Skip to comments.Secrets, Lies, and Atomic Spies,.....Or... Joe McCarthy was more right than he ever knew
Posted on 02/05/2002 11:06:24 PM PST by quietolong
NOVA reveals startling new evidence that Soviet spies penetrated America's deepest secrets, including the Manhattan Project, in the 1940's. By cracking the code of Soviet diplomatic cables, the FBI was able to hunt down "atom spies" such as Klaus Fuchs and Julius Rosenberg. But the true "master spy," a physicist named Ted Hall, got away -- and his gripping story is presented for the first time by NOVA. Read Venona Intercepts By Peter Tyson
In 1995, the U.S. National Security Agency broke a half century of silence by releasing translations of Soviet cables decrypted back in the 1940s by the Venona Project. Venona was a top-secret U.S. effort to gather and decrypt messages sent in the 1940s by agents of what is now called the KGB and the GRU, the Soviet military intelligence agency. The cables revealed the identities of numerous Americans who were spies for the Soviet Union, including those chronicled in NOVA's "Secrets, Lies, and Atomic Spies."
The four Venona cables presented here provide striking evidence of the covert activities of several atomic-era spies, including Klaus Fuchs, Julius Rosenberg, and Theodore Alvin Hall. Through the cables and accompanying stories, peer through the keyhole into the secret lives of these and other agents, who gave away details of the atomic bomb and other highly sensitive technologies. Watch for code words such as "Enormous," which stood for the Manhattan Project, America's atomic-bomb program
Link to Nova web sight on this show
Chapter 5 "Super Lend-Lease"
Pages 99-100 lists nuclear materials sent.
FYI - text is available in paperback edition.
Thats a easy one. We took all there Uranium
This is also detailed in the book Dark Sun ( see reply 37 )
British interference in U.S. policy is pretty well documented by now. The degree of alienation of the policy elites of the 1930's and 40's from the people whose proxy they supposedly held as a sacred trust -- it was the bedrock of the New Deal, still implicitly believed in by e.g. Doris Kearns Goodwin -- has yet to be fully documented beyond (self-interested) dispute.
To me, the American experience since FDR brought the Brain Trust to power and established the current policy-wonk technocratic "meritocracy" will bear in some important lessons for future American voters and politicians. To me, the apex and defining moment of that relationship between the policy elite and the People occurred in February 1968, when the Ten Wise Men, swallowing their earlier advice to Lyndon Johnson, told him the Vietnamese War was lost.....the first war America had ever lost, and it was their war ..... and simply got up and left the room, leaving President Johnson muttering to himself and an aide or two, "Somebody poisoned the well."
Exactly, Lyndon. That's exactly what happens when you trust other people who think they're smarter than you are.
My dad told me about that one, too. The Treasury people were going nuts -- they were responsible for the President's security.
See a trend here?
Yes, a lot of the New York "Progressives" referred to above were Jewish, as were the socialists who were hunted down by the Nazis in Vienna during the Anschluss, when Dollfuss was assassinated and scores of socialists were murdered. Harold A.R. "Kim" Philby was in Vienna then, and the experience was one of those that cemented his treason.
I've also read that secularized Jews tend to extrovert their morality, which propels them into reformist and utopian politics -- the Jewish socialists were a big chunk of the Left in prerevolutionary Russia, and Lenin had to drive them out of the "mass party" to consolidate his control.
Which is why you wont see Hasidim participating in the kind of activity we're talking about, and in fact conservative, observant Jews were never involved as far as I know.
The story,as well as the front page photo from the Washington Post are on the internet. Eleanor had a communist boyfriend named "Joe" something that was most likely her "handler". At any rate,Hoover kept him under survelience,and even taped Joe and Eleanor bumpin' ugly in several hotel rooms. I had links to all this stuff bookmarked,but a virus got them.
But with historians such as "Cheshire cat" Goodwin and "Copy cat" Ambrose leading the charge ... Americans are doomed even in the basic understanding of their own history.
How many "Constitutional historians and scholars" signed that full-page newspaper letter ok'ing Clinton's behaviour - 400 +/-? Just compare the Congressional reactions to ENRON's Skillings saying "I can not recall" and those selfsame Congressmen to the former first lady's "I can not recall." Politically expedient - "tax, tax - spend, spend - elect, elect" ...
As an FYI, if you have not already seen these: "The Roosevelt Myth" John T. Flynn - rather old now, but speaks to how FDR et. al., did not "fix" America's Depression woes; but shows instance how their policies put Americans on the (now solid) path of governmental dependence. That is FDR real legacy - and THAT MUST BE PROTECTED AT ALL COSTS!
Also, "The Jew from Linz" - speaks to the Russia Pale history, the various Tsarist pogroms, some of the origins of Zionism, ... and the schism between Liberal/Reform/Orthodox dogma comes from ... and yes, where Cambridge University fits in.
Ye Olde Lydon never got the nexus of his "Great Society" and "guns and butter" - remember Clinton "dodged the draft" and still made Prez. Weird world Americans live in!
Finally, as Charles A. Beard once said, "Writing history is a dangerous trade."
And remember, boys and girls -- the German Nazis were a Left party, too, and don't ever let anyone tell you differently!
No, they were a right-wing party, as everyone agreed at the time. Left and right are mere groupings, not ideals or ideologies. The nazis were right-wing socialists. There are such critters, you know. They are more common in Europe than in America, though.
That's what the other Socialists and fellow-pinko's said about them, to distance themselves.
Labels don't mean much, but programmes do. The Nazis were a Left party, and socialists. There is no such thing as a "right-wing socialist". If challenged to identify a "right-wing socialist", I doubt that any academic on the face of the earth could identify one, with the possible solitary exception of the Nazi Party of Germany, and that is only because the Leftists have always insisted, "we aren't with Ugly over there.....he isn't one of us!" But of course that was an expedient lie.
As between Left and Right, self-identifying and programming as a Socialist has always been definitive: if it's Socialist, it's Leftist.
"...I would like to be clearly understood...we, the Soviet people, are for socialism.... We want more socialism and, therefore, more democracy." Mikhail Gorbachev
"Socialism has a bad name in America, and no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the left is going to change that.... The words Economic Democracy are an adequate and effective replacement." Derek Shearer cited in Reason 1982
Senator McCarthy was never part of the House Unamerican Activities Committee. McCarthy was never anywhere near the "blacklist".
BTW - I'm not yelling at you, but I know there is a lot of confusion on this subject. The dumbing down of American education has taken its toll over the years.
Gee, thanks. I never said he was.
German National Socialists, btw, didn't insist on formally owning all the means of production. They just appointed people like Fritz Todt and Albert Speer to control them.......which btw is what FDR did over here, and even went so far as to have troops throw Mr. Avery, chairman of Montgomery Ward I think it was, out of his own office, to make his point -- that everyone had to toe the mark and pull together for Victory. Stalin would have had the guy shot, but the end result was the same.
And the idea of controlling property without owning it has been voguish in the U.S. Left for a while: Barry Commoner ran for President in 1980, as you may recall, and he made that same idea his own: we'll let people continue to own property -- we'll just separate them from control, which we'll exert to turn capital to public purposes. Broadcasting that idea netted Commoner a lot of appeals from liberals to shut up -- he was letting their favorite cat out of the bag!
Whether they are outright Communists or corporatist fascists like the Nazis who permit a private sphere to continue in existence under State controls and intervention, socialists are all still parties of Government Control and are therefore leftist, IMHO.
What I would like to know is, why did Liberals turn on McCarthy and set out deliberately to destroy him?
Because he was an alcoholic? Lots of alcoholics in the Congress.
Because he was a Republican? They liked Arthur Vandenburg and Dwight Eisenhower just fine.
Because he dealt in innuendo like J. Edgar Hoover did?
I still don't see an obvious peg. It had to have been cultural, the fact that he was a boostrapper, a nobody. It had to be pride of place, and snobbery.