Robert Gibbs and Obama: no more Mr. nice guy
The curious and troubling tendency of President Obama to use his communications and political aides as advisers on everything under the sun, including foreign policy, has been documented before. That wouldn’t be so bad if any of them had expertise on these subjects, but for the most part they are strictly political creatures.
Robert Gibbs is a case in point. One of the least appealing of Obama’s inner circle (and that’s saying something), he is also one of the most visible in his role as Obama’s press secretary. Look at his bio and tell me whether you can see anything there that would qualify him to give advice to fellow-neophyte Barack Obama in any policy field, much less foreign affairs. He is a political animal, specializing in campaigns and communications.
Nevertheless here’s a piece from the WaPo about his tremendous and growing influence on policy in this administration [emphasis mine]:
…Anita Dunn, the Obama administration’s former communications director, [says,] “[Gibbs] is one of the very few people who can sit in on anything he wants to sit in on.“…Much of Gibbs’s day is spent sitting in on a broad swath of policy meetings in the Oval Office, educating himself for his public performances, but also for the greater private role to come. Some policy advisers have wondered why the administration’s flack is so often in attendance, but insiders fluent in the administration’s power dynamics know Obama values his views…
Gibbs is also a regular at foreign policy meetings. He volunteered that he attended all 33 hours of the Afghanistan briefings, though he noted that he never said a word. He did chime in during last month’s escalating tensions with Israel, if only to make sure the president understood the “conventional wisdom” promoted in the media, that Obama’s toughness with Likud hard-liners would potentially erode his domestic Jewish support. “For a lot of reasons, he would discount that,” Gibbs said, referring to the president.
So it appears that all of Obama’s foreign policy decisions are vetted at the outset by Gibbs for their potential political repercussions. If so, he seems to be doing an abominable job; Obama’s polls continue to fall. Or perhaps Obama just doesn’t take Gibbs’s advice, although he certainly solicits it.
What’s more, the abrasive and condescending Gibbs appears to have alienated virtually the entire Washington press corps, not an easy feat in that formerly Obamaphilic crowd [emphasis mine]:
There are a few things about Gibbs that irritate even the least excitable reporters in the briefing room, though none of them would speak for the record out of fear of retaliation. One reporter expressed frustration with the way Gibbs has compared reporters — and even Sen. John McCain — to his 6-year-old son because he didn’t approve of the way they were behaving…Unlike press secretaries past, who would make rounds of calls to reporters as they neared deadlines, Gibbs is notoriously tough to get on the phone. His soliloquies are full of “first and foremost” and “I will say this,” and he relies on escape-hatch promises to “check and get back to you.”
Initially it seemed surprising that the supposedly charismatic, calm, and likeable Obama would surround himself with so many downright unpleasant people. But that aspect of Obama is a mere facade, and he selects his aides very carefully. The pattern that emerges is that they are amoral thugs who insult, intimidate, and lie, while providing an increasingly thin cover for the very same aspects in Obama’s personality and methodry.
The pattern was apparent even before the election to anyone who cared to look at Obama’s history. Taken separately and looked at by the naive, Rezko and Ayers and Wright seemed to be curious anomolies. But one would be hard-pressed at this point to find any close friend or adviser of Obama who doesn’t fit this mold.
” Look at his bio and tell me whether you can see anything there that would qualify him to give advice to fellow-neophyte Barack Obama in any policy field, much less foreign affairs.”
Are you kidding? He’s got everything necessary. He played soccer in school. He played the sax like Clinton. And he’s got a long track record as a wall-to-wall, floor-to-ceiling prostitute. He’s just the thing for the thing.
As the French say, “An agreeable person is a person who agrees with me.”
-Birds of a feather flock together.
-Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.
-You’ll be known by the company you keep.
Funny how all of these old sayings seem more and more true.
To expand on that, any person with an extensive knowledge of what foreign policy was is a liability. Gibbs knows what foreign policy will be. How does he know? He’s been told by the man advising him. That would be the man he’s advising.
Once you understand “daisy chain” you understand all about the inner dynamics of this group.
I’m glad to see that Obama does not seem to be escaping his past. His policies and actions so invite questions which are prompting many people to understand what is motivating him. The incredibly brave actions of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin (refusing to serve until Obama’s birth credentials are established) is on point here. It is up to us to learn the facts, spread them without fear, and expose the lie that is the public image of Obama. How do you like the latest one: Obama and Reagan are really the same on nuclear policy. Good deconstructionist position there.
I remember the early days of President George W. Bush’s administration, as he announced his lineup of advisors and Cabinet secretaries. A few media types were actually critical because such a galaxy of talented, accomplished people might intimidate and manipulate poor Bush.
A strong, confident leader picks the best people he can find. A weak, insecure person picks nonentities.
That wouldn’t be so bad if any of them had expertise on these subjects, but for the most part they are strictly political creatures.
That’s why Obama chose them – he has so much in common with them.
Any Administration that features Hillary Clinton as the voice of experience is in deep trouble.
2 Chronicles 10:8,15 – “But he forsook the counsel which the old men gave him, and took counsel with the young men that were brought up with him, that stood before him… So the king hearkened not unto the people…”
A while back Gibbs made the remark that four years previously, no one was comparing the POTUS to a Nazi, while this was occurring constantly for NObama. I have not been able to find this again. Has anyone run across it?
I read the Wiki entry on Gibbs some months ago, Not only is he a political animal, he was raised as one. As a child he tagged along with a parent who was active in Democratic Party Politics.
Obama and the Obami (including Gibbs, Axelrod and Jarrett) are all dopes who believe with all their hearts that we are stupid and gullible and will believe anything they say. The reason Obama is in perpetual campaign mode is Obama and the Obami don’t know how to get into the governing thing. That’s for the czars. By this time some of us are waking up to the fact that there is no flash of brilliance in any of Obama’s policies. They are stupid to begin with and when they don’t work he just doubles down and reveals their lack of mental muscle. For example, Obama is still pushing the Government in Honduras to do something but I’m not sure he or they know what. This thing with Israel will not end. The problem is existential. The survival of Israel. Going after settlements (whether or not in Jerusalem) was stupid and immediately seen as counterproductive. There is no smart way out of this stupid strategy so it will appear to die, as it will not be given much talking time, but it will not die. Obama will hold the failure of this policy against Netanyahu until the day Obama dies.
So, stupid policies are pursued with a vengeance and people await the kicker, the trump card, the ace in the hole, the subtle and nuanced gotcha. It ain’t there guys. It’s as Forest Gump (Gore) says, “Stupid is as stupid does.”
There is no there there.
Scary.
Steve
From Commentary, here is news of a recent survey in the Palestinian territories:
To have NObama pressuring Israel, given these poll numbers, which appear to me to be fairly consistent with poll numbers from 5-10 years ago, is the height of absurdity. No, make that stupidity. At least that is how this card-carrying member of the goyim sees it.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/pollak/276331
Gibbs is a red diaper baby too…
His parents, Nancy and Robert Coleman Gibbs, worked in the Auburn University library system and involved their son in politics at an early age.[7][1] Nancy Gibbs would take Robert, then known as “Bobby,” to local League of Women Voters meetings rather than hire a babysitter, and involved him in “voter re-identification” work at the county courthouse
and before people say no..
The league works to “secure equal rights and equal opportunity for all, to promote social and economic justice, and to secure the health and safety of all Americans.”
ie, they are progressive/socialist/communist from the start… social and economic justice is the clue, and the fact that it has the name LEAGUE in it, as in LEAGUE of nations. the progressives were hated after woodrow wilson and fdr, and so they moved to other terms.
The league has worked on a broad range of activities under the rubric of Social Policy including ending racial discrimination, providing equal access to quality education, fair housing, health care, and gun control.
so as always said, the feminists were socialists.
by the way… anyone read recently of the idea that people who dont pay taxes shouldnt vote? well, do you want to guess which movement helped break that and allow those who get freebies to be bought?
they, like other progressive groups dont give a damn about the constititoni, hence social justice and economic justice… two synonyms for marxism.
so gibbs as a child, was taken to communist party meetings of the league of women voters.
lineage goes back to guess who?
Eleanor often took the children to the Roosevelts’ sprawling summer home off the coast of Maine. Franklin often stayed behind in Washington. This distance led Franklin to seek a relationship with Eleanor’s social secretary, Lucy Mercer. Upon learning of it, Eleanor wanted a divorce, but was told that, “Roosevelt’s don’t do divorce.” She agreed to go on with the marriage, but they never lived as husband and wife again.
The Roosevelts moved back to New York in 1920. Eleanor embarked on a new life. Congress passed the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote. Eleanor joined the League of Women Voters and the Women’s City Club.
and
History of the Comintern. Sections
Communist Party, USA
http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/parties/cpusa/encyclopedia-american-left.htm
just so you get it… league is old code
The Socialist Propaganda League, located in Boston with the support of the strongly pro-Lenin Latvian-American socialists, was the first to send out a call for American Socialist adherence to the principles of the Bolshevik Revolution. The Friends of the Russian Revolution, or Friends of New Russia, formed at the end of 1917, and the American Bolshevik Bureau of Information formed in 1918. Both provided positive information about the Russian Revolution to the general American public. like the first book popularizing the event, Louis Fraina’s anthology The Proletarian Revolution in Russia (1917), these phenomena were American in origin rather than responses to Russian initiatives.
and
For the next three years, mostly “underground” but under the close watch of federal spies, the Communists accelerated the internecine propaganda war, largely against each other or against other Left groupings. Each of the parties sought membership in the Comintern, and each was told that Moscow would not favor one over the other and that they would have to unify. Each of the original Communist organizations suffered various schisms with departing groups often appropriating the organizational name. Efforts also continued to unite the multiplying factions into a single organization. In 1922 those who had remained in the original Communist Party of America joined with the United Communist Party (a merger of the Communist Labor Party and a faction of the Communist Party of America) to establish the Workers Party of America as a unified above ground entity. The Workers Party of America was able to gain the adhesion of most other Communist formations within a matter of years, most notably the United Toilers of America, which had also presented itself in 1922 as an above ground Communist party seeking unification. The new merger was named the Workers (Communist) Party, a name which prevailed until 1929 when it was changed to Communist Party, USA.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The emerging Workers (Communist) Party bore the stamp of a new Communist international strategy, the United Front. Conceived by the Comintern to meet the perceived delay in the world-revolutionary process, this policy entailed a strategic reorientation of major proportions. Unlike the old left-wing Socialists and the IWW, the Communists would work within non-Left, mass institutions, including the AFL and labor or labor-farmer parties. Many moderate socialists had long urged these policies, but with their revolutionary aims, Communists were forced to carry out their work in semi-concealed fashion. The tarring of Bolsheviks as bearded bomb-throwers had by this time been so successful, and the general defeat of the revolutionary left so complete, that concealment of one’s affiliation and ideology seemed necessary.
-=-=-=-
ith the dubious counsel of Comintern representatives (themselves actors in a far larger, international factionalism), American Communists struggled first of all to create a Left presence within the AFL. The Trade Union Educational League, the most successful of their efforts, indeed rallied many traditional unionists for a fighting program.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The second major effort at mass influence, the formation of a Left-oriented farmer-labor movement, failed for the same internal and external reasons, resulting in the Communists’ isolation from the Progressive Party campaign of 1924 headed by “Fighting Bob” LaFollette.
i would look into laFollette if you want interesting stuff you may have never heard.
The third and last major effort, the Trade Union Unity league, set out to form new unions of unorganized and unskilled workers. The TUUL filled some of the vacuum left by the IWW collapse and by AFL indifference toward the unskilled. It would be remembered, in later years, for the “shop papers” published by activists with particular grievances aired – a clear anticipation of and preparation for the CIO.
ok… so why all that?
as an introduction to later in the article where they list out communist/progressive/socialist organizations.
and that things are more similar now if you read their work for their own consumption rather than read what they write publicly
The Communist approach to the 1936 election set the tone for the virtual abandonment of its traditional strategies and slogans. Roosevelt’s promulgation of a “Second New Deal,” replete with real and promised social benefits, had won over millions of immigrant voters (or previous nonvoters), including the mass base of industrial unions. As veteran SP notables abandoned their party to support Roosevelt, Communists pronounced a de facto support of Roosevelt against Alf Landon – the first time an official U.S. Marxist organization had taken such a position.
much the same as with obama..
read this next thing CAREFULLY..
and notice that they are following the exact same plan, and it is only working because we are IGNORANT
Influence in labor, especially, grew rapidly after John 1. Lewis agreed to use Communist organizers in the nascent CIO. Communist leaders, rising out of the ranks, won wide approval through their fearlessness and their dedication. Communists in New York State’s American Labor Party (which repeatedly sent the radical Vito Marcantonio to Congress), in Minnesota’s Farmer-Labor Party, and in the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, came to be looked upon as agents not of Moscow but of the democratic agenda. Influential Communists could be found in cinema, the theater, music, and the graphic arts. The vital social theater and mural art of the Works Progress Administration, especially, were at their highest creative levels, often quite pro-Communist in sympathies. Communist identification of racism as the running sore of democracy and the mark of incipient fascism, combined with Communists’ ardent efforts to uplift the cause of minorities both politically and culturally, prompted liberal respect almost bordering upon awe.
so what we have now, we have not noticed happening to us much for close to 100 years.
The fraternal international Workers Order, a financial backbone of the Party and a symbol of Communist respectability among aging European immigrants and many of their descendants, was quashed. Communists lost contact with several generations of working-class activists who, without joining, had taken Party teachings and local representatives seriously. Fraternal and folk-dance groups, summer-camps, shuls, choruses, and other activities remained, but far smaller and more insular. Second, the youth sector, reorganized in 1949 as the Labor Youth League, practically had to operate underground. The Party lost, in effect, virtually an entire generation that might have bridged the gap to the New left.
Two international events of 1956 brought new chaos to the Party: the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian Revolution and revelations of Stalin’s misdeeds at the Twentieth Soviet Congress. Individuals long faithful to the Party now felt betrayed and wondered privately and openly if their political lives had been built upon self-delusion.
so if you know the history, you know whats going on, as its so much a copy, it could be called a homage.
and notice again… its the youth LEAGUE… and League of women voters, and the league of nations.
when communism fell temporarily out of fashion, everyone knew that that word was a lable and a symbol and so almost ALL organizations with that word disappeared.
symbol games and label changes.
As a result, while Communists took a leading role in some specific fronts of the anti-Vietnam War movement, pacifists and Trotskyists ultimately staffed most of the movement’s infrastructure.
The new W. E. B. DuBois Clubs (organized in 1965) renewed campus activism but with far fewer members than Students for a Democratic Society and fewer chapters than the Young Socialist Alliance.
dont those names sound familiar? check out how many obama people have connections to those organizations…
Successful CP mechanisms among youth: Che-Lumumba Club of Los Angeles
[now you know who was promoting che early on]
The resignation of West Coast leader Dorothy Healey in 1973 was taken as a signal to many outsiders that the established Party leadership had determined to remain impervious to the democratic challenges heard in Eurocommunism.
[eurocommunism? they mean the european union, where they took control of all the states with a body that no one votes or can do much to]
Communists also gained from long-standing political contacts in the black community. Victories of black mayoral and congressional candidates with decades – old ties to the CP – a short list would include Coleman Young and George Crocket in Detroit, Gus Newport in Berkeley, and somewhat more ambiguously, Harold Washington in Chicago – helped to rehabilitate the Party image. Like the continuing struggle against racism within unions, this public vindication brought a trickle of new black and Latin members, although never enough to compensate for the attrition in the aging fraternal networks.
so they are telling you the story of their people. and outside, in the world most walk in, they dont read this stuff, and so they dont know about the people they are supporting and why they dont listen to them.
The CP managed to emerge from the 1970s in far better organizational shape than might have been expected and much stronger than any of its immediate political rivals // The Maoists, whose various organizations had had a combined membership in the thousands, had all but disappeared as had would-be successors to SDS. The only other large Left group was the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which remained smaller than the CP (which still claimed it had over 10,000 members), and had a less activist rank and file.
so it makes sense why obama and others are trying to deny membership in certain organizations even if the majority dont know their history.
the more you konw about these organizations, the more the stories that sound like nothings about their childhoods, turn out to be clues as to why they are doing what they are doing.
so when a person wh went through dewey (a spy) progressive school system, they think nothing of SANGER, and LEAGUE of WOMEN VOTERS, and so on.
but if you know he history in detail, these were all communist fronts. (like christine quinns fake organizations in which she deposited 50 million dollars and she is still in office).
you would know the line of history spreading from the ideas of the 1850s, and marx, and the progressives, all the way up through Ayers group, and SDS…
National Negro Labor Congress
This is why the accusation was made against Bush that Karl Rove was giving policy advice based on purely political reasons. That is what the Democrats themselves do when they have the chance, and they cannot conceive of it being done any other way.
Artfldgr, I find it a little far-fetched to say that Gibbs was a red diaper baby without more evidence than League of Women Voters. As you point out, his mother was involved in the League of Women Voters. The League of Women Voters is not a communist front, as far as I can tell. A neighbor who was also a staunch Republican was very involved in it.
It would appear to me that the parents of Robert Gibbs were garden variety liberals who, by being liberals in the South, viewed themselves as bringing enlightenment to darkness. ( Liberal condescending? perish the thought.)
AVI: and the funny thing is that if Karl Rove was doing that, it was only Rove. Bush had plenty of savvy experts on policy who were not political. Obama has hardly any—all of his close advisers are totally political, to a man/woman.
Of course, Obama himself is so expert on everything that he doesn’t need no steenking experts :-).
yesterday was the anniversary of the death of FDR..
April 12 1945
WSJ has a historian write about it…
and is it me, or is more and more valid history being flung around?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304024604575173632046893848.html
The media can break Obama,Gibbs et al if they desired it.That they are supine, worried about retaliation,tells me that they mightily approve of the tactics and agenda of this administration, though at times wish they’d be a bit more courteous to them.He could stroke their egos more, but figures, why bother? They won’t attack them.
I read the WSJ article and thought it excellent. I’ve also read Amity Shlaes’ “The Forgotten Man,” and it was good and well reviewed. Contrast this to comments like, “FDR was one of our three greatest presidents,” which occured in the movie, “Doubt,” and know that it will take the rest of our lifetimes to overcome the stereotypes. But encouraging stats are coming out. A recent Pew Research Center report said 40 percent of voters ages 18 to 28 lean Republican, up from 30 percent last year. Fifty-four percent of those voters said they lean Democratic, down from 62 percent last year. Interestingly, I’ve been reading and hearing many comments regarding the Democrats true position as “black liberators.”
Born 1971?! I’m older than that fat turd?
Speaking of characters:
http://bigjournalism.com/sright/2010/04/12/were-reporters-used-to-spread-n-word-narrative/
Big story here on where the “n” word stuff came from. Can we prosecute these people for slander?
Art,
my poor scroll wheel…
Political Creature: see AlGore
Consider the job of a press secretary. He is the day to day voice of the administration, interacting with the media trying to establish the narrative chosen by the administration. Spin is the current term, propaganda is an older word. Niether has any but coincidental relationship with the truth. Bullshit is an earthier more descriptive synonym.
The whole point being to build support for chosen policies. The more straight forward and forthright the policy the more it can stand on it’s own merits.
Conversely the more deceitful or destructive an agenda the less likely it can it can bear scrutiny.
The importance of the press secretary in an administration may well be inversely proportional to the validity of the policies he is charged with establishing a narrative for. So what does that suggest when a press secretary transcends from a lower level pr man to a higher level adviser?
Gray Says:
April 13th, 2010 at 6:07 pm
Heck, I’m older than both Obama and Palin. The 2008 election was the first one that featured candidates who are older than me.
Kurt Vonnegut said a long time ago that you know you’re getting older when you realize that you’re being governed by people you knew in high school.
Should be “younger”, not “older”.
I hearby nominate any and everyone who is surprised that Obama, after spending his entire life in the company of amoral thugs is, himself an amoral thug, for the Louis Renault Award.
“no more Mr. nice guy”
With all due respect, When the Hell was there a “Mr. nice guy” among then.
Robert Gibbs reminds me of a nastier version of the PC guy in the Mac commercials.
–
Gringo-
“To have NObama pressuring Israel, given these poll numbers, which appear to me to be fairly consistent with poll numbers from 5-10 years ago, is the height of absurdity. No, make that stupidity. At least that is how this card-carrying member of the goyim sees it.”
You make the mistake of most conservatives when critiquing a liberal, such as the big dope. Logic plays no part in their makeup nor does it have any impact on their policies. If it feels good then, damn, it must be good, and who is that fool Netanyahu anyway to stand in my way. It sort of goes this way, every time:
You present a logical argument to a liberal, who is not listening to you except on the most visceral level, and he (excuse my chauvinism) responds with an anecdote that is most likely way off point. See, my anecdote trumps your logic, you evil conservative and, to prove my point I raise you three anecdotes. You racist, misogynistic, homophobic, chauvinistic, soda drinking and transfat eating whatever. How dare you treat me as less than the really good person I am by daring to even question the validity of my goodness which, by the way, is the sum total of my identity.
soupcon, you are correct that the MSM could begin to take Obama to task, and eventually expose him, if they chose. That they do not choose to is not the result of any single pressure, but of multiple pressures:
1. Most of their readers have a narrative they are not interested in having challenged. Working here in liberalville, I can assure you that vast steaming piles would need to be delivered before social workers, psychologists, etc would do anything other than dismiss criticism of progressives in general and Obama in specific as right-wing propaganda. So these outlets would lose viewership (Why, they’re no better than Fox News!) and go out of business faster. No one wants to be first, so they are all taking half-hearted attempts.
2. Being cut off from access to the POTUS is also a career-killer. If one strikes against the king, one must be sure not to merely wound him. (Yeah, someone will read incitement to violence in that, not knowing the reference.)
3. They have a similar narrative to their readership, and it is personally costly to give such things up. No one wants to think they’ve been backing the wrong horse all these years.
4. It’s fun to rub shoulders with those in power.
Paul_In_Houston: the “Mr. nice guy” reference was sarcastic as regards Obama’s aides like Gibbs, who of course were never nice guys. But it’s also a sarcastic reference to the early perception of Obama as a nice guy, which evaporated as soon as anyone looked at his actual history, and watched much of his actual behavior.
Pingback:Why politics? « Fatherhood
Gringo
you can take that tack if you want. certainly i don’t have the time to dig the dirt on things, and then connect dots to expand history which is never taught.
does anyone here remember the voting laws as they stood originally… did they forbid women, or was it reserved to tax payers? and as reserved to tax payers, who were the only ones then to pay taxes?
if you read planned parenthood and feminists sites on Margaret Sanger, few of them will bring up her history other than what they want to agree with. now i think planned parenthood makes a side mention of other things.
and if you didnt know a lot of history of the period and how things fit together and who was doing what and calling for what. you wouldnt know today.
Margaret Sanger hated ‘Negroes’ and Chinese, her autobiography makes it quite clear. she was a democrat, and a progressive. there is an image of her on a chair giving a speech to KKK (i don’t trust that one completely). even without that, one can read how birth control was to build a master race. a thoroughbred human, new socialist/progressive man in another form i guess. her magazine was Eugenics, and two of her friends were C Gamble and P Popeno, who Hitlers people wrote to her people for advice on his program.
there is a lot of history that we dont remember from these progressive movement organizations.
those that were popular ended up being targeted for use by either progressives or communists, or whatever in the same pool.
there is no right… at least not in any real sense.
the right is the enemy of communism, which is everyone else that is not communist.
so these early activist organizations worked from the premises that the US state was fixed and could not change (the way the french monarchy was), and so protest in the street, and such was the only way to change things.
which is true since the changes they wanted were unconstitutional. we were taught to celebrate them as if they brought us something that would never happen ever. when the truth is that they brought us something that would have happened (Wiemar Germany had it before us), but by doing it this way, they broke the spine of the constitution and its due processes.
Then when someone wants to point out this and such, they play the “throwback game”, that your a cro magnon throwback that wants it to return.
no… as i said we were going to have it all anyway, that was plain. in fact, that kind of social change was happening without socialism as a product of the ideals of American exceptionalism.
however, in the real world, such destinations are not like on a map, you cant really accelerate to them.
and thats the problem, when you do, you dont really get the ideal that you were going to go as it grew up and such, you get this banzai version that isnt really what it should be, and that they then spend a lot of time teaching you its the same thing and thats what it is, and they brought it to you. (so all you have to do is see the trend, jump on the trend ahead of it whiler there is some resistance as its slowly adopted, pervert the trend by forcing early adoption, and then claim you made it happen as if it never would happen. and that is the end of the class on how to make your movement seem to be delivering the goods to people. ie. take credit for natural trends (like global warming) so that you can manipulate peoples beliefs and through that, their choices)
so no… i have no sheet or any evidence beyond a doubt..
the truth is, there seldom is that at all.
thats the idea with movements whose ideals technically had laws on the books that would have jailed you… (and unlike the hyper good, they were not too good to tolerate such)
so back then you had people pushing the same ideals without labeling from whence they came.
then over time, by defocusing on the grounding history and culture they cut us adrift.
their idea of utopia is a state where the people have no past, and no changing future. they have the idea that things were always this way, and things have never been any other way, nor will they be any other way.
social creationism replaces social Darwinism.
once they have that state, then what?
how far are they from that?
are the elderly holding them back?
Artfldgr:
Perhaps because my father was born and raised 30 miles from the Mississippi River and Missourah, the Show Me State, I require some documentation and not a stream of consciousness flow.
BTW, the founder of the League of Women Voters, Carrie Chapman Catt, used to be Superintendent of Schools in Mason City Iowa, the home of Meredith Wilson, creator of the famed musical The Music Man. But well before Meredith Wilson was born. At least according to Wiki, which tends to be OK for noncontroversial topics.
Chilling.
Obamacare will take care of the elderly. “Take care of” as in “deal with”.
the Mississippi River and Missourah, the Show Me State, I require some documentation and not a stream of consciousness flow.
and i DO respect that and DO love to plink down odd history… (as those more familiar with my posts know)
however i always walk a horrible drunken line as to how long posts have to be.
however there is a problem here that goes beyond the examination of facts. and that is that when there is a certain disbelief and a prove to me attitude, what happens is there is a higher burden as if one was a disinterested examiner.
and when the whole of most of these issues ahve to do with who you were friends with, who their parents where, what their beliefs were, what the context of the times where.
i will point out one tiny point.
how bad or good a person perceived the term progressive.
to those that know nothing of them, and what they do and their history, the term sounds great. (ergo the young, the vain, etc siding with it).
then there are people who do know to some extent, but then refuse to connect the past with the present and the future. that whatever is past is past and so has no bearing.
and then there are people who know quite a bit, and do not care for their politics.
and the last of the list are those that know them in fine detail. know in detail the kinds of things they think is ok, and what kinds of tactics and terms they use, and how they embed them into their speeches and things while most people dont even hear it.
i am in that last crowd, who have read so much detailed history of people (not events) that i can work a chain of connections and such.
so when you say show me, what your asking for is what they didnt do. only a small percentage of people actually went and got a communist party card. the rest never bothered. and so for all those that enver bothered, everyone says, they werent. and for those that bothered, they say they changed their minds.
however, there is a reason why our formative years aer so special to them. we are impressionable.
i do remember a portion of my childhood was watching different groups of adults vying for my attention or time to groom me to their ideas.
what saved me? too many cooks. if one or two do this, you don’t notice, when they cluck around you like your the grain in a trough and they are pigs you start to notice and not exactly be cooperative.
FBI Kept a Close Eye on Chapman Catt
Carrie Chapman Catt, the suffragist whose efforts led to the adoption of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920 guaranteeing women the right to vote, was later monitored by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for her world peace activism and association with “radicals,” according to documents obtained by the Charles City Press recently.
by the way, i dont know a thing about catt, i am just looking up now what she is into, connected to, and such.
the difference between me and most people, is that i dont just say stuff. before i would have written your paragraph, i would have done a simple search to see if the person and idea i thoguth was valid WAS valid.
yes i make mistakes, we all do. but compared to most here, my historical knowlege seems to be huge.
its only somewhat that way, because every time someone like you asks somehting and i find the answer is in dont know, or i dont know enough.
that tells me i missed an area of study, and lo and behold i find the answers and fill that in.
so lets see what else they have to say about cat and compare that to what i said above. (another nice thing is that i know this movements and such so much, i seldom even have to know the facts, they almost ALWAYS follow the same line! its like always knowing a bird has feathers, its the nature of the beast)
The FBI documents, totalling 57 pages, span over two years – from May of 1927 to July of 1929 – and were released in response to a request filed under the federal Freedom of Information Act. They consist mainly of memoranda prepared by FBI staff for internal government use. Prior to release, the names of the memos’ authors were deleted from the files on grounds of confidentiality under terms of the federal Privacy Act.
Excerpts of Catt’s speeches and related newspaper accounts of the day are intermingled throughout the files with observations and commentary by FBI staff or their informers.
In one instance, Catt’s opposition to the Monroe Doctrine, a foreign policy she called “a sword suspended by a hair over the Latin continent” in a 1926 publication, prompted a denunciation in a May 9, 1927, FBI report: “Her connection with the National Council for the Prevention of War is sufficient to condemn her as a supporter and advocate of subversive propaganda. As vice chairman of this organization, she is associated with Jane Addams, John A. Lupp, Julica C. Lathrop, Bishop Francis J. McConnell, James G. McDonald, [and] Lucia Ames Mead, who are her fellow vice chairmen,” the report said.
The FBI in 1927 was a new agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, formed only three years before, with J. Edgar Hoover as its founding director. Between 1919 and 1924, it functioned as the General Intelligence Division (GID) of the Justice Department, created during the administration of President Woodrow Wilson by Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer. The GID and, later, the FBI authorized secret investigations and intelligence reports on the political activities of numerous public and private U.S. citizens, including Catt.
Woodrow Wilson, they don’t teach about him much at all, but if they did, you might know more of why the term progressive was considered so bad no one wanted to be associated with it till most of who remember were dead.
So now if you know the history of the early anti war movement, you will know that it was all mostly a soviet active measures thing. jsut another facet of fighting. early on they used “leagues” and “councils” and “committees” because that is waht a SOVIET is, its a committee/league/council/board etc.
[communism is rule by totalitarian committee. and so any personality you see is only playing a role as a focus point for the committee who actually is orchestrating things, and why, when that leader goes, the condition continues, because its teh committee and the person. the person is the sink hole for everything, and so the committee never has anything stick to it, it may not even be perceived as being there in most cases]
[edited for length by n-n]
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn
From 1910 to 1917, she worked as an organizer
for the IWW and was attracted to their philosophy
that the problems of women could not be separated
from those of the working class. She was
arrested in 1917 during World War I, with 168
other IWW members, for alleged violation of the
Espionage Act.
-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Next, she helped organize defense
committees during the first Red Scare of 1919,
when hundreds of radicals were arrested and
imprisoned. In 1920, she founded and chaired the
International Labor Defense for Sacco and
Vanzetti, two Italian anarchists accused of a Massachusetts robbery and murder. She headed their defense committee for seven years, until their execution in August 1927. Exhausted after her work on the Sacco and Vanzetti case, she spent a decade
recovering her health in Portland, Oregon.
She was a founding member of the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in 1920 and served
on its board of directors until 1940. In 1937, she
joined the Communist Party, and three years later
the ACLU board, in a purge of communist members,
expelled her.
She wrote a biweekly column for the Daily
Worker and served as chair of the Communist
Party’s women’s commission for 10 years. She ran
unsuccessfully for a Bronx congressional seat in
New York in 1942, and later ran unsuccessfully for
a seat on the city council, using the slogan, “Clean
Jim Crow out of New York.”
She believed that in spite of unsuccessful electoral campaigns, her presence helped move mainstream groups toward more progressive ideas.
again… top fellow traveler promoting progresive ideas. (and so what do we think of the ACLU which was founded by a cadre of DECLARED communists?)
In 1951, she and other Communist Party leaders
were prosecuted under the Smith Act for their
political views. The 1940 Smith Act banned the
advocacy of the overthrow of the government and
was used to suppress communists and other leftist
groups in the United States. Smith and other communists were convicted of violating the Smith Act. Her supporters argued for her right of free speech
to express her political views.
her death is suspicious to me. if you read about these connected people you will find that they often died of stomach ailments. Reading later about kamera and their use of radioactive thalium and such which result in death by stomach ailments, makes one wonder… (do also remember that prior to using paper filters, coffee caused stomach cancer).
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn died of gastroenterocolitis
while visiting Moscow in 1964. She received a
state funeral in Red Square, and then, as she had
requested, her remains were flown home for burial
in Chicago’s Waldheim Cemetery, near the graves
of labor leader Big Bill Haywood and the Haymarket
martyrs, labor leaders who were framed for
throwing a bomb and hanged in 1887. In 1976,
the ACLU rescinded her expulsion posthumously.
She remained an unabashed radical throughout
her life, steadfast in her commitment to justice.
you can see why they love terrorists..
they started in terrorism…
and all terrorism today is to move states to either communism, or some form of totalitarianism, which can easily be converted to communism.
Rote Zora was a feminist anarchist group that planted bombs
Weatherman, same ends, planted bombs
Sacco and Vanzetti?
ELIZABETH NAOMI GOLDSTEIN FRIEDAN,
BETTY FRIEDAN,
Betty Friedan, a founder of the National Organization
for Women (NOW), wrote The Feminine
Mystique in 1963. Her book launched the modern
women’s movement.
yup
Her father, Harry Goldstein, was a Jewish immigrant
from Russia who owned Goldsteins’ Jewelry Store.
Betty’s mother, Miriam, had wanted to attend
Smith College, but at her parents’ insistence she
attended a local college in Illinois.
first of all, lets correct that paragraph.
He was an immigrant from the SOVIET UNION
Russia had not been Russia since 1917, and to be allowed out was a rarity
Betty skipped the second and fourth grades.
She was such a bookworm that her father limited
her reading to five books a week
IE, she lived in fantasy, and learned about reality second hand.
They could have told her that pigs could sprout wings and fly on special occaisions
And if she didn’t read the altnertiave books, she would not know alternative ideas
Given she is a bookworm, and such, she is among the wallflower crowd
The disaffected women who join and become militant
A psychology major, she graduated summa
cum laude in 1942 as class valedictorian.
she had many women tell her not to go into science, and so she formalized her academic hell and such to all the world, and wrote her book as if her life and experience was shared by all women.
which it wasn’t. again, another one of these feminist women who helped create the myth of non education, ends up having a degree from a prestigious school. (see a pattern)…
GOLDMAN, EMMA
Emma Goldman was one of the best-known
women radicals in American history. In her annual
lecture tours she spoke against government and
organized religion and in favor of civil liberties,
sexual freedom, free speech, unions, the eight-hour
workday, feminism, and birth control. Emma
Goldman was born on June 27, 1869, in Kovno,
Russia, to lower-middle-class Lithuanian Jews,
Taube Bienowitch Goldman and Abraham Goldman.
She fled from Russia and an arranged marriage
when she was 15. She settled in Rochester,
New York, and married Jacob Kershner, thus gaining
citizenship.
another hero… and if she is a hero, then she HAS to have commnunist creds of some sort, or be so out in front that they have to celebrate her or be obvious. But others like emmy noether, don’t get celebrated (nor would my grandmother. Neither needed communism to succeed as they succeeded by merit on their own… as did most of these women who never realized that in a communist state they actually never would have had hat schooling, nor would they have made it by merit into a position of being able to poison us agaist the system that granted them that, while they pretended it wasn’t allowed (beause itw asnt handed to them on a silver platter outright, like todays trophies in a system they created!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Goldman started attending socialist meetings in
Rochester and was spurred to activism by the Haymarket
trial of 1886, in which eight anarchists
were accused of setting a dynamite explosion that
killed eight police officers. Four of the eight defendants
were hanged.….
Now.. its your turn gringo… show me that these people all around Gibbs as a child who all were related to communist, suffragette, progressive, socialist, anarchist, feminist, racialist, groups with the common ideal of overthrowing he republic and putting a socialist totalitarian state in.
“Feminism, Socialism, and Communism are one in the same, and Socialist/Communist government is the goal of feminism.” – Catharine A. MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (First Harvard University Press, 1989), p.10
She knows the history, even if most women don’t, and also don’t know how serious it is and don’t oppose it. (Besides who wants to be a traitor to their gender? Maybe those that don’t want to be a traitor to their countrymen?)
[edited for length by n-n]
ok gringo…
show me that being surrounded by this ideology and its followers would nto have been the point of taking him early to impress things..
your turn.
[probably is gone and never read it!!! ]
and the nail in the coffin to the point.
here is another paragaraph on catt. and i will put in bold my comments inside the paragraph
so let me know about how they have nothing to do with communism…
or is it that they taught you that they didnt, and that you never took the time to find out for yourself?
Artfldgr: I had to shorten some of your posts considerably—just way too long. I know you were answering a question and were asked for evidence, but they were just too long.
I skimmed most of them, though. I don’t think there’s any doubt that some of the early feminists were Communists and/or fellow travelers. But (although I don’t know that much about Friedan’s personal politics specifically) your conclusions about her don’t necessarily follow from what you wrote of her early background. I know many people with that same history—Jews who were born here (or came as children) and whose parents came from the Soviet Union post-1917, and they are not even leftists, much less Communists. Apparently it was not all that hard to leave during the first few years after the revolution. These were very ordinary people, and they did it. Their children (most of whom are deceased now, since they arrived in the early 1920s) were politically either garden-variety liberals or even conservative.
That is not to say that there weren’t red diaper babies whose parents came from the USSR or pre-revolutionary Russia/Ukraine. There definitely were, and I know quite a few of those too. But leaving the Soviet Union in the 20s had little to do with the politics of the children or the parents, at least from the evidence I know, and I know quite a bit of it.
As for Patty Hearst, you are too young to remember that one. But I have done extensive research on it (wrote about the case in a two-parter post, that begins here). Patty was a teenager who was kidnapped, raped, tortured, and brainwashed, and put in fear of her life. She was no Communist then, and if you look at her subsequent life she has been quite conservative.
Again, I am not trying to say that some of these people are Communists—perhaps even many. But you are casting too wide a net.
Artfldgr: I had to shorten some of your posts considerably–just way too long. I know you were answering a question and were asked for evidence, but they were just too long.
and this is why we lose…
(not because you shorten..)
because evidential proceedures take a while, and EVERY time i try to show evidence, i cant.
now being a lawyer, you know that if i cant present evidence, or its cut off, what is the judgment of those on the other side?
i lost.
ergo they won
ergo ipso facto, i lose by not being able to present the case.
===
As for Patty Hearst, you are too young to remember that one.
Really? but i am NOT too young to know her or her sisters. care to see some of my photos of the Hearst clan?
Patty was a teenager who was kidnapped, raped, tortured, and brainwashed, and put in fear of her life. She was no Communist then, and if you look at her subsequent life she has been quite conservative.
yup… maybe… but if you knew the daughers, and the clan, they are very socialist. care for me to dig up hearsts parents connections? why bother, any evidence that is too logn is not allowed, and i am not of such great standing that i can proclaim a fact and have it stick.
the hearsts have been part of NY nightlife for quite a while…
by the way, i also know the clinton clan personally (and they know me too. no not hillary, but her cousins and such. i have met bill, check out his image on my website)
and i said i know people who know the freidans personally, that is freinds of the family.
But (although I don’t know that much about Friedan’s personal politics specifically) your conclusions about her don’t necessarily follow from what you wrote of her early background.
if your saying that your childhood isnt a programatically entry that ends up creating a fixed outcoem, yeah i agree.
you know i am HORRIBLE at stating my case correctly..
perhaps it would be better to take that common life, as you put it, and then think about it.
that in the diaspora of good, come a trickle of what?
wars and such things haev been used for centuries to put people in places.
I know many people with that same history–Jews who were born here (or came as children) and whose parents came from the Soviet Union post-1917, and they are not even leftists, much less Communists.
oh, i do too… but i ALSO knew a man who was an anticommunist, who got me a job with a communist that was here. a man named izzy, and through guiding me with that other joker, he taught me some of the games.
no… but inside the mass of people, there were many who were on that side.
then there is another aspect that most foreigners dont know. the soviets consider soviets outside of the soviet union to still be soviets. and MANY of the people let out, had family back home. and so they did a lot of things to protect family back home, to protect being able to talk to them. etc.
usually little stuff.
Apparently it was not all that hard to leave during the first few years after the revolution.
actually this was not true, it was always hard to leave. but the russians were as antisemitic as the germans were (i can show you photos).
so jews were favored to be let go. they couldn’t exterminate them, and they would not give up god. in with the Jews that were observant were others.
historically speaking it was their idea to let thsoe that they didnt like and thought were harmful, to go to another country.
ergo, they opened up prisons once and did that, castro did too, and so did others. the idea was to send us their criminals, and let them do what they do naturally
But leaving the Soviet Union in the 20s had little to do with the politics of the children or the parents, at least from the evidence I know, and I know quite a bit of it.
this is not true… the children in that society (our earlier one) were much closer to the parents. and often if you read these people they had kids but were too busy to be with them in many cases.
to look at the movements would be to read a whose who of the children of these immigrants!!!!!!! and their friends among the American educated elite.
Friedans politics did NOT come from mom and dad. it came from the books she read, and from her inability to integrate with people. the movement love bombed her and gave her the attention she craved all through her life in exchange for her writings.
again, if you want to know the history that would inform you of all this, you HAVE to go to tracking the people around each person.
for each icon of socialism, progressive, and such, becomes mythologized. (that is until they break with such).
friedan was not in isolation… she also knew franz boas, and meade… along with kinsey, they formed a false front of false science to justify social changes.
meades work is a farce, and kinsey used criminally insane as normal… (he is the most cited in laws and legal judgements, and most of his work is also invalid)
of course then you have to tie this all to the work of a man named lukacks in bella kuhn government. this is where they learned of how to use childrens sexualization to effect social change by dividing thme from parents and the old social order with the temptation of sexual pleasures.
this was never the future, this was mental games, or mental bombs wrapped up like presents so that greeks bearing gifts would present them.
Friedan was and is a horrible person as far as persons go. she had a couple of kids, married a wealthy man. and her whole gulag thing is a farce if you knew her life. she emotioanlly abandoned the kids to nannies. she divorced and destroyed her husband.
the people i know who are friends of the family are friends of the husband. Friedan later (if i remember correctly, but i am not sure) recanted some of the allegations she made on him.
again, if you knew all the people around her, who was helping her, who published her. etc. you could work out things.
but if your going to read summaries recaps and such, then your not going to learn about the people around her and what they were into.
[edited for length by n-n]
The following is excerpted from a report printed by the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1974:
The activities of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler prior to and during World War II…are instructive. At that time, these three firms dominated motor vehicle production in both the United States and Germany.
Due to its mass production capabilities, automobile manufacturing is one of the most crucial industries with respect to national defense.
As a result, these firms retained the economic and political power to affect the shape of governmental relations both within and between these nations in a manner which maximized corporate global profits. In short, they were private governments unaccountable to the citizens of any country yet possessing tremendous influence over the course of war and peace in the world.
The substantial contribution of these firms to the American war effort in terms of tanks, aircraft components, and other military equipment is widely acknowledged.
Less well known are the simultaneous contributions of their foreign subsidiaries to the Axis Powers. In sum, they maximized profits by supplying both sides with the materiel needed to conduct the war.
During the 1920’s and 1930’s, the Big Three automakers undertook an extensive program of multinational expansion…
By the mid-1930’s, these three American companies owned automotive subsidiaries throughout Europe and the Far East; many of their largest facilities were located in the politically sensitive nations of Germany, Poland, Rumania, Austria, Hungary, Latvia, and Japan…
Due to their concentrated economic power over motor vehicle production in both Allied and Axis territories, the Big Three inevitably became major factors in the preparations and progress of the war.
In Germany, for example, General Motors and Ford became an integral part of the Nazi war efforts. GM’s plants in Germany built thousands of bomber and jet fighter propulsion systems for the Luftwaffe at the same time that its American plants produced aircraft engines for the U.S. Army Air Corps….
Ford was also active in Nazi Germany’s prewar preparations. In 1938, for instance, it opened a truck assembly plant in Berlin whose “real purpose,” according to U.S. Army Intelligence, was producing “troop transport-type” vehicles for the Wehrmacht.
That year Ford’s chief executive received the Nazi German Eagle (first class)….
The outbreak of war in September 1939 resulted inevitably in the full conversion by GM and Ford of their Axis plants to the production of military aircraft and trucks…. On the ground, GM and Ford subsidiaries built nearly 90 percent of the armored “mule” 3-ton half-trucks and more than 70 percent of the Reich’s medium and heavy-duty trucks.
These vehicles, according to American intelligence reports, served as “the backbone of the German Army transportation system.”….
After the cessation of hostilities, GM and Ford demanded reparations from the U.S. Government for wartime damages sustained by their Axis facilities as a result of Allied bombing…
Ford received a little less than $1 million, primarily as a result of damages sustained by its military truck complex at Cologne…
Due to their multinational dominance of motor vehicle production, GM and Ford became principal suppliers for the forces of fascism as well as for the forces of democracy. It may, of course, be argued that participating in both sides of an international conflict, like the common corporate practice of investing in both political parties before an election, is an appropriate corporate activity. Had the Nazis won, General Motors and Ford would have appeared impeccably Nazi; as Hitler lost, these companies were able to re-emerge impeccably American. In either case, the viability of these corporations and the interests of their respective stockholders would have been preserved.
next time you see schindlers list…
and you see the time clock they punch into
that was made by IBM…
did you know any of this?
In 1940 Graeme K. Howard, Vice President of General Motors, published America and a New World Order, in which he advised that America give full cooperation to the Nazi regime. In his book he blames FDR for causing the war in Europe and goes on to say that the fascists should be supported as the better alternative to the spread of Communism.
another one of those interesting books only insiders read.
The du Ponts helped to finance the Black Legion. The Black Legion was a Nazi style group supported by the du Ponts who were supporters of the Nazi movement in Germany and fanatical followers of the Third Reich. The organization was an American anti-socialist group that used violence against union leaders and union members. They have been implicated in the murder of several members of workers groups who were working in support of workers rights and benefits. The Black Legion was reported to have over 1.5 million members in the United States and was a group that was opposed to the FDR administration and was supposedly working to overthrow the administration. The Black Legion also had ties with the Ku Klux Klan, which was also a pro-Nazi group. The American Liberty League was another such organization.
For more on the Black Legion you can refer to the Federal Freedom of Information archives
fun stuff, eh
William Randolph Hearst is known as one of the largest media moguls of all time. During the 1930s he worked with the Nazi party to help promote a positive image of the Nazi party in American media. He also received loans from Italian fascists bankers during this time. The actions of Hearst were an important element in shaping American sentiment about not getting involved in the political situation in Europe as many Americans were led to believe that there was nothing terribly wrong going on in Europe, and even after the war started some Americans continued to support the Nazi regime based on the propaganda that they had been exposed to through Hearst media sources.
Below is an example of what was said about the Nazis in Hearst publications, in this case the Reader’s Digest, 1933:
“That Hitler’s conquest of the hearts and minds of all classes of Germans is now so complete that even if all his Brown Shirts and Steel Helmets were to be disbanded, tomorrow he would still be easily the strongest man in Germany, and on any appeal to the electorate would be confirmed in power by a quite overwhelming majority of votes.
Hitler is recognized by the whole of the political and official intelligentsia as an exceedingly able man. As of the militarist question: One may say with complete certainty that what Hitler said in his Reichstag speech on May 17 was exactly what he meant and accurately represents the policy that he will pursue.
I found no German who dreamed of the possibility of war, few who did not hope that it might be prevented in the future altogether. The truth is that the Nazi mind is concentrated on the internal problems of Germany and does not want to be bothered by foreign affairs for a long time to come.
Hitler has passed from the stage of party leader to being the national prophet of an exceedingly serious people, and it would need another prophet to replace him.”
– Clifford Sharp, former editor of the New Statesman writing in The New Statesman and Nation. Reprinted in Readers Digest, September, 1933
want to see hearst articles in ladies home journal…
In 1935 American Ambassador to Germany wrote to President Roosevelt about the extent of Hearst’s dealings with the Nazis.
In this letter it was stated:
“For this service Hearst was to receive $200,000 a year, and he at once began to bring pressure to bear on his correspondents to give only friendly accounts of what happened in Germany.”
“…I [reporter Karl von Wiegand] learned a little later that all my reports from Germany went directly to Hearst and were re-edited so as to fit the new program.”
“…he [Hearst] at the same time sent Dosch-Fleurot here from Paris to administer the service in such a way that it would always be friendly to the Hitler regime.”
Hearst publications continued to present the fascist regimes in Europe in a positive light until America finally entered the war.
you see patty came AFTER the atrocities of the reich. and so they didnt change that they liked to be aristocrats in a socialist state, they just switched to communism, another socialism.
Perhaps one of the most egregious contributors to the Nazi cause was IBM under the direction of Thomas J. Watson.
IBM knowing helped to setup Nazi census databases through the use of data sorting machines that enabled the Nazis to carry out the Holocaust in a way that they would not have otherwise been able to. Point blank, IBM increased the size and scope of the Holocaust, and did it for profit. Not only this, but IBM leased the machines, which they had developed especially for the Nazis, to the regime with the intention of taking them back, “once they were finished with them”. Thomas Watson was awarded a medal by Adolph Hitler for his role in assisting in the Nazi regime, .and Watson expressed, “the necessity of extending a sympathetic understanding to the German people, and their leader Adolph Hitler.” He also expressed “the highest esteem for Hitler, his country, and his people.”
am i casting too wide, or am i showing you that they didnt tell you stuff, they didnt write about it.
think of this..
hearsts owned a press conglomerate.
and so they were able to feed you, as a child, and me too, this kind of stuff.
if i said that readers digest supported nazis, you wouldn’t believe me.
patty came from the same liberal education that ayers did. that freidan did. that lots of them in what i wrote and you deleted did.
a common thread.
school as indoctrination.
and even told you who did it and admitted it
bella dodd, head of the CPUSA AND teachers union.
you have to know the detailed history to be able to know. and once you know, you realize that you were missing tons of those hiding in front of you .
In 1920 Ford stated: “The international financiers are behind all war. They are what is called the International Jew — German Jews, French Jews, English Jews, American Jews. I believe that in all these countries except our own the Jewish financier is supreme… Here, the Jew is a threat.”
so is it coincidence that GM is to survive again as a company in a fascist state as govenment motors?
in fact if you look at who they are supporting and such, and tie it back, you will find its the same FAMILIES.
and of course these FAMILIES have been pushing the destruction of all other FAMILIES as that is what aristocratic dynastic people do.
if you want you can put other labels on them, but tha wont change what they are, hteir goals, or really anything.
it will just change how you think about things.
and thats the point.
here is a booklet by ford.
and remember its teh ford fouidnation that coordinates all these not for profits, and its the council of forign reliations (what famous big family is still there).
they are still in business… every president of your lifetime EXCEPT reagan was a CFR member
obama is, so is mccain. its a progressive organization.
the trilateral commission, is their activity arm, and they use a hammer triskelion as a symbol
did you type in libertarian green party as i said?
did you fiond the swastika on a GREEN field instead of a red communist one?
In the 1920s he published The International Jew. Hitler himself ordered many copies of this book and was said to keep a copy on his desk. It is easy to see why when reading the book, because the attack on the Jews is vehement. The book states:
WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT?
Simply identify the source and nature of the influence which has overrun our schools and universities. Let the students know that their choice is between the Anglo-Saxons and the Tribe of Judah. Let the students decide, in making up their allegiance, whether they will follow the Builders or those who seek to tear down. It is not a case for argument. The only absolute antidote to the Jewish influence is to call college students back to a pride of race.
We often speak of the Fathers as if they were the few who happened to affix their signatures to a great document which marked a new era of liberty. The Fathers of our nation were the men of the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic race. The men who came from Europe with civilization in their blood and in their destiny. The men who crossed the Atlantic and set up civilization on a bleak and rock-bound coast; the men who drove north to Alaska and west to California; the men who opened up the tropics and subdued the arctics; the men who mastered the African veldt; the men who peopled Australia and seized the gates of the world at Suez, Gibraltar and Panama; men who have given form to every government and a livelihood to every people and an ideal to every century. They got neither their God nor their religion from Judah, nor yet their speech nor their creative genius- they are the Ruling People. Chosen throughout the centuries to Master the world, by building it ever better and better, and not by breaking it down.
Into the camp of this race, among the sons of the rulers, comes a people that has no civilization to point to, no aspiring religion, no universal speech, no great achievement in any realm but the realm of “get,” cast out of every land that gave them hospitality, and these people endeavor to tell the Sons of the Saxons what is needed to make the world what it ought to be!
If our sons follow this counsel of dark rebellion and destruction, it is because they do not know whose sons they are, of what race they are the scions. Let there be free speech to the limit in our universities and free intercourse of ideas, but let Jewish thoughts be labeled Jewish, and let our sons know the racial secret…
NAME THE ENEMY!
…
Judah has begun the struggle. Judah has made the invasion. Let it come. Let no man fear it. But let every a man insist that the fight be fair. Let college students and leaders of thought know that the objective is the regnancy of the ideas and the race that have built all the civilization we see and that promises all the civilization of the future; let them also know that the attacking force is Jewish.
That is all that will be necessary. It is against this that the Jews protest. “You must not identify us,” they say, “You must not use the term ‘Jew’.” Why? Because unless the Jewish idea can creep in under the assumption of other than Jewish origin, it is doomed. Anglo-Saxon ideas dare proclaim themselves and their origin. A proper proclamation is all that is necessary today. Compel every invading idea to run up its flag!
its very hard to navigate the detailed history.
for just as your ready to say a ha! you may fidn that they were working for someone else and so had to put forth that image. or some other deal.
but the point is, that these children of these wealthy people or those who their parents sent to these liberal educatinos came out with the education that the men who created the schools wanted them to have.
At the Nuremberg Trials Baldur Von Shirach claimed that Henry Ford was the primary inspiration for his anti-Semitism.
Shirach, a former Nazi youth leader, stated: “You have no idea what a great influence this book had on the thinking of the German youth…I read Henry Ford’s book ‘The International Jewry’…and became anti-Semitic.”
did you know this stuff?
and by the way… this isnt the most shocking stuff
Artfldgr: I repeat that you are casting too wide a net regarding the offspring of people, such as Patty Hearst for example, and about people whose parents came here in the 1920s from Russia.
And I know about Ford. Have for decades.
Artfldgr: well then, we are in some sort of basic agreement then. Because all I’m saying is that you can’t conclude something about the child from the parent. That is not the same as saying there isn’t often an influence, and a correlation.
As far as leaving Russia goes, the people I know who left in the 20s were Jewish. So perhaps it was easier for them, as you say. But my point is that nothing about their politics can be gleaned from that. The ones I know were not leftists, or even liberals.