Why Senator Joe McCarthy Had to Be Destroyed
To Comment on this article go to BMans Revolt.
The more I learn, particularly when it involves history over about the past two centuries, the more I discover that things are almost the opposite of what we have been led to believe they were. Historians, for instance, consistently rank Woodrow Wilson as one of Americas best presidents, but now we have a very well reasoned argument from David Stockman that almost everything bad that happened in the 20th century resulted from Wilsons decision to involve us needlessly in what was known at the time as the Great War. And Stockman even omits any mention of the Balfour Declaration, whose promises Great Britain could not have made good upon without U.S. entry into the war, and the endlessly troublesome state of Israel would not have been created.
The Wilson administration also gave us the federal income tax and the Federal Reserve. But Wilson got a lot of his countrymen killed toiling on the winning side of a war, and that was good enough to merit a place in the presidential pantheon for the power worshippers of academia. Just look at the company he keeps there, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and George Washington.
Speaking of the Balfour Declaration, in which the British government promised a home to world Jewry in their ancestral land of Palestine, assuming the Brits could grab it from the Ottoman Empire, who were allies of the Germans in the Great War, the latest best evidence indicates that Palestine is not the ancient home of the Jews, after all. According to Shlomo Sand, a very diligent Israeli history professor and author of The Invention of the Jewish People, virtually all of the so-called Jewish diaspora are descendants of converts to Judaism, products of the era in which it was a proselytizing religion almost as much as was Christianity. And if that were not bad enough for the conventional wisdom, Sand tells us that, in all likelihood, many if not most of todays Arab Palestinians are the descendants of the Biblical Israelites (along with Philistines, Hittites, Samaritans, and offspring of various conquerors and local women) who were given a very strong incentive to convert by the conquering Arabs. Initially, the caliph taxed only non-believers in Islam.
Lied to about
McCarthy
See what we mean by everything being
the opposite of what weve been told?
And that brings us back to Joe McCarthy. Has any American elected official ever
been so completely vilified as has the junior Senator from Wisconsin? He is best known today for the term of
opprobrium that A.Word.A.Day defines as, The
practice of making unfounded accusations against someone, and backs up with
this etymology: After US senator Joseph McCarthy (1909-1957) known for making
unsubstantiated claims accusing people of being Communists, spies, and
disloyal.
With his
finger held carefully to the political winds an execrable young academic
careerist by the name of Matthew
A. McNiece could
refer in his 2008 dissertation, without fear of contradiction, to the
burgeoning anticommunist hysteria that bred all manner of conspiracy
theories–culminating most recognizably in McCarthys unverified claim of
widespread communist infiltration of the federal government.
The fact
of the matter is that McCarthys claims were unsubstantiated or unverified
only to the extent that the Truman—and later the Eisenhower—administration,
with the aid of allies in the Senate and the news media, put up all manner of
obstacles to McCarthys attempt to show publicly what he had learned privately,
mainly from the FBI. An example of
how the obstacles were placed and the history of the period distorted is shown
in my 2011 article, M.
Stanton Evans on Good Night and Good Luck.
What
McCarthy was up against, and some appreciation of the degree of Communist and
pro-Communist infiltration and, indeed, takeover of key levers of power by the
end of the 1940s can be had by examining the 1952 report of the Senate
Judiciary Committee, of which, McCarthy was never a member. These conclusions are completely
supported by the testimony of the independent-minded private citizen, Alfred
Kohlberg, who lays heavy blame upon the
Institute for Pacific Relations (IPR) for the fall of China to the Communists
in 1949. One of the key members of
the IPR mentioned in the report was Owen Lattimore, who was
also one of McCarthys main targets.
The primary avenue of Lattimores influence
upon government policy on China was through his close associate, Lauchlin Currie, who had been revealed to the White House as a Soviet agent
by Communist defector Whittaker Chambers in 1939
at a time that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were allies.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS REPORT
OF
THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY*
SECOND
SESSION
JULY 2
(legislative day JUNE 27), 1952.—Ordered to be
printed.
CONCLUSIONS
The
Institute of Pacific Relations has not maintained the character of an objective
scholarly and research organization.
* * *
The IPR
has been considered by the American Communist Party and by Soviet officials as
an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and military intelligence.
* * *
The IP disseminated
and sought to popularize false information including information originating
from Soviet and Communist sources.
* * *
A small
core of officials and staff members carried the main burden of IPR activities
and directed its administration and policies.
* * *
Members
of the small core of officials and staff members who controlled IPR were either
Communist or pro-Communist.
* * *
There is
no evidence that the large majority of its members supported the IPR for any
reason except to advance the professed research and scholarly purposes of the
organization.
* * *
Most
members of the IPR, and most members of the Board of Trustees, were inactive
and obviously without any influence over the policies of the organization and
the conduct of its affairs.
* * *
IPR
activities were made possible largely through the financial support of American
industrialists, corporations, and foundations, the majority of whom were not familiar with the inner workings of the
organization. (Emphasis added)
* * *
The effective
leadership of the IPR often sought to deceive IPR contributors and supporters
as to the true character and activities of the organization.
---
Owen Lattimore was, from some time beginning in the 1930s, a
conscious articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.
---
Owen Lattimore testified falsely before the subcommittee with
reference to at least five separate matters that were relevant to the inquiry
and substantial in import.
---
Owen Lattimore and John Carter Vincent were influential in
bringing about a change in United States policy in 1945 favorable to the
Chinese Communists.
---
Many of
the persons active in and around the IPR, and in particular though not
exclusively Owen Lattimore, Edward C. Carter,
Frederick V. Field, T.A. Bisson, Lawrence K. Rosinger, and Maxwell Stewart, knowingly and deliberately
used the language of books and articles which they wrote or edited in an
attempt to influence the American public by means of pro-Communist or
pro-Soviet content of such writings.
* * *
The net
effect of IPR activities on United States public opinion has been such as to
serve international Communist interests and to affect adversely the interest of
the United States.
Look
again at the passage I have emphasized: IPR activities were made possible
largely through the financial support of American industrialists, corporations,
and foundations, the majority of whom
were not familiar with the inner workings of the organization. The committee coyly leaves the reader
with the impression that those providing the funding for the
IPR were duped by the Communist staff members, just as IPR member
Kohlberg had been duped before he began to take a more careful look at the
organization.
Tune Callers
Identified
But we
all know that the old saying is usually valid that he who pays the piper calls
the tune. Forget about the
majority of contributors providing financing; what
about the key minority of contributors who provided the majority of the
financing? The committee is
strategically silent on that absolutely crucial question. For that, we must turn to the pages of Tragedy and Hope: A
History of the World in Our Time by the
very well connected Georgetown University historian, Carroll
Quigley:
In 1951 the Subcommittee on Internal Security
of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the so-called McCarran Committee, sought to
show that China had been lost to the Communists by the deliberate actions of a
group of academic experts on the Far East and Communist fellow travelers whose
work in that direction was controlled and coordinated by the Institute of
Pacific Relations (IPR). The influence of the Communists in IPR is well established,
but the patronage of Wall Street is less well known.
The IPR was a private association of ten
independent national councils in ten countries concerned with affairs in the
Pacific. The headquarters of the IPR and of the American Council of IPR were
both in New York and were closely associated on an interlocking basis. Each
spent about $2.5 million dollars over the quarter-century from 1925 to 1950, of
which about half, in each case, came from the Carnegie Foundation and the
Rockefeller Foundation (which were themselves interlocking groups controlled by
an alliance of Morgan and Rockefeller interests in Wall Street). Much of the
rest, especially of the American Council, came from firms closely allied to
these two Wall Street interests, such as Standard Oil, International Telephone
and Telegraph, International General Electric, the National City Bank, and the
Chase National Bank. In each case, about 10 percent of income came from sales
of publications and, of course, a certain amount came from ordinary members who
paid $15 a year and received the periodicals of the IPR and its American
Council, Pacific Affairs and Far Eastern Survey.
The financial deficits which
occurred each year were picked up by financial angels, almost all with
close Wall Street connections. The chief identifiable contributions here were
about $60,000 from Frederick Vanderbilt Field over eighteen years, $14,700 from
Thomas Lamont over fourteen years, $800 from Corliss Lamont (only after 1947),
and $18,000 from a member of Lee, Higginson in Boston who seems to have been
Jerome D. Greene. In addition, large sums of money each year were directed to
private individuals for research and travel expenses from similar sources,
chiefly the great financial foundations.
Most of these awards for work in the Far
Eastern area required approval or recommendation from members of IPR. Moreover,
access to publication and recommendations to academic positions in the handful
of great American universities concerned with the Far East required similar
sponsorship. And, finally, there can be little doubt that consultant jobs on
Far Eastern matters in the State Department or other government agencies were
largely restricted to IPR-approved people. The individuals who published, who
had money, found jobs, were consulted, and who were appointed intermittently to
government missions were those who were tolerant of the IPR line. The fact that
all these lines of communication passed through the Ivy League universities or
their scattered equivalents west of the Appalachians, such as Chicago,
Stanford, or California, unquestionably went back to Morgan's influence in
handling large academic endowments.
---
It was this group of people, whose wealth and
influence so exceeded their experience and understanding, who
provided much of the frame-work of influence which the Communist sympathizers
and fellow travelers took over in the United States in the 1930's. It must be recognized that the power that
these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist
power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie, and,
once the anger and suspicions of the American people were aroused, as they were
by 1950, it was a fairly simple matter to get rid of the Red sympathizers.
Before this could be done, however, a congressional committee, following
backward to their source the threads which led from admitted Communists like
Whittaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss, and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas
Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of the
interlocking tax-exempt foundations. The Eighty-third Congress in July 1953 set
up a Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations with
Representative B. Carroll Reece, of Tennessee, as chairman. It soon became
clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went
too far and that the "most respected" newspapers in the country,
closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any
relevations to make the publicity worth while, in
terms of votes or campaign contributions. An interesting report showing the
Left-wing associations of the interlocking nexus of tax-exempt foundations was
issued in 1954 rather quietly. Four years later, the Reece committee's general
counsel, Rene A. Wormser, wrote a shocked, but not
shocking, book on the subject called Foundations: Their Power and Influence. (Emphasis added)
So, the missing names from the Senate Committee reports were primarily the
big Wall Street connected foundations of the Rockefellers and J.P. Morgan. The Senate Judiciary Committee knew how
far they could go in belling the cat, but McCarthy didnt know how far he could
go. Quigley, himself, as a member
of the established American academic history community, was also a lot like the
Committee in his circumspection. My
quotes are from pp. 945-956 of his book, which can be found on the Internet here. One can see there that in the midst of
his shocking revelations Quigley creates a red herring and lets loose a blast
at those who have drawn what would appear to be quite plausible conclusions:
The radical Right version of these events as
written up by John T. Flynn, Freda Utley, and others, was even more remote from
the truth than were [Communist defectors Louis] Budenz's
or [Elizabeth] Bentley's versions, although it had a tremendous impact on
American opinion and American relations with other countries in the years
1947-1955. This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in
many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in
regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by
extreme Left-wing elements, operating from the White House itself and
controlling all the chief avenues of publicity in the United States, to destroy
the American way of life, based on private enterprise, laissez faire, and
isolationism, in behalf of alien ideologies of Russian Socialism and British
cosmopolitanism (or internationalism).
In the great mass of Quigleys verbiage,
though, is the simple truth that the heavy hitters of Wall Street knowingly
funded a massive sell-out to the Communists in the Far East. One might speculate as to what their purposes
were in doing so, but it would appear that the fact they did so is indisputable. Noticeably absent from the pages of his
work is the name of Alfred Kohlberg, a businessman with no particular
ideological axe to grind, whose description
of the IPR as a thoroughly
Communist and very influential outfit accords quite closely to what Quigley suggests
is a radical Right fairy tale.
A View from Down Under
Fortunately, we dont have to depend upon
Quigleys muddy and sometimes contradictory prose to see who destroyed Joe McCarthy and why
they did it:
The deathblow to McCarthys campaign was administered not by some Party hack at the Daily Worker, but by Sen. Ralph Flanders, who introduced the resolution for Senate censure of McCarthy. This was backed by Sen. Herbert Lehman
, son of Mayer Lehman, founder of Lehman Brothers international investment bank, of which Herbert was a partner.---
Lehman, like the Warburgs,
Schiffs, et al., was one of those who intermarried
among the banking dynasties, marrying Edith Louise Altschul,
the daughter of the head of the New York branch of Lazard Frres, the
Paris-based banking house. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for
his campaign against Sen. McCarthy, as was the anti-McCarthy cartoonist Herbert
Block.
Sen. Flanders as the introducer of the
Senate death blow to McCarthy himself had an interesting background, not as
some progressive or liberal Democrat, but as a Republican, an industrialist
and a banker.
---
McCarthys most dangerous enemies were,
in this writers opinion, not the Soviet spies and American Communist Party
functionaries he was exposing, but those whom he had not even yet got around to
targeting, the power elite and their agents.
Flanders had been president of the
Boston Federal Reserve Bank for two years prior to being elected Senator for
Vermont. In 1942 he was appointed to the Committee for Economic Development,
which was established to formulate US post-war economic policy, including the
role of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
---
Keep in mind at this stage that both Flanders and Lehman
were members of the Council on Foreign Relations, which CFR official historian
Peter Grosse described as the US foreign policy establishment. Flanders had
been involved in a CFR study committee on post-war US foreign policy set up in
1940. Flanders was also a member of the Business Advisory Council, another
association of significance that will be considered shortly.
Other CFR study group members included Lauchlin
Currie and Benjamin V Cohen both
from the US State Department, Asia expert Prof. Owen Lattimore,
and economist Leo Pasvolsky, special assistant for
post-war planning to the US Secretary of State. All of these CFR advisers were
to come to the attention of Sen. McCarthys investigations into subversion.
This CFR connection is a primary key to understanding
McCarthys political destruction.
All of these quotes (with links
supplied by me) are from the well-documented November 2013 article, Joe McCarthy & the
Establishment Bolsheviks, by New Zealand writer Kerry Bolton, and I commend it to readers in its
entirety. Here is Boltons
conclusion:
McCarthy was finished off by a coalition of Big Business,
CFR, Business Advisory Council, US Administration, New
York Times, Washington Post, CIA. He carried on as Senator for a
further several years during which time he was ostracised
and his speeches boycotted in the Senate. McCarthy was wrecked emotionally and
physically by the campaign against him, Fred J Cook describing him as a pale
ghost of his former self; he died in 1957 at the age of 48. E Merrill Root cogently described the
situation with which McCarthy was probably unknowingly confronted: . . . I do
not think that the Senator ever quite saw the real nature of the enemy within,
the full scope of the Conspiracy in New York and Washington . . ..
A different perspective on Joe McCarthy: Mrs
Jean McCarthy thanks the Marine Corps for the honours
that were accorded to her late husband, showing a man of tolerance, bravery and
humour. Note Mrs McCarthys
references to the DCF and the Air Medal Four Stars, and the citation for
bravery written by Admiral Nimitz. The letter is featured on the website of The 8th & I Reunion Association of the US Marine Corps.
McCarthy, a Judge at the time of World War II, had volunteered for Service, despite
his exemption. One of the major smears against McCarthy continues to be that he
had not seen active service, that the image of Tail Gunner Joe was a myth,
and that he had faked the Nimitz citation for bravery
Joe McCarthy might be a prophet without honor
in his own land, but its good to see that that is not the case in at least one
small corner of New Zealand.
To my
mind, the biggest indicator of Senator McCarthys naivet is that he allowed
himself to be treated at Bethesda Naval Hospital, considering the fate that had
befallen James Forrestal there. For
evidence that McCarthys death may not have been any more natural than was
Forrestals, see The Assassination
of Joe McCarthy by
Medford Evans and the section entitled McCarthys Death at Bethesda in my
article James Forrestal and Joe McCarthy.
*This report is Appendix L of the very
illuminating book, The China Lobby
Man: The Story of Alfred Kohlberg by
Joseph Keeley.
The appendices alone are worth the price of the book. Kohlbergs Senate
testimony was also a Keeley
appendix as was the JFK speech around which I built the article, John F.
Kennedy on the Loss of China. Theres something very curious about
this book, though. If you go to the
Amazon.com page
for the unbound version, what you will see there represented as an illustration
of the cover is actually a picture of the cover of one of the most worthless
books ever written, Quotations from
Chairman Bill: the Best of William F. Buckley, Jr. I know
that it is worthless because when I ordered the Keeley
book from a used book company, what they sent me was the Buckley abomination
instead. Naturally, I complained
and requested that I get what I had ordered. The sellers told me not to bother even
sending the Buckley book back and they then sent me the requested Keeley work.
Whats going on? To find out, go to BookFinder.com and search for the book using author and
title. When the Keeley
book comes up its ISBN will accompany it.
Now go back and do the search again, but this time only by that
ISBN. All you get is that lousy
Buckley book. The two books have
the same ISBN. The Keeley book came first, but the Buckley book has been given
its ISBN and now seems to have been given priority. A more suspicious mind than mine might
conclude that someone is steering us away from the story of the China Lobby Man
and those valuable appendices.
David Martin
July 17, 2014
Home
Page Column Column 5 Archive Contact