So although at times it's been fun toying with your inflated ego, until you come up with something other than your standard lightweight drivel I'll leave you with "Don't call me, I'll call you."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be honest....I've ripped your absurd support for the Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins, to shreds.
> 
> 
> And it ain't over.....
> 
> 
> 
> 12. . Averell Harriman was special envoy of FDR.
> 
> "At the Tehran Conference in late 1943 Harriman was tasked with placating a suspicious Churchill while Roosevelt attempted to gain the confidence of Stalin."
> W. Averell Harriman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Harriman made this interesting observation: "When Stalin saw him [Hopkins] enter the conference room [Tehran]he got up, walked across the room and shook hands with him. *I never saw him do that to anybody, even Roosevelt. He was the only man I ever saw Stalin show personal emotion for." *
> Encounter Magazine interview, 1981.
> 
> 
> 
> "Harry Hopkins was a true patriot who labored through the period in question sick with cancer but tirelessly for America and the World. He actually worked himself to death for America. You and your sniveling yapping back-stabbing ilk are not fit to lick his boots."
> 
> Did you write that....or did Joseph Stalin?
> 
> 
> Smugly....you can run but you can't hide.
Click to expand...


Harry Hopkins, a true patriot for Josef Stalin

Smugly, the Stalinist bootlicker


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never having been as wrong a Smugly and his pals, never having been raised, as they say, like 'mushrooms: kept in the dark and fed...garbage'....it is hard for me to be empathetic.
> 
> But, truth is truth....and that is what I provide.
> 
> 
> 
> So...here's but one more of the dozen indicia I've provided to show that Harry Hopkins was far from a 'patriotic American'.....he was a dyed-in-the-wool Soviet collaborator.
> 
> 
> 
> 13. General Philip Faymonville was the US Lend-Lease officer in Moscow. Not only was* his position provided by Harry Hopkins, *but, prior to his Hopkins-secured promotion to general, he was known as the *pro-Soviet "Red Colonel."* Army intelligence had tagged him as a security risk.
> West, "American Betrayal," p.183.
> 
> 
> a. "Brigadier General Philip Faymonville is a controversial figure in the history of World War II. His services were highly valued by Roosevelt and Harry Hopkins ... but he was still the target of accusations of communist sympathy and even working for the Soviets as their agent." https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/4183/THOMPSON-THESIS.pdf?sequence=1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I am wrong about my interpretation of sources being misused, distorted, unreliable and unable to stand up to accepted standards.
> In this case the root source is a Thesis presented by a Steven Thompson, B.A. for a master of arts degree at Texas State-San Marcos, May 2012. This is PC's source for making her point.
> 
> Here are some quotes by the source in his conlusions in regards to Faymonville's service and dedication to fullfilling the orders he was given:
> 
> "Additionally, this seems to have been such obsessive devotion for him that everything else became secondary: he felt he had to go out of his way to personally cultivate good relations with the Soviet Union on the basis that the United States would need relations some day."
> 
> Now look at what the author of the thesis, the source being used to revise and distort history had to say at the conclusion of his thesis:
> 
> "Phillip Faymonville was not by any stretch of imagination a spy for the Soviets nor a member of the communist party."
> 
> Don't take my word. Download the Thesis like I did and read page 81 in the guys conclusion of his thesis.
Click to expand...




I actually like this post.


It is one of the first, I believe, in which you have attempted to provide an alternative view.....

....your usual mode is the Liberal attack on the person making the charge.



As usual, of course, you are wrong.



 In February 18, 1949, when the "People's Daily World," an official communist organ, wrote a glowing article about Brigadier General Faymonville, it quoted his views. In his paean to the Bolshevik tyranny he declared that "there is no such thing in the Soviet Union as hostility to other nations, or a desire for their conquest." 
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 97.


So....the same question arises with Faymonville as with Franklin Roosevelt: was he a dupe, or was he a communist enabler? 


The question does not have to be applied to Harry Hopkins, the one who positioned Faymonville in Moscow, in charge of the buffet known as Lend-Lease, and who saw to the promotion of the Red Colonel, ....

...since I have documented that Hopkins was Stalin's spy.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never having been as wrong a Smugly and his pals, never having been raised, as they say, like 'mushrooms: kept in the dark and fed...garbage'....it is hard for me to be empathetic.
> 
> But, truth is truth....and that is what I provide.
> 
> 
> 
> So...here's but one more of the dozen indicia I've provided to show that Harry Hopkins was far from a 'patriotic American'.....he was a dyed-in-the-wool Soviet collaborator.
> 
> 
> 
> 13. General Philip Faymonville was the US Lend-Lease officer in Moscow. Not only was* his position provided by Harry Hopkins, *but, prior to his Hopkins-secured promotion to general, he was known as the *pro-Soviet "Red Colonel."* Army intelligence had tagged him as a security risk.
> West, "American Betrayal," p.183.
> 
> 
> a. "Brigadier General Philip Faymonville is a controversial figure in the history of World War II. His services were highly valued by Roosevelt and Harry Hopkins ... but he was still the target of accusations of communist sympathy and even working for the Soviets as their agent." https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/4183/THOMPSON-THESIS.pdf?sequence=1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I am wrong about my interpretation of sources being misused, distorted, unreliable and unable to stand up to accepted standards.
> In this case the root source is a Thesis presented by a Steven Thompson, B.A. for a master of arts degree at Texas State-San Marcos, May 2012. This is PC's source for making her point.
> 
> Here are some quotes by the source in his conlusions in regards to Faymonville's service and dedication to fullfilling the orders he was given:
> 
> "Additionally, this seems to have been such obsessive devotion for him that everything else became secondary: he felt he had to go out of his way to personally cultivate good relations with the Soviet Union on the basis that the United States would need relations some day."
> 
> Now look at what the author of the thesis, the source being used to revise and distort history had to say at the conclusion of his thesis:
> 
> "Phillip Faymonville was not by any stretch of imagination a spy for the Soviets nor a member of the communist party."
> 
> Don't take my word. Download the Thesis like I did and read page 81 in the guys conclusion of his thesis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I actually like this post.
> 
> 
> It is one of the first, I believe, in which you have attempted to provide an alternative view.....
> 
> ....your usual mode is the Liberal attack on the person making the charge.
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, of course, you are wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> In February 18, 1949, when the "People's Daily World," an official communist organ, wrote a glowing article about Brigadier General Faymonville, it quoted his views. In his paean to the Bolshevik tyranny he declared that "there is no such thing in the Soviet Union as hostility to other nations, or a desire for their conquest."
> Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 97.
> 
> 
> So....the same question arises with Faymonville as with Franklin Roosevelt: was he a dupe, or was he a communist enabler?
> 
> 
> The question does not have to be applied to Harry Hopkins, the one who positioned Faymonville in Moscow, in charge of the buffet known as Lend-Lease, and who saw to the promotion of the Red Colonel, ....
> 
> ...since I have documented that Hopkins was Stalin's spy.
Click to expand...


I believe in a thing called spinicitus. It's a word I use to refer to what happens when people begin believing spins to the point that they form opinions and come to conclusions on spin. Spin being based on some degree or level of false and exaggerated or distorted data creates false conclusions and twisted opinions based on crap data. 
This makes the kind of sources used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories useless. 

When dealing with a topic like espionage and the gathering of intelligence, misleading data, misinterpreted data, etc. is particularly dangerous and misleading due to the very nature of espionage and intelligence gathering. How do you determine with certainty that an individual is not using infiltration and manipulation of contacts to ascertain "loose lips" type of intel. When an undercover cop infiltrates a gang, how many minor crimes might he or she have to comit to convince the bad guys he or she can be trusted?  With the methods used by revisionist and conspiracy theorist, virtually any and every cop that has ever worked undercover could be made to appear dirty. Even with the relevation that he or she was working undercover, arguments could be made that the undercover cop "went to far" and "turned".

It is even more difficult for foriegn intelligence operatives. They rarely get the oppurtunity to speak of their missions. At least the undercover cop can have the expectation of testifying in some court and or ending the undercover status and return to wearing a uniform or carrying a badge. Foriegn intelligence gathering more ofter than not requires silence forever to protect "methods" and other operatives and especially with foriegn service in a place like the USSR, the families of operatives.

Civilians that serve in danger for the benifit of the security of their nation are rarely given recognition. They are easy targets for the conspiacy theorist and revisionist.
I happen to reject the types of sources so often used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories. For me, a foriegn operative attempting to project himself as a cooperative friend that is understanding of the foriegn countries culture, politics and traditions would be expected to say kind and cooperative things to the government controlled newspaper. 
I also reject writings by policial pundits and commentators that have political agenda's and have no reason to follow scholarly methods or even methods that would be expected to be used for writing a college thesis. At least the writer of the thesis has a set of standards to follow. Not so with the pundit and commentators. They can say what they want, get it published by anyone they want and puff.....it becomes a source.
This does not mean I do not value some writing of pundits and commentators. Some of them use and list legitimate  sources. Unfortunitly, those types are not the types seen on these pages.
I honestly don't see why it is unreasonalble for a person to insist on highly reliable and provable data when debating history. Part of the study of history, for me anyhow, is the fun in researching the research and tracking sources. Sometimes you find cool stuff you didn't know and sometimes you find bullshit. Both are rewarding to find. That is how I see it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I am wrong about my interpretation of sources being misused, distorted, unreliable and unable to stand up to accepted standards.
> In this case the root source is a Thesis presented by a Steven Thompson, B.A. for a master of arts degree at Texas State-San Marcos, May 2012. This is PC's source for making her point.
> 
> Here are some quotes by the source in his conlusions in regards to Faymonville's service and dedication to fullfilling the orders he was given:
> 
> "Additionally, this seems to have been such obsessive devotion for him that everything else became secondary: he felt he had to go out of his way to personally cultivate good relations with the Soviet Union on the basis that the United States would need relations some day."
> 
> Now look at what the author of the thesis, the source being used to revise and distort history had to say at the conclusion of his thesis:
> 
> "Phillip Faymonville was not by any stretch of imagination a spy for the Soviets nor a member of the communist party."
> 
> Don't take my word. Download the Thesis like I did and read page 81 in the guys conclusion of his thesis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I actually like this post.
> 
> 
> It is one of the first, I believe, in which you have attempted to provide an alternative view.....
> 
> ....your usual mode is the Liberal attack on the person making the charge.
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, of course, you are wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> In February 18, 1949, when the "People's Daily World," an official communist organ, wrote a glowing article about Brigadier General Faymonville, it quoted his views. In his paean to the Bolshevik tyranny he declared that "there is no such thing in the Soviet Union as hostility to other nations, or a desire for their conquest."
> Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 97.
> 
> 
> So....the same question arises with Faymonville as with Franklin Roosevelt: was he a dupe, or was he a communist enabler?
> 
> 
> The question does not have to be applied to Harry Hopkins, the one who positioned Faymonville in Moscow, in charge of the buffet known as Lend-Lease, and who saw to the promotion of the Red Colonel, ....
> 
> ...since I have documented that Hopkins was Stalin's spy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I believe in a thing called spinicitus. It's a word I use to refer to what happens when people begin believing spins to the point that they form opinions and come to conclusions on spin. Spin being based on some degree or level of false and exaggerated or distorted data creates false conclusions and twisted opinions based on crap data.
> This makes the kind of sources used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories useless.
> 
> When dealing with a topic like espionage and the gathering of intelligence, misleading data, misinterpreted data, etc. is particularly dangerous and misleading due to the very nature of espionage and intelligence gathering. How do you determine with certainty that an individual is not using infiltration and manipulation of contacts to ascertain "loose lips" type of intel. When an undercover cop infiltrates a gang, how many minor crimes might he or she have to comit to convince the bad guys he or she can be trusted?  With the methods used by revisionist and conspiracy theorist, virtually any and every cop that has ever worked undercover could be made to appear dirty. Even with the relevation that he or she was working undercover, arguments could be made that the undercover cop "went to far" and "turned".
> 
> It is even more difficult for foriegn intelligence operatives. They rarely get the oppurtunity to speak of their missions. At least the undercover cop can have the expectation of testifying in some court and or ending the undercover status and return to wearing a uniform or carrying a badge. Foriegn intelligence gathering more ofter than not requires silence forever to protect "methods" and other operatives and especially with foriegn service in a place like the USSR, the families of operatives.
> 
> Civilians that serve in danger for the benifit of the security of their nation are rarely given recognition. They are easy targets for the conspiacy theorist and revisionist.
> I happen to reject the types of sources so often used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories. For me, a foriegn operative attempting to project himself as a cooperative friend that is understanding of the foriegn countries culture, politics and traditions would be expected to say kind and cooperative things to the government controlled newspaper.
> I also reject writings by policial pundits and commentators that have political agenda's and have no reason to follow scholarly methods or even methods that would be expected to be used for writing a college thesis. At least the writer of the thesis has a set of standards to follow. Not so with the pundit and commentators. They can say what they want, get it published by anyone they want and puff.....it becomes a source.
> This does not mean I do not value some writing of pundits and commentators. Some of them use and list legitimate  sources. Unfortunitly, those types are not the types seen on these pages.
> I honestly don't see why it is unreasonalble for a person to insist on highly reliable and provable data when debating history. Part of the study of history, for me anyhow, is the fun in researching the research and tracking sources. Sometimes you find cool stuff you didn't know and sometimes you find bullshit. Both are rewarding to find. That is how I see it.
Click to expand...





What you mean is that your mind is closed, and even facing the events that can only flow from the premise of this thread, you cannot bring yourself to admit that, at it's very foundations, your understanding of politics and geopolitics is flawed.


Look at the stated aims of the the communist party from the 1930's, and note that they have, in fact, been imposed upon this nation, and accept that the results stems, largely, from the indoctrinated.....folks like you.


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I actually like this post.
> 
> 
> It is one of the first, I believe, in which you have attempted to provide an alternative view.....
> 
> ....your usual mode is the Liberal attack on the person making the charge.
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, of course, you are wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> In February 18, 1949, when the "People's Daily World," an official communist organ, wrote a glowing article about Brigadier General Faymonville, it quoted his views. In his paean to the Bolshevik tyranny he declared that "there is no such thing in the Soviet Union as hostility to other nations, or a desire for their conquest."
> Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 97.
> 
> 
> So....the same question arises with Faymonville as with Franklin Roosevelt: was he a dupe, or was he a communist enabler?
> 
> 
> The question does not have to be applied to Harry Hopkins, the one who positioned Faymonville in Moscow, in charge of the buffet known as Lend-Lease, and who saw to the promotion of the Red Colonel, ....
> 
> ...since I have documented that Hopkins was Stalin's spy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe in a thing called spinicitus. It's a word I use to refer to what happens when people begin believing spins to the point that they form opinions and come to conclusions on spin. Spin being based on some degree or level of false and exaggerated or distorted data creates false conclusions and twisted opinions based on crap data.
> This makes the kind of sources used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories useless.
> 
> When dealing with a topic like espionage and the gathering of intelligence, misleading data, misinterpreted data, etc. is particularly dangerous and misleading due to the very nature of espionage and intelligence gathering. How do you determine with certainty that an individual is not using infiltration and manipulation of contacts to ascertain "loose lips" type of intel. When an undercover cop infiltrates a gang, how many minor crimes might he or she have to comit to convince the bad guys he or she can be trusted?  With the methods used by revisionist and conspiracy theorist, virtually any and every cop that has ever worked undercover could be made to appear dirty. Even with the relevation that he or she was working undercover, arguments could be made that the undercover cop "went to far" and "turned".
> 
> It is even more difficult for foriegn intelligence operatives. They rarely get the oppurtunity to speak of their missions. At least the undercover cop can have the expectation of testifying in some court and or ending the undercover status and return to wearing a uniform or carrying a badge. Foriegn intelligence gathering more ofter than not requires silence forever to protect "methods" and other operatives and especially with foriegn service in a place like the USSR, the families of operatives.
> 
> Civilians that serve in danger for the benifit of the security of their nation are rarely given recognition. They are easy targets for the conspiacy theorist and revisionist.
> I happen to reject the types of sources so often used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories. For me, a foriegn operative attempting to project himself as a cooperative friend that is understanding of the foriegn countries culture, politics and traditions would be expected to say kind and cooperative things to the government controlled newspaper.
> I also reject writings by policial pundits and commentators that have political agenda's and have no reason to follow scholarly methods or even methods that would be expected to be used for writing a college thesis. At least the writer of the thesis has a set of standards to follow. Not so with the pundit and commentators. They can say what they want, get it published by anyone they want and puff.....it becomes a source.
> This does not mean I do not value some writing of pundits and commentators. Some of them use and list legitimate  sources. Unfortunitly, those types are not the types seen on these pages.
> I honestly don't see why it is unreasonalble for a person to insist on highly reliable and provable data when debating history. Part of the study of history, for me anyhow, is the fun in researching the research and tracking sources. Sometimes you find cool stuff you didn't know and sometimes you find bullshit. Both are rewarding to find. That is how I see it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you mean is that your mind is closed, and even facing the events that can only flow from the premise of this thread, you cannot bring yourself to admit that, at it's very foundations, your understanding of politics and geopolitics is flawed.
> 
> 
> Look at the stated aims of the the communist party from the 1930's, and note that they have, in fact, been imposed upon this nation, and accept that the results stems, largely, from the indoctrinated.....folks like you.
Click to expand...


I think the ones we have to be most careful with, are the ones that present a great anti-communist front, pointing out all the spies about us when in reality they are the spies. 
I just  went to get a haircut and the first thing the barber did was ask me how my day was going. I now know that "day" is a code word for: are you a communist spy , and if so, do you have any information to be transmitted to Moscow? McCarthy used this type of anticommunist front for years until the commies decided his drinking made him more apt to talk in cheap bars, so bingo.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe in a thing called spinicitus. It's a word I use to refer to what happens when people begin believing spins to the point that they form opinions and come to conclusions on spin. Spin being based on some degree or level of false and exaggerated or distorted data creates false conclusions and twisted opinions based on crap data.
> This makes the kind of sources used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories useless.
> 
> When dealing with a topic like espionage and the gathering of intelligence, misleading data, misinterpreted data, etc. is particularly dangerous and misleading due to the very nature of espionage and intelligence gathering. How do you determine with certainty that an individual is not using infiltration and manipulation of contacts to ascertain "loose lips" type of intel. When an undercover cop infiltrates a gang, how many minor crimes might he or she have to comit to convince the bad guys he or she can be trusted?  With the methods used by revisionist and conspiracy theorist, virtually any and every cop that has ever worked undercover could be made to appear dirty. Even with the relevation that he or she was working undercover, arguments could be made that the undercover cop "went to far" and "turned".
> 
> It is even more difficult for foriegn intelligence operatives. They rarely get the oppurtunity to speak of their missions. At least the undercover cop can have the expectation of testifying in some court and or ending the undercover status and return to wearing a uniform or carrying a badge. Foriegn intelligence gathering more ofter than not requires silence forever to protect "methods" and other operatives and especially with foriegn service in a place like the USSR, the families of operatives.
> 
> Civilians that serve in danger for the benifit of the security of their nation are rarely given recognition. They are easy targets for the conspiacy theorist and revisionist.
> I happen to reject the types of sources so often used to promote revisionist histories and conspiracy theories. For me, a foriegn operative attempting to project himself as a cooperative friend that is understanding of the foriegn countries culture, politics and traditions would be expected to say kind and cooperative things to the government controlled newspaper.
> I also reject writings by policial pundits and commentators that have political agenda's and have no reason to follow scholarly methods or even methods that would be expected to be used for writing a college thesis. At least the writer of the thesis has a set of standards to follow. Not so with the pundit and commentators. They can say what they want, get it published by anyone they want and puff.....it becomes a source.
> This does not mean I do not value some writing of pundits and commentators. Some of them use and list legitimate  sources. Unfortunitly, those types are not the types seen on these pages.
> I honestly don't see why it is unreasonalble for a person to insist on highly reliable and provable data when debating history. Part of the study of history, for me anyhow, is the fun in researching the research and tracking sources. Sometimes you find cool stuff you didn't know and sometimes you find bullshit. Both are rewarding to find. That is how I see it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you mean is that your mind is closed, and even facing the events that can only flow from the premise of this thread, you cannot bring yourself to admit that, at it's very foundations, your understanding of politics and geopolitics is flawed.
> 
> 
> Look at the stated aims of the the communist party from the 1930's, and note that they have, in fact, been imposed upon this nation, and accept that the results stems, largely, from the indoctrinated.....folks like you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the ones we have to be most careful with, are the ones that present a great anti-communist front, pointing out all the spies about us when in reality they are the spies.
> I just  went to get a haircut and the first thing the barber did was ask me how my day was going. I now know that "day" is a code word for: are you a communist spy , and if so, do you have any information to be transmitted to Moscow? McCarthy used this type of anticommunist front for years until the commies decided his drinking made him more apt to talk in cheap bars, so bingo.
Click to expand...




I know you believe that your being cute....but this is one of the most stupid non-posts ever.


The reality is that Smugly Backside and you, and the rest of the sorority of simpletons are furious because I have shown that so much of what they have believed is just plain wrong. FDR bowed to the wishes of Soviet communists, and his closest adviser, Harry Hopkins, was Stalin's spy. 

Really.



I have numbered....what, a dozen or so pieces of the whole picture, and the cadre simply does what Liberals always do....attacked the person quoted, rather than deny the fact...or simply ignore it. 

So it was with Maj. George R. Jordan, Representative Martin Dies, scholars and historians Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel, Murray Garsson, M. Stanton Evans, Vasili Mitrokhin , former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence Ray Wannall, US Air Force historian Eduard Mark, and Averell Harriman, ....Each added a piece of the puzzle, and added to the preponderance of the evidence.


And Hopkins efforts to send Kravchenko back to Stalin, his efforts to place communists like Faymonville in charge of Lend-Lease......hardly accidents.



And I have more testimony and more pro-communist efforts by Hopkins.




You apologists and excuse makers cannot admit, even to yourselves, how totally indoctrinated, how blind, you have been.

The truth is evident: the aims of the communist party have been taken up by Liberals/Progressives/Democrats.....and they can never admit to the provenance: Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Hopkins.

 I can list a dozen of the communist aims that correspond to the aims of the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats...coincidence?

And as far as "Liberals/Progressives/Democrats" ....isn't that where you fit in, politically?

Another coincidence?

Hardly.





14. " How did this massive penetration and policy twisting occur? Deception, [M. Stanton] Evans mentioned at a recent lecture, succeeds best when people want to be deceived. *Franklin Roosevelt&#8217;s willful blindness to Stalin&#8217;s malignant goals,* aggravated by the President&#8217;s health problems, was clearly a major cause. FDR saw what he wanted to see: that Josef Stalin liked him and would cooperate in preserving a peaceful and just world. That mindset went hand-in-hand with *a New Deal bureaucracy chock-a-block with Soviet agents, Communist party members and ardent Stalinist* sympathizers, including two FDR confidants, Lauchlin Currie and *Harry Hopkins, FDR&#8217;s most trusted friend who for several years lived at the White House."*
Infiltration, intrigue and Communists - Conservative News




I understand that you will never admit to the truth....but perhaps others will read this and place blame where it belongs.


----------



## Dante

yawn:



> What is infuriating is how the Western press is aiding Mr. Gordievsky's efforts to craft a best-seller. In the excerpts of his book, "KGB: The Inside Story," I have seen, he never calls Mr. Hopkins a spy. Yet headline writers do.
> 
> A Soviet Agent? Harry Hopkins? - NYTimes.com
> 
> What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him? According to Mr. Gordievsky, who was in knickers when Mr. Hopkins died in 1946, the former social worker advocated positions favored by Moscow. Under this definition, King George VI and Ronald Reagan could be considered Soviet agents.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Dante said:


> yawn:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is infuriating is how the Western press is aiding Mr. Gordievsky's efforts to craft a best-seller. In the excerpts of his book, "KGB: The Inside Story," I have seen, he never calls Mr. Hopkins a spy. Yet headline writers do.
> 
> A Soviet Agent? Harry Hopkins? - NYTimes.com
> 
> What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him? According to Mr. Gordievsky, who was in knickers when Mr. Hopkins died in 1946, the former social worker advocated positions favored by Moscow. Under this definition, King George VI and Ronald Reagan could be considered Soviet agents.
Click to expand...





Harry Hopkins not a Soviet spy?

What is infuriating is how the Liberal press, i.e., the NYTimes,  is aiding the Left's efforts to obfuscate communist infiltration.


'What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him?'

Read this thread.




"....advocated positions favored by Moscow...."

Yup.....tip of the iceberg.


----------



## Dante

PoliticalChic said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> yawn:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is infuriating is how the Western press is aiding Mr. Gordievsky's efforts to craft a best-seller. In the excerpts of his book, "KGB: The Inside Story," I have seen, he never calls Mr. Hopkins a spy. Yet headline writers do.
> 
> A Soviet Agent? Harry Hopkins? - NYTimes.com
> 
> What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him? According to Mr. Gordievsky, who was in knickers when Mr. Hopkins died in 1946, the former social worker advocated positions favored by Moscow. Under this definition, King George VI and Ronald Reagan could be considered Soviet agents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins not a Soviet spy?
> 
> What is infuriating is how the Liberal press, i.e., the NYTimes,  is aiding the Left's efforts to obfuscate communist infiltration.
> 
> 
> 'What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him?'
> 
> Read this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....advocated positions favored by Moscow...."
> 
> Yup.....tip of the iceberg.
Click to expand...


and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!


----------



## PoliticalChic

Dante said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> yawn:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins not a Soviet spy?
> 
> What is infuriating is how the Liberal press, i.e., the NYTimes,  is aiding the Left's efforts to obfuscate communist infiltration.
> 
> 
> 'What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him?'
> 
> Read this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....advocated positions favored by Moscow...."
> 
> Yup.....tip of the iceberg.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!
Click to expand...







Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.


----------



## Dante

PoliticalChic said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins not a Soviet spy?
> 
> What is infuriating is how the Liberal press, i.e., the NYTimes,  is aiding the Left's efforts to obfuscate communist infiltration.
> 
> 
> 'What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him?'
> 
> Read this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....advocated positions favored by Moscow...."
> 
> Yup.....tip of the iceberg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.
Click to expand...


It is 


seriously


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins not a Soviet spy?
> 
> What is infuriating is how the Liberal press, i.e., the NYTimes,  is aiding the Left's efforts to obfuscate communist infiltration.
> 
> 
> 'What deeds did Mr. Hopkins commit that may, in the popular mind, attach the monicker "spy" to him?'
> 
> Read this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....advocated positions favored by Moscow...."
> 
> Yup.....tip of the iceberg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.
Click to expand...


You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.


----------



## regent

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
> OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.
Click to expand...


But for me they always bring on a smile, not a guffaw, but a smile--and maybe a little shake of the head. It's almost like McCarthy waving a piece of paper saying: I have in my hand....


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
> OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.
Click to expand...




The only "garbage" is your ability to use the facts provided.

And the intensity of your post indicates that you know very well that I have provided the truth.


I'll provide more.


----------



## Dante

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets...  OMG!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
> OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.
Click to expand...


for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel


----------



## PoliticalChic

Dante said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
> OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel
Click to expand...




That's an outright lie.


----------



## Dante

PoliticalChic said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
> OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's an outright lie.
Click to expand...


okay, you win.  Supported by nefarious and unreliable sources at best


----------



## Camp

Dante said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's an outright lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> okay, you win.  Supported by nefarious and unreliable sources at best
Click to expand...


It's a "Buyer Beware" kiind of thing. You better read the label of ingredients before you injest the product. If you wait until you have already injested the product you will be very upset that you just injested a bunch of junk that has no nutritional or redeeming value and may in fact be harmful.


----------



## HenryBHough

Brussel Sprouts are your friend!

Especially if you view flatulence as a sport.


----------



## Dante

Lots of gas


----------



## Camp

Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.


----------



## Dante

Camp said:


> Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.





stereotypes and bullshit from FOX News


----------



## HenryBHough

Dante said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stereotypes and bullshit from FOX News
Click to expand...


Wow, they're almost caught up with you!


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.






President Reagan?


Interestingly, today is an anniversary of sorts.


March 30th, 1981,  John Hinckley,Jr. attempted to kill President Ronald Reagan.


 Wielding a .22 caliber "Saturday-night special," John Warnock Hinckley shot President Reagan in the chest outside the Washington Hilton Hotel. The 25-year-old drifter with a history of psychological problems also shot the president's press secretary, James Brady, in the incident. 


Reagan was the only US President to survive being shot while in office (just 69 days into his presidency). 


Afterwards, he wrote in his diary:
 Whatever happens now, I owe my life to God and will try to serve him in every way I can.



The finest President in the last 100 years.

Don't you agree?


----------



## Mushroom

I find it interesting that so many people are just flinging poop, instead of actually looking at some of the evidence presented.

Whenever I hear about somebody possibly being involved in Soviet espionage in the middle part of the 20th Century, my immediate reaction is to look at the Venona Papers.  And Harry Hopkins appears in it many times.

Initially under reports by "18" and "19", then from "Diana".  And as a source he was deemed important enough to gain the code name of "Deputy".  Of course, it has also been pointed out that "19" may be Hopkins.

Now, is this proof that he himself is a spy?  No, but at the least it shows that he as a minimum spoke to freely among people he should not have.

But then we continue.  In 1941, he was sent to the Soviet Union to negotiate Lend-Lease.  He was instructed to press hard for democratic reforms in the Soviet Union, for Americans to inspect distribution of food and medical supplies, as well as to allow American military advisors to serve in Soviet military units (this is common between allies).  In the end, the Soviets agreed to none of these, but got the aid anyways.  However, he added an interesting request, that a large shipment of uranium be added to Lend-Lease supplies to the Soviets.

Then in 1945 he returned to help negotiate the end of the war.  He was instructed to push for a free democratic Poland, but instead he told Stalin that the US felt he should do with Poland whatever he wanted.

Then there is the 1943 incident where Hopkins notified the Soviet Ambassador that the FBI had tapes of a Soviet spy meeting with the CPUSA supervisor in San Francisco.

But what I find most interesting is that there is no direct evidence that Hopkins was a spy in either Venona, the KGB archives, nor from any defectors.  However, there are statements that he supported the Soviets, and was an "unconscious source of information".

So in the end, I can not say yes or no on this.  However, he certainly fought harder for the Soviets then he did for his own country when negotiating with them, turned over intelligence and suggested that captured spies be returned to them, and spoke openly to people who were actually spies.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> *A Peoples History of Koch Industries: How Stalin Funded the Tea Party Movement*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Roots of Stalin in the Tea Party Movement | Alternet



Democrat Founding Father Funds Tea Party?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Mushroom said:


> I find it interesting that so many people are just flinging poop, instead of actually looking at some of the evidence presented.
> 
> Whenever I hear about somebody possibly being involved in Soviet espionage in the middle part of the 20th Century, my immediate reaction is to look at the Venona Papers.  And Harry Hopkins appears in it many times.
> 
> Initially under reports by "18" and "19", then from "Diana".  And as a source he was deemed important enough to gain the code name of "Deputy".  Of course, it has also been pointed out that "19" may be Hopkins.
> 
> Now, is this proof that he himself is a spy?  No, but at the least it shows that he as a minimum spoke to freely among people he should not have.
> 
> But then we continue.  In 1941, he was sent to the Soviet Union to negotiate Lend-Lease.  He was instructed to press hard for democratic reforms in the Soviet Union, for Americans to inspect distribution of food and medical supplies, as well as to allow American military advisors to serve in Soviet military units (this is common between allies).  In the end, the Soviets agreed to none of these, but got the aid anyways.  However, he added an interesting request, that a large shipment of uranium be added to Lend-Lease supplies to the Soviets.
> 
> Then in 1945 he returned to help negotiate the end of the war.  He was instructed to push for a free democratic Poland, but instead he told Stalin that the US felt he should do with Poland whatever he wanted.
> 
> Then there is the 1943 incident where Hopkins notified the Soviet Ambassador that the FBI had tapes of a Soviet spy meeting with the CPUSA supervisor in San Francisco.
> 
> But what I find most interesting is that there is no direct evidence that Hopkins was a spy in either Venona, the KGB archives, nor from any defectors.  However, there are statements that he supported the Soviets, and was an "unconscious source of information".
> 
> So in the end, I can not say yes or no on this.  However, he certainly fought harder for the Soviets then he did for his own country when negotiating with them, turned over intelligence and suggested that captured spies be returned to them, and spoke openly to people who were actually spies.



Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either


----------



## JakeStarkey

*Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy * _What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is *important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme*._ Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review


----------



## Mushroom

CrusaderFrank said:


> Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either



You are misreading my conclusion.

I actually do not think he was a "spy".  I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them.  One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".

From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets.  This is very un-sly like behavior.  I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are misreading my conclusion.
> 
> I actually do not think he was a "spy".  I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them.  One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".
> 
> From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets.  This is very un-sly like behavior.  I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.
Click to expand...






During Franklin Roosevelt's administration there was not only no reason to hide his admiration for Stalin and the Soviets, it was a resume enhancer.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are misreading my conclusion.
> 
> I actually do not think he was a "spy".  I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them.  One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".
> 
> From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets.  This is very un-sly like behavior.  I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.
Click to expand...







If you have read how Hopkins influenced Roosevelt to knuckle under to the wishes of Stalin, perhaps you can answer the query at the bottom.


Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days.  The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of "Stalin&#8217;s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt&#8217;s Government," by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):

a. Hopkins&#8217;s pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display* in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments are available for viewing.*  Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, *he continued to ply his influence with FDR, *who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.  

After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of &#8220;reparations.&#8221;  At this point, *Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta.  &#8220;Mr. President,&#8221; this said, &#8220;the Russians have given in so much at this conference I don&#8217;t think we should let them down.*  Let the British disagree if they want&#8212;and continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings]&#8221; (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).

b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had &#8220;given in&#8221; to FDR&#8212;the entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm




How were Hopkin's efforts different from these folks?

April 5, 1951 ....Julius & Ethel Rosenberg sentenced to death


----------



## Camp

JakeStarkey said:


> *Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy * _What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is *important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme*._ Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review



Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.

The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

PoliticalChic said:


> Mushroom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are misreading my conclusion.
> 
> I actually do not think he was a "spy".  I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them.  One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".
> 
> From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets.  This is very un-sly like behavior.  I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have read how Hopkins influenced Roosevelt to knuckle under to the wishes of Stalin, perhaps you can answer the query at the bottom.
> 
> 
> Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days.  The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of "Stalins Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelts Government," by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):
> 
> a. Hopkinss pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display* in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments are available for viewing.*  Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, *he continued to ply his influence with FDR, *who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.
> 
> After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of reparations.  At this point, *Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta.  Mr. President, this said, the Russians have given in so much at this conference I dont think we should let them down.*  Let the British disagree if they wantand continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings] (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).
> 
> b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had given in to FDRthe entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm
> 
> 
> How were Hopkin's efforts different from these folks?
> 
> April 5, 1951 ....Julius & Ethel Rosenberg sentenced to death
Click to expand...


Hopkins efforts were far worse which is why modern Progressives defend him and try to smear McCarthy. Many Democrat heroes should have been tried for treason along with the Rosenbergs


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Camp said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy * _What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is *important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme*._ Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.
> 
> The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.
Click to expand...


FDR was Stalin's sock puppet and is rightfully in Hell along with Brutus, Judas and the other traitors. Read Dante's Inferno and see where he puts traitorous scum like FDR


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy * _What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is *important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme*._ Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.
> 
> The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.
Click to expand...






You keep repeating the same FDR boot-licking posts as though your hot air offers any rebuttal to the myriad facts, with links, that I post.


You are simply the poster child for 'Ideologue.'


----------



## ThirdTerm

One great example of the achievements of the communist spies inside the American government was the "Hull Note," which was the hard ultimatum delivered from President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull to Japan on November 26, 1941. It was the very one which made Japan finally decide to attack Pearl Harbor. The draft of the Hull Note was not really written by Hull himself, but was written by a high official Harry White, who after the war turned out to be a communist spy for the Soviet Union.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FouuKUhxqdc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FouuKUhxqdc[/ame]

White&#8217;s plan was calculated to inflame public opinion in Japan and undermine Emperor Hirohito and Prime Minister Prince Fumimaro Konoye, both of whom favored peace with the U.S. It was also aimed at guaranteeing the rise to power of Japan&#8217;s political forces that were beating the drums for war. This is precisely &#8212; and predictably &#8212; what happened. However, White did not undertake this move on his own initiative, it is important to note, but as a directive of the NKVD (an earlier name for the Soviet KGB). His Kremlin bosses were most anxious for assurance that Japan would not attack the Soviet Union; they thus expended great efforts through their spy and propaganda networks in Japan, Europe, and the United States to ensure that Japan would strike America, rather than the U.S.S.R.

Steil notes that, *as a result of White&#8217;s fierce lobbying, FDR &#8220;authorized [Secretary of State] Hull to present the Japanese with what became known as the Ten-Point Note. Hull summoned Nomura and Kurusu on November 26 to deliver the austere ultimatum, incorporating White&#8217;s demands on China, without concessions*. An alarmed Kurusu told Hull that the Japanese government would &#8216;throw up its hands&#8217; if presented with such a response to their truce proposal. Hull did not waiver. The collision course had been set.&#8221;

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



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



Steil notes that &#8220;*the Soviets, American allies in the European war, were anxious to ensure that such an attack did take place*.&#8221; He quotes Soviet spymaster Vladimir Karpov in this regard:



> &#8220;The war in the Pacific could have been avoided,&#8221; wrote retired GRU military intelligence colonel and World War II &#8220;Hero of the Soviet Union&#8221; Vladimir Karpov in 2000, nearly sixty years after Pearl Harbor. &#8220;Stalin was the real initiator of the ultimatum to Japan,&#8221; he insisted.



How was that possible? Steil allows Karpov to explain:



> &#8220;Harry Dexter White was acting in accordance with a design initiated by [NKVD intelligence official Iskhak] Akhmerov and Pavlov,&#8221; Karpov argued. &#8220;[White] prepared the aide-memoire for signature by Morgenthau and President Roosevelt.&#8221; *The Soviets had, according to Karpov, used White to provoke Japan to attack the United States. The scheme even had a name, &#8220;Operation Snow,&#8221; snow referring to White. &#8220;[T]he essence of &#8216;Operation Snow&#8217; was to provoke the war between the Empire of the Rising Sun and the USA and to insure the interests of the Soviet Union in the Far East.... If Japan was engaged in a war against the USA it would have no resources to strike against the USSR."*



The Communist Agent Who Caused Pearl Harbor - and Global Economic Havoc


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy * _What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is *important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme*._ Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.
> 
> The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep repeating the same FDR boot-licking posts as though your hot air offers any rebuttal to the myriad facts, with links, that I post.
> 
> 
> You are simply the poster child for 'Ideologue.'
Click to expand...


And you keep using the same old garbage sources that were used by McCarthy and his followers from the 50's or redo's of that trash made by the likes of political hacks like West.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

ThirdTerm said:


> One great example of the achievements of the communist spies inside the American government was the "Hull Note," which was the hard ultimatum delivered from President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull to Japan on November 26, 1941. It was the very one which made Japan finally decide to attack Pearl Harbor. The draft of the Hull Note was not really written by Hull himself, but was written by a high official Harry White, who after the war turned out to be a communist spy for the Soviet Union.
> 
> Operation Snow - TheBlazeTV - REAL HISTORY - 2013.02.15 - YouTube
> 
> Whites plan was calculated to inflame public opinion in Japan and undermine Emperor Hirohito and Prime Minister Prince Fumimaro Konoye, both of whom favored peace with the U.S. It was also aimed at guaranteeing the rise to power of Japans political forces that were beating the drums for war. This is precisely  and predictably  what happened. However, White did not undertake this move on his own initiative, it is important to note, but as a directive of the NKVD (an earlier name for the Soviet KGB). His Kremlin bosses were most anxious for assurance that Japan would not attack the Soviet Union; they thus expended great efforts through their spy and propaganda networks in Japan, Europe, and the United States to ensure that Japan would strike America, rather than the U.S.S.R.
> 
> Steil notes that, *as a result of Whites fierce lobbying, FDR authorized [Secretary of State] Hull to present the Japanese with what became known as the Ten-Point Note. Hull summoned Nomura and Kurusu on November 26 to deliver the austere ultimatum, incorporating Whites demands on China, without concessions*. An alarmed Kurusu told Hull that the Japanese government would throw up its hands if presented with such a response to their truce proposal. Hull did not waiver. The collision course had been set.
> 
> And Soviet agent Harry Dexter White had set that course. Steil comments:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *That White was the author of the key ultimatum demands is beyond dispute. That the Japanese government made the decision to move forward with the Pearl Harbor strike after receiving the ultimatum is also beyond dispute*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steil notes that *the Soviets, American allies in the European war, were anxious to ensure that such an attack did take place*. He quotes Soviet spymaster Vladimir Karpov in this regard:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The war in the Pacific could have been avoided, wrote retired GRU military intelligence colonel and World War II Hero of the Soviet Union Vladimir Karpov in 2000, nearly sixty years after Pearl Harbor. Stalin was the real initiator of the ultimatum to Japan, he insisted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How was that possible? Steil allows Karpov to explain:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Dexter White was acting in accordance with a design initiated by [NKVD intelligence official Iskhak] Akhmerov and Pavlov, Karpov argued. [White] prepared the aide-memoire for signature by Morgenthau and President Roosevelt. *The Soviets had, according to Karpov, used White to provoke Japan to attack the United States. The scheme even had a name, Operation Snow, snow referring to White. [T]he essence of Operation Snow was to provoke the war between the Empire of the Rising Sun and the USA and to insure the interests of the Soviet Union in the Far East.... If Japan was engaged in a war against the USA it would have no resources to strike against the USSR."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Communist Agent Who Caused Pearl Harbor - and Global Economic Havoc
Click to expand...


Japan should have attacked the USSR

Have to give Stalin credit for directing his US puppets into a collision with Japan. The timing of Pearl Harbor was PERFECT For the USSR.

In Dec 1941, the Germans had Moscow in their field glasses


----------



## Mushroom

Camp said:


> Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.



And surely you have some kind of reference to validate that insane claim, right?


----------



## Mushroom

ThirdTerm said:


> One great example of the achievements of the communist spies inside the American government was the "Hull Note," which was the hard ultimatum delivered from President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull to Japan on November 26, 1941. It was the very one which made Japan finally decide to attack Pearl Harbor.



Uhhh, sorry.  This is a complete and utter fail of such magnitude I can't believe it.

*Mostly because the fleet that was enroute to attack Japan had left on 25 November!*

Now kindly tell me how in the hell this would have "made Japan finally decide to attack Pearl Harbor", when the fleet that was going to do so had left the day before?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And surely you have some kind of reference to validate that insane claim, right?
Click to expand...




Actually, no...his posts provide enough hot air to float a blimp.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> ThirdTerm said:
> 
> 
> 
> One great example of the achievements of the communist spies inside the American government was the "Hull Note," which was the hard ultimatum delivered from President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull to Japan on November 26, 1941. It was the very one which made Japan finally decide to attack Pearl Harbor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uhhh, sorry.  This is a complete and utter fail of such magnitude I can't believe it.
> 
> *Mostly because the fleet that was enroute to attack Japan had left on 25 November!*
> 
> Now kindly tell me how in the hell this would have "made Japan finally decide to attack Pearl Harbor", when the fleet that was going to do so had left the day before?
Click to expand...






Background:

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


b. Pavlov "was sent to the United States seven months before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor to meet with* Harry Dexter White,* then director of Monetary Research for the Treasury. Did "Snow" mean "White"? Yes, Harry Dexter White had been a Soviet "asset" since the early 1930s, providing information to Whittaker Chambers, a courier for the communist underground. By 1941 White was a top aide and adviser to Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Secretary of the Treasury. Pavlov wrote that the Soviets feared a Japanese attack from the east, and his mission was to discuss with White what could be done to* keep the Japanese from joining forces with the Germans." * Sacred Secrets: How Soviet Intelligence Operations Changed American History


c. "The chapter on Pearl Harbor is likewise instructive as to how *Soviet agents operated. Japan seriously considered an attack on Russia, but Stalins agents in the Japanese government and in the highly efficient Sorge spy ring on the island nation helped persuade Imperial Japan to turn its aggression elsewhere. *That elsewhere eventually turned out to be Pearl Harbor. Stalins acolytes in the U.S. were simultaneously pushing a foreign policy against Japan that would lead the Japanese away from any designs on Siberia and toward conflict with America."
Infiltration, intrigue and Communists - Conservative News


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.
> 
> The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep repeating the same FDR boot-licking posts as though your hot air offers any rebuttal to the myriad facts, with links, that I post.
> 
> 
> You are simply the poster child for 'Ideologue.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you keep using the same old garbage sources that were used by McCarthy and his followers from the 50's or redo's of that trash made by the likes of political hacks like West.
Click to expand...




No.

Actually, having more expertise on the subject than you, I provide links and sources.


You, on the other hand, begin with your preparatory spittle-spewing, and proceed all the way up to your signature move: soiling your shorts.


And that is all that can be expected from ideologues wedded to the FDR cult.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

From this evidence West presents ( emails, conflicting stories from witnesses )  it does appear the Hopkins was indeed Agent 19, Political Chick.  I looked this up this morning.   Note the email dialogue.  This looks like a cover up.  

The Death of the Grown-Up | Diana West > Home - Warning: Historians at WorkThen Radosh went farther still.

He describes a dramatic scene at a gathering of espionage experts and authors he, Radosh, in part presided over at the Wilson Center in Washington, DC in 2009. Among the assembly were M. Stanton Evans, John Earl Haynes, Harvard's Mark Kramer, Eduard Mark (d. 2009) Herbert Romerstein (d. 2013), and Alexander Vassiliev.

In this company, Radosh writes, Mark &#8220;publicly&#8221; recanted his 1998 findings that identified Hopkins as &#8220;19.&#8221;

Radosh:

At a conference on Soviet espionage held a week before his untimely death, West&#8217;s source, Eduard Mark, publicly stated that he now acknowledged that Harry Hopkins was not Agent 19, and that the conclusion he had reached in his 1998 article was false.&#8221;

In Part Two of The Rebuttal, I flag a discrepancy in the record. I compare Radosh's August 7, 2013 statement --  Mark recanted his thesis -- with what he wrote me in an email two months earlier on June 13, 2013.

Addressing the same topic -- Hopkins/"19" vs. Duggan/"19" -- Radosh wrote me:

Were Mark still alive, I&#8217;m certain he would have conceded the point.&#8221;

What was that again?

Were Mark still alive, I'm certain he would have conceded the point.

On August 7, 2013, Radosh describes Mark's public recantation of his thesis in 2009. Mark died the following week.

But in June 13, 2013, Radosh is speculating that "were Mark still alive," he would have recanted his thesis.

Both statements cannot be true.

Here is the full email of June 13, 2013:

Diana,

Re what Bostom says about Hopkins is wrong, and if it is from your book, it is also incorrect.

Here's what John Haynes just e-mailed me:

"Ed Mark was wrong about 19.  Harvey and I always treated 19 as unknown.  Mark was sure he an eliminated all of the possibilities and Hopkins was the the last man standing.  I disagreed with him and told him he was putting too much faith in his analysis of who was at various Trident conference social events.  I thought he might be right but that the evidence was just too thin to reach a conclusion, even a tentative one.  This was prior to AV's notebooks [Alexander Vassiliev's notebooks of hand-copied KGB cables]. When AV's notebooks came out, 19 was repeatedly identified as Laurence Duggan."

The Vassiliev papers show conclusively that Larry Duggan was 19, not Hopkins. So while Hopkins might have been pro-Soviet, as others were, and naive and a fellow-traveler, he was not an agent.  

One has to be meticulous and careful when making charges, and very careful about consulting the most authoritative sources. Were Mark still alive, I'm certain he would have conceded the point. He was a careful scholar for the most part.

Ron

It's hard not to linger a little over the undercutting tone of that final enconium to Mark, but the fact remains that as of June 13, 2013, Radosh and John Earl Haynes both are writing as if Mark's 1998 thesis is still intact. In other words, there is not any indication, not a whisper, about Marks' 2009 before-death public recantation that Radosh reports in his August review.

It is also worth pointing out that Haynes similarly treated the Mark thesis as current in a January 2013 essay he posted here.  In this essay, Haynes argues that &#8220;19&#8221; was Laurence Duggan, not Harry Hopkins as Mark's 1998 paper argued. Discussing Mark, Haynes wrote: &#8220;But on the matter of Venona 812 he and I disagreed.&#8221;

Note that he didn&#8217;t say, &#8220;On the matter of Venona 812, he and I disagreed until Mark publicly recanted his paper&#8217;s findings in 2009.&#8221;

I asked John Earl Haynes for any further information he could offer about what transpired at the 2009 conference. Here is an excerpt from his August 16 email. (Full email exchange below.)

At the symposium Ed did mention briefly in one of the Q&A sessions that he no longer held to his view that "19" was Hopkins.  cont reading on link to see email dialogue which exposes a cover up.  

______________________

It is very suspicious that Eduard Mark dies suddenly only one week after he allegedly recanted on his own findings about Hopkins being "19" at a meeting with men who offer different versions of what happened.  It looks like Eduard was murdered which would prove he was right.   It also proves Political Chick is right!  Good job!

Question!  Are Americans so gullible as to believe that a man who stood by his findings since 1998 would suddenly change his mind before a few people in 2009 for absolutely no reason and then die a week later unexpectedly?  The Communists are certainly hoping we are!


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jeremiah said:


> From this evidence West presents ( emails, conflicting stories from witnesses )  it does appear the Hopkins was indeed Agent 19, Political Chick.  I looked this up this morning.   Note the email dialogue.  This looks like a cover up.
> 
> The Death of the Grown-Up | Diana West > Home - Warning: Historians at WorkThen Radosh went farther still.
> 
> He describes a dramatic scene at a gathering of espionage experts and authors he, Radosh, in part presided over at the Wilson Center in Washington, DC in 2009. Among the assembly were M. Stanton Evans, John Earl Haynes, Harvard's Mark Kramer, Eduard Mark (d. 2009) Herbert Romerstein (d. 2013), and Alexander Vassiliev.
> 
> In this company, Radosh writes, Mark publicly recanted his 1998 findings that identified Hopkins as 19.
> 
> Radosh:
> 
> At a conference on Soviet espionage held a week before his untimely death, Wests source, Eduard Mark, publicly stated that he now acknowledged that Harry Hopkins was not Agent 19, and that the conclusion he had reached in his 1998 article was false.
> 
> In Part Two of The Rebuttal, I flag a discrepancy in the record. I compare Radosh's August 7, 2013 statement --  Mark recanted his thesis -- with what he wrote me in an email two months earlier on June 13, 2013.
> 
> Addressing the same topic -- Hopkins/"19" vs. Duggan/"19" -- Radosh wrote me:
> 
> Were Mark still alive, Im certain he would have conceded the point.
> 
> What was that again?
> 
> Were Mark still alive, I'm certain he would have conceded the point.
> 
> On August 7, 2013, Radosh describes Mark's public recantation of his thesis in 2009. Mark died the following week.
> 
> But in June 13, 2013, Radosh is speculating that "were Mark still alive," he would have recanted his thesis.
> 
> Both statements cannot be true.
> 
> Here is the full email of June 13, 2013:
> 
> Diana,
> 
> Re what Bostom says about Hopkins is wrong, and if it is from your book, it is also incorrect.
> 
> Here's what John Haynes just e-mailed me:
> 
> "Ed Mark was wrong about 19.  Harvey and I always treated 19 as unknown.  Mark was sure he an eliminated all of the possibilities and Hopkins was the the last man standing.  I disagreed with him and told him he was putting too much faith in his analysis of who was at various Trident conference social events.  I thought he might be right but that the evidence was just too thin to reach a conclusion, even a tentative one.  This was prior to AV's notebooks [Alexander Vassiliev's notebooks of hand-copied KGB cables]. When AV's notebooks came out, 19 was repeatedly identified as Laurence Duggan."
> 
> The Vassiliev papers show conclusively that Larry Duggan was 19, not Hopkins. So while Hopkins might have been pro-Soviet, as others were, and naive and a fellow-traveler, he was not an agent.
> 
> One has to be meticulous and careful when making charges, and very careful about consulting the most authoritative sources. Were Mark still alive, I'm certain he would have conceded the point. He was a careful scholar for the most part.
> 
> Ron
> 
> It's hard not to linger a little over the undercutting tone of that final enconium to Mark, but the fact remains that as of June 13, 2013, Radosh and John Earl Haynes both are writing as if Mark's 1998 thesis is still intact. In other words, there is not any indication, not a whisper, about Marks' 2009 before-death public recantation that Radosh reports in his August review.
> 
> It is also worth pointing out that Haynes similarly treated the Mark thesis as current in a January 2013 essay he posted here.  In this essay, Haynes argues that 19 was Laurence Duggan, not Harry Hopkins as Mark's 1998 paper argued. Discussing Mark, Haynes wrote: But on the matter of Venona 812 he and I disagreed.
> 
> Note that he didnt say, On the matter of Venona 812, he and I disagreed until Mark publicly recanted his papers findings in 2009.
> 
> I asked John Earl Haynes for any further information he could offer about what transpired at the 2009 conference. Here is an excerpt from his August 16 email. (Full email exchange below.)
> 
> At the symposium Ed did mention briefly in one of the Q&A sessions that he no longer held to his view that "19" was Hopkins.  cont reading on link to see email dialogue which exposes a cover up.
> 
> ______________________
> 
> It is very suspicious that Eduard Mark dies suddenly only one week after he allegedly recanted on his own findings about Hopkins being "19" at a meeting with men who offer different versions of what happened.  It looks like Eduard was murdered which would prove he was right.   It also proves Political Chick is right!  Good job!
> 
> Question!  Are Americans so gullible as to believe that a man who stood by his findings since 1998 would suddenly change his mind before a few people in 2009 for absolutely no reason and then die a week later unexpectedly?  The Communists are certainly hoping we are!






How about more testimony that Hopkins controlled FDR...and toward what end:


1. George Earle was a special emissary of FDR's to Europe...and returned in 1944 with proof that implicated the Soviets in the Katyn Forest massacre (In April of 1943, the mass graves of thousands of shot, bayoneted, and asphyxiated Polish officers were uncovered in the Katyn pine forest near Smolensk, Russia.) 

Earle testified later at the Katyn Forest hearings that Joe Levy of the NYTimes, warned him that *bringing an anti-Soviet report to FDR would be a career ender : "George, you don't know what you are going to over there. Harry Hopkins has completed domination over the President and the whole atmosphere over there is 'pink.'"* 
West, "American Betrayal," p.211.


2. On March 22, 1945, FDR wrote to Earle: "I have noted with concern your plan to publicize your unfavorable opinion of one of our allies. I do not wish you to do so. Not only do I not wish it, I* specifically forbid you to do so.*" 
He then ordered Earle to Samoa for the duration.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

FDR was one evil man!


----------



## Mushroom

PoliticalChic said:


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



Sorry, that is all conspiracy theory nonsense.  The KGB had no influence inside the Japanese Imperial Cabinet, and could no more have influenced it to start a war with the US as it could have influenced me to have tea over coffee in the morning.

And BTW, your source has been rejected in most serious circles, because the majority of the claims are unsourced.  Yes, they do have documents for part of their case, but the majority is based upon "confidential interviews with the people involved".

Yea, about as much "proof" in my mind as a "confidential" interview with the real gunman in the JFK-RFK killings.

No, Pearl Harbor happened for purely logistical reasons.  They needed to go after Indonesia and South-East Asia.  And there was no way that Japan was going to expand their war with the US forces sitting like they were in the Philippines.

No conspiracies, no hidden agenda, no carriers kept out of Pearl on purpose, and you will find that when people start to drag in CT as part of their argument, I start to tune it out.


----------



## Camp

Much of the debate on WWII Soviet related intelligence is dependent on which Russian spys and spy masters one decides to believe. Defectors have less credibility IMO due to motivation (financial). I suggest reading interviews and information about Lt. Gen. Vitaly Pavlov, particularly his interviews with Svetlana Chervonnaya when researching accusations Americans being "Soviet spys" such as Hopkins.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

Actually, Camp, Anatoli Galistin was a Major in the KGB when he defected.  He said that after he defected many defectors would be sent along to discredit him.  It does appear that there is a concerted effort to discredit anyone proving Hopkins was "19".  Then you have Eduard Marks story where he suddenly dies a week after allegedly changing his beliefs that Hopkins was "19".   The people claiming he changed his story cannot even keep their own story straight on what happened.  The Soviets are not as clever as they think they are.


----------



## Mushroom

Camp said:


> Much of the debate on WWII Soviet related intelligence is dependent on which Russian spys and spy masters one decides to believe. Defectors have less credibility IMO due to motivation (financial). I suggest reading interviews and information about Lt. Gen. Vitaly Pavlov, particularly his interviews with Svetlana Chervonnaya when researching accusations Americans being "Soviet spys" such as Hopkins.



Actually, no it is not.

Over the last quarter century, a lot of hard evidence has come out about Soviet espionage.  And a lot of it from the KGB itself.  And then through releases of previously classified material, like Venona.

Heck, a great deal of this information is available for download!

KGB DOCUMENTS ON-LINE - KGB documents online

Then we have Mitrokhin Archive, the Vassiliev Papers, and huge amounts of other data released over the years.  Trying to claim that the "truth is being hidden" is simply ignoring fact and following conspiracy theories.

I for one follow facts.  If Hopkins was a spy, I think there would be evidence by now.  If the Soviets were really behind the US having to enter the war, there would be facts to support it.  If the Apollo landings were faked by NASA and Hollywood, we would have facts to back this up.

Do I think Hopkins was a traitor, he may very well have been.  But that does not mean he was a spy.  And I have heard the Operation Snow theories before, nothing new there.  From all reasonable evidence, it appears that there was such a project, but it ultimately made absolutely no difference at all.

Japan wanted the Philippines.  The only way to stop or delay an American attempt to retake the islands before they could be secured was to attack the fleet and facilities at Pearl Harbor.

Period.  In reality, the Japanese could not have cared less about Hawaii.  They were after the Philippines.


----------



## Mushroom

Jeremiah said:


> The Soviets are not as clever as they think they are.



They never really have been.  Soviet (and Russian) methods tend to be rather straightforward and brutal.  Not the elegance that most people think of.

Look at the Bulgarian Umbrella for example.  Not really very sophisticated at all, just stab somebody with a poisoned umbrella.

Or poisoning Viktor Yushchenko with Dioxin.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Background:
> 
> a.In " Sacred Secrets: How Soviet Intelligence Operations Changed American History,"  Leona Schecter and Jerrold Schecter make a very strong case for Pearl Harbor being the *most complex and successful KGB operation, designed to avert a Japanese attack on the USSR, and to force the United States to fight a two-front war,* and be unable to stop Stalin from control of at least half of Europe. In 1995, former Kremlin agent Vitaly Pavlov revealed his role in this *"Operation Snow." *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, that is all conspiracy theory nonsense.  The KGB had no influence inside the Japanese Imperial Cabinet, and could no more have influenced it to start a war with the US as it could have influenced me to have tea over coffee in the morning.
> 
> And BTW, your source has been rejected in most serious circles, because the majority of the claims are unsourced.  Yes, they do have documents for part of their case, but the majority is based upon "confidential interviews with the people involved".
> 
> Yea, about as much "proof" in my mind as a "confidential" interview with the real gunman in the JFK-RFK killings.
> 
> No, Pearl Harbor happened for purely logistical reasons.  They needed to go after Indonesia and South-East Asia.  And there was no way that Japan was going to expand their war with the US forces sitting like they were in the Philippines.
> 
> No conspiracies, no hidden agenda, no carriers kept out of Pearl on purpose, and you will find that when people start to drag in CT as part of their argument, I start to tune it out.
Click to expand...







You may choose to believe what ever you wish.

Why imagine that Japan would be any more difficult to manipulate than the United States was?



After all, our WWII generation certainly wouldn't have accepted the *communist proposals that you live under today:*

 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. 

3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.




4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.




7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."




9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."






10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce

Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and direction of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?


I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...
The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals (1963)
The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals


You accept the above....do you think your grandfather would?




You do know that totalitarian medicine, i.e., ObamaCare, was a Soviet inclination, don't you?


----------



## Mushroom

PoliticalChic said:


> Mushroom said:
> 
> 
> 
> You may choose to believe what ever you wish.
> 
> Why imagine that Japan would be any more difficult to manipulate than the United States was?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe where the _facts_ point.  Not what I wish, not what I want, but the facts of both Japan, their culture, and knowing about the Soviet Union.
> 
> And trust me, trying to infiltrate Japan is magnitudes more difficult then infiltrating the United States.
> 
> The US is an immigrant nation.  Only a small percentage can actually say they are "from the US".  We are all immigrants, and descended from immigrants.  And we have a policy that encourages people to move here, we have since even before there was a United States at all.
> 
> Japan is probably the most closed culture on the planet.  Here, we have no problem of recognizing somebody who is 3rd or 4th or even 10th generation "Japanese", or "German", or "Irish" and allowing them to identify themselves as such.
> 
> Japan is not like that.  Are you aware that in Japan, you can only really be "Japanese" if you are born in Japan of Japanese parents?  And if you are born overseas to Japanese Parents, there is a term to reflect that?
> 
> If your parents come to the US, they are Japanese.  Their children are _Nisei_, they are *not* considered to be Japanese to those in Japan.  And their children are _Sansei_, and their children are _Yonsei_.  Even if every single ancestor was Japanese, and this continues down.
> 
> Now remember, Japan is the opposite of the US.  We have always welcomed immigration.  But just over 100 years ago a foreigner landing in Japan was more likely then not to be put to death!  Their culture is xenophobic to the extreme, and outsiders are always outsiders.
> 
> Now, let me put some nails into your coffin, ok?
> 
> Yes, the Soviets did have some spies in Japan.  But they had nowhere near the access and anonymity that spies enjoyed in say Europe or the US.  And the most famous was Richard Sorge.  An Azerbaijani, he worked under the cover of being a German journalist, he traveled extensively after being discharged from the German Army after WWI.  And this includes travels in China and Japan.
> 
> However, his network only ran to providing political information.  It had little in military intelligence, and had absolutely no influence in the decision making of Japan.  In fact, his main source of information was Hotsumi Ozaki, a Japanese Journalist and an advisor to Prime Minister Konoe.
> 
> And in fact, Mr. Ozaki was a known vocal opponent to going to war with the United States!
> 
> So here we have the highest ranking Soviet spy in Japan, and his main target of intelligence gathering was to find out what Germany was doing.  And his highest source was strongly opposed to a US-Japanese war.
> 
> These are the facts, well documented and readily available.  And in over 30 years of studying Japan (primarily during the Showa era), I have never found any serious proof of any successful intelligence operation to the degree you are implying ever happening.
> 
> *****
> 
> You see, this is what I do when presented with information.  I question it, I analyze it, I research it.  I do not just take a singe source, I research many.  And only after I have compared what everything shows do I start to make an opinion.
> 
> But please, feel free to do the same thing.  But remember, early Showa-era Japan has been my particular "historical playground" for over 3 decades now.
> 
> ExecutedToday.com » 1944: Richard Sorge and Hotsumi Ozaki
> The Traitor Who Inspired His Country
> Tokyo Spy Ring - spymuseum.com
> The Spy Who Saved the Soviets
> Rikhard Zorge ? Russiapedia History and mythology Prominent Russians
Click to expand...


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mushroom said:
> 
> 
> 
> You may choose to believe what ever you wish.
> 
> Why imagine that Japan would be any more difficult to manipulate than the United States was?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe where the _facts_ point.  Not what I wish, not what I want, but the facts of both Japan, their culture, and knowing about the Soviet Union.
> 
> And trust me, trying to infiltrate Japan is magnitudes more difficult then infiltrating the United States.
> 
> The US is an immigrant nation.  Only a small percentage can actually say they are "from the US".  We are all immigrants, and descended from immigrants.  And we have a policy that encourages people to move here, we have since even before there was a United States at all.
> 
> Japan is probably the most closed culture on the planet.  Here, we have no problem of recognizing somebody who is 3rd or 4th or even 10th generation "Japanese", or "German", or "Irish" and allowing them to identify themselves as such.
> 
> Japan is not like that.  Are you aware that in Japan, you can only really be "Japanese" if you are born in Japan of Japanese parents?  And if you are born overseas to Japanese Parents, there is a term to reflect that?
> 
> If your parents come to the US, they are Japanese.  Their children are _Nisei_, they are *not* considered to be Japanese to those in Japan.  And their children are _Sansei_, and their children are _Yonsei_.  Even if every single ancestor was Japanese, and this continues down.
> 
> Now remember, Japan is the opposite of the US.  We have always welcomed immigration.  But just over 100 years ago a foreigner landing in Japan was more likely then not to be put to death!  Their culture is xenophobic to the extreme, and outsiders are always outsiders.
> 
> Now, let me put some nails into your coffin, ok?
> 
> Yes, the Soviets did have some spies in Japan.  But they had nowhere near the access and anonymity that spies enjoyed in say Europe or the US.  And the most famous was Richard Sorge.  An Azerbaijani, he worked under the cover of being a German journalist, he traveled extensively after being discharged from the German Army after WWI.  And this includes travels in China and Japan.
> 
> However, his network only ran to providing political information.  It had little in military intelligence, and had absolutely no influence in the decision making of Japan.  In fact, his main source of information was Hotsumi Ozaki, a Japanese Journalist and an advisor to Prime Minister Konoe.
> 
> And in fact, Mr. Ozaki was a known vocal opponent to going to war with the United States!
> 
> So here we have the highest ranking Soviet spy in Japan, and his main target of intelligence gathering was to find out what Germany was doing.  And his highest source was strongly opposed to a US-Japanese war.
> 
> These are the facts, well documented and readily available.  And in over 30 years of studying Japan (primarily during the Showa era), I have never found any serious proof of any successful intelligence operation to the degree you are implying ever happening.
> 
> *****
> 
> You see, this is what I do when presented with information.  I question it, I analyze it, I research it.  I do not just take a singe source, I research many.  And only after I have compared what everything shows do I start to make an opinion.
> 
> But please, feel free to do the same thing.  But remember, early Showa-era Japan has been my particular "historical playground" for over 3 decades now.
> 
> ExecutedToday.com » 1944: Richard Sorge and Hotsumi Ozaki
> The Traitor Who Inspired His Country
> Tokyo Spy Ring - spymuseum.com
> The Spy Who Saved the Soviets
> Rikhard Zorge ? Russiapedia History and mythology Prominent Russians
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't respond to the essential point of the post.
> 
> 
> 
> There must be a reason.
Click to expand...


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

Mushroom said:


> Jeremiah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Soviets are not as clever as they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They never really have been.  Soviet (and Russian) methods tend to be rather straightforward and brutal.  Not the elegance that most people think of.
> 
> Look at the Bulgarian Umbrella for example.  Not really very sophisticated at all, just stab somebody with a poisoned umbrella.
> 
> Or poisoning Viktor Yushchenko with Dioxin.
Click to expand...


What a beautiful face he had!  Putin is responsible for doing this to him.  What a monster Putin is.  Just incredible.


----------



## Camp

Mushroom said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of the debate on WWII Soviet related intelligence is dependent on which Russian spys and spy masters one decides to believe. Defectors have less credibility IMO due to motivation (financial). I suggest reading interviews and information about Lt. Gen. Vitaly Pavlov, particularly his interviews with Svetlana Chervonnaya when researching accusations Americans being "Soviet spys" such as Hopkins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, no it is not.
> 
> Over the last quarter century, a lot of hard evidence has come out about Soviet espionage.  And a lot of it from the KGB itself.  And then through releases of previously classified material, like Venona.
> 
> Heck, a great deal of this information is available for download!
> 
> KGB DOCUMENTS ON-LINE - KGB documents online
> 
> Then we have Mitrokhin Archive, the Vassiliev Papers, and huge amounts of other data released over the years.  Trying to claim that the "truth is being hidden" is simply ignoring fact and following conspiracy theories.
> 
> I for one follow facts.  If Hopkins was a spy, I think there would be evidence by now.  If the Soviets were really behind the US having to enter the war, there would be facts to support it.  If the Apollo landings were faked by NASA and Hollywood, we would have facts to back this up.
> 
> Do I think Hopkins was a traitor, he may very well have been.  But that does not mean he was a spy.  And I have heard the Operation Snow theories before, nothing new there.  From all reasonable evidence, it appears that there was such a project, but it ultimately made absolutely no difference at all.
> 
> Japan wanted the Philippines.  The only way to stop or delay an American attempt to retake the islands before they could be secured was to attack the fleet and facilities at Pearl Harbor.
> 
> Period.  In reality, the Japanese could not have cared less about Hawaii.  They were after the Philippines.
Click to expand...


I was not referring to Pavlov because of his involvment with Operation Snow. The interview I gave as a source was meant as a direct response to the accusations of Hopkins being a spy. The interviews that took place and are known as April 22, 23, 26 and May 7, 2002 by Svetlana Chervonnaya, Moscow are pretty precise. 

"...Gordiievsky, the traitor, alleged that Akhmerov met with Hopkins...I am saying that is absurd!...Akhmerov could not have met with Hopkins and Hopkins never had anything to do with our intelligence."
Question: "Still, was Harry Hopkins an NKVD agent"
Answer:   "By no means! I have already said - I have written in memiors..."
Lt. Gen. Vitaly Pavlov Interview with Svetlana Chervonnaya Apr 22,23,26 and May 7 2002 Moscow

Ofcourse it should be significant that Pavlov was one of the highest ranking NKVD officials of the era in question and went on the be a powerful authority in Soviet intelligence.


----------



## Mushroom

PoliticalChic said:


> You didn't respond to the essential point of the post.
> 
> There must be a reason.



The point that you made an empty accusation with no evidence?  That I then refuted with evidence?

Sorry, I do not drink the koolaid conspiracy nonsense.  To me unless there is evidence and proof, it is just empty words.

But please, do you have verifiable evidence to verify your claims?  If you do not, then they are just more conspiracy theory nonsense, and not really worth responding to.

In fact, the longer this thread goes on, the more it is looking less like an interest in history, and more like an airing of fantastic conspiracy theories.


----------



## Mushroom

Jeremiah said:


> What a beautiful face he had!  Putin is responsible for doing this to him.  What a monster Putin is.  Just incredible.



He is also the President who was trying to sever ties with Russia, and join NATO.

He was replaced by Viktor Yushchenko, who just fled the country and is now wanted for mass killings of civilians.

But yea, that was roughly in the middle of Putin's first 2 terms as President.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Mushroom said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't respond to the essential point of the post.
> 
> There must be a reason.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The point that you made an empty accusation with no evidence?  That I then refuted with evidence?
> 
> Sorry, I do not drink the koolaid conspiracy nonsense.  To me unless there is evidence and proof, it is just empty words.
> 
> But please, do you have verifiable evidence to verify your claims?  If you do not, then they are just more conspiracy theory nonsense, and not really worth responding to.
> 
> In fact, the longer this thread goes on, the more it is looking less like an interest in history, and more like an airing of fantastic conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...




You did no such thing.


You ran away and hid under your desk.


----------

