McCarthy2

   Voting
           Senator McCarthy at the polling place on the day he was re-elected to the Senate, November 4, 1952.

NOW LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD:
List of Americans in the Venona papers

The Late Senator Joseph R McCarthy

Narrated by Mrs Larry Lawrence Lent, his secretary

Published by The Government Educational Foundation, 1998

I am delighted to talk about Senator McCarthy. This is being recorded in April 1990, and that's about forty years since I was with Senator McCarthy.

It is true; when people learn that I have been secretary to Senator McCarthy, they invariably want to know, "What was he really like?" To me Senator McCarthy was a courageous American hero. His religious convictions and his deep love for his country were topmost in his mind. He believed in our Constitution and the American people. He believed that he could help preserve liberty and justice by ridding the nation of its enemies.

As for the man McCarthy, I liked and admired him tremendously. He was friendly and unassuming, the kind of a man that most people like the first time they meet him. He was generous, he was thoughtful, he had a brilliant mind and a fabulous memory. He was absolutely honest, he was kind and gentle and he loved children. He had a good sense of humor and a positive outlook. He was morally clean, and despite all the malicious attacks on him personally, he was not at all bitter.

This was really extraordinary and I can add one more thought: he was a grand person to work for. Now that is quite a list of attributes which you may doubt, but I assure you I can prove every one of them. Before I go on, let me add that the Senator loved this Nation with such devotion that he actually inspired those around him. It became a real joy working for him and with him for America; it seemed as though we were all part of his crusade.

Now Senator McCarthy had been Judge McCarthy of a circuit court in Wisconsin when the Japs bombed Pearl Harbor. He had joined the Marines and had fought in the Pacific during WW2. When he returned, he ran for the U.S. Senate and won a surprising victory over LaFollette. So now he was coming to Washington, a decorated Marine, a handsome, fearless patriotic Irish-American. He was the heroic son of God-fearing Christian parents, ready to serve in his government; he had fought and helped win a war, which he thought would assure peace and freedom for the world. You can imagine how he must have felt when he finally realized that his government had negotiated away our victory and we had truly lost the peace.

He soon began to realize that subtle treason had flowered in Washington, and the people did not have a patriotic watchman to warn them what was going on. So, it came as a terrible blow to learn that the Soviets would not only control half of Germany and half of Berlin, but Stalin had convinced our government to sacrifice Poland to the Communists as well as all the nations adjoining Russia, such as Romania, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, and so forth. These had all been free and independent countries, and there was really no good reason to let the Communists take them over. But our President and some of our high officials liked Stalin, and it seemed that they were convinced that by giving in to Soviet demands they would assure peace in our times.

Our surrender of China seemed just as pointless. Today we are seeing the results we saw at Beijing. Once when the Senator was reminiscing about some interesting experiences in the Pacific, he commented, "I came to know the Pacific and the coast of Asia as well as I did my dad's farm when I was a boy, and for the first time I began to fully appreciate the great wisdom of America's long term policy on Asia, the policy of maintaining a free, independent friendly China in order to keep the Pacific, actually the Pacific in fact as well as in name. And now I learn that our wise and long term policy was being 'scuttled." So when Senator McCarthy came to Washington, he realized the situation in the Far East.

When Senator McCarthy, the Senator-elect, arrived in Washington December 1946, about two weeks before being sworn in, three days later he and his administrative assistant were invited to have lunch with James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy. The Senator often wondered why the busy Secretary of the Navy discovered that a freshman Senator had arrived in town and why he took so much time to discuss our nation's problems with him. I think we can see God's hand in this, and the Senator often told us he thanked God many times for Forrestal's time and advice.

Forrestal was fully knowledgeable about Communist penetration and influence in our government. He was able to bring Senator up to date on communist influence in our schools, in all our educational systems, in our news media, and definitely in our government. In the State Department, for instance, Communists had recommended Communists for jobs and then recommended each other for raises until some of them were in policy making positions where our foreign policy was definitely slanted towards Soviet objectives.

Before talking to Jim Forrestal, Senator McCarthy admits he thought we were losing to Communism because of incompetence or stupidity on the part of our national planners; he mentioned that to Forrestal. Senator McCarthy claimed he would never forget Forrestal's answer: "McCarthy," he said, "consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If our State Department boys were merely stupid, they would make a mistake in our favor once in awhile." Forrestal then told the Senator that the FBI had not been asleep; however, all during the thirties and forties they had continued investigations of subversion and had copious files on Communist infiltration into American government, but no way to bring it to the attention of the American people, and no authority to remove the traitors from the government.

At one time the FBI had notified President Truman that a top official in his Treasury Department was favoring Communism. In fact they notified him six or seven times, and Truman gave that suspected Treasurer a more responsible position. This man was Harry Dexter White, and we find him very active in our government and all their decisions. In fact it was he who helped send our money-plates to the Soviet Union so they could charge money to the American people.

Now Secretary Forrestal explained when the House Committee on un-American Activity had held hearings and exposed Alger Hiss as a Communist agent working in our State Department and reported this to President Truman, Truman had ridiculed this report, calling it a "red herring." Secretary of State Dean Acheson proudly declared that he would never turn his back on Alger Hiss, a convicted traitor.

Secretary Forrestal deserves our sincere appreciation: he did his task well. He informed Senator McCarthy of the dangers our Nation faced. He furnished names and places and inspired the young Senator to begin his crusade. It wasn't long before Forestal fell or was pushed to his death from the Bethesda Naval Hospital. The Secretary of the Navy had challenged him, and Senator McCarthy was a fighter.

Let's let Senator McCarthy tell about the beginning of his crusade in his own words. He said, "When I took on my duties as a Senator, I discovered that certain outstanding Senators and Congressmen, for years, had been intelligently trying to alert the American people. Unfortunately, when they clearly and intelligently presented a picture of incompetence or treason, which should have commanded banner headlines in every newspaper, the story was found, if at all, hidden in the want ads. I've witnessed the frustration of those honest, intelligent, loyal Americans who are attempting to expose our suicidal foreign policy. Day after day I came into contact with convincing evidence of treason. Obviously, unless the public was aroused, the downward course upon which we were embarked would continue, and at an accelerated pace."

What puzzled the Senator was how to alert the American people. He became convinced that the American people could not be awakened by merely a discussion of treacherous policies generally. The men who had made those policies, well meaning as they might be, had to be exposed. Foreign policy, after all, does not just happen, it is carefully planned by men with faces and names. Those faces and names had to be exposed. As J. Edgar Hoover had said, "Victory will be assured once Communists are identified and exposed, because the public will take the first step of quarantining them so they can do no harm."

Senator McCarthy decided it did but little good to argue about changing our suicidal foreign policy so long as the men in charge of forming that policy were in the camp of the enemy. The change that had to be made, if this country was to live, was a change of experts, the experts who had so expertly sold out China and Poland without the American people realizing what was happening. Day after day, Senator McCarthy admitted he came into contact with additional evidences of treason. More and more government employees were coming to him reporting suspicious activities in their department; sometimes they had absolute proof of sabotage or espionage. Senator and his staff were spending a great deal of time following the leads they were receiving, and more and more the Senator felt the need to awaken the American people.

His first opportunity came when he was invited to speak at a Lincoln Day dinner in Wheeling, W. Virginia given by the Republican Women of Wheeling. It was on February 9, 1950, that Senator McCarthy finally got his crusade underway. He began his speech with a statement. He said, "Today we are engaged in a final all out battle between Communism and Christianity." He charged the Communists with treason, threatened them all with exposure if they remained in our government. He declared he had the names of fifty-seven Communists working in our State Department. He also showed a copy of a letter written some time ago by Secretary of State Burns stating that there had been 284 unfit persons employed in the State Department, and only seventy-nine had been removed. Senator McCarthy pointed out this left 205 security risks still in our State Department. The Senator did not know any of those 205, but he did have the names of the fifty-seven which he had mentioned before, and would be happy to give them to a loyalty board or some investigative committee for an executive session. All of this information was then sent to the President suggesting that he ask the present Secretary of State, Dean Acheson, to give him the names of those subversives still in the State Department.

There were three important results of that speech. First the press gave it some publicity, ridiculing the charges of course, but at least admitting they were made. Second, the Senate appointed a committee to investigate Senator McCarthy's charges. Thirdly the Communist Party lost no time in coining the word "McCarthyism" as they commenced their ferocious attack on the Senator and anyone else who would are join him, or course.

Let's look first at the committee which the Senate had appointed to look into McCarthy's charges. Senator Tydings of Maryland was to be its Chairman. We were disappointed at this choice, for we feared he would not be a friendly chairman. Our fears were correct. The first move of the Tydings committee was to challenge the numbers Senator McCarthy had given; in fact, both the committee and the Communists juggled the numbers and confused everyone. In those days speeches were not taped, and Tydings sent one of his employees, Dan Buckley, to check with people who had heard the Senator. When Dan Buckley returned with affidavits from all the people he could locate who had heard McCarthy's speech, everyone agreed with the numbers given by the Senator in his report. This was definitely not the report the committee wanted. Dan was sent down to Wheeling again, this time accompanied by a senior member of the committee. I had coffee with Dan after his first trip to Wheeling, and he told me that Tydings had been absolutely furious at that report. Tydings was evidently determined to destroy the credibility of Senator McCarthy. When the second visit failed to indicate McCarthy had lied, the committee fired Dan Buckley. At first I couldn't understand why some Senators were so antagonistic towards my Senator. I finally came to the conclusion that they were jealous, and beginning to fear maybe the American people were going to wake up and wonder why their Senator had failed to warn them, sort of sinning by omission it was. I guess I was right because the people of Maryland refused to re-elect Tydings the next time he ran. And several other Senators, like Benton of Connecticut, lost their bids to return to the Senate after attacking Senator McCarthy.

Now to the Communist version of the word "McCarthyism," which they had just coined. It was to be a dirty, hateful, disgusting word meaning frightening attacks on innocent people, destroying their lives, character assassination, a vicious witch hunt. The first time I actually saw the word in print was in the Daily Worker newspaper. This was the Communist Party newspaper published in New York City which carried orders to American Communists from the Soviet Union. They would, of course, follow the instructions which Lenin had given them to use language to sow hate, revulsion, scorn, and the like toward anyone who disagreed with them.

Now the Communist attack on Senator McCarthy came into full swing. Following Lenin's instructions, every effort was being made to smear and discredit his life, his character, his work, and particularly his method. Because some people did not understand what the Communists called his methods and the press continued using the Communist's meaning, Senator McCarthy wrote a book explaining all that he was doing. He named it "McCarthyism, The Fight For America." I will tell you later how you can get a copy of that book, which is very, very interesting. Senator McCarthy did warn the American people to take a long look at what had happened to the Russians when the Communist Bolshevik terrorists took over their country. All of a sudden their freedom was completely gone, millions murdered and many millions of their farmers were starved to death. It was a frightening picture, and McCarthy knew the true aim of the Communists was total world domination. When you think about it, the Communists have never denied that ultimate goal. Back in 1946, one of the Soviet leaders, Dametre Namreleske, told his Communist followers to be patient. He told them that war to the hilt, between Communism and Capitalism, is inevitable. "Today," he told them, "They are too weak to strike; their day will come in thirty to forty years." But first he told them "We must lull the Capitalist countries to sleep with the greatest overtures of peace and disarmament known throughout history. And then when their guard is dropped, we shall smash them with our clenched fists."

I think we need to remember that was in 1946, and nowhere have we seen any indication that they have changed their ultimate aim. Today we can easily recognize their talk of peace and disarmament and what it really means. When the Senator's book "McCarthyism, The Fight For America" was printed, it was sent to libraries and book stores throughout America, but it was hidden and almost never displayed. The news media continued to accept and publicize the communist version of "McCarthyism" again and again. Over the years it is a fact that when a lie is repeated often enough, people tend to believe it. If people would just take time to do a little research, they would discover not McCarthy, the Evil Accuser, but McCarthy, the American Hero. The integrity of his motives, the accuracy of his charges, and the validity of his message are vindicated by the truth. Of course, the truth is now that McCarthy was right.

I do seem to be taking along time before I start describing what it was like working for the Senator, but I believe that unless we understand conditions facing the Nation back in the 1940s and 50s, we will never be able to understand and appreciate the Senator and the importance of his crusade. So, for the moment let's think back to the Tydings Committee which had been instructed to look into Senator McCarthy's charges of Communists working in our State Department and/or influencing the foreign policy of our Nation. One of the first names Senator McCarthy gave the committee was the name of Owen Lattimore. I thought the Senator must have been very sure of his facts as Owen Lattimore was a highly respected Far Eastern authority, to whom our State Department looked for advice on policy decisions. He was known all over the world for the books he had written and the articles in magazines, mostly about China and the Far East. Also he was a professor at Johns Hopkins University. The Tydings Committee seemed delighted; surely this was perfect example of a wild man making irresponsible charges, and they promptly cleared Lattimore of having any Communist bias. It was truly amazing to watch the news media join the attack on the Senator and defend Owen Lattimore. Unless Senator McCarthy could be proven right, this looked bad for him, and you can imagine we all sighed a sigh of relief when the Senate at that very moment established the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, a branch of the Judiciary with authority to research and investigate any and all subversive movements or individuals in our Nation. And we all said a prayer of thanks when the new committee, called the SISS, was given the task of investigating any Communist influence in the Institute of Pacific Relations; Owen Lattimore was one of its leaders. Senator Pat McCarran was chosen to be Chairman of the new Subcommittee. This was an excellent choice as McCarran was well known for his anti-Communist leanings. Chief counsel of the committee was to be Robert Morris, formerly with Naval Intelligence, whom I knew well. Ben Mandell was a research director, and I understand he was, at one time or another, a member of the Communist Party and could be a wonderful help to the committee.

There were several secretaries, and I believe they were looking for another secretary, one cleared for Secret. I had Naval clearance for Secret and was working for the Navy at that time. This was a temptation I simply couldn't resist. I asked for release from my job at the Navy, and when they learned why I wanted to be released, they gave it to me and I secured the position with the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. This was the same kind of work I had been doing for the Navy, and I was truly thrilled.

When the Second World War started, my children were all in school, so I was free to work. I applied for a job with the Navy. After a most thorough search of my background and my family, even checking on friends I had in school, at last I had a job. It was to work in the Italian, Yugoslav, Croatian section of the Naval counter-intelligence. It was here I had my first introduction into how the Communists move in to take a country and enslave its people. When my husband was transferred to the Navy base in San Diego, I transferred to California until the end of the war, and then went back to Washington and the Navy. This time I was placed in the Pentagon, in the Far East section of Intelligence where I took dictation from six or seven intelligence officers reporting happenings in the Far East to the Admiral. It was here that I heard the names of many of the pro-Communists and the Communists active in the Far East, and much of what they were doing. I had for some time been closely following the charges being made by Senator Joseph McCarthy, particularly because the men he named were ones which I was familiar form Naval Intelligence reports.

Senator McCarthy was not a member of the Internal Security Subcommittee and had no connection with it, with the exception we were going to investigate a man he had charged with being subversive. When the committee learned that some of the back files of the Institute of Pacific Relations had been hidden in a barn in Lee, Masssachusetts, acting on the authority given them, the Subcommittee took possession of those files and moved them to the Senate office building in Washington. All together there were some twenty thousand documents including books, magazine articles, memorandum, letters, minutes and reports, all of which were studied for the next six months. Some two thousand became the preliminary basis for the committee's investigation, and now it was time to hold hearings. These hearings lasted about six months and included many witnesses along with the twenty-eight Institute of Pacific Relations members. It has been conceded that was the most important, careful and productive investigation ever conducted by a committee of Congress. Those hearings became big news followed closely by all the news media.

Indeed those were exciting days. The hearings were held in the Senate Judiciary Room which adjoins our office, so we were in and out of the hearings and often taking dictation from one or more witnesses. There were many pro-American witnesses such as General Albert C. Wedemeyer, Major General Charles A. Willoughby, Igor Bogolepov, former member of the Soviet Foreign Office, Loui Budenz who had been the communist editor of the Daily Worker newspaper and Elizabeth Bentley, who had joined the Communist Party and had later become a Soviet Courier. Now she was working to expose her former party members who still gave their allegiance to the Soviets. A number of the IPR witnesses took the 5th Amendment and refused to answer any questions, and a number of them answered questions but failed to tell the truth.

The committee's final report states that Owen Lattimore testified falsely with reference to at least five separate matters that were relevant to the inquiry and substantial in import. The final report of the year's investigation was published in July, 1952. Among other conclusions we find the following: "The effective leadership of the Institute of Pacific Relations views the IPR prestige to promote the interest of the Soviet Union in the United States." And another section read, "During the period of 1945 to 1949, persons associated with the IPR were instrumental in keeping the United States policy on a course favorable to Communist objectives in China." And when it came to reports on Owen Lattimore, they proved beyond any doubt that McCarthy had been right. The committee report stated, "Owen Lattimore was (sometime beginning in the 1930s) a conscious, articulate instrument of the Communist Conspiracy." There are many more conclusions on a similar vein, many of them proving Senator McCarthy's charges of subversion and Communist affiliation were correct.

Now that the hearings were printed, I applied for a position with Senator McCarthy. My interview with him was quite short; he didn't ask me if I were a Republican or a Democrat. In fact, we talked mostly about the sad problems our country was going through and how to solve them. My position was assistant secretary, but shortly his secretary left on a protracted leave and I moved into her position. I'll never forget the first time the Senator called me to come into his office to take dictation. I had heard that he was preparing an answer to letters requesting information, and after a few sentences Senator stopped, turned, and asked, "Larry, am I going too fast?" He wasn't, and I never worried again about taking his dictation. I think I told you that the Senator was thoughtful, and indeed he was. Someone asked me if Senator McCarthy dictated all the letters that went out under his signature; I can assure you he did. He answered every letter which came from Wisconsin and many others. When the Senator's reply would serve for a number of letters, the Senator would dictate a form letter. When it was typed, he would read it carefully and then sign his name across the whole letter which we could then use to answer all letters requesting that same information. Every letter that went out under his name, however was signed by him personally. He even signed every Christmas card he sent. This was unusual, for most Senators had a secretary line their signature.

Now while on the subject of letters, I must mention that no matter how busy he was, the Senator always took time to dictate a letter to each young person writing for information. Sometimes it would take several pages to give the young person a complete answer, but he never failed. Senator McCarthy certainly loved young people, and little children loved him. Every time he was around little children, the first thing you would see would be one of them on his lap, maybe one climbing on his shoulders. They just loved the Senator, and he loved them. I can remember one event that occurred just following his stay in the hospital for a hernia operation. We didn't know he was going back to the office that evening, or we surely would have stopped him from chasing two college boys down the hall. They were trying to pry the brass plate from his Senator's door, and when he heard them he gave chase, and what's more, caught them and brought them back to the office for a friendly chat! Now he told me to order two new name plates with his name on them and send one to each boy with a letter he would write; those boys, I believe, were from Dartmouth College.

While I served as his secretary, all the mail which came into the office came over my desk. It was thrilling to see because such a large percentage of the mail was favorable, I would say 85-90%. Many letters were quite enthusiastic. Quite a few asked if they could help. Here is part of one of the answers which he wrote in reply to that question: "Yes, you can do a tremendous job if you will; you can help alert America to a danger much greater than Communists in the State Department or any other branch of the government, a danger much greater than any threat from Communist Russia. Hitler once said, 'Give me control of the minds of the youth of a country, give me control of the educational system for five years and I shall control that country indefinitely.' The Communists thoroughly recognize the truth of that statement. One of their major efforts, therefore, is to infiltrate the educational system of this country and control school and college publications. Every man and woman in America can appoint himself and herself to undo the damage which is being done by Communist infiltration in our schools and colleges through Communist minded teachers and Communist text books. The educational system of this country cannot be cleansed and swept clean unless the mothers and fathers and the sons and daughters of this nation individually decide to do this job. This can be your greatest contribution to America. This is a job which you can do. This is a job which you must do if America and western Civilization are to live. I warn you, however, that the task will not be a pleasant one. When you detect and start to expose a teacher with a Communist mind, you will be attacked and smeared. You will be accused of endangering academic freedom. Remember, to those Communist minded teachers, academic freedom means their right to force you to hire them to teach your children a philosophy in which you do not believe. We can not win the fight against Communism if Communist minded professors are teaching your children. We cannot lose the fight against Communism if loyal Americans are teaching your children." The Senator sent a similar letter to hundreds of people who wrote and wanted to help.

I believe I mentioned that the Senator was generous; let me give you just a few instances. Priests would write to the Senator from all over the world suggesting that they needed certain books or other supplies. Without hesitation, the Senator would authorize someone to get whatever the priests needed, charge it to his personal account, and send it on to the priests. Because he was so generous, we often tried to handle requests ourselves. Once when a mother from Wisconsin was expecting another baby, her carpenter husband had been hurt and couldn't work and therefore they needed all kinds of supplies. We placed a large box in the corner of our office and were gradually filling it with little gifts. When the Senator saw the box, he wanted to know what it was for, so we had to explain. Right away he suggested we buy her a nice crib and send it to her with a card on it signed by the office secretaries.

There was one thing that had been unusual which I had noticed as soon as I joined the office staff. That was the terrific amount of respect that each one of his staff felt for the Senator. When addressing him, of course, they all said "Senator McCarthy", and when speaking of him they invariably said "the Senator", not because he requested it, but their respect was shown in many ways. His staff knew how dedicated he was and how hard he worked; they also knew that he did not recklessly charge people with being Communist, unless he was sure they were. As a matter of fact, he often warned us not to label anyone a Communist unless we had seen their Communist card. In those days Communists did carry a card.

Now to the Eisenhower-Stevenson elections, most of my friends can't understand how Senator McCarthy could have voted for Eisenhower. The truth was that the news media had kept Eisenhower's dealings with Stalin from the public, and of course the Senator didn't know that Eisenhower would become such a vindictive enemy. We did have information Stevenson stood by the convicted Communist Alger Hiss, declaring how much he admired him and how he was the best informed man in the United Nations. Senator McCarthy was convinced that Stevenson would be a dangerous man if President. The truth is that there really probably wasn't much choice.

Well, to get back to the Senator's speech exposing Stevenson's record. When I went into his office to take dictation for that talk, there were a number of agents giving documents to the Senator and explaining their importance. If Senator McCarthy decided he would use a document, he dictated just what he would say in regard to that particular bit of information and he handed the document to me to be numbered. When the Senator gave his speech in Chicago, he took along all the documents I had numbered and had announced that everything he was to submit was well documented. He invited all members of the press to come back stage as soon as he was finished to get the documentation. Not one reporter came back for his copy, and the next day we all read in the Chicago paper about the vicious, unfounded charges Senator McCarthy had made. It really was a bit frustrating.

For his first two years in the Senate, Senator McCarthy was a one man investigator with one or two men working with him. He exposed eighty-one subversives working in the State Department; all were proven guilty and removed from government work. The Senator also had turned over the names of suspected Communists on other branches of our government. He had also investigated waste and inefficiency in several government departments, which resulted in saving millions of dollars to the taxpayers. He was dedicated, and he was a hard worker. Early one New Year's morning, another secretary and I had decided to work to catch up on a number of things that we had not done the week before. I had taken off my shoes and was comfortably sitting on the Senator's desk while she read times, dates and places to be put into the Senator's desk calendar when all of a sudden, the door flew open and there stood the Senator. I think that was the shock of my life! He looked surprised and asked, "Larry, what on earth are you girls doing here now?" When he realized what we were doing, he laughed and we all worked a full day. That didn't sound like a man who had been celebrating much the night before, did it? Senator McCarthy was being accused of drinking too much. Well, if he did, it wasn't during the day because I sat next to him or across the desk from him every day taking dictation, and I never smelled liquor on his breath. He never offered people a drink in his office, as the news media had charged, because there never was a bottle in his office. Now it is possible that the Senator had cocktails in the evening, maybe one or two. I don't know; I imagine he did. But he didn't go out many evenings and a lot of evenings he would work; so really could not have been an alcoholic. But the attacks on Senator McCarthy continued. Some accused him of wanting to be President, as if that were a crime, but they tried to make it seem like it was a crime. But when they did announce it, hundreds of people reacted differently. We were soon absolutely flooded with hundreds of letters of encouragement and offers containing everything from fifty cents to many dollars. We sent it all back with a gracious letter of appreciation from the Senator saying he really didn't want to run for President. He wanted to remain the Senator from Wisconsin and fight on to rid our Nation of treason. Some of us really wished he could be President; what a difference that would have made? We were all mighty proud of our Senator, I can tell you.

I trust I haven't given you the impression that I think all reporters are evil, today one just doesn't know how the news is being slanted and why... One time Senator McCarthy did sue a newspaper for slander. That was the Syracuse Standard Times, of Syracuse, N.Y. It was great to have that newspaper retract all the vicious lies they had printed. Now I had hoped the Senator would sue the Washington Post, he could have easily won, but he refused to take the time. He felt that would please the Communists because it would keep him from exposing more traitors and getting them removed. About that time Louie Budenz, who had been editor of the Communist Daily Worker had turned over the names of four hundred Communist party members all employed in the newspaper and radio field. All these would require research and hearings. It would take the Senator's staff a great deal of time to handle this.

One day the Marine Corps called from the Pentagon and wanted an appointment with the Senator; they suggested one day the following week. I told the Senator and he asked me what they wanted. I really didn't know if I should have asked them, so I hadn't. Senator said never mind. Of course, he would be glad to see them. When they arrived, there were a number of them and a man with a camera. They had come to present the Flying Cross with four or five medals, I forgot which, but it was a very nice ceremony. However, it seemed to spark another attack on the Senator. Some reporters wrote that he had seen McCarthy's Navy record and that McCarthy had never even seen active duty. This was so ridiculous! Senator Cain of the state of Washington was furious. He knew McCarthy's record and because he knew Senator McCarthy would never publicize it, Senator Cain secured a copy and read it into the Congressional Record where it is available to anyone who can read. Senator McCarthy was humble, I said he was and he was.

Here is the Marine record: "The Commander in Chief, United States Pacific Fleet, takes pleasure in commending CAPTAIN JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, UNITED STATES MARINE CORP RESERVE for service as set forth in the following CITATION: 'For meritorious and efficient performance of duty as an observer and rear gunner of a dive bomber attached to a marine scout bombing squadron operating in the Solomon Islands area from September 1, to December 31, 1943. He participated in a large number of combat missions, and in addition to his regular duties, acted as aerial photographer. He obtained excellent photographs of enemy gun positions, despite intense anti-aircraft fire, thereby gaining valuable information which contributed materially to the success of subsequent strikes in the area. Although suffering from a severe leg injury, he refused to be hospitalized and continued to carry out his duties as Intelligence Officer in a highly efficient manner. His courageous devotion to duty was in keeping with the highest traditions of the naval service.' ~ C.W.NIMITZ, Admiral, U.S. Navy, Commendation Ribbon Authorized".

I read that entire commendation because I believe some of you saw NBC's film entitled "Tail-Gunner Joe", supposedly portraying the life and character of Senator McCarthy. It was undoubtedly one of the most monstrous diabolical distortions that has ever been my misfortune to see. One must wonder why they are still trying to destroy the memory of the great anti-Communist Senator. Do they want to make certain that another pro-Christian anti-Communist fighter doesn't begin another crusade? "Tail- Gunner Joe", not only ridiculed Senator McCarty shooting down coconuts, but they portrayed one untruthful act after another in an obvious attempt to make the Senator look irresponsible. They enacted a complete scene of him as a boy wrecking a truckload of chickens and then abandoning the truck, chickens and all in a ditch. If these producers of the show had been interested in the truth, it was all printed in the Wisconsin State Journal on July 16, 1946. Let's look at a few quotes from the Journal. It said, "Joe's youth wasn't much different from that of other Wisconsin farm youngsters. He worked on his dad's farm and with $65.00, earned by working for an uncle in his spare time, Joe started a chicken farm. He had built his business to two thousand laying hens and ten thousand broilers when influenza put him to bed for several weeks. Neighborhood boys who attended the flock didn't display the same enthusiasm that Joe did. Result: thousands of dead chickens and Joe out of business." Joe moved to a neighboring town and got a job. He later got two jobs and then decided he should go back to school. At nineteen, he entered the local high school and according to the Wisconsin State Journal, he crammed four years of high school into one. He passed the final exams with flying colors and ended on the honor roll. Principal L.D. Hershberger, in passing out the diplomas, described the boy who completed the four year high school course in one year, while working at two jobs as "the irresistible force who over came the immovable object."

I believe I told you before that when the Second World War started, Joe McCarthy was a judge and couldn't let his country fight a war without him; so he turned his judgeship over to another and volunteered in the Marines.

Now let's go back to the crusade in the Senate. There were times when it was rather tense in our office and we couldn't help but wonder if some radical might toss a bomb in our door instead of spitting on it as they sometimes had. Not only were we hated by the Communist traitors, but there were Americans who supported the Communists because they honestly believed Communism, or what they thought Communism was, would be far better for the working man than Capitalism. They hated us, too. It would help our mood sometimes to have a good laugh, and I told you that Senator McCarthy had a good sense of humor. Once the Senator learned that a con-man was claiming he had access to our office and would report what went on for a price. Several groups started paying him. We learned that the A.D.A., Americans for Democratic Action, some members of the Democratic Party, the Washington Post and probably some other newspaper representatives were paying. I think the con-man was Paul Huse, I'm not sure. Anyway, this man furnished some fabulous tales of events in our office, and never even opened our front door and came in. Some of the stories drifted back to us, and they were hilarious. A taxi driver supplied more laughs. One afternoon the Senator took a taxi home. When he stepped into the cab the driver began telling him stories he had heard about what McCarthy was doing to hurt people. He evidently hadn't recognized the Senator who kept encouraging him to tell another story and then another story. When they finally drove up to the Senator's home and the Senator's car was out in front, the driver couldn't apologize enough and they had a good laugh together.

When Roy Cohn died of A.I.D.S. a year or so ago, a lot of people remembered that he had worked for Senator McCarthy; they asked me how the Senator could have hired such a person. In order to explain that, I must go back to the time Republican Eisenhower won the Presidency and all Republican Senators took over the Chairmanship of the Senate Committees. Senator McCarthy became Chairman of the Government Operations Committee and its Permanent Investigations Subcommittee. This gave him a tremendous boost, and as a matter of fact, I believe he held many more hearings than had ever been held by that committee. He had planned on Bob Morris coming over from SISS to be his Chief Counsel. Bob had asked me to be his secretary, and the Senator had finally agreed to let me go. We were all excited, and that was a sad time for the Senator and me, but Senator Jenner, who was taking over the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, was about to investigate some cases of subversion in the United Nations and he needed Bob Morris. We were then without a Chief Counsel, and anti-Communist lawyers were scarce. A number of people suggested Roy Cohn; Senator realized he was very young. He was also known as a liberal, but recently he had done a fine job prosecuting Communists in New York, so Senator hired him, and I found myself Roy Cohn's secretary.

From the beginning there was a serious friction between Roy and Bobby Kennedy, who was Minority Counsel. They used the same office spaces and the same secretaries. The first order that Roy gave me was to set up his office space, but the next was to never let Bobby have our best secretary, Ruth. So from then on when Bobby asked for Ruth, I had to tell him she was too busy or something and sent him another girl from our pool of secretaries. In a couple of days a friend of Roy, David Schine, arrived to work and we set him up in the office too. As soon as he got his phone, he called the Pentagon trying to get the address of a soldier. I heard him having some trouble and I heard him use Senator McCarthy's name. So I called Don Surene, Senator's top investigator; Don called the Army and apologized and straightened it out with that officer. This was the first brush those two young fellows had with the Army, but it was not the last, I'm sorry to say. Senator never criticized Roy; he always defended his employees, but I believe those two boys were the reason other Senators turned away from our committee, and I feel they did more harm than good in our crusade.

I've also had many questions about the Army-McCarthy hearings. The first thing we need to remember is that this T.V. extravaganza was a trumped up affair to stop McCarthy and his investigations of Communists and traitors in our government; he was stepping on too many toes. Actually the charges against Senator McCarthy were so falsely manufactured that even the Secretary of the Army, Robert Stevens, confessed that they were without "substantial foundations." Those were his exact words.

Millions of Americans who watched the hearings realized that the Senator was being harassed, and reports were that most listeners liked our Senator and what he stood for. It was true that Roy Cohn had requested the Army allow his friend to remain near Washington after he was drafted so he could work with the committee, but I'm not at all sure the Senator even agreed to it.

And then there was the Peress case. Senator had evidence proving Dr. Irving Peress, then Capt. Peress in the Army of the United States, was a Communist and was soliciting for the Communist party. Senator McCarthy so advised the Army. Instead of investigating or turning the case over to a loyalty board, the Army had given Peress a raise to Major and an Honorable Discharge. Now this did infuriate the Senator. However, none of this was worthy of such a waste of taxpayers' money, time, and men who could have spent their days better serving our Nation than in ridiculous hearings.

I think those hearings were a disgrace to our country. I've really only touched the surface of all the treason and stupidity that Senator McCarthy exposed. As a result of these investigations many subversives were removed from our government, and I believe the Communist timetable was set back many years.

On Washington's birthday 1956, arrangements were made for Senator McCarthy and Senator Jenner to speak at Carnegie Hall in New York City. It was reported that they had an overflow audience, but it was much more than that. We had arrived an hour in advance and the hall was practically full already. Shortly, buses filled with cheering people waving American flags and McCarthy banners began to pull up at the entrance, so we had hundreds of patriots from Connecticut, upper New York state, New Jersey, and I even noticed one from Rhode Island and other states. Hurriedly, loud speakers were secured and put in place so that those that were out front could at least hear what was being said. It brought tears to many eyes to hear those cheers of approval not only from those inside, but from all the buses parked along the curbs outside. For a couple of Senators who were taking so much slander and abuse it surely must have been an encouragement. I will never forget that afternoon, and I don't believe any of those that were there will either.

...Senator McCarthy explained fourteen mistakes our government had made in dealing with the Far East problem, mistakes which seriously injured our prestige and leadership. He offered suggestions of how they should have been and now could be handled. I think you will be very interested in all of them, but I will only take time to read two or three. 1) In December 1945, he explained, the American Government instructed the Chinese people that the only way to keep American friendship was to take Communists into their government. George C. Marshall, General Marshall, went to China for our Government and presented this ultimatum to them. 2) In January 1947, our Government made good on the ultimatum. Chiang Kieshek, the leader of the anti-Communist forces, had refused to take Communists into his Government, and Truman had cut off all their supplies; the Communists then took over China. When I saw the tragic slaughter at Beijing, I couldn't help but feel ashamed for my country. As Lattimore had suggested, we should let China fall, but don't let it look like we pushed them. But we did.

Then on November 3, 1950, Senator McCarthy explained, the American Armies were fighting in Korea when they were attacked by Chinese Communist troops. The American Government ordered the military commanders not to bomb Chinese bases or supply lines, even though American troops were in danger of destruction. The reason given: this might bring China into the war, and believe it or not, our country had turned down the Chinese anti-Communist forces offer of 33,000 troops to help defeat the Chinese and Korean Communists. Also, and I don't suppose you've read this in many history books, American forces were protecting the Communist-Chinese coasts. The American fleet was ordered to protect Red China against the anti-Communist Nationalist raid, and our seventh fleet was ordered to protect shipments of military supplies for the Red Chinese forces killing American boys.

Senator McCarthy continued to explain all fourteen errors he felt our government had made. At the last case, he told them, quoting from his report given as late as May, 1955: "The Senate Subcommittee on Investigations reported on the questioning of top State Department/Defense Department officials that 481 American prisoners of war were still unacounted for and were believed to be in Chinese prisons. Last year, with great fanfare and by making who knows what concessions to the Reds, we obtained the release of fifteen, which leaves 466 American fighting men whom the mightiest Nation of earth is evidently not lifting a finger to protect. I say the world will never respect us, will never acknowledge us as a worthy leader in the anti-Communist cause until it learns that when an American soldier goes overseas, he packs on his shoulders the entire strength of the United States of America. The Nation owes the same duty to the soldier as the soldier owes to the Nation."

"Therefore I repeat what I have urged a hundred times before, that we put Red China in an economic straight jacket, that so long as an American boy remains in Communist control that no American money go to nations that trade with Red China in strategic supplies or otherwise. One of the results of the Geneva Friendship meeting is that we are permitting our alleged allies to ship highly strategic war supplies to the Soviet Union. This policy affects the Far East as well as other parts of the world since Communist China gets what she needs from Communist Russia."

This was a subject the Senator stressed in press releases. I can't remember that there were any more boys released after that.

I won't take tome to go into all the mistakes Senator McCarthy explained, but I should mention the suppression of the Wedemeyer Report. General Wedemeyer was one of our top Intelligence officers who had prepared a special report to Congress on how China could be saved from Communist conquest. This special, important report has been withheld from the Congress. When the Armed Services Committee of the United States Senate learned of this, they asked General Marshall why he had joined in the suppression of that report. "I did not join in the suppression of that report; I personally suppressed it." Congress did not have that report to use in their making of a decision.

Senator McCarthy kept finding more and more references to General Marshall as he continued his research into the reasons China fell to the Communists. When he heard that the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House had been requested to approve the arming of, by America, ten Chinese Communist Divisions he could hardly believe it. And then he learned that Secretary of State Dean Acheson reported that General Marshall had agreed to assign sixty-nine United states officers and 400 tons of American equipment to train ten Communist Chinese armies. This was incredible, and when Senator McCarthy had completed his research, he gave a report of General Marshall's record to the Congress and printed his book "America's Retreat From Victory" a story of George Catlett Marshall. General Marshall had been built up as such a great General and hero by the press that most people had a hard time believing the truth, but his book was completely documented. I'll tell you how to get a copy if you really want to know the truth, and I hope you want to get one.

Before I finish, remember in describing Senator McCarthy that I used the word "gentle". Now that does sound a bit strange for such a masculine man, but he was gentle. The author, Brent Bozell, who was known as a good judge of character, wrote, "I studied Senator McCarthy's work, and I helped write a book about it; and in the course of professional interviews I caught glimpses of the bouncy, the strength of will, the awesome single mindedness, the gentleness of this man." So Brent Bozell saw what I saw.

Another character witness I'd like to quote is William Rusher, publisher of National Review. After the Senator had been censored, Rusher thought perhaps this would be a good time to find out if the Senator were ever bitter. After his interviews, Rusher commented that bitterness was just not in Senator McCarthy's character and then he added, "We might interject here that surprising as it may sound, the dominate quality in Senator McCarthy was a singular sweetness in his character; this was once the key to his success, just as in its purity depended his courage, and it was courage that put him in the forefront of anti-communism. Many of whom were more knowledgeable than he, and the cause of his down fall. For valiant, though he was, in fighting for his country or for principal, he could not be ruthless in fighting for himself."

I almost forgot to tell you about the Senator's marriage to Jean Kerr, and it was a very important and a really beautiful part of his life. Jean had worked for the Senator and had helped write his book "McCarthyism, The Fight For America." Jean was a beautiful, very smart girl; we all loved her dearly. She joined the Catholic Church and they were married in the huge Washington D. C. Catholic Church with both political and social friends in attendance. It was a beautiful wedding. This marriage was a very happy marriage. After awhile they adopted a baby girl whom they both adored. Jean has since died and I don't know where to find her daughter; I'd love to meet her. I'm sure that all the vicious smears against that great Patriot who adopted her must bother her very much, and I wonder if she knew that in 1954, the Gallop Poll listed Senator Joseph R. McCarthy as the fourth most admired man in the whole United States.

Many thousands of people were alerted to the Communist menace and were aware that Senator McCarthy was fighting a good fight. He had challenged us to be very sure our young people knew the truth that International Communism has but one goal, and that is to place the free people of the world under complete and dictatorial control of the Soviet Government. This truth was published by the House Committee on un-American activities in the 1950s. That Committee had endeavored to wake up America and published a pamphlet entitled, "The Shameful Years, 30 Years of Soviet Espionage In The United States". I do wish I had a copy of this pamphlet to give each of you. It explains so well how our Federal Government was gradually brought under foreign control, which had so shocked Senator McCarthy. Then in 1956, the United States Senate published a handbook for Americans entitled, "The Communist Party Of The United States Of America, What It Does And How It Works". The Senate Committee explains that the Communist Party of America is in fact a Russian-inspired, Moscow-dominated, anti-American, quasi-military conspiracy against our Government, our ideals, and our freedoms. Now, most books that contain this truth are out of print or have mysteriously disappeared from the shelves of our libraries.

Before I finish, perhaps I should answer a number of questions from my friends. For instance, I have been asked, "What did Senator McCarthy think of the United Nations?" For one thing, he was well aware that the U.N. Charter had been drawn up by the Communists, pro-Communists, Socialists and the like. He knew the Charter did not guarantee protection of private property, nor religious freedom, and in fact under the United Nations there is no God. Senator McCarthy suggested that we give Red China our seat in the United Nations, and that would get us out from under the jurisdiction of that dangerous organization.

I wonder how many people today realize that our school history books are filled with vicious attacks on Senator McCarthy. What a pity that we are not able to stop this false reporting to the youth of our Nation; they need to know the truth.

...Another point I would like to bring out at this time is the question often asked: "How many peoples' lives have been ruined by the Senator's false accusations?" Actually, there was never one, not even one. But because some people confused McCarthy's investigations with the Hollywood investigation of Myron Fagan, you need to know that Senator McCarthy never investigated the Hollywood film industry at all.

This brings us to Senator McCarthy's death. He was in his 40s when he died on May 2, 1957. He died at Bethesda Naval Hospital, the same hospital from which that other great Patriot, Secretary of the Navy, Forrestal, fell or was thrown to his death. Senator McCarthy's death certificate reads "Hepatitis Unknown." There were so many conflicting reports concerning his death that it is very confusing. Medford Evans, the man who wrote "The Assassination of Joseph R. McCarthy" was convinced that the Senator had been murdered, and I'm inclined to agree with him. But I hope his life will encourage others to learn the truth, and I pray that the truth will lead America back to a Christian government. Joseph McCarthy was buried at Appleton, W.I., where every Spring there is a Memorial Service. These Memorial Services are held under the auspices of the McCarthy Educational Foundation, which has been doing an excellent job of keeping his memory alive... The Foundation would like to continue the placement of the Senator's two books in high schools and colleges... Both Senator McCarthy's "McCarthyism, The Fight For America" and "America's Retreat From Victory," the story of George Catlett Marshall, are available from the Joseph R. McCarthy Educational Foundation, Inc, 2219 South 65th Street, Milwaukee, WI, 53219... Thank you so much for listening, and thank you for helping to bring some truth back to America. May God bless the memory of a great Christian Patriot, Joseph R. McCarthy.

Formal Portrait
Judge McCarthy in June, 1942, shortly before he took a leave of absence from
his judicial post and joined the U. S. Marine Corps as a First Lieutenant.

For generations of American students, the name Joe McCarthy and not Joe Stalin has been synonymous with evil. A practitioner of “black arts,” a “demon,” “ogreish,” and a “seditionist” are a few of the descriptions of him handed down to us from his first major biographer. The passage of time hasn’t tempered these hysterical reactions.
The late senator, the story goes, created a climate of fear in the early 1950s by conducting a witchhunt that called liberals “Communists” and Communists “spies.” We now know better. The witches were real. Today, even many of McCarthy’s most extreme and ridiculed statements—alleging “a conspiracy on a scale so immense” or lambasting “twenty years of treason” in Democratic administrations—seem, if anything, to understate the pervasiveness of Communist infiltration of the U.S. government and the enormity of its damage.
Documents from the Soviet Union’s archives, USSR spy messages deciphered by the U.S. government’s Venona program, and declassified FBI files and wiretaps all prove that hundreds of U.S. officials were agents of an international Communist conspiracy. If these previously inaccessible documents shed light on only a few of McCarthy’s specific charges, they certainly vindicate his general charge that security in the U.S. government was lax and that large numbers of Communists penetrated positions of great importance.
Alger Hiss, Roosevelt foreign policy advisor and first secretary general of the United Nations; Harry Dexter White, assistant secretary of the Treasury and Truman’s appointee as director of the International Monetary Fund; and Lauchlin Currie, administrative assistant to Presidents Roosevelt and Truman, have all been confirmed, among hundreds of others, to have been agents of the USSR. In addition to the multitudes of executive branch agents, we also know of at least three Congressmen working clandestinely for the Soviet Union during this time period.
Government was hardly the only domain targeted by Soviet espionage. Influential media figures like I.F. Stone of The Nation, Michael Straight, editor of The New Republic, and Pulitzer Prize Winner Walter Duranty of The New York Times were actually agents of the Soviet Union. Prominent unions like the Congress of Industrial Organizations and the Screen Actors Guild were dominated by Communists. Even major industrialists like Armand Hammer did their part by laundering Soviet money to domestic U.S. Communists.
Despite many of these new revelations, academic opinion of “tail-gunner Joe,” the central enemy of domestic subversion in the early 1950s, has remained static. This consensus had gone unchallenged within academic circles until the release of Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator by George Mason University History Professor Arthur Herman.
In Joseph McCarthy, Arthur Herman writes that the “standard claim that McCarthy had never exposed a real Communist in the government” is “demonstrably false.” A perusal of the major books on McCarthy reveals that this statement itself sets Herman’s work apart.
McCarthy’s “critics were right,” Rutgers Professor David Oshinsky remarks in A Conspiracy So Immense, “he never uncovered a Communist.” Thomas Reeves of the University of Wisconsin opines in The Life and Times of Joe McCarthy that “McCarthy did not have a single name.” Robert Griffith maintains in The Politics of Fear, “Each of McCarthy’s charges was fraudulent.” “It happened to be a fact,” boasted Richard Rovere in Senator Joe McCarthy, “that not one certifiable Communist had been disclosed as working for the government” as a result of the junior senator from Wisconsin’s efforts.
Herman dissents and offers up Owen Lattimore, Edward Posniak, Mary Jane Keeney, Gustavo Duran, and John Carter Vincent as among the cases in which McCarthy had things essentially right.
Among one of the first names McCarthy named was that of Mary Jane Keeney. Mrs. Keeney worked in various sensitive overseas State Department jobs during the 1940s before settling in at the United Nations. Intercepted Venona cables, as well as her own diaries, prove that Keeney and her husband were Soviet agents. In February of 1950 McCarthy understated matters by labeling this agent of a foreign power merely a Communist. By the end of that year she was forced out of her post at the United Nations.
For anti-anticommunists, McCarthy’s charges against Gustavo Duran stood as “proof of the insanity of the red scare.” Michael Straight, Duran’s brother-in-law and editor of The New Republic, would use the pages of his magazine to promote Duran’s supposed innocence and McCarthy’s assumed recklessness. Testimony by many attesting to Duran’s Stalinism and work for the Spanish Communist secret police during the Spanish Civil War—even a picture of him in a Communist uniform—was dismissed as Francoist propaganda. One would think that Straight’s later admission to being a Soviet agent should have at least sparked a second look into this McCarthy allegation by historians.
Besides Herman, there haven’t been any takers. Herman asserts that Duran was “not only a Communist but a central figure in Stalin’s cold-blooded purge of his Trotskyite and anarchist allies during the Spanish Civil War.” Later, Duran’s supporters would lamely point out that Duran, like Mrs. Keeney, was technically no longer a State Department employee since he worked at the United Nations. The fact that he, like Keeney, was paid by the State Department and was definitely a Communist didn’t factor into their passage of judgement on McCarthy’s charges against Duran.
More so than any other witness, Annie Lee Moss purportedly exposed the cruelty and recklessness of Joseph McCarthy. Moss, who somehow jumped from an Army cafeteria worker to a clerk in the Pentagon code room, was labeled by McCarthy to be a loyalty risk. A middle-aged African American woman who walked to give her testimony with an elderly gait, Moss quickly gained the sympathy of Democrats on McCarthy’s committee. When asked about her knowledge of Karl Marx, Moss asked, “Who’s that?” The copies of The Daily Worker that arrived at her house were sent to the wrong address, she maintained. There were three Annie Lee Mosses in Washington, DC, her defenders intoned, so perhaps McCarthy had gotten the wrong woman.
McCarthy-haters seized on the Moss case as a club with which to beat anti-Communists. Edward R. Murrow devoted his weekly “See It Now” program to Mrs. Moss’s plight, while Missouri Senator Stu Symington told the witness that if she lost her job with the Army she could always come work for him. Just a year after McCarthy’s death it was revealed that he had indeed got the right woman. There was only one Annie Lee Moss in Washington, DC and it was the same Annie Lee Moss whose name and address appeared on the rolls of the local Communist Party. A former FBI agent even attested to seeing her actual Communist Party membership card from years earlier. If one U.S. Senator should be destroyed for allegedly making false accusations of Communism, what should the penalty be for another who announces to the world his willingness to give a Communist a job in his office?
If a dishonest characterization of McCarthy is the largest common denominator among anti-anticommunists, then hypocrisy is a close second.
So-called McCarthyite devices, such as the Smith Act and the House Committee on Un-American Activities, were creations not of Cold Warriors, but of New Deal Democrats. When they were used against fascists or even Trotskyites, Herman reminds readers, the Communists applauded and at times even aided and abetted the government. Only years later when the tables were turned did liberals change their tune about the methods they created. All that mattered was whose ox was being gored.
After McCarthy first made his charges public in February of 1950, Senate Democrats demanded that he stop hiding behind closed-door sessions and name names. Once McCarthy did what they asked, these very same Senate Democrats pounced on him for making charges without giving the accused the opportunity to defend themselves.
McCarthy’s enemies—supposed champions of civil liberties—tapped his phone, intercepted his incoming personal mail, placed a paid spy in his office, and illegally released his tax returns to the press (resulting in a large refund!). Herman recounts the amusing story of Paul Hughes, one that has been curiously forgotten by most McCarthy biographers. Hughes, a confidence man, convinced members of the Democratic National Committee, famous labor lawyer Joseph Rauh, and the Washington Post that he was a spy in McCarthy’s office and that he had evidence of major lawbreaking by the Senator. Rauh and a DNC leader paid more than $10,000 for the information, and the Post prepared a twelve-part series on the allegations, which included a bizarre tale about McCarthy stockpiling weapons in the basement of the Capitol, with an obvious implication of a coup. After nine-months of feeding absurd stories about McCarthy to liberals hungry for anything that would defame their enemy, Hughes was revealed as a fraud. The massive Post series was killed at the last minute.
“McCarthy opponents liked to claim that what made McCarthy reek in the nostrils of American democracy was not what McCarthy was doing but how he did it: the public airing of unsubstantiated charges, the use of smear and innuendo, and ‘confidential informants, dossiers, political spies,’ as Joseph Rauh himself had written,” Herman observes. “The Hughes case proves that some of them were willing to do at least the same to him.”
Although McCarthy is charged with a failure to distinguish between liberals and Communists, it was generally liberals, Herman points out, who couldn’t recognize the differences. It was Franklin Roosevelt, after all, who brought Alger Hiss to Yalta and Harry Truman who promoted Harry Dexter White to head the International Monetary Fund. Both Truman and Roosevelt entrusted these Soviet agents with top positions long after they had been told that Hiss and White were involved in espionage.
During the time that the Senate was debating whether to condemn McCarthy, Andrei Vishinsky, prosecutor for Stalin’s show trials, passed away after having sent scores of people to their deaths for crimes they didn’t commit. “McCarthy had not sent one person to jail. Yet by a terrible irony of fate,” Herman notes, “it is his name, not Vishinsky’s, that has been universally remembered and reviled as the symbol of an error of terror and suspicion.”
This February 9, marks the 50th anniversary of McCarthy’s famous Wheeling, West Virginia, address. The five decades that have passed since this earthshattering speech have seen an unending academic assault not just on McCarthy, but on just about any figure who took the view that Communism was inherently evil. Arthur Herman’s Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of Americas Most Hated Senator is a much needed antidote to the many propagandistic screeds that have made McCarthy a bogeyman in academic circles and beyond. Willing to point out McCarthy’s flaws and his strengths, Herman offers up a view of McCarthy detached from the hysteria surrounding so many other works on the subject.
It is folly to think that Joe McCarthy, like J. Parnell Thomas, Martin Dies, and A. Mitchell Palmer before him, was attacked because he smeared innocents. Joe McCarthy’s real crime was calling Communists precisely what they were: Communists.

Courthouse Office
Judge McCarthy in his office at the Outagamie County Courthouse, May 18, 1946.

Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America
and The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—
The Stalin Era

Copyright (c) 1999 First Things 93 (May 1999): 53-57.

Old Ghosts
Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America. By John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr. Yale University Press. 475 pp. $30.

The Haunted Wood: Soviet Espionage in America—The Stalin Era. By Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev. Random House. 402 pp. $30.

Reviewed by Andrew J. Bacevich

To label the period after 1945 "The Cold War" is to misconstrue the ideological contours of our times. In the decades following the Second World War, Americans found themselves embroiled in not one but at least two cold wars. The seemingly more dangerous of the two—the political and military struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union—ended abruptly in 1989. With amazingly little fuss, the Soviets simply gave up. They abandoned their empire. When in short order their country began to disintegrate, they could barely rouse themselves to protest. It soon became apparent that this cold war—the contest between democratic capitalism and Marxism–Leninism—had effectively resolved itself years earlier. Somewhere along the line, the long–suffering peoples of the Soviet Union had concluded that their revolution had been a cruel hoax not worth defending.

The second cold war, a conflict within the United States and throughout the West generally, has proven to be more durable. Already by the 1930s, belief that the antidote to capitalist repression and exploitation could be found only on the radical left had become an article of faith for leading members of the intelligentsia. For these self–styled progressives, the Bolshevik experiment in utopia provided both inspiration and model. In the West, revolution acquired an allure that persisted long after it had lost its appeal among those who actually lived under regimes erected on its principles.

Waged in highbrow journals or behind the scenes in labor unions, editorial offices, movie studios, and faculty clubs, this internal cold war has not attracted as much public attention as its external counterpart. There was, however, one exception: from the late 1940s to the early 1950s, a succession of exposés, spectacular trials, and headline–grabbing congressional investigations of domestic communism convulsed the nation and transformed the American political scene. The individuals raised to prominence by these events—Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy, Whittaker Chambers and Elizabeth Bentley, Alger Hiss and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, to name only a few—almost immediately assumed iconic status. As individuals, they might be heroes, villains, or simply unlucky bystanders, depending upon one’s political point of view. Yet it was as protagonist in a drama of surpassing moral and political significance that each would henceforth be remembered.

According to the left, the essence of that drama went like this: ambitious, unscrupulous politicians (like Nixon and McCarthy) abetted by neurotic and duplicitous informers (like Chambers and Bentley) victimized innocent citizens (like Hiss and the Rosenbergs) whose only "crime" lay in their commitment to working for a more humane and genuinely democratic order. The result was national hysteria and the de facto suspension of civil liberties for anyone hesitating to enlist in the anti–Communist crusade.

An odd collection of bedfellows—conservatives, Cold War liberals, and a few anti–Stalinist radicals—offered a different and more sinister interpretation. In their eyes, the "victims" of the anti–Communist crusade were not innocents. They were instead agents of Joseph Stalin, engaged in a conspiracy to subvert the existing constitutional order while promoting, by whatever means, the interests of the Soviet Union, even, and perhaps especially, at the expense of the United States. In this interpretation, the story was one of deception, treason, and betrayal.

These controversies of the forties and fifties remained contested terrain for years afterward. Yet with no small amount of skill, the left succeeded in setting the terms of the ensuing debate. In the literature, this became the period of the "Second Red Scare," a label implying paranoia and intolerance. The term McCarthyism, initially a reference to witch hunts and smear tactics, became an all–purpose code word used to place out of bounds questions about the implications of being a Communist Party member or fellow traveler. Despite the efforts by a few historians to show that some Americans actually were complicit in Soviet espionage, the impression prevailed that the controversies of the period had unnecessarily and irreparably harmed the American political system. In sophisticated quarters, at least, the anti–anti–Communists had secured the moral high ground.

By all rights, these two invaluable books should change all that. Venona, the product of two American historians, and The Haunted Wood, a collaboration of an American historian and a Russian KGB operative–turned–journalist, provide crushingly authoritative answers to questions that have lingered since the days when the charges and countercharges hurled by ex–Communists and alleged Communists riveted the nation’s attention. How prevalent was the treason committed by Americans on behalf of Stalinist totalitarianism? How pervasive was Communist influence in American government? Above all, who told the truth and who lied? In putting these issues to rest, the authors of these two volumes make it possible at long last to move on to new questions more relevant to the age in which we now live.

The two accounts cover much the same ground but in ways that complement rather than duplicate. The Venona project, subject of the study by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, was a highly classified government effort to decrypt messages between the Kremlin and Soviet agents in the U.S. during the Second World War. During the period 1942–1946, as a result of production shortcuts undertaken due to the duress of war, Soviet codes, theoretically unbreakable, contained a fatal flaw. In 1943 American analysts identified this flaw. Through painstaking work, they managed by 1946 to decipher portions of transmissions that American intelligence had intercepted. That endeavor continued into the 1970s, by which time the National Security Agency (NSA) had deciphered in whole or in part nearly three thousand Soviet messages.

The Venona project did not by any means provide a complete picture of Soviet espionage in the United States. Despite the best efforts of the NSA code–breakers, many intercepts from the 1942–1946 period remain unbroken. Even during that period, U.S. military intelligence managed to intercept only a fraction of the encoded message traffic between Moscow and its intelligence operatives in Washington and New York. Above all, Soviet encryption procedures used before 1942 and after 1946 avoided the defect that Venona had exploited. Such caveats notwithstanding, Venona produced an intelligence bonanza, as was immediately evident when the project, long a closely held secret, and its findings were finally declassified in 1995.

The material gathered by Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev, if acquired by less exotic means, is no less compelling. As a result of a 1993 agreement between Random House, SVR (Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, the successor to the KGB), and a cash–hungry association of retired KGB agents, Weinstein and Vassiliev paid for access to KGB operational files from the 1930s and 1940s. Yevgeny Primakov, now Russia’s prime minister but then its intelligence chief, instructed the SVR archivists to provide only selected files; despite this limitation, The Haunted Wood tells a devastating story.

A too brief summary of the findings offered by the two books would include the following points. Prior to and during World War II, the Soviet Union orchestrated a sustained campaign of espionage and subversion directed against the United States. Several hundred Americans, variously motivated by revolutionary romanticism, ideological fervor, or sheer venality, enlisted in that campaign. Some served the Soviet Union as spies, others as controllers, couriers, mail drops, or talent–spotters. Beginning with the New Deal, members of this Soviet–controlled apparatus infiltrated deep into the agencies of the federal bureaucracy. Entrance of the United States into World War II only increased the opportunities for espionage so that, for example, even the Office of Strategic Services, the wartime predecessor of the CIA, had well over a dozen Soviet agents on its payroll.

Stalin’s agents rose to positions of prominence in the U.S. government: Alger Hiss, Laurence Duggan, and Noel Field (all State Department), Harry Dexter White (Treasury), Lauchlin Currie (assistant to President Franklin Roosevelt) routinely passed highly sensitive information to the Soviet Union. So too did many other lesser known or still unidentified figures scattered about from the War Department to defense industries. (Indeed, by 1944, a well–placed Soviet agent in the U.S. government had already tipped off his handlers as to the existence of the Venona project.) Internal security for the Manhattan Project was particularly lax. With Julius Rosenberg playing a vital role, American spies provided crucial technical information that accelerated Stalin’s program to acquire the atomic bomb. For its part, the Communist Party USA routinely aided and abetted these efforts and accepted covert financial subsidies from the Kremlin in return. The party’s assertion that it was independent of Soviet control was fraudulent.

As with periodic allegations of presidential infidelities, it might be argued that none of this is really new. In fact, the findings contained in Venona and The Haunted Wood qualify as genuinely significant on several counts. First, they suggest that Stalin never viewed his wartime partnership with the United States as other than a temporary marriage of convenience. Given the scope and intensity of Soviet covert offensive, it becomes evident that the Cold War began not in postwar disputes over Germany and Eastern Europe but, as Haynes and Klehr write, as "a guerrilla action that Stalin had secretly started years before." The belief that more generous or forthcoming American policies, informed by a sympathetic understanding of Stalin’s security concerns, might have averted the Cold War is an illusion.

Second, these two accounts establish beyond any reasonable doubt that witnesses such as Chambers testified truthfully when sounding the alarm about Communist subversion. Diehards will still contend that Hiss was innocent or that Julius Rosenberg was framed, much as some adamantly insist that Oswald did not act alone or that James Earl Ray did not assassinate Martin Luther King. At some point, the accumulation of evidence permits us to dismiss such people as crackpots. We are now well past that point with regard to the most controversial spy cases of the 1940s and 1950s.

Third, Venona and The Haunted Wood show that espionage at the behest of the Soviet Union was much more extensive than previously recognized. To dismiss it as the handiwork of a few misguided souls is to understate the problem by an order of magnitude. The existence of a network on such a vast scale effectively demolishes the notion of "McCarthyism before McCarthy"—the thesis advanced by some scholars that internal security reforms instituted by the Truman Administration after World War II were irrational, unnecessary, and motivated by political expediency. The gist of this argument is that Truman ignited the anti–Communist mania that McCarthy himself exploited shortly thereafter. In fact, Truman was responding to a serious threat that his predecessor had allowed to fester. That response was prudent and necessary, just as the larger American effort to contain the Soviet Union was prudent and necessary.

These conclusions do not justify or excuse the demagoguery of Senator McCarthy and his acolytes. They do not constitute a defense for every action taken under the rubric of eliminating subversion. (Ethel Rosenberg offers a case in point. That she was complicit in her husband’s spying is beyond dispute; her offenses did not justify execution, however.) Nor should Venona and The Haunted Wood be read as suggesting that every American who flirted with communism or fell prey to an infatuation with the Soviet Union was guilty of treason. Indeed, these accounts deserve attention not because they offer an opportunity to settle old scores but because they provide a vehicle for moving beyond a debate that has long since outlived its usefulness.

Only by exorcising the ideological ghosts that have haunted national politics for the past half century will Americans rediscover the nexus of the issue that gave the domestic cold war significance in the first place: the threat posed by a radically materialist philosophy that in the name of "liberation" would snuff out even the possibility of authentic freedom. As was the case when the United States faced off against the Soviet Union, the ultimate question today turns on whether and how man relates to God. "At every point," observes Whittaker Chambers in Witness, "religion and politics interlace, and must do so more acutely as the conflict between the two great camps of men, those who reject and those who worship God, becomes irrepressible." By exorcising old ghosts, these two histories permit us to redirect our attention to the new fields on which that conflict continues.

Andrew J. Bacevich is Professor of International Relations at Boston University.

copyright © 1995-2003 Leadership U. All rights reserved.
This site is part of the Telling the Truth Project.
Updated: 13 July 2002

NOW LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD:

List of Americans in the Venona papers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Originally declassified by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Chairman of the bipartisan Commission on Government Secrecy, the Venona project and its associated documentation, contains codenames of several hundred individuals said to be involved on differing levels with the KGB and the GRU.^[1]^[2] Many of the codenames have been identified by the FBI, CIA, NSA and other academics and historians by using a combination of circumstantial evidence, corroborating testimony from Eastern Bloc defectors, direct surveillance, informants and a number of other means.^[3] Many academics and historians believe that most of the following individuals were either clandestine assets and/or contacts of the KGB, GRU and Soviet Naval GRU.^[4]^[5].

The following list of individuals is extracted in part from the work of John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr^[2]; as well as others listed in the references below.

To what extent any given individual named below was clandestinely involved with Soviet intelligence is a topic of dispute, with a few scholars, most notably Victor Navasky, skeptical of attempts to identify individuals from codenames found in Venona.

Twenty-four persons targeted for recruitment remain uncorroborated as to it being accomplished. These individuals are marked with an asterisk (*).

John Abt United States Department of Agriculture; Works Progress Administration; Civil Liberties Subcommittee, Senate Committee on Education and Labor; special assistant to the United States Attorney General, United States Department of Justice
Solomon Adler, United States Department of the Treasury, supplied info to Silvermaster group, went to China after communist revolution and joined government of Mao Zedong
Lydia Altschuler
Thomas Babin, Yugoslavia Section Office of Strategic Services
Marion Bachrach, (*) congressional office manager of Congressman John Bernard of the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party
Rudy Baker
Vladimir Barash
Joel Barr, United States Army Signal Corps Laboratories
Alice Barrows, United States Office of Education
Theodore Bayer, President, Russky Golos Publishing
George Beiser, National Research Establishment, Research and Development Board; engineer Bell Aircraft
Aleksandr Belenky, General Electric
Cedric Belfrage, journalist; British Security Coordination
Elizabeth Bentley, companion of Jacob Golos of Sound/Myrna group; turned herself in to FBI in 1945 leading to unraveling of many Soviet spy rings
Marion Davis Berdecio, Office of Naval Intelligence; Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs; United States Department of State
Josef Berger, (*) Democratic National Committee
Joseph Milton Bernstein, Board of Economic Warfare
Walter Sol Bernstein, Hollywood Screenwriter, listed on the MPAA's Hollywood blacklist
T.A. Bisson, Board of Economic Warfare
Thomas Lessing Black, Bureau of Standards United States Department of Commerce
Samuel Bloomfield, (*) Eastern European Division, Research and Analysis Division, Office of Strategic Services
Robinson Bobrow
Ralph Bowen, (*) United States Department of State
Abraham Brothman, chemist convicted for his role in the Rosenberg ring
Earl Browder, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the United States
Rose Browder
William Browder
Michael Burd, Head of Midland Export Corporation
Paul Burns, employee of TASS
Norman Bursler, United States Department of Justice Anti-Trust Division
James Michael Callahan
Sylvia Callen
Frank Coe, Assistant Director, Division of Monetary Research, United States Department of the Treasury; Special Assistant to the United States Ambassador in London; Assistant to the Executive Director, Board of Economic Warfare; Assistant Administrator, Foreign Economic Administration, went to China and joined government of Mao Zedong
Lona Cohen, sentenced to 20 years; subject of Hugh Whitemore's drama for stage and TV Pack of Lies
Morris Cohen (Soviet spy) sentenced to 25 years; subject of Hugh Whitemore's drama for stage and TV Pack of Lies
Eugene Franklin Coleman, RCA electrical engineer
Anna Colloms, New York City schoolteacher
Judith Coplon, Foreign Agents Registration section, United States Department of Justice; her convictions for espionage were overturned on technicalities
Lauchlin Currie, Administrative Assistant to President Roosevelt; Deputy Administrator of Foreign Economic Administration; Special Representative to China
Byron Darling, United States Rubber Company; United States Office of Scientific Research & Development
Eugene Dennis, General Secretary Communist Party USA sentenced to 5 years for advocating overthrow of U.S. government
Samuel Dickstein, United States Congressman from New York known to be paid by Soviets; New York State Supreme Court Justice; Vice Chair of HUAC during hearings into the Business Plot against FDR
Martha Dodd, daughter of United States Ambassador to Germany William Dodd, Popular Front
William Dodd Jr., son of William Dodd, United States Ambassador to Germany; Democratic Congressional candidate
Laurence Duggan, head of United States Department of State Division of American Republics
Demetrius Dvoichenko-Markov, U.S. Army
Eufrosina Dvoichenko-Markov
Frank Dziedzik, National Oil Products Company
Nathan Einhorn, Executive Secretary of American Newspaper Guild
Max Elitcher, (*) Naval Ordinance Section, National Bureau of Standards
Jacob Epstein, International Brigades
Jack Fahy, Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs; Board of Economic Warfare; United States Department of the Interior
Linn Markley Farish, Liaison Officer with Tito's Yugoslav Partisan forces, Office of Strategic Services
Edward Fitzgerald, War Production Board
Charles Flato, Board of Economic Warfare; Civil Liberties Subcommittee, Senate Committee on Education and Labor
Isaac Folkoff
Jane Foster, Board of Economic Warfare; Office of Strategic Services; Netherlands Study Unit
Zalmond Franklin
Isabel Gallardo
Boleslaw Gebert, National Officer of Polonia Society of International Workers Order
Harrison George, senior CPUSA leadership, editor of People's World
Rebecca Getzoff
Harold Glasser, Director, Division of Monetary Research, United States Department of the Treasury; United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration; War Production Board; Advisor on North African Affairs Committee; United States Treasury Representative to the Allied High Commission in Italy
Bela Gold, Assistant Head of Program Surveys, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Department of Agriculture; Senate Subcommittee on War Mobilization; Office of Economic Programs in Foreign Economic Administration
Harry Gold, sentenced to 30 years for his role in the Rosenbergs ring
Sonia Steinman Gold, Division of Monetary Research United States Department of Treasury Department; United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Interstate Migration; United States Bureau of Employment Security
Elliot Goldberg, engineer for an oil equipment company in New York
Jacob Golos, "main pillar" of NKVD spy network, particularly the Sound/Myrna group, he died in the arms of Elizabeth Bentley
George Gorchoff
Gerald Graze, United States Department of State
David Greenglass, machinist at Los Alamos sentenced to 15 years for his role in Rosenberg ring; he was the brother of executed Ethel Rosenberg
Ruth Greenglass, avoided prosecution thanks to her husband's testimony against his sister that he later admitted was perjured
Joseph Gregg, Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs; United States Department of State
Theodore Hall, physicist at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project, volunteered to spy for Soviets, never prosecuted
Maurice Halperin, Chief of Latin American Division, Research and Analysis Section, Office of Strategic Services; United States Department of State
Kitty Harris, globe-trotting companion of communist party boss Earl Browder
William Henwood, Standard Oil of California
Clarence Hiskey, University of Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory, Manhattan Project
Alger Hiss, Director of the Office of Special Political Affairs United States Department of State, sentenced to 5 years for perjury
Donald Hiss, United States Department of State; United States Department of Labor; United States Department of the Interior
Harry Hopkins, advisor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt
Louis Horvitz, International Brigades
Rosa Isaak, Executive Secretary of the American-Russian Institute
Herman R. Jacobson, Avery Manufacturing Company
Bella Joseph, motion picture division of Office of Strategic Services
Emma Harriet Joseph, (*) Office of Strategic Services
Julius Joseph, National Resources Planning Board; Federal Security Agency; Social Security Board; Office for Emergency Management; Labor War Manpower Commission; Deputy Chief, Far Eastern section (Japanese Intelligence) Office of Strategic Services
Gertrude Kahn
David Karr, Office of War Information; chief aide to journalist Drew Pearson
Joseph Katz
Helen Grace Scott Keenan, Office of the Co-ordinator of Inter-American Affairs; Office of United States Chief Counsel for Prosecution of Axis War Criminals, Office of Strategic Services
Mary Jane Keeney, Board of Economic Warfare; Allied Staff on Reparations; United Nations
Philip Keeney, Office of the Coordinator of Information (later OSS)
Alexander Koral, former engineer of the municipality of New York
Helen Koral
Samuel Krafsur, journalist TASS
Charles Kramer, Senate Subcommittee on War Mobilization; Office of Price Administration; National Labor Relations Board; Senate Subcommittee on Wartime Health and Education; Agricultural Adjustment Administration; United States Senate Civil Liberties Subcommittee, Senate Committee on Education and Labor; Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee; Democratic National Committee
Christina Krotkova, Office of War Information
Sergey Nikolaevich Kurnakov
Stephen Laird, Hollywood Producer; Time Magazine Reporter; Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) correspondent
Rudy Lambert, California Communist party labor director and head of security
Oskar Lange
Trude Lash, United Nations Human Rights Committee
Richard Lauterbach, Time Magazine
Duncan Lee, counsel to General William Donovan, head of Office of Strategic Services
Michael Leshing, superintendent of Twentieth Century Fox film laboratories
Leo Levanas, Shell Oil Company
Morris Libau
Helen Lowry
Willaim Mackey
Harry Magdoff, Chief of the Control Records Section of War Production Board and Office of Emergency Management; Bureau of Research and Statistics, WTB; Tools Division, War Production Board; Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce; Statistics Division Works Progress Administration
William Malisoff, owner of United Laboratories of New York
Hede Massing, journalist
Robert Menaker
Floyd Miller
James Walter Miller, United States Post Office, Office of Censorship
Robert Miller, Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs; Near Eastern Division United States Department of State
Robert Minor, Office of Strategic Services
Leonard Mins, Russian Section of the Research and Analysis Division of the Office of Strategic Services
Arthur Moosen
Vladimir Morkovin, Office of Naval Research
Boris Moros, Hollywood Producer
Nicola Napoli, president of Artkino, distributor of Soviet films
Franz Leopold Neumann, consultant at Board of Economic Warfare; Deputy Chief of the Central European Section of Office of Strategic Services; First Chief of Research of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal
Melita Norwood
Eugénie Olkhine
Rose Olsen
Frank Oppenheimer, (*) physicist
Robert Oppenheimer
Nicholas W. Orloff
Nadia Morris Osipovich
Edna Patterson
William Perl, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) at Langley Army Air Base; Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory; sentenced to 5 years for his role in the Rosenberg ring of atomic spies
Victor Perlo, chief of the Aviation Section of the War Production Board; Head of Branch in Research Section, Office of Price Administration Department of Commerce; Division of Monetary Research Department of Treasury; Brookings Institution
Burton Perry
Aleksandr N. Petroff, Curtiss-Wright Aircraft
Emma Phillips
Paul Pinsky
William Pinsly, Curtiss-Wright Aircraft, Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory
William Plourde, engineer with Bell Aircraft
Vladimir Pozner, head Russian Division photographic section United States War Department
Lee Pressman Department of Agriculture; Works Progress Administration; General Counsel Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO)
Mary Price, stenographer for Walter Lippmann of the New York Herald
Esther Trebach Rand, United Palestine Appeal
Bernard Redmont, head of the Foreign News Bureau Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs
Peter Rhodes, Foreign Broadcasting Monitoring Service, Allied Military Headquarters London; Chief of the Atlantic News Service, Office of War Information
Stephen Rich
Kenneth Richardson, World Wide Electronics
Ruth Rivkin, United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration
Samuel Rodman, United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration
Allan Rosenberg, Board of Economic Warfare; Chief of the Economic Institution Staff, Foreign Economic Administration; Civil Liberties Subcommittee, Senate Committee on Education and Labor; Railroad Retirement Board; Councel to the Secretary of the National Labor Relations Board
Julius Rosenberg, United States Army Signal Corps Laboratories, executed for role in Rosenberg ring
Ethel Rosenberg, executed for role in Rosenberg ring based on perjured testimony of her brother David Greenglass
Amadeo Sabattini, International Brigades
Alfred Sarant, United States Army Signal Corps laboratories
Saville Sax, Young Communist League, friend of Los Alamos spy Theodore Hall
Marion Schultz, chair of the United Russian Committee for Aid to the Native Country
Bernard Schuster
Milton Schwartz
John Scott, Office of Strategic Services
Ricardo Setaro, journalist/writer Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS)
Charles Bradford Sheppard, Hazeltine Electronics
Anne Sidorovich
Michael Sidorovich
George Silverman, Director of the Bureau of Research and Information Services, US Railroad Retirement Board; Economic Adviser and Chief of Analysis and Plans, Assistant Chief of Air Staff, Material and Services, War Department
Greg Silvermaster, Chief Planning Technician, Procurement Division, United States Department of the Treasury; Chief Economist, War Assets Administration; Director of the Labor Division, Farm Security Administration; Board of Economic Warfare; Reconstruction Finance Corporation Department of Commerce
Helen Silvermaster
Morton Sobell, General Electric, sentenced to 30 years at Alcatraz for his role in the Rosenberg ring
Jack Soble, brother of Robert Soblen, sentenced to 7 years for his role in the Mocase ring
Robert Soblen, psychiatrist, sentenced to life for espionage at Sandia Lab, escaped to IsraeI, committed suicide
Johannes Steele, journalist and radio commentator
Alfred Kaufman Stern, Popular Front
I. F. Stone, (*) journalist for The Nation
Augustina Stridsberg
Anna Louise Strong, journalist for The Atlantic Monthly, Harper's, The Nation and Asia
Helen Tenney, Office of Strategic Services
Mikhail Tkach, editor of the Ukrainian Daily News
Lud Ullman, delegate to United Nations Charter meeting and Bretton Woods conference; Division of Monetary Research, Department of Treasury; Material and Services Division, Air Corps Headquarters, Pentagon
Irving Charles Velson, Brooklyn Navy Yard; American Labor Party candidate for New York State Senate
Margietta Voge
George Vuchinich, 2nt. United States Army assigned to Office of Strategic Services
Donald Wheeler, Office of Strategic Services Research and Analysis division
Enos Wicher, Wave Propagation Research, Division of War Research, Columbia University
Maria Wicher
Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
Ruth Beverly Wilson
Ignacy Witczak
Ilya Wolston, United States Army military intelligence
Flora Wovschin, Office of War Information; United States Department of State
Jones Orin York
Daniel Zaret, United States Army Explosives Division
Mark Zborowski

[edit] References

National Security Agency, Venona Archives, Introductory History of VENONA and Guide to the Translations by Robert L. Benson, 1995.

[edit] Footnotes

^ "Secrecy : The American Experience". Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Yale University Press; December 1, 1999.
^ ^a ^b "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, Appendix A". John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-300-08462-5
^ "The Venona story". Robert L Benson, National Security Agency Center for Cryptologic History; January 1, 2001.
^ "How VENONA was Declassified". Robert L. Benson, Symposium of Cryptologic History; October 27, 2005.
^ "Tangled Treason". Sam Tanenhaus, The New Republic; 1999.

[edit] External links

National Security Agency Archives Cryptographic Museum, Custodian of Documents for the Army Signals Intelligence Agency
Selected Venona Messages
Venona FBI FOIA Files
FBI Memo "Explanation and History of Venona Project Informantion" (1 February 1956)
MI5 Releases to the National Archives
John Earl Haynes, Harvey Klehr, Venona; Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, Yale University Press, 1999. Despite the title, this is less about Venona itself than about Communist Party USA espionage and support of espionage. It is based on research in the CPUSA archives made available to the authors in Moscow. See Yale University Press Web site information on the book
Stalin-Era Research and Archives Project
Russian State Archive (RGASPI)

Captain Joseph McCarthy
Shown in 1942, Captain Joseph McCarthy, U. S. Marine Corps, served
as an intelligence officer in a dive-bombing squadron in the South Pacific during World War II.

Latest Episode Shows Why Left Refuses To Let Go Revisionist Critics Misrepresent McCarthy's Legacy By Patrick J. Buchanan

Why do they keep digging up the corpse of Joe McCarthy for a ritual flogging? The Wisconsin senator died in 1957. He never killed anyone. He never sent anyone to prison.

Harry Truman dropped atomic bombs on two defenseless cities of a prostrate nation and sent 2 million Russian prisoners back to Stalin to be murdered in Operation Keelhaul. Yet Truman remains a hero to those who despise McCarthy with an undying hatred.

Why? Even if what is alleged is true—that McCarthy bullied witnesses and accused men of disloyalty who only made mistakes—that still does not explain why the Left cannot let go of him.

The answer: As no other man, Tailgunner Joe stripped the old establishment of its reputation, credibility and moral authority in the eyes of the people.

McCarthy convinced Middle America that FDR and Truman had been duped by “Uncle Joe,” had tolerated treason, and had blundered and lost in five years all the fruits of the victory won by the blood and sacrifice of the Greatest Generation in World War II.

The establishment has never recovered from that beating.

In the latest document dump by the Senate, we learn—horror of horror!—that McCarthy questioned witnesses in private before selecting those he put on the stand. But so, too, did the Watergate committee of the sainted Sam Ervin. This is a common practice of senators who don’t want to be surprised before TV cameras.

The New York Times’ Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes that those few historians shown the latest documents claim they “do not support McCarthy’s theories that, in the 1950s, communist spies were operating in the highest levels of government.”

Perhaps not, Ms. Stolberg. But if so, that is only because, by the 1950s, the spies had been rooted out, though their collaborators remained. But they had been there, selling out their country.

Indeed, the espionage and treason, proven again by the Venona transcripts—the intercepted coded messages from Soviet agents to Moscow—were far more extensive than even McCarthy imagined. In the 1940s, the U.S. Government was honeycombed with traitors and spies. Even today, not all the names have been revealed. Call the roll:

Alger Hiss and Lawrence Duggan, two of the highest ranking diplomats at State, were communist traitors and spies. Hiss stood behind FDR at Yalta when Eastern Europe was signed away to Stalin and helped shape the United Nations for Harry Truman. Harry Dexter White, father of the International Monetary Fund and the “Morgenthau Plan” to smash all German industry after the war—a plan embraced, then disowned, by FDR—was a Soviet agent. Truman knew it by 1946 and covered it up. Lauchlin Currie was a Soviet spy on the White House staff. William Remington was the Soviet spy at Commerce. Judith Coplon headed up a spy ring at Justice with access to the FBI secrets and files she transferred to Soviet agents. The Rosenbergs were communist traitors who gave their Russian handlers secrets of the atom bomb. The brother of Robert Oppenheimer, father of the A-bomb, was a communist, as was his wife, who was a lifelong friend of Steve Nelson, a key figure in the Communist Party underground apparatus. On and on the list goes. For an unbiased account of McCarthy’s life, Arthur Herman’s Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator is indispensable.

McCarthy’s career as an anti-Communist began in February 1950 with his Wheeling speech and was effectively ended with his censure in December 1954. Why was Harry Truman chased out of Washington in 1952 with an approval rating of 23%? Why did Joe McCarthy enjoy a 50-29 favorable rating as late as January 1954?

Because McCarthy, almost alone, was exposing the treason and folly of those who had ceded half of Europe to Stalin and all of China to the murderous hordes of Mao Tse-tung. And with 200 American boys dying every week in Truman’s “no-win war” in Korea, Americans were demanding explanations.

The 1950s were good years. No one was terrified then, except the fools who had joined a Communist Party that turned out to be a lickspittle of the Comintern. Gallup polls of the era show not even 1% of Americans were concerned about “witch-hunting” or “anti-Communist hysteria” or “McCarthyism.” That is pure myth.

In 1954, when some snot at the 15th reunion of his class got up to toast Harvard College for never having produced an Alger Hiss or a Joe McCarthy, John F. Kennedy stood up and walked out, roaring, “How dare you couple the name of a great American patriot with that of a traitor.” Yes, indeed, that was when the Right was right.

McCarthy and Eisenhower
Senator McCarthy shakes hands with Republican presidential nominee Dwight D. Eisenhower in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, October 3, 1952. Earlier that day, Eisenhower had endorsed McCarthy's bid for re-election. At center is Charles D. Ashley, Chairman of the Milwaukee County Republican Party.

Witch-hunt? The high-profile cases cited by McCarthy — Owen Lattimore, John Stewart Service, and Philip C. Jessup — all ended with the senator’s charges being validated.

‘‘I was a representative of the Young Communist League and the Communist party of the United States [at] the meetings of the executive committee of the Communist International, Young Communist International, Moscow," pronounced Paul Crouch during his September 15, 1953 testimony before a closed session of Senator McCarthy’s investigative subcommittee. Crouch’s testimony, contained in the 4,232 pages of recently unsealed transcripts, offered details of a resumé the witness had compiled during 17 years of diligent service to the Soviet Union.

"I was a student and lecturer at the Frunze Military Academy and an honorary officer of the Red Army," continued Crouch. "I was the head of the Communist party’s National Department for Infiltration of the Armed Forces in the United States, national editorial director of the Young Communist League, member of the editorial staff of the Daily Worker, district organizer for the Communist party in Virginia, New York and South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah, member of the district bureau of the Communist party in the Alabama district and the California district, Alameda County organizer, 1941."

Predictably, Crouch’s detailed account of his Communist activities received no attention in media accounts of the recently unsealed transcripts. Nor were media outlets willing to report Crouch’s testimony regarding nuclear scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer, one of the key figures in the U.S. government’s top-secret Manhattan (atomic bomb) Project. Asked by Senator McCarthy, "Is there any doubt in your mind that Oppenheimer was a member of the Communist party?" Crouch replied: "No, sir, none whatever. I met him in a closed meeting of the Communist party in a house which was subsequently found to have been his residence at the time...."

Three years prior to his testimony before McCarthy’s subcommittee, Crouch and his wife (who had also been a member of the Communist Party) had similarly testified regarding Oppenheimer before the California Legislature’s Committee on Un-American Activities. But any further inquiry about Oppenheimer’s activities was stymied when the scientist received a prominent endorsement from a popular young Golden State congressman with impressive anti-Communist credentials: Richard M. Nixon.

In his testimony at McCarthy’s closed-door hearings, Crouch described another occasion when powerful figures in the U.S. government came to Oppenhemier’s aid. During Oppenheimer’s perjury trial, two Justice Department attorneys forbade Crouch to testify that he and his wife had attended Communist Party meetings at Oppenheimer’s home. As a result, Crouch related, the jury "found him not guilty due to lack of sufficient identifying witnesses who had been in closed meetings with him, that is, witnesses who could testify to that effect."

On November 7, 1953, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover received a letter from William L. Borden, former executive director of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, containing a litany of detailed allegations leading to Borden’s "exhaustively considered opinion, based upon years of study, of the available classified evidence, that more probably than not J. Robert Oppenheimer is an agent of the Soviet Union." Oppenheimer was stripped of his security clearance, thereby becoming a "martyr" to the scourge of "McCarthyism." But like others given that exalted title, Oppenheimer was guilty as charged.

In 1994, Pavel Sudoplatov, former head of the KGB’s Administration for Special Tasks, published his memoirs: Special Tasks: The Memoirs of an Unwanted Witness. In that position, Sudoplatov stated, he was "responsible for sabotage, kidnapping, and assassination of our enemies beyond the country’s borders." In Special Tasks, Sudoplatov disclosed that he had headed "the Soviet espionage effort to obtain the secrets of the atomic bomb from America and Great Britain. I set up a network of illegals who convinced Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Leo Szilard … and other scientists in America and Great Britain to share atomic secrets with us." Further confirmation of Oppenheimer’s role as a Soviet spy was provided with the release of the "Venona" transcripts in 1995.

Senator McCarthy first became aware of extensive Communist penetration of the State Department in 1949, when three men brought to his office a detailed FBI report on the problem. The report had been made available to the State Department in 1947. However, the State Department, under Secretary George C. Marshall, ignored the evidence and actually accelerated efforts to dismantle its security staff. A secret memo sent to Marshall by a Senate Appropriations subcommittee protested what it described as "a condition that developed and still flourishes in the State Department under the administration of [State Department official] Dean Acheson. It is evident that there is a deliberate, calculated program being carried out not only to protect Communist personnel in high places but to reduce security and intelligence protection to a nullity. On file in the department is a copy of a preliminary report of the FBI on Soviet espionage activities in the United States which involves a large number of State Department employees, some in high official positions."

Many of these figures had been brought into the State Department when it was merged in 1945 with several wartime agencies riddled with Communists and Communist-front members. Assurances from President Harry S. Truman that efforts would be taken to cull Communists from sensitive positions proved empty.

In 1949, Acheson — who had been a paid attorney for the Soviet Union prior to FDR’s decision to grant the regime diplomatic recognition in 1933 — became secretary of state. In that position he continued his efforts to protect Communists and Soviet agents, most notoriously his good friend, the arch-traitor Alger Hiss.

A year later, in his February 9th speech before a group of Republican Women in Wheeling, West Virginia, Senator McCarthy made public his knowledge of Communist infiltration of the State Department. He subsequently discussed in public the names of nine of these people, including Owen Lattimore, John Stewart Service, and Philip C. Jessup. A Senate committee created by Democrat Senator Millard Tydings, supposedly to investigate McCarthy’s charges, became instead an effort to vilify and demonize McCarthy. After 31 days of hearings, the Tydings subcommittee labeled McCarthy’s accusations a "fraud" and a "hoax" and gave a blanket clearance to the State Department. But the facts were on McCarthy’s side.

The high-profile cases cited by McCarthy — Lattimore, Service, and Jessup — all ended with the senator’s charges being validated. The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee later investigated Lattimore, declaring in 1952 that "Owen Lattimore was, from some time beginning in the 1930s, a conscious articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." John Stewart Service, after being cleared by the State Department’s Loyalty and Security Board six times, was finally ousted from the department in December 1951 after the Civil Service Loyalty Review Board found that there was "reasonable doubt" as to his loyalty. In Jessup’s case, the uncontested record showed that he had belonged to at least five Communist fronts, had close ties to many Communists, and was an influential member of the Institute for Pacific Relations, which the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee would describe two years later as "a vehicle used by Communists to orientate [sic] American Far Eastern policy toward Communist objectives."

Of the 110 names McCarthy gave to the Tydings subcommittee, 62 were at the time employed by the State Department. Though the subcommittee cleared them all, within one year a State Department Loyalty Board instigated proceedings against 49 of the 62, and by the end of 1954, 81 of those on McCarthy’s list had either resigned from their government posts or been dismissed.

Glasses
Senator McCarthy adjusts his glasses while waiting for a procedural ruling during a meeting of the Senate committee investigating his activities, September 1, 1954.

Wedding
Senator McCarthy and his wife, the former Jean Kerr, descend the steps of St. Matthew's Cathedral in Washington, D. C. following their wedding, September 29, 1953.

The Rockefellers’ Agents Frame ‘Tailgunner Joe’

By Dr. Emmanuel Josephson

Dr. Emmanuel Josephson wrote three books on the Rockefeller family, one entitled, Rockefeller: Public Enemy Number 1: Studies in Criminal Psychopathy. The average person today has no idea how much economic and political power this family, their agents and dupes acquired and wielded in the establishment of a virtual dictatorship over the United States and its people. Here is but one example . . .

Their quest for control over the world’s oil supplies; their theft of our money system (under the direction of the Rothschilds) by plotting and engineering the passage of the Federal Reserve Act and income tax; manipulating our nation into two world wars, Korea and Vietnam; creating the “Great Depression” in 1929 through the early 1930s; helping to establish and finance the world communist movement by destroying Christian nationalist governments; promotion of foreign aid programs designed to benefit their business interests, while getting American taxpayers to foot the bills; and, of course their control of public education, which shapes the minds and destinies of our youth from kindergarten to college, and which has all but destroyed the constitutional foundations upon which the American republic was founded.

The following chapter from the above cited book reveals why Nelson Rockefeller hated Sen. Joe McCarthy and how he and his agents “brought him down” politically and were ultimately responsible for his death at Bethesda, Maryland, Naval Hospital May 2, 1957.

Nelson Rockefeller’s vindictiveness and fury were sadly underestimated by his defected and unwitting collaborators in “foreign aid” looting of American taxpayers. Sen. Joseph McCarthy, as chairman of the Senate Government Operations Committee, conducted an investigation of communists and their infiltration of the government. Much of the ground that he covered was merely a reinvestigation and repetition of the exposures that had been made by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and other congressional committees investigating communist and other forms of subversion. The investigation was absolutely essential for the security and survival of the nation in spite of the fact that it was once again covering previously explored ground.

Despite earlier exposure, the subversives then brought to light were, as at present, even more firmly entrenched in key government positions because of their survival and the extended length of their tenure. In this they were aided by the support of their activities, and their defense, with public funds including the tax-exempt funds of the conspirators’ foundations. All previous investigations, as well as all undertaken since then, were stopped in their tracks as soon as they approached the master conspirators and their foundations. Others have talked about the Rockefeller role in the ordered destruction of the records of the Martin Dies-led HUAC. These fortunately have survived because of defection in the ranks of the conspirators; and of the destruction ordered by Rockefeller associates and henchmen of the armed forces records of subversives to prepare the way for their infiltration and promotion in the services.

The dynastic leaders of the conspiracy exert all their immense powers and their enormous plunder protecting their subversive agents whom they have planted in government and other strategic positions. The extent of the infiltration of their trained agents into the government is, as has been mentioned, the subject of boasting by the director of one of many of their foundation-subsidized, tax-exempt organizations, their “foreign office,” the Council on Foreign Relations.

The dynastic conspirators use the onslaught of their vast Rockefeller-Soviet axis propaganda machine that parades as “educational philanthropy” as well as its numerous other subversive-laden bogus “philanthropies” to destroy anyone who undertakes to investigate and expose their agents, in order to avert exposure of themselves. It was from them that there emanated the attacks that destroyed previous investigators of subversion, including Hamilton Fish, Martin Dies, J. Parnell Thomas and Harold D. Velde, among the chairmen of the HUAC; Robert Stribling, David Schine and Roy Cohn, among the counselors of the various committees; and Whit taker Chambers when he exposed Rockefeller’s associate and agent, Alger Hiss, as a communist.

Sen. McCarthy extended his investigation in so much greater depth than the earlier investigators that he was in a position to expose the dynastic master conspirators themselves. He ordered a raid on the Sunset Farm of Edward C. Carter, secretary of the Rockefeller-controlled and financed Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR), the mother organization of Amerasia (and of the YMCA), and seizure of the records of those dangerously subversive organizations that had been secreted in the dilapidated barn that camouflaged a modern mahogany-furnished office. There were discovered data regarding subversive and treasonous activities that led McCarthy to pronounce it to be the most dangerous spy-nest in the world.

The seized correspondence indicated that the Rockefellers not only financed the subversive activities of these organizations, but also participated personally in their direction; and that at least one of them, John D. III, attended meetings of the organization in the barn. This meant that McCarthy was in a position to expose the Rockefellers, personally, as ringleaders in the treacherous activities of the IPR and its Amerasia subsidiary. This correspondence was shown to this author by an employee of the committee, and has since come into his possession.

Rockefeller’s fear and hatred of McCarthy was in no wise mitigated by the following that he had gained among patriotic Americans. To the entire treasonous breed of “liberals” and “internationalists,” McCarthy and his patriotic activities were anathema. Especially is this true of Nelson Rockefeller, who never missed an opportunity to give vent to his rabid detestation of the patriotic citizenry whom he characterized as the “lunatic fringe of the radical right.” By his definition, as has been related, he placed George Washington in that category.

The Rockefellers, and especially Nelson, made special and persistent efforts to hound all patriots out of public life as menaces to their “internationalist” conspiracy. Through their control of education and all media of mass communications, especially those financed through their bogus “philanthropies,” they have been able to inculcate in the younger generation their principle that “treason is a virtue of which only ‘liberals’ are capable,” and “patriotism is a vice.” These “principles” have been given a pseudo-philosophic and psychoanalytic basis in Rene Allendy’s Treason Complex that was published by the conspirators’ Social Science Press.

There appears to be in Nelson Rockefeller’s intense hatred of patriots in the Republican Party, a large element of mixed political and financial concern, that particularly centers about their rejection of treasonous “internationalism” and jeopardy to the “foreign (Rockefeller) aid” profits that derive therefrom. In respect to the Democratic Party, he had no fears. For from its origin, it has accepted as its basic platform unrelenting opposition to the clauses in the Constitution that make “internationalism” and the taxation of the American people on the pretext of support or defense of another nation, not only un-constitutional, but also treasonous. And throughout its history, the Democratic Party has adhered to the sham of “democracy,” not rule, supposedly by the people, but actually thinly masked dictatorial rule by demagogues who have been ever ready to adopt the various doctrines of the Weishaupt-Marx-Nickerson totalitarianism.

The Republican Party came into being about the time of the Civil War for the express purpose of preserving the union, our republic and the Constitution on which it is based. To be sure, it was largely infiltrated from the start by the leftist adherents of the Weishaupt-Marx program of destroying the Union for the purpose of seizing control of our country and converting it to the totalitarian dictatorship that has always been their criminal objective. They carried on the plot that had been fostered by even some of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and reluctant supporters of the Constitution. From the start they fostered “bipartisanship” that linked their malign activities with those of their fellow conspirators in the Democratic Party. The history of the Republican Party has been one of its takeover by these “bipartisan” conspirators. The most active of these in the past sense was Nelson Rockefeller. Red and liberal, he was a Trojan horse in the Republican Party and led the conspirators, with the support of the dynasty’s tax-exempt loot, in its takeover. Frank Lynn, in a brilliant series of articles in the New York World-Telegram & Sun on the subject of Rockefeller’s campaign, aptly said: “Scratch Nelson Rockefeller and you will find a Democrat.”

Every Republican who has shown the slightest sign of Americanism, or opposition to unlimited looting of the taxpayers through “internationalism” and “foreign aid,” has been purged. Many of them lost their lives in the process of purging. Fatalities have occurred with curious regularity in the purging of defected agents of the Catholic faith. Even more curious is the fact that two of them died by supposedly “committing suicide,” as the police blotters read, by jumping out of upper story windows.

James Forrestal was closely associated with Rockefeller. As head of Dillon Read & Co., he effected the financing of the Rockefellers’ German interests, including that of their I.G. Farbenindustrie A.G. office building. He came under Rockefeller-Soviet discipline in Rockefeller’s CFR. It was Forrestal, appointed for the purpose a special assistant in charge of inter-American affairs, who served to cover up Rockefeller’s appointment to his draft-dodging, lucrative post of “coordinator,” with the help of Harry L. Hopkins and Anna Rosen berg. Forrestal turned over his position to Rockefeller and was given the post of assistant secretary of the Navy. Later he became the first secretary of defense, where he was in a position to sluice off arms contracts to firms controlled by his Rockefeller patrons.

As defense secretary, Forrestal first became alert to the treasonous tie-ins of the conspirators with the Soviets and of their significance. He instituted an investigation through his department that revealed the key role of his patrons in our betrayal to the reds. An initial report of this investigation was published on his order. Shortly thereafter, Forrestal was invited to the Georgia home of an associate in the CFR, Robert A. Lovett. There it has been reported he was seized, declared insane and committed to the psychiatric wards of the Bethesda Naval Hospital, under close guard in a room with barred windows. Later it was announced that Forrestal had “committed suicide by jumping out of his room window.” Forrestal’s investigation of the Rockefeller-Soviet axis was dropped by his Rockefeller-CFR-trained successor, Lovett.

Laurence Duggan was a grandson and son of members of Rockefeller’s CFR. An associate of Nelson Rockefeller, Alger Hiss and others of that “select” crew in the State Department, he was appointed director of the Rockefeller-subsidized Institute of International Education. Following questioning by the HUAC, in closed sessions, of his activities in planting communists and other subversives in schools, colleges and universities, during which he broke down and acknowledged following the directions of the conspirators, he returned to his 16th floor office in New York, close by Rockefeller Center. He died, as have so many other associated in this conspiracy, in a highly suspicious plunge from the window of his 16th floor office. Despite the facts that: he left no suicide note; that folk who plan to commit suicide by jumping from a window do not dress up for the occasion; that people who begin to dress usually complete the act before going on to other acts; and that there was evidence of a scuffle in his office, no question was ever raised by the authorities and his death was instantly and definitively declared to be “suicide,” without an investigation by the police, as if by pre-arrangement. But, it is reported, Duggan’s widow still receives salary checks from his employers, a highly unusual and suspicious gesture.

Sen. McCarthy’s investigations had furnished him and his committee with indubitable proof of the identity of the ringleaders of the subversive conspiracy. And in his hearings, he was coming dangerously close to exposing them. Probably fear of exposure accentuated Rockefeller’s rage at McCarthy joining Sen. Robert Taft in voting against the “foreign aid” bill for which he had intensively lobbied. Members of his staff report that he raved and vowed to destroy McCarthy; that he made no secret of it.

A vicious campaign of vilification of McCarthy was launched in every medium of mass communication, here and abroad, which is controlled by the dynasty. Their tax-exempt foundations and other agencies were brought into play. All of the overshadowing power for subversion and propaganda of the Rockefeller-Soviet axis was brought to bear on the vicious and virulent campaign to destroy McCarthy. The propagandists quickly converted his name into the epithet of “McCarthyism” that was soon on the lips of all “liberals” as well as of folks who should have known better, as an expression of contempt. In reality, the contempt was directed against the manifestation of patriotism that his activities represented.

Within minutes after a statement or release by Sen. McCarthy or of his committee, the gigantic propaganda machine that the conspirators have built up during more than a century, went into action to brainwash the “peasants” into a mass hysterical reaction to so-called “McCarthyism” that might well have proved their salvation if heeded. Cowardly members of McCarthy’s committee flinched and deserted him, as did many of his so-called “patriotic” friends.

When Sen. McCarthy undertook to investigate the granting of commissions in the armed services to notorious communists, and announced his plans to investigate the infiltration of communists and the use of communist textbooks in the academies at West Point and Annapolis, the conspirators “saw the hand writing on the wall.” The facts, as related, were notorious, as was the destruction of the armed forces’ records of communists and other subversives by order of such Rockefeller agents as John J. McCloy. Earl Browder made no secret of these facts; and he widely published boasts of these “accomplishments” of the Communist Party.

The trail of a thorough investigation of “Who promoted Peress?” would have led ultimately to the orders authorizing such promotions by the Rockefellers’ close CFR associate (later head of the Chase National Bank) John J. McCloy. And ultimately, it would have led to the Rockefellers themselves. And it would have led, in particular, to their “Fuehrer,” Nelson Rockefeller, the dedicated champion of reds and their cause, and the virulent, venomous hater of patriots and of the “ugly vice” of patriotism that is so detested by all dedicated “internationalists.”

“Defense of the Army” and an absurd pretense of “patriotism” were the pretexts used by the conspirators to block their exposure by McCarthy and his committee. The pawn in this move was a Rockefeller employee, who had been recently appointed trustee of the Rock e feller Foundation, Robert Tenbroek Stevens. Stevens was president of the textile firm, J. P. Stevens & Co., which it is reported had fallen into the clutches of the conspirators during the Depression. Col. John Zott, a West Point graduate who was sent by Rockefeller’s Caltex subsidiary, Aramco, with drafted GIs, to geologize and drill their Saudi Arabian oil field, informed the author that when, on his return to the United States, he was placed in charge of Army procurement, he was instructed to give almost three-quarters of the contracts for Army uniform cloth to J.P. Stevens & Co. In view of conflicts that invariably arise in connection with procurement, it is quite obvious that the appointment of Stevens involved a flagrant conflict of interest that should have made him a very vulnerable target.

The objectives of the conspirators in their attack on Sen. McCarthy were primarily three: 1) To make an object lesson of Sen. McCarthy in order to intimidate any official who might consider exposing them or demanding their prosecution for their crimes. 2) To wear out public patience and interest in exposures, thereby averting being exposed. 3) To cover up their conspiratorial trail by playing on patriotic attitudes of the “peasants” with regard to the armed services and on their easily-manipulated emotions.

For these purposes they employed as counsel for the committee of the Senate appointed to hear the charges, a ham actor who doubled as an attorney, named Welch, who was given full leeway in the display of his dubious talents. (He later was rewarded by the conspirators by given the stellar role in a motion picture to “glorify” himself.) And the conspirators arranged televising the hearings on a nationwide scale, making a circus of them. In order to make sure that Sen. McCarthy would not dare to present to the nation evidence that was available to him for exposing them and their conspiracy, they effectively intimidated him by various devices at their command.

The conspirators rigged the televised hearings before a Senate committee of their congressional agents and accomplices, on vague charges of harassing subversives in the government service. In other words, McCarthy was tried for performing ably, courageously and patriotically the duty for which he had been appointed. Simultaneously, they utilized every means at their command, which are almost limitless, to intensify their campaign of hate against him; and redoubled the cry of “McCarthyism,” with the help of their illiberal, brainwashed, so-called “liberal,” pink and red henchmen. A curious and extremely interesting phase of this “McCarthyism” campaign of hate was that it was joined in by his Catholic coreligionists, including numerous priests and prelates, and especially by the Jesuits who have distinguished themselves by their “liberalism” to the point of becoming leaders of the red movements.

McCarthy and his attorneys had available to them evidence that would have exposed Rockefeller and his associates as ringleaders in subversion and treason, and in the conspiracy to destroy him and discredit his patriotic following. Exposure of Army Secretary Stevens as a Rockefeller employee and of the conflict of interest in his appointment, alone, would have raised grave doubts in the public mind. Among the witnesses who were prepared to volunteer to testify on behalf of McCarthy were some of Rockefeller’s confidential employees who had been present when he had expressed himself in the matter.

But the conspirators had a throttle hold on McCarthy that blocked him from entering a valid offensive against his principal enemies and openly exposing to public gaze their too obvious subversiveness and malice. The senator did this in spite of the fact that he was warned and he knew that his failure to do so would be fatal. Whereas, as was pointed out to him, if he followed the example of Sen. Truman and exposed the conspirators as traitors, he also would be on his way to the White House. For the craven spirit of the dynasty impels them to court their enemies and betray their friends. There has been some suggestion that McCarthy’s reluctance to use some of the data available for his defense and his “pulling his punches” may have involved his own rocky marital situation.

McCarthy’s failure to use the means at his command to counter the attack of the conspirators on him facilitated their propaganda in building up a crushing antagonistic sentiment among the brainwashed elements among the peasants, as well as among his fair-weather “friends” and cowardly supporters. Extremely telling was his throwing to the wolves by his coreligionists, in and out of the Senate and Congress, by many clergymen, and especially actual condemnation by some prelates. Even Sen. John F. Kennedy, in whose name there appeared a volume entitled Profiles in Courage, lacked the courage, and possibly the desire, to support Sen. Joseph Mc Carthy’s outstanding patriotic services to the nation that he rendered at the actual sacrifice of his life. For his valiant patriotic activities, he certainly deserved better treatment by the nation.

The conspirators’ agents on the committee and the cowardly members of Senate who were scared to defy the “McCarthyism” propaganda flood that was loudly echoed by the red and communist press and communications media, traitorously condemned and censured McCarthy. They thus destroyed the effectiveness of the only man in their midst who had the courage and patriotism to defend the country against the conspirators. And they aided and abetted the destruction of the man himself.

In censuring Sen. McCarthy, his colleagues made it possible for the conspirators to intimidate any and all men in public life. “McCarthyism” was made by the subversive conspirators an epithet synonymous with “patriotism” and equally “reprehensible.”

Shortly after the hearings, Sen. McCarthy’s health began to fail. This is not an unusual experience for those who oppose the conspirators, which is a distinctly unhealthy occupation. It is the trail of a multitude of deaths. His illness “baffled” the physicians who treated him at the Bethesda Naval Hospital, the same institution where Forrestal was hurled to his death. McCarthy’s health went steadily and rapidly downhill to his death in the institution.

McCarthy’s medical attendant issued a death certificate and a statement to the press that indicated to the informed that he had been murdered in some unknown fashion. The death certificate read: “Cause of death: Acute hepatitis, CAUSE UNKNOWN.”

Simultaneously the physician released a statement to the press that Sen. McCarthy had not suffered from an infection that caused the symptoms of hepatitis. To understand the medical significance of these facts, one must bear in mind that hepatitis may develop as a manifestation of either an infection or of poisoning. Since the hospital made it quite clear in its press release that the cause of the hepatitis and death was not infection, the inference to be drawn from the death certificate is obvious.

The laws of the land dictate that the deaths due to unknown causes must be investigated by postmortem examinations to eliminate the possibility of murder. Such postmortems are compulsory and routine. There may be no interference with them by anyone. And no consent is required of the surviving members of the family. Burial of the corpses without postmortems is a felony under both local and federal laws.

No move was made by the conspirators to comply with the law and determine by postmortem what caused McCarthy’s death. A number of McCarthy’s associates and intimates, including his hometown friend, Mr. Engel, who acted on behalf of his family, approached this author with the request that he attempt to induce the authorities involved to order that an autopsy be done on the corpse to determine the unknown cause of his death and to eliminate the possibility of murder.

This author requested compliance with the law, by phone, of all the officials in the various parts of the country who were involved, including: officials of the Bethesda Naval Hospital; officials of Montgomery County, Maryland, where the hospital is located; officials of the District of Columbia; federal officials; officials of the state of Wisconsin; and officials of Appleton, Wisconsin, McCarthy’s home town. These efforts to secure compliance with the law met with no success. Each official “passed the buck.” The excuse that they offered for their disregard of the law was: “Mrs. McCarthy objects to an autopsy.”

None of them explained why it was that the wishes of any McCarthy, including his recently acquired wife, superseded the criminal laws of the land. It did not seem to matter to the responsible officials that their failure to comply with the law put them in the position of being accomplices after the fact in a felony, in a possible murder. Obviously, extremely powerful influence bore on the matter.

An extremely interesting but assiduously neglected phase of the John Kennedy assassination and its “investigation” or whitewash, was presented in a story published in the New York Daily News of November 10, 1963, by Joseph Cassidy and Lester Abelman. They related that President Kennedy visited New York on the preceding day, shortly after Nelson Rockefeller had announced his candidacy. He stopped at the Carlyle Hotel, which is reported to be jointly owned by the Rockefeller and Kennedy interests. They reported that the Secret Service maintained the “tightest vigilance on a New York visit in recent years”; and that no one, even newspaper reporters, was permitted to approach the president. No explanation has been offered, or sought by the “investigators,” for this extraordinary vigilance by the Secret Service in New York as contrasted with the lack of vigilance in Dallas. Was the service warned that Kennedy’s life was in danger in New York? Did they have reason to believe that an attempt would be made on his life in New York? A clarification of this matter might throw considerable light on the unexpected assassination in Dallas.

To set at rest the suspicions of murder raised by the McCarthy death certificate and the inquiries launched into the matter, Drew Pearson falsely alleged in his syndicated column that the hepatitis had been caused by alcoholism. In so doing, he cast a serious reflection on the reputations of the Bethesda Hospital physicians. For they would be poor specimens of the profession if they could not recognize cirrhosis resulting from the vitamin B deficiency caused by alcohol abuse, and treat it accordingly. Sen. McCarthy’s associates vouch for the fact that he had not been able to take liquor because of his illness for many months prior to his development of the hepatitis. Whatever poison precipitated his death, they attest that it was not alcohol. The obvious purpose of the Pearson column was to draw a “red herring” across the conspirators’ trail.

Entering Church
The body of Senator McCarthy being carried into St. Mary Catholic Church, Appleton, Wisconsin, May 6, 1957. An honor guard of Appleton's Commodore John Barry Post, Catholic War Veterans, led the procession. Eight Marines carried the body as a 35-man honor guard stood in salute.

"For four years, from 1950 until 1954, [Sen. Joseph] McCarthy was the only voice in America speaking out against those in government that were Communists, fellow-travelers (liberals who believed in but did not join the Communist Party), Russian sympathizers, and Stalin apologists. His enemies, consistent with the Left today, chose to attack the messenger rather than the message."

— Don Capron, Oswego Daily News, July 9, 2002

There are many parallels that can be drawn between the patriotism of the late Wisconsin Sen. Joseph McCarthy versus the treason of the late CBS News hack Edward R. Murrow, who just happens to be Hollywood leftist George Clooney’s all-time, favorite Communist media hero. For instance, while McCarthy sought to expose Communism in the deepest levels of government, Hollywood and even the news media, Murrow acted as if the Soviet threat never existed – and even seemed to have sympathized with it.

As a result, Murrow’s politics of hate against true patriots like McCarthy unfortunately spawned even more fellow Communist sympathizers – especially those in the press. By going on a self-aggrandizing witch hunt of McCarthy at that precise time in history, Murrow made himself a bonafide enemy of the U.S. and subsequently gave us fellow CBS’ Communist sympathizers like his anti-American prodigies, Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather, who had also sought the destruction of America in the name of journalism.

But that shouldn’t be too surprising – especially since today’s media leftists like Cronkite and Rather have done everything possible to promote America’s enemies by re-writing history via the news, which turned them more Red with every evening "news" broadcast.

After all, when Cronkite cheered on the North Vietnamese Communists by calling for America’s defeat in the Vietnam War, he was essentially interfering with U.S. foreign policy by changing from a so-called objective news anchor, to aligning himself with the very Communist threat we were trying to eliminate at that place in history.

Similarly, when Rather held doting "interviews" with Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro and Yasser Arafat, juxtaposed to later hunting down not only Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, but also our military’s current commander-in-chief, President Bush, through patently phony memos, he, too, had proven himself to be a traitor of the U.S. in his willing acquiescence to the world’s bloodiest barbarians.

Of course, these are the same media leftists today, who, time and again, have given fellow Democrat traitors like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Harry Reid, Charles Schumer and Dick Durbin free media passes to trash Bush, our courageous military – and the U.S.

"If anyone has the gaucherie to point to the Left’s nearly unblemished record of rooting against America, liberals turn around and scream "McCarthyism!" wrote Ann Coulter in her wonderfully researched best-seller Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism, which masterfully vindicates and sets the record straight on Joseph McCarthy, who equally should have been praised for exposing Communist enablers.

Now, put Hollywood’s latest attacks on McCarthy against the backdrop of the elite media’s malicious lies about Bush and you have all the makings of yet another bankrupted attempt by the Left to grasp at every available straw possible to try to fix the 2006 and 2008 elections through Dan Rather-style fraudulence and anti-U.S. leftist propaganda – even if they have to spit on McCarthy’s grave once again to do it.

"Liberals invented the myth of McCarthyism to delegitimize impertinent questions about their own patriotism (p. 1)…"having ceded the lie of "McCarthyism," now no one is allowed to call liberals unpatriotic," Coulter wrote in her 2003 book. "Liberals relentlessly attack their own country, but we can’t call them traitors, which they manifestly are, because that would be "McCarthyism," which never existed (p. 75)."

But that’s exactly why the Left still hates McCarthy: He not only exposed Communist spies in our own government, he also unwittingly stirred up the hornet’s nest of its rogue sympathizers already residing in the U.S. media. In effect, McCarthy dared to not only root out Communism in high places but also question the patriotism of those who had so manifestly belittled its threat. Why else would Murrow have been so strangely compelled to vilify McCarthy without first giving him a fair trial in the court of public opinion?

Similarly, today, while the McCarthys of the New Media are taking the global terrorist threat seriously by reporting the facts from both sides, the Murrows of the Old Media openly mock national security threats, which they have often created themselves, by providing their usual CNN-turned-al-Jazeera-type aid and comfort to America’s enemies. After all, for the last five and a half years, Democrats and their equally corrupt media accomplices have desperately tried to overthrown the Bush administration to try to regain political power and stop democracy from taking root and flourishing in the Arab world.

Ironically, the same Democrats and media allies that viciously decried the false charges of the GOP’s so-called "politics of personal destruction" are now the very ones implementing them by subverting U.S. foreign policy and driving a wedge between President Bush and the American public, while coddling our enemies (i.e., CNN).

We have already seen their vilification of Bush in the form of the baseless, phantom scandals they have eagerly foisted on Tom DeLay, Karl Rove and Bill Frist, as well as the colossal fiasco that is Harriet Miers. However, whether or not you agree with the Miers nomination, the Democrat Party’s media allies will eventually seek the personal destruction of any Republican they can find to put their fellow Democrats back in power.

In effect, the same reason the Left went on a witch hunt of McCarthy is the same reason they, in recent years, have also demonized top conservatives Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett, Trent Lott, Rick Santorum, as well as libertarian Bill O’Reilly. It’s also the only way the Democrats can ever hope to win elections, which backfired in 2004.

In the end, that was Murrow’s goal when he maliciously perverted McCarthy’s own strategy and tried to thwart McCarthy’s mission of exposing Communists in our very midst. But what was Murrow so afraid of anyway? Could it be Murrow secretly feared that McCarthy’s heroic endeavors would one day change the course of history and eventually result in the domino-effect-style collapse of Communism? Think Alger Hiss, Adlai Stevenson, and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg as noted in the Venona Project.

Alongside Murrow, other media figures were also waging war on McCarthy, since the Wisconsin senator suspected them of being spies.

While they launched a massive crusade to label McCarthy as a fear-monger, media leftists at the time were the ones instilling fear in the hearts of their captive audiences – and excusing the blatant treason of their fellow colleagues:

I.F. Stone, a Stalin apologist and former associate editor of the Stalinist rag, The Nation, who later led the subversive 1960s leftist media call for America’s defeat against Communism in the Vietnam War, was a constant critic of U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War. But as we later found out from McCarthy’s investigations, Stone turned out to be a Soviet agent.
"Even today, the New York Times and the Washington Post can’t accept the evidence that I.F. Stone was a Soviet agent," wrote Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media (Feb. 25, 2000).

Kincaid also wrote on March 31, 1999 that "I.F. Stone postured as an independent writer whose mission was to expose corruption in U.S. policies and the U.S. Government. When North Korea attacked South Korea in 1950, he tried to bolster the false Communist allegation that the United States and South Korea had started the war. During the Vietnam War, he became an icon of the anti-war movement.

"After his death, the evidence came out. Decoded cables from the National Security Agency, known as the Venona intercepts, conclusively demonstrate that Stone was taking money from the KGB during many of the years he was publishing his newsletter, I.F. Stone’s Weekly. One of the documents describes his recruitment by the KGB. In addition, FBI files released to Accuracy in Media through a Freedom of Information Act request state that an informant within the Communist Party USA had identified Stone as a member in the 1930s."

Herbert Block, the 1950s Washington Post cartoonist, who was a strong critic of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Nixon, was credited with helping to bring down Nixon via his cartoons; he was also the first person to label McCarthy’s honorable intentions, with the legendary misnomer of "McCarthyism." Block especially hated Nixon because Nixon helped expose Alger Hiss as a Soviet spy.
Daniel Fitzpatrick, the 1930s St. Louis Post-Dispatch cartoonist, directly took on McCarthy in his cartoons.
Walter Duranty, the 1930s New York Times reporter, who covered up Joseph Stalin’s atrocities, also was considered a Soviet agent. Recently, there was a call for the Times to strip Duranty of his Pulitzer Prize for his pro-Stalinist propaganda but, not surprisingly, Times editor Bill Keller refused to relinquish the statute.
Wilfred Burchett, a self-described Communist sympathizer, was an Australian "journalist" who had stories running in the U.S. media, and was a Soviet agent. Burchett "reported" from the "other side" in Korea, in which he claimed was an attempt to get a balanced view of so-called "Western deception in armistice negotiations." But according to Capitalism Magazine’s Jean Francois Revel, in an article about anti-Americanism (Feb. 27, 2004), Burchett made up the lie about "the farcical allegation of bacteriological warfare waged by Americans in Korea."
But these are only a handful of media traitors who sold out to our enemies, while often getting paid under the table by Communists to slant their stories against the U.S.

Slate.com Editor-at-Large Jack Shafer, a devote liberal, but an intellectually honest one, wrote that "Murrow’s intense partisanship" was further transparent when he "secretly tutored the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, Adlai Stevenson, on how to speak to the camera effectively (Oct. 5)."

Murrow, however, refused to see the Communist threat that was under his alleged newshound nose when he was busy coaching a Communist spy friend he was aiding and abetting. In fact, Murrow even refused to believe that his friend Laurence Duggan, Harry Truman’s State Department turncoat, could have been a Soviet spy – but he was.

Yet, the late great former President Ronald Reagan could spot a Communist a mile away – and eventually won his 40-year fight against the insidious cancer of Communism, while the anti-U.S. useful idiots in the elite media were hating him for it, which showed up in their slanted coverage against the Gipper.

But that’s what’s really behind the elite media’s opposition to the New Media of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge, where both sides of the issues actually get out to the American public without gatekeepers. This is in contrast to Old Media leftism, where the Communist-Marxist enablers of the past still push their defeated, one-sided, anti-American propaganda that was once never challenged or questioned – until now.

Essentially, it took a grassroots effort to get both sides of the story out – and passed the filters of the mainstream press. With the advent of the New Media, we are not only finding traitors in the Old Media, but also Tinseltown as well – who are increasingly seeking out every avenue possible to sell out America.

Take George Clooney’s new anti-McCarthy hack piece "Good Night, and Good Luck" he’s now pushing – and promulgating, which is nothing more than leftist propaganda within leftist propaganda. What was meant to be a film about Murrow, as well as an indirect thank you card to Dan Rather for his 40 years of sloppy, acquiescently anti-U.S. Pravda, is really a propaganda piece that revives the Left’s witch hunt of McCarthy.

But Clooney never bothered to include the very information that refuted his claims – and ultimately vindicated McCarthy – in his Michael Moore-like history revision.

"A terrific movie about the Murrow-McCarthy duel could be made, mind you, but Clooney and company ignore the material that might argue against their simple-minded thesis about Murrow, the era, and the press to produce an after-school special," Shafer said of Clooney’s Woodward and Bernstein’s Watergate-style hatchet job on McCarthy.

"…Plowing through the Murrow and McCarthy literature after viewing the film, I was impressed at how deeply Clooney and [Grant] Heslov researched the topic yet dismayed at how they cherry-picked material to compose their sermon," Shafer added.

Ultimately, Murrow’s March 9, 1954 ambush on his program, "See It Now" – and eventually, Clooney’s October surprise hack piece – on McCarthy, turned out to be nothing more than another public lynching of a great man the Left and their media minions vehemently despised. Even Murrow’s "boys," Eric Sevareid, Daniel Schorr, Howard K. Smith, Marvin Kalb and Bob Pierpoint, pushed their leftist biases.

But that’s what we’ve come to expect from Hollywood and their media friends. Since the Left is finally being held accountable by the New Media for decades of lies and distortions of history, their anarchical impulses compel them to take their Pravda to the big screen. It’s all a subversive move to try to shift the public paradigm from patriotism and love of country that our brave U.S. military invoke, to the Left’s insatiable lust for complete hegemony that Communism embodies.

By all accounts, Murrow was more interested in making McCarthy out to be a terrorist than he was acknowledging the real Soviet threat. In Murrow’s mind, what better way to spread anti-American, pro-Communist sentiment than through the airwaves, where he had a captive audience – as well as no one to refute his charges. Once Murrow took off his reporter hat and took on McCarthy, Murrow became the exact opposite of who he pretended to be behind the anchor chair. In effect, Murrow was no longer an objective new reporter; he became a Communist sympathizer who adamantly refused to even take much less the Communist threat seriously, much less McCarthy.

Even by Murrrow’s very line of questioning to McCarthy, capped off by the utter arrogance and condensing he displayed towards McCarthy, Murrow showed that he didn’t care about the Communist threat. In fact, Murrow was trying to prove that McCarthy was supposedly the bigger threat to America than Communism. Eventually, there was absolutely no attempt on Murrow’s part to get to the truth.

For Murrow, it was all show to try once again to make a name for himself as he did as a war correspondent, while embracing the anti-McCarthy hysteria that swept the country via Murrow’s partisan grandstanding.

While McCarthy was rooting out Communism, which actually was infiltrating the U.S., Murrow was seeking to paint McCarthy as the real enemy and Communists as victims of so-called American imperialism.

Now, Clooney’s trying to egregiously pass off Murrow as the hero.

"Why I should have expected anything other than an exercise in media triumphalism from Good Night and Good Luck, I don’t know, but I did," said James Bowman of The American Spectator (Oct. 12). "Silly me. If I had seen the advertising tagline before I saw the movie, I’d have known better.

"In A Nation Terrorized By Its Own Government, One Man Dared to Tell The Truth." What nation would that be, I wonder? Oh, right, of course it’s the United States of Amerika (Shafer’s spelling). And such nonsense is not only in the tagline.

"The film’s hero, Edward R. Murrow (David Strathairn), a once famous CBS newsman, explains his broadcast attack on Senator Joseph McCarthy in March of 1954 by saying he’s "going to go after him because the terror is right here in this room." Yeah, right. The real Murrow made his name reporting to Americans on the Blitz in London. It’s a little hard to believe that he didn’t have a better idea than this of what "terror" meant."

In fact, Bowman wrote, Clooney and Heslov also don’t know.

"They have completely and uncritically bought into the official Hollywood version of the McCarthy era," Bowman wrote. "It’s hardly surprising, but it’s quite false. Not by the wildest caprice of imagination was "A Nation Terrorized" by McCarthy.

"…Because his heroes are so perfect – always right, as McCarthy is always wrong – Mr. Clooney must have seen the need to qualify his admiration in some way, lest his film become mere hagiography," Bowman concluded.

But there are still many media leftists, however, who insist on showering Murrow and Cronkite with unending praise for confronting so-called "evil" Republicans.

These media sycophants are also blinded to the realities of their own biases that one media hack, Detroit Free Press media critic Tom Lawson, refuses to see Clooney’s leftist propaganda for what it really is: anti-Bush, anti-U.S. hatred, devoid of any facts or logic.

"Before there was Walter Cronkite and "That’s the way it is," there was Edward R. Murrow," heralded Lawson (Oct. 14) of Clooney’s anti-McCarthy hit piece, which Lawson enthusiastically gave four stars. "…He was, if not the first broadcast television legend, the first to truly deserve the status.

"George Clooney has been a persistent and mostly on-target critic of how the legacy of Murrow and television news has been tramped on by corporate greediness, political agendas and producers obsessed with celebrity and ratings," wrote Lawson, who later claimed that the public had an alleged "swift national disillusionment with McCarthy and his fall from grace."

So what was Lawson’s final analysis on Clooney’s anti-McCarthy propaganda piece?

"Good Night, and Good Luck" stands, tall, solid, impressive and expressive joining not only the best films about journalism, but also those about real Americans."

Instead of calling McCarthy a real American for courageously exposing Communism, Lawson said he believed Murrow was actually the real American for trying to keep a lid on it. Never mind that Clooney’s poor excuse for a film is laced with inaccuracies, innuendoes and hype.

Chicago Sun-Times reporter Miriam Di Nunzio also fawned over Murrow, while falsely charging that "McCarthy’s famous "blacklist" of celebrities unwilling to testify before the House Committee on Un-American Activities (and those who refused to fink on their colleagues, friends and relatives) destroyed many a Hollywood career and became one of the most dangerous attacks on American civil liberties":

"The infamous Communist witch hunts of Sen. Joseph McCarthy in the mid-1950s might have turned out differently had it not been for the unflinching persistence of CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow, who called the junior senator from Wisconsin to the mat on live television," Di Nunzio opined (Oct. 16).

Notice that Di Nunzo emphasized "live television," as in a calculated ambush where Murrow tried to catch McCarthy off guard. But Murrow failed to do so because of McCarthy’s deep convictions and honesty, which the Left always tries to manufacture.

What’s more, Houston Chronicle columnist Eric Harrison (Oct. 14) equally gushed over Murrow, while taking a cheap shot at Fox News, despite ignoring the fact that Bill O’Reilly actually praised Clooney’s propaganda film, saying it was "really excellent."

In his anti-McCarthy smear piece, entitled "Murrow stood against McCarthy, set tone for nation," Harrison was at least right on one point: Murrow did stand against McCarthy, but for all the wrong reasons.

In the end, Harrison failed to recognize that Murrow opposed McCarthy because he hated what McCarthy was standing for: America; Murrow did set the tone for the nation at that point in time as one who was nothing more than a Communist sympathizer.

But you wouldn’t know that by Harrison’s relentless praise of Murrow.

"He was principled, cerebral and eloquent – not necessarily qualities we associate with television newscasters today," gushed Harrison. "They may not even be qualities we want in television newscasters today. But long before Anderson Cooper’s twitchy stutter, Bill O’Reilly’s bombastic bullying or Keith Olbermann’s wisecracks, Edward R. Murrow epitomized the ideal of the TV journalist."

It’s no wonder then that Rather told the Hollywood Reporter (Nov. 30, 2004) that he often sought the "spirit of Edward R. Murrow" while nocturnally roaming the halls of CBS "News." As Rather continues to melt down before our very eyes, we also see the real motive behind the collective nature of the elite media.

Because of Rather’s decision in September 2004 to make Bush out to be the villain in the former CBS has-been’s psychotic need for revenge, Rather played a treasonously dangerous game with our national security. It’s as if the Sept. 11 attacks on our country didn’t mean anything to him, despite shedding crocodile tears on David Letterman.

Since then, Rather has been going stark raving mad. Like Murrow, Rather crossed the line as a so-called reporter by denying the terrorist threat to our country. If Rather were serious about the terrorist threat, he never would have gone after Bush in the first place.

So it’s no surprise that Rather has also been praised by Hollywood for viciously smearing Republicans – especially by Clooney, who actually lamented that the Big Three Communist networks were no longer able to get away with speciously vilifying conservative Republicans.

"But Dan Rather and CBS often have shown their belief that good journalism depends mostly on selecting good targets; whether the shots fired at those targets are true or ethical isn’t really the point," wrote Media Research Center Director Brent Bozell (Oct. 16). "All that matters is: Was the target destroyed?

"We shouldn’t be surprised, therefore, when Clooney told the Village Voice that "Dan Rather loves, loves, loves this movie." Clooney expressed sadness at Rather’s predicament, quoting Marvin Kalb. "What’s important to remember about Rather is that the story was right, but the source was wrong." It was fake, but accurate."

The falsehoods of Hollywood and the elite media are no different now. It’s no secret that Clooney despises the war in Iraq and will do anything to abuse his power in Hollywood to see to it that the terrorist threat we face also gets thwarted. Therefore, it’s no surprise that Clooney worships Murrow, who never took national security threats seriously, either.

Instead of exposing the evils of Communism, Murrow deliberately made McCarthy out to be the evil one. That’s why Murrow would have been proud of his prodigy, Dan Rather, who tried to use phony memos to bring down a sitting Republican president, just like Murrow used known Communists as "witnesses" to smear McCarthy.

It was this fear that ultimately made Murrow demonize McCarthy. In fact, Murrow couldn’t believe that there were actually patriotic American senators like McCarthy who would dare to expose Communism down to its very core (the way Murrow was supposed to as a so-called journalist).

In fact, in his closing smear against McCarthy, Murrow exposed his own utter partisanship and the real motive behind his anti-McCarthy witch hunt.

"We will not walk in fear, one of another," Rather’s hero said. "We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason if we dig deep in our history and doctrine and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes which were for the moment unpopular. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of the Republic to abdicate his responsibility."

But, in the end, Murrow was the one who eventually "abdicated his responsibility" because he blatantly misrepresented McCarthy and sought to destroy him. Like Murrow, this is exactly what Rather wanted to do with Bush.

We are seeing this happening before our very eyes with the way the elite media are putting the Bush administration on trial by playing up the trumped-up charges of Rove, DeLay and Frist. Contrast that with the real charges against Saddam Hussein, which the elite media are playing down. While they have already convicted and sentenced Rove, DeLay and Frist, ABC, CNN and the Times are actually wondering if Hussein is getting a fair trial.

If only we could get censures for these so-called journalists who routinely give aid and comfort to the enemy. What’s even more ironic, Times hack Judith Miller is now trying to cover her tracks by calling for a shield law to protect confidential sources. But in Miller’s case, she wanted to protect the sources who sought to destroy President Bush, while she desperately tried to escape culpability for her treasonous role in the "leak."

Now, in the same way, with Clooney, the devil is definitely in the details.

"…Were there, in fact, any communists in Hollywood, the media or the government and were they a real danger to the Republic?" Bowman wrote. "These questions the movie never thinks it worth its while to ask, let alone answer…"

In Clooney, we also see the remnants of the Hollywood Left that went after McCarthy with a vengeance.

"I think Clooney and Hollywood are paranoid," wrote Don Irvine of Accuracy in Media (Oct. 5). "They feel the need to present this piece of revisionist history in an effort to defend their out of the mainstream way of thinking.

"In commenting on the situation today, Clooney says of journalists, "They’re the first writers of history. There is no civil-rights movement without journalists. There is no end of McCarthy. It’s been a tough time for journalists – if you ask a tough question of this administration, on a rare occasion when they have a press conference, you’re put in the back of the room, or you're Maureen Dowd and you get your credentials pulled. To question anything about them is meant to be unpatriotic."

Since Clooney is giving journalists so much credit, Irvine concluded, he should also mention how "journalists misreported events in Vietnam that led to the end of the war and to genocide in Cambodia.’

"Or how about without journalists reporting favorably about Saddam Hussein during the first Iraq War we might have been able to oust him and prevent further killings of Iraqi citizens by his regime.

"As with most Hollywood liberals, Clooney lacks the facts and will not help restore honor to the word "liberal" whatever that is supposed to mean."

Today’s mainstream media resemble more of the Murrow-style of "journalism." By not welcoming the New Media of Fox News, Newsmax.com, Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge, who have broken through the pro-Democrat gatekeepers and essentially exposed the Old Media of Communist and terrorist sympathizers, they are nothing more than Pravda channels that live within their own little bubble.

It’s the meltdown of this leftist media culture that is no longer in control of the message and in charge of pushing a pro-Democrat agenda they once did without challenge.

For example, the McCarthys of the New Media are reporting what the Old Media Communists refuse to report:

The real story of the so-called CIA leak investigation is not Karl Rove; it’s Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame’s attempt to abuse their classified positions in Washington, D.C. to treasonously subvert U.S. foreign policy in Iraq.
The real story behind Tom DeLay’s baseless indictment is Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, Dan Rather’s close friend, and his politically motivated charges, which no one in the elite media are calling Earle on right now.
The real story behind Bill Frist is a partisan-motivated Clinton holdovers who excused Bill Clinton’s corrupt ties to Enron, Global Crossing and WorldCom.
It’s media leftists like Rather, who are only starting to crack up under the weight of their own anti-Americanism that is also left unreported.

This is especially true since the Left can’t tell a true patriot like Joseph McCarthy apart from a U.S. traitor like Edward R. Murrow.

"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Well-informed anti-Communists know how right McCarthy was when he denounced and exposed Owen Lattimore and the rest of the gang responsible for the Communist conquest of China. But even the Senator's best friends usually keep silent when he is accused of having "defended Nazi murderers" because, back in 1949, he dared to question the validity of confessions obtained under duress from the German prisoners of war accused of the Malmedy Massacre; and further insisted that even defeated enemies should not be denied a fair trial by due process.

Since few of McCarthy's supporters have been as courageous as he in defying the "liberal" smear-bund, which has vilified anyone who demanded justice for Germans, they have let his enemies get away with murder, literally as well as figuratively. Figuratively because they have played upon both ignorance and moral cowardice to assassinate McCarthy's character. Literally because it was the "professional liberals" who inspired the war crimes trials which condemned German prisoners of war to death on evidence which no court in the United States would have considered valid.

Now that an ignorant old man from Vermont has smeared McCarthy on the Senate floor with the same false accusation as Drew Pearson, Elmer Davis and other Pharisees, it is more than ever necessary to publish the facts. But it is unlikely that either the New York Times, or other newspapers less guilty of suppressing all the news which does not fit, will ever perform this public service. Nor can I, in a short article, hope to do more than refute some of the lies and correct some of the misinformation spewed forth by the totalitarian liberals and anti anti-Communists.

This is not a question which concerns simply McCarthy's reputation. Whatever the reader's opinion may be concerned the Junior Senator from Wisconsin, he cannot afford to ignore the dire consequences of the trials of the vanquished by the victors of the second World War. Far from deterring any nation from committing atrocities in future wars, these trials annulled centuries of effort to establish civilized rules of warfare. For they established the terrible precedent that the victors are immune from punishment, while the vanquished can have no hope of a fair trial. The net result of our return to the Roman principle of "woe to the vanquished" is to encourage the commission of any and every atrocity which can help to win a war.

It was bad enough that we shared the bench at Nuremberg with Soviet Russia, which had committed, and was still busily engaged in committing, at least as great and terrible crimes against humanity as Nazi Germany. It was worse that Article 6 of the Charter which established the "International Military Tribunal" precluded consideration of crimes not committed "in the interests of the Axis countries." Then the U.S. and Britain became accessories after the fact by forbidding mention of Communist crimes at Nuremberg.

Mr. Justice Jackson, the chief U.S. prosecutor, together with our representative on the bench, showed no hesitation in collaborating with the Soviets in refusing to hear the evidence presented by German defense council proving that the Russians, not the Germans, had murdered 10,000 Polish officers in Katyn Forest. The tribunal instead heard a witness produced by Moscow who said the Germans had committed this crime.

Today, most Americans probably would agree with Senator Taft and the few others who had the courage and foresight to condemn the Nuremberg trials at the time they were held. But the public has been kept in almost complete ignorance of the U.S. Army trials at Dachau of minor German "war criminals," where both the methods of investigation and the trials were far worse than at Nuremberg; and which established a precedent for the mistreatment of our prisoners of war in Korea.

Few, if any, of the American soldiers who were starved, beaten and tortured by their Communist captors to make them confess to "germ warfare" or other "war crimes" can have known that the American Army had employed similar methods to force confessions from teen-age enlisted men and junior officers accused of having murdered American prisoners of war at Malmedy. And none of them are likely to have ever heard of Lieutenant Colonel Willis M. Everett, of Atlanta, Georgia, who wrote as follows in his 1946 petition to the Supreme Court on behalf of the German soldiers for whom he had acted as Chief Defense Counsel at Dachau:

It is not only because of the fate of the seventy-four accused, but primarily of the historical significance and fundamental importance of the Malmedy Trial this Petition for Review may be justified. Unfortunately, the history of international law reveals that many injustices have been committed and many bad precedents have been established. This trial will receive a share of criticism in the future because its decision will necessarily serve as a precedent for the military profession of all of the nations of the world.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the petition, thus washing its hands of all responsibility. Nor was any heed taken of the appeal of the twenty-five German Catholic bishops who wrote in 1948:

"Will not the tortures at the preliminary inquests at Schwabische Hall and Obersesel, and the mass executions at Landsberg, later on do more harm to victorious America than a lost battle?"

Today the mills of God grind so fast that these prophecies have already been fulfilled. But, unhappily, by our young men who, like many of the condemned Germans, were guilty only of having fought bravely for their country in far-off Korea.

The columnists and commentators who, like Elmer Davis, accuse McCarthy of having "used propaganda from German Communists to save the lives of Nazi officers who had murdered American prisoners at Malmedy" are either deliberately misinforming the public or have never taken the trouble to learn the facts.

The majority of the young men sentenced by the U.S. Army Court at Dachau for the Malmedy Massacre were neither Nazis nor officers, but teen-age enlisted men and young non-commissioned officers. And when Senator McCarthy, to his everlasting credit, endeavored to stop the hangings at Laadsberg of these German prisoners of war, he was relying upon information given by such irreproachable Americans as Lt. Colonel Willis P. Everett, and by prominent religious leaders.

Like the German Catholic bishops, the Lutheran Bishop Wurm of Stuttgart had protested to the American authorities against what he called "terrible investigation methods which mock description." These "methods" consisted of beatings and kickings; knocking out of teeth and the breaking of jaws; starvation and solitary confinement for months without exercise or visitors or correspondence; promises of release from pain and the threat of death if the victim would sign statements incriminating others; threats of reprisals on the prisoner's wife, children and parents if he refused to sign dictated statements; mock trials in dark rooms around a table lighted only by candles around a crucifix; and bogus priests promising absolution if the prisoner would agree to sign false statements.

The sickening details can be read in a long book, printed in the English language, issued by the "evangelical Church in Germany," and called Memorandum on the Question of War Crimes Trials before American Military Courts.

Far from denying the truth of these allegations, two of the "un-American" investigators employed by the U.S. Army to extract "confessions" from German prisoners of war, namely, Lt. Colonel Ellis and Lt. Perl, told Judge Von Roden of the Simpson Commission in 1949 that force was necessary in view of the difficulty in obtaining evidence. Perl said: "We had to use persuasive methods." He further admitted that these methods included "some violence and mock trials," and that the prosecution's case in the Malmedy cases rested on the evidence thus obtained.

Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld, who was Chief of the Dachau branch of the U.S. War Crimes Administration until he resigned in 1948, when asked at a press interview before leaving Germany whether there was any truth in the German allegations concerning mock trials, replied, "Yes, of course. We couldn't have made those birds talk otherwise. It was a trick and it worked like a charm."

One needs only to read the U.S. Military Government directive to the tribunals which tried the Germans to realize that these soldiers were judged according to un-American "principles" of justice closely akin to those applied by the Nazis and the Communists. Dated November 30, 1945, this U.S. Army Order says:

The purpose of proceedings in Military Government Courts and of principal enactments enforced by them is the protection of the U.S. Forces in occupation and the advancement of the political, military and administrative objectives declared by the Control Council and Theatre Commander. All enactments will therefore be interpreted broadly and in accordance with their obvious intention. Proceedings will be conducted with the view to the attainment of this purpose to the fullest possible extent; technical and legalistic viewpoints will not be allowed to interfere with such a result.

Ordered not to allow "technical and legalistic viewpoints" to interfere with the desired result of the trial, the judges disregarded normal rules of evidence. They admitted the testimony of co-defendants as conclusive evidence; based some of their verdicts on heresy, double hearsay, and unsigned documents; regarded "confessions" as conclusive proof of guilt even when they were retracted in court; and rejected the rebuttal evidence of the defense even when it was supplied by American Army witnesses.

There was no jury, nor were the accused allowed German defense counsel, although they had been arbitrarily reduced to civilian status before their trial in order to deprive them of the protection offered by the Geneva Convention to prisoners of war. The court consisted of ten U.S. Army officers and one "law member," who was the same Colonel A. H. Rosenfeld who had directed the pre-trial inquisition of the defendants. Since the prosecutors were his investigators, it was hardly surprising that Colonel Rosenfeld blocked all attempts by the defense to prove that confessions had been made under duress. As Colonel Everett has stated:

"When details of the beatings and other pressures were requested, the prosecution would object, and the law member of the court would always sustain the objection and prevent the evil and ruthless tactics of the prosecution from being further exposed in open court."

It was typical of the proceeding that in the case of a boy of eighteen called Arvid Freimuth, who had hung himself in his cell after repeated beatings rather than sign the "confession" dictated to him, the prosecution was permitted to bring in as "evidence" the statement which he would have been forced to sign if he had not committed suicide.

We shall probably never know the truth concerning the "Malmedy Massacre" of surrendered Americans during the Battle of the Bulge. The Germans contend that they were accidentally killed because, after their surrender, they had been left disarmed, but unguarded, and were shot down by German tanks whose gunners were unaware that the uniformed Americans impeding their progress were prisoners of war.

The truth of the matter was probably most correctly stated by General Handy who, in commuting the death sentences of the surviving Malmedy prisoners on January 31, 1951, said: "The offenses are connected with a confused, mobile and desperate combat action." No American combat soldier is likely to disagree with this pronouncement, which is supported by the confused and contradictory account of the incident by American soldiers who survived the massacre. Moreover Lt. Colonel McCowan testified for the defense that he himself and some hundred other Americans taken prisoner by the task force accused of the crime had been properly treated.

The Senate Judiciary Committee which, in 1949, under the chairmanship of Baldwin of Connecticut, "investigated" the charges against the Army, like the Tydings Committee a year later, showed itself more interested in a whitewash operation than in remedying evil. On July 26, 1949, Senator McCarthy, after withdrawing in disgust from the hearings, made a speech on the Senate floor in which he drew attention to the fact that Senator Baldwin's law partner was one of the men responsible for the tortures inflicted on the accused Germans; and that another member of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Kefauver, had as his law partner a certain Mr. Shumaker, who was similarly responsible for the unlawful and un-American procedures at Dachau. In 1953, two of the Army's investigators at Dachau were arrested in Vienna as Soviet spies.

When I visited Landsberg last fall, there were still some 300 Germans incarcerated in its grim fortress, including the surviving Malmedy defendants. Our prisoners are today decently treated and a considerable number have been released on parole during the past year, but there are many who have little or no hope of release because they are serving life sentences.

And as if to give substance to the charge that improper means were used to extract confessions of guilt, the instructions given on August 31, 1953, to our "Mixed Interim Parole and Clemency Board: say that any "parolee" who issues "any public written or oral statement of a personal, historical, military or political content, without prior approval of the competent authority, will be sent back to prison and deprived "of all credits otherwise allowable at the completion of his sentence."

Some of the inmates of Landsberg were undoubtedly guilty of crimes against humanity and are lucky to have escaped death by hanging. But the plain fact is that the majority of the real war criminals are either dead, or are living comfortably in the East Zone as adherents of the Communist regime; or are in Russia helping the Soviet preparations for war against us; or have disappeared among the mass of the German population. Most prisoners are little people who got caught up by accident to bear the brunt of the world's horror of Nazi crimes.

For the sale of America's reputation for justice, no less than because we wish to enlist the German people as our allies against Communist tyranny, we should seek to right the injustice of the post-war period. If those whose hearts bleed for McCarthy's "victims" would display some interest in the real miscarriages of justice in Germany, there would be hope of annulment of the instructions signed last August by our "liberal" High Commissioner, Mr. James B. Conant, which reads as follows:

"Neither parole nor clemency involves consideration of the propriety or legality of the trial proceedings, guilt or sentence, which are final and conclusive."

In the early 1950's, the House Committee on Un-American Activities barely scratched the surface of a conspiracy too mind-boggling to comprehend, let alone accept:

"Communists" have secretly controlled the United States since 1913.

The reason that Senator Joseph McCarthy and his colleagues did not recognize this fact was because they were looking for Soviet agents. They did not appreciate that the Bolshevik revolution itself was largely the brainchild of the same international banking cartel that already controlled the United States, and planned to use "Communism" to melt down all nationalities into a fascist "new world order" administered by the United Nations.

In December 1953, Rowan Gaither, the President of the Ford Foundation confessed that the objective of all the major tax-exempt foundations was "to alter life in the United States so as to make possible a comfortable merger with the Soviet Union." He revealed this to Norman Dodd, the Research Director of the US House of Representatives' Reece Commission. (See William McIlhaney, "The Tax Exempt Foundation" 1980, p. 63.)

The international bankers realized they could not maintain their monopoly over money indefinitely. Why would great nations continue to pay billions of dollars in interest on loans that bankers created out of thin air? Therefore the international bankers had to secure control of the politics, media and education of each country. Moreover, they had to engineer world government in case one country tried to repudiate their "debt." Communism, with its bogus promise of universal brotherhood, was the ideological cover for this "new world order." Feminism, diversity, multi culturalism and globalism are the latest disguises for this fascist agenda.

To assist, the bankers recruited other anti social groups: socialists, the Mafia, other cartels, European aristocracy, occult societies, anybody who felt threatened by nationhood, democracy, religion, nuclear family, free enterprise, justice and the healthy development of mankind.

These deviants and their high-priced toadies constitute the global elite. The CIA, MI-5/6, the Mossad and every major intelligence agency owe their loyalty directly to this elite. These agencies have the additional function of operating the annual $500 billion drug trade, which has been a source of elite power for more than 200 years. These agencies executed the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City attacks. This cabal is probably responsible for 95% of the "terrorist" acts and political assassinations of the last 100 years.

The totality of its control of the United States is brought home by what happens to people who stand in their way.

They are murdered.

Take, for example, James Forrestal, the first US Secretary of Defence. He saw an alien hand at work in the administration of Harry Truman, When it became clear that he intended to talk, Forrestal was dismissed and forcibly hospitalized for "extreme fatigue." His diaries were taken from his office. He was drugged and prevented from seeing his family or friends. On May 22, 1949, hours before his brother was planning to take him home, he "committed suicide" falling from his 16th floor window at Bethesda Naval Hospital.

In the book, "The Death of James Forrestal" (1966), Cornell Simpson documents many cases of people in a position to expose the elite conspiracy who met similar fates.

Anti Communist crusader Senator Joseph McCarthy died May 2, 1957, at age 47, after entering Bethesda for treatment of hepatitis, a non-fatal disease.

Harry Dexter White died mysteriously August 16, 1948 at his summer home three days after testifying at the House Committee on Un-American Activities. He was part of the coterie of "Soviet agents" in the State Department who tilted U.S. foreign policy in favor of the Soviet Union and China, and who wrote the United Nations Charter.

Another member of this coterie was Alger Hiss, who was now the president of the elite sponsored "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace." Former Soviet agent Whittaker Chambers had denounced Hiss as a Communist spy. Hiss denied it. William Smith, a Justice Dept. lawyer who could prove Hiss was lying, fell to his death in a Dept. of Justice stairwell Oct. 20, 1948.

On Dec. 20, 1948, another Hiss State Dept. associate Lawrence Duggan fell from the window of his Manhattan office, days after the FBI had questioned him.

Another, Morton Kent had his throat slit June 11, 1949. Abraham Feller, general counsel of the United Nations fell from his Manhattan window in Nov. 1952, after the Senate launched an investigation. Former Senator Robert LaFollette Jr. was found shot to death in 1953 after the same Senate Committee asked him to testify.

The frightening fact is that all these deaths were ruled "suicide" and covered up by the US Dept. of Justice. When the families disputed this finding, the FBI told them: "Our hands are tied."

Moreover, the US Dept. of Justice wiretapped and harassed whistle blowers and congressional investigators. For example, during the 1954 Army-McCarthy hearings, the Justice Dept. followed and placed taps on the home telephones of every member of the McCarthy Senate committee and staff of 25 in order to discredit them. Cornell Simpson who personally knew Senator McCarthy records this in his book. (pp.122-155) Let's fast forward to the present.

On January 25, 2002, John Baxter, a former Enron vice-chairman "committed suicide" before he could testify at a Senate subcommittee. "There was a self-inflicted gun shot wound to the head," said the local police chief. "There was no sign of foul play."

Do you see the pattern? The elite agenda is to grab the wealth of the whole world, including the US investors'. They don't care how they do it.

On May 16, 1996, US Navy Admiral in Chief Jeremy (Mike) Boorda "committed suicide" outside his Washington home. The "elite" media dutifully reported he was distraught over allegations one of his medals was bogus. More likely he was murdered because he opposed the CIA's use of US Navy ships to transport drugs and he had a meeting with both Newsweek and President Clinton that very afternoon.

White House Counsel Vincent Foster also "committed suicide" in 1993. The list of people who are killed before they can expose the elite's dirty business goes on and on.

Wittingly or unwittingly, most of our political and cultural leaders belong to a criminal conspiracy to set up a world fascist state.

The banking and oil cartels are using Sept. 11 and the "War on Terror" to trick Americans into conquering Iraq, which has the world's largest oil reserves, and into accepting the loss of liberty at home.

If the Arab terrorists posed a real threat, they would have driven through the parched US countryside and set forest fires.

No, the real terror threat is from the nation's elite. It is responsible for the atrocities of Sept. 11 that it naturally refuses to investigate properly. It is responsible for the anthrax scare and the "inevitable" nuclear or biological attacks.

It is holding a gun to our head.
___

Henry Makow Ph.D. is the inventor of the board game Scruples and the author of "A Long Way to go for a Date." His web site is http://www.savethemales.ca/ www.savethemales.ca and he welcomes your comments and ideas at henrym@mts.net c.2002 Henry Makow Ph.D.

GOOD NIGHT & GOOD LUCK
CLOONEY & HOLLYWOOD HACK HISTORY, ONCE AGAIN

By: Roderick T. Beaman

National Public Radio (NPR) tries to shake its reputation of liberal bias and then it offers movie reviews like the one on October 7, on Morning Edition. It was by Kenneth Turan of the new film, ‘Good Night and Good Luck’, directed by George Clooney. ‘Good night and good luck’ was Edward R. Murrow’s signature sign off of his program ‘See It Now’ on CBS.

The movie is about the conflict between Edward R. Murrow and Sen. Joseph McCarthy. Turan is a movie critic for both NPR and the Los Angeles Times. With all this as background, you know what to expect from the review. But whatever you expect, it’s optimistic.

Murrow was a war correspondent in Europe and had achieved star status in America. Urbane with a mellifluous voice, he had legions of followers. Today, some might be called groupies.

On one of the ‘See It Now’ episodes, he did an expose! of McCarthy. If you didn’t know what to expect from Turan’s review based on the above and if this doesn’t tell you, you need to recall CBS as the network that gave us Dan Rather.

Turan goes on to extol the movie with misrepresentations and convenient omissions about McCarthy and the famous encounter. The episode began with a long pan on McCarthy in the Senate. The pan ended with McCarthy emitting a long belch. That was Murrow’s idea of objectivity.

Turan cites Murrow’s courage in confronting McCarthy about how much he had to lose. In fact, the anti-McCarthy hysteria of the establishment was already in high gear. The New York-Washington media axis, most of the Democratic Party, much of the Republican, including the President Dwight Eisenhower, much of the government, especially the State Department and liberal academe had closed ranks against McCarthy. McCarthy’s support was from other than those circles, essentially everyman, outside the Belt types.

Murrow delivered a coup-de-lowblow, kicking the man while he was down. His reputation soared. Today he has a journalism award named after him. Even a laudatory Op-Ed article by Neal Gabler, in The Oct.9 New York Times, admits that Murrow abandoned objectivity for righteousness. He should have said self-righteousness but such is courage to liberals. Gabler even calls Murrow’s work, advocacy journalism. More properly, it should be called journalistic bias.

For his efforts at exposing communists in government, McCarthy received the censure of the Senate for behavior ‘contrary to senatorial traditions’. This from a group that must have felt that Sen. Edward Kennedy behavior was not contrary to senatorial traditions when he drove a car off a bridge and left a young woman to die just fifteen years later.

Joseph McCarthy is among the most vilified figures in American history, exceeded only by Benedict Arnold and, possibly, Aaron Burr. His name is anathema and brings visions of jack-booted thugs dragging scores of people out of bed to his subcommittee for questioning and ruining their careers. Nothing like that happened. He died in 1957 from liver disease partially due to years of alcohol use. His funeral was attended by 70 senators, Barry Goldwater and Everett Dirksen, who delivered a poignant eulogy. Goldwater and Dirksen were true gentlemen of the Senate. Mourners included many Democrats who had been pressured to vote for the censure. This is also unpublicized.

McCarthy was hardly the boor and ogre painted by the Left. As a senator, he had very little power. Courteous to a fault, even reporters from media outlets that opposed him, were quick to head to the bar with him at the end of the day. His frequent points of order were ignored by the Senate. He possessed an offbeat sense of humor. Domestically, his record placed him right in the middle of the Republican pack.

Turan’s review and, probably, the movie omit any mention of the conveniently forgotten McCarthy-Kennedy Family connection. All the liberals have conveniently forgotten it. Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr. was an avid supporter of McCarthy as were John and Robert. McCarthy was a frequent guest at Hyannisport and Joseph Kennedy, Sr. wanted one of his daughters to marry him.

Robert Kennedy served as a counsel for McCarthy’s subcommittee. RFK’s tenure helped cement his reputation for ruthlessness that would dog him until his assassination. McCarthy served as godfather for one of his children, a high honor in the Catholic Church.

John Kennedy once walked out of a meeting at Harvard for the organization of alumni and faculty to oppose McCarthy’s efforts. He called to the assembly that he would have nothing to do with anything that would besmirch a ‘patriot like Joe McCarthy’.

So deep was the bond between the Kennedys and McCarthy that Eleanor Roosevelt tried to block New York State’s Liberal Party from endorsing JFK in his 1960 presidential campaign. It was mostly her husband’s administration that had allowed, and even solicited, communist penetration of the government.

What is never mentioned either is the incident with Joseph Rauh. Rauh was a Democratic labor lawyer who let himself be swindled out of thousands of dollars by a con-man who claimed that he was privy to information that would discredit McCarthy. Rauh leaped at the bait and the scam went on for months. The claims became so absurd that someone smelled a rat and it came undone. William Buckley showed Rauh’s gullibility in uproarious fashion as only Buckley could in "Up From Liberalism." Richard Rovere acknowledged the farce but neither he nor any of McCarthy’s enemies have ever owned up to it on the record.

As it has turned out, McCarthy completely understated the communist penetration of the government. This is being borne out more and more by declassified KGB records.

It would truly be courageous for someone to present these facts as they unfolded in a movie. Also, it might be nice to see some historical context, such as that the United States had been caught flat footed at the outbreak of World War II when it found that Germany had a well-developed espionage ring here. Hollywood dramatized that in ‘The House on 92 Street.’

No doubt Clooney will be hailed in lotus land for his courage just as Hollywood showed its great courage throughout the Cold War by turning out movies by the dozen about the Nazi and neo-Nazi threats to America.

And NPR and Hollywood will continue wondering why mainstream America loathes them.

George Clooney asserts that he is a liberal and proud of it. No doubt. And no doubt, none of these inconveniences will be covered in his movie nor any of the reviews.

Can’t you just, see it now?

"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Aisle of St. Mary Catholic Church
The family of Senator McCarthy follows the casket down the aisle of St. Mary Catholic Church, Appleton, Wisconsin, May 6, 1957. Left to right: Andrew Fraser, Ogdensburg, New York, cousin of Mrs. Jean McCarthy; Roman Kornely, Appleton, brother-in-law of Senator McCarthy; Jean McCarthy, Senator McCarthy's widow; William McCarthy, Chicago, brother of Senator McCarthy.

Long Line
A long line of mourners outside St. Mary Catholic Church, Appleton, Wisconsin, waiting to pass the bier of Senator McCarthy, May 6, 1957. More than 17,000 viewed the body.

Outside Funeral
Graveside ceremony for Senator McCarthy, St. Mary Catholic Cemetery, Appleton, Wisconsin, May 7, 1957.

Bust
The bust of Senator McCarthy stood in the Outagamie County Courthouse from 1959 until 2001, when it was moved to the Outagamie Museum. (Photo dated July 8, 1986.)

NOW LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD: List of Americans in the Venona papers

NOW LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD:

List of Americans in the Venona papers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] References

[edit] Footnotes

[edit] External links

NOW LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD:
List of Americans in the Venona papers