DontTreadOnMe wrote:Monte Cargo wrote:DontTreadOnMe wrote:ossobuco wrote:Welllllllll. Free lance but not all all alone on the deep blue sea.
he had jedgar and nixon to keep him company. reagan was doing his part over in hollywood to sniff out them reds what was "hatin' us for our freedoms".
ya know. like freedom of speech. freedom of political expression. all that stuff that seems to evaporate everytime one of these types of witch hunt becomes popular.
Oh, is that the liberal summarization of history, then?
don't know about the liberals, but it is what i come up with having read various material over nearly 50 years regarding the mccarthy bunch.
Which was written by liberals.
Quote:do you deny that hoover and nixon were in cahoots with him ?
I bristle at the use of the term "in cahoots" to describe Americans who worked together to identify Soviet agents. That's like asking if I deny the Navy was in cahoots with the Army to defeat Adolf Hitler. Again, although we've had fifty years of liberal revisionist history about McCarthy, anyone with even the most modest curiousity would want to read the recently declassified Venona Papers. So what you are saying is that J Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy were "in cahoots" identifying Soviet KGB agents in this country. Contrary to the popular mythology regarding this era, there were no suicides, and McCarthy actually got it right. If not allowing Soviet agents to produce propoganda films that falsely depict the United States and glorify the Soviets, so be it. These people were free to go to France.
Quote:do you deny that reagan was involved in the creation of the black lists ?
I don't deny it, but it seems as though it is a fait accomplis of a deduction that you deny that it was a really good idea to keep communists out of the film production business. I would disagree with that point of view.
Quote:do you deny that for all of the upheaval and gross abuse of the house unamerican activities committee, very little was produced in the way of verifiable and even less in the way convictions?
You will need to produce one person who was wrongfully prosecuted and you will need to produce one person who was personally abused in order to deserve an answer to this question. Sir, when a question becomes an editorial, namely your editorial, the questions ceases being a question. You have chosen to remain ignorant and not expand your extremely limited understanding of the House Unamerican Activities except the propoganda that you have been fed, no doubt by your liberal teachers. If you are not willing to acquaint yourself with the Venona papers, which exonnerated Joseph McCarthy from all of the garbage that people like you bestow upon him, then you are not worth the time to debate the topic.
Quote:do you deny that over the last 5 years there has been, and is, a similarity in the bush administration's rhetoric, activities and paranoic secrecy?
[/color]
Do you deny that we were attacked on 9-11? It certainly appears so. Please remove your head from the sand. From your armchair, you have personally lost no freedoms or been called upon to make any sacrifice. You may consider yourself lucky, considering that this country has been at war for five years. You expect the government not to make any adjustments to that fact? I think you would benefit from reading the 9-11 report, which concludes that surveillance of terrorists and particularly their financial transactions is one of the best ways of catching terrorists.
Do you deny the findings of the 9-11 Commission's report and its recommendations?
I can find a lot of fault with the Bush administration, but the concerns you post are perhaps the best means by which a president can protect its citizens. If you don't have any calls to make Afghanistan to speak with Al Queida, you don't have anything to worry about.
