Jeremy Kuzmarov argues the Cold War case has enduring relevance to American political culture and provides clues to the motives and machinations underlying the new Russophobia.
By Jeremy Kuzmarov
In January 1950, Alger Hiss, a former State Department employee and director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, was convicted of perjury and sentenced to five years in a federal penitentiary. The sentence, of which Hiss served 44 months, culminated a frenzied political trial that catapulted Richard Nixon to fame, undergirded the advent of McCarthyism and heated up the Cold War.
Today, it is worth looking back at the Hiss case because it offers important clues to the motives and machinations underlying the similarly politicized Russia-gate investigations. In both cases, powerful political players appear to have attempted to deflect acts of malfeasance by falsely accusing political adversaries of treasonous behavior while igniting anti-Russia hysteria and paranoid fears of subversion that threatened war between the major nuclear powers.
Hiss testifying in 1950. (Wikipedia)
Hiss was the embodiment of the liberal, New Deal establishment, which had promoted a major expansion of domestic social welfare programs. Educated at Harvard Law School, Hiss clerked for Supreme Court Justices Felix Frankfurter and Oliver Wendell Holmes, and worked for the State Department before moving on to head the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Supportive of President Franklin Roosevelt’s policy of accommodation towards the Soviets, Hiss had been present at the 1945 Yalta conference, which resulted in a spheres of influence agreement.
Hiss had also worked as a legal assistant for the Nye Committee in the 1930s, a congressional investigation into war profiteering led by Gerald Nye, a Republican senator from North Dakota. The investigation exposed high-level corruption and connections between American companies and the growth of the Nazi war machine.
For instance, it revealed how United Aircraft sold commercial airplane engines to Germany for use in Luftwaffe fighter planes. It showed how Nazi troops were armed with American guns, and how Union Banking Corporation had engaged in a cartel agreement with the German chemical conglomerate, I.G. Farben, soon to be gas maker for Holocaust gas chambers.
Because of his work on the committee, Hiss made many powerful enemies. The Republican Party at the time was looking to revive its fortunes through red- baiting tactics that would deflect attention from their anti-labor program. The Justice Department also had begun to investigate alleged treasonous activities by GOP power brokers.
Among them was Thomas McKittrick, a former agent of the Office of Strategic Services (predecessor of the CIA) who was the wartime president of the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland. He was also an executive with Chase Manhattan Bank and a Marshall Plan administrator who allegedly conspired with his friend, the future CIA Director Allen Dulles, to move looted Nazi gold to Argentina.
The Dulles brothers.
Another official under DOJ investigation was Sen. Prescott Bush, a managing director of the Union Banking Corporation, which helped provide financing to Nazi industrialists in violation of the Trading with the Enemy Act during World War II. Bush was the father of President George H.W. Bush and grandfather of President George W. Bush.
The Dulles’ Diversion’
The origins of McCarthyism predate McCarthy. In order to bury the war profiteering investigation and undermine a wartime plan adopted by FDR’s Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau to deindustrialize Germany and break the power of its banking cartel, Dulles and his associates began accusing New Deal Democrats of being spies.
The first was Harry Dexter White, liberal postwar director of the International Monetary Fund, who had pushed the German deindustrialization plan, and then came Hiss.
The GOP’s accusations of treason were part of a political counter-offensive designed to protect the real traitors while bolstering the party’s political fortune. Hiss’ alleged treason provided the “proof” that the Roosevelt and Truman administrations were “dyed pink in Moscow.” Hiss’ trial was in turn politicized as much as the Soviet show trials.
John Foster Dulles, President Dwight Eisenhower’s secretary of state, and his brother Allen had worked as attorneys for Sullivan & Cromwell, which according to journalist Stephen Kinzer, “thrived on its cartels and ties to the Nazi regime,” and kept its business with its clients all the way through the war.
After supporting Nixon’s campaign in California’s 12th Congressional district against Democrat Jerry Voorhis in 1946, the Dulles brothers began to accuse their enemies of communist subversion in order to bury investigation into their nefarious war-time activities and to undermine Morgenthau’s plan to deindustrialize Germany and break the power of its banking cartel.
The first target of their accusations was Harry Dexter White, liberal postwar executive director of the IMF and an assistant to Morgenthau who championed the German deindustrialization plan. President Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill adopted the plan at the second Quebec Conference in September 1944. Truman replaced it in 1947 with the Marshall Plan, a robust program of economic aid that benefited U.S. business.
Hiss was the second major target to fall victim to Dulles’ plot. Like Russia-gate, which has deflected attention from the Democratic Party failings, Hiss’ case became a media sensation that derailed critical scrutiny into treasonous wartime activity by plutocratic interests and provided “proof” for GOP voters that the Roosevelt and Truman administrations were “dyed pink in Moscow”–much as Donald Trump is portrayed as a Moscow puppet.
Trump: Portrayed as Moscow puppet.
Like the allegations against Trump, Hiss’ actual connection to Soviet espionage remains unproven. He never left any traces of even being a socialist. The documents Hiss is alleged to have smuggled were mundane and would have done nothing to harm national security. They included blank and illegible microfilms along with synopses about economic conditions in Manchuria, German trade policy in Braziland, unclassified manuals for operating naval rafts, parachutes and fire extinguishers; information that could have been found in the New York public library.
The Hiss case was marred by prosecutorial misconduct and illegalities. Hiss was entrapped by prosecutors who benefited from FBI surveillance of his witnesses and the sharing of that information with the prosecution’s leading witness, Whittaker Chambers, a Time magazine editor who said he had known Hiss in the mid-1930s. Allegations of biased FBI misconduct against Trump are similarly rife.
Like proponents of Russia-gate, Chambers had questionable credibility. His credibility was undermined by contradictory statements, dubious claims about the spy-craft trade and false testimony. William A. Reuben, who spent four decades researching the Hiss case, found that “the first thing to note about Whittaker Chambers’ confessions of communist underground work is that it has never been corroborated, either by documentary evidence or by the word of any other human being.”
KGB: Hiss Never an Asset
Years after the case, Oleg Kalugin, a former KGB general and longtime chief of Russia’s foreign intelligence operations, stated that “Russian intelligence service has no documents proving that Alger Hiss cooperated with our service somewhere or anywhere,” while retired KGB Maj. Gen. Julius Kobyakov said Hiss “never had any relationship with Soviet intelligence.”
Hede Massing, an Austrian actress and confessed former Soviet spy inside the U.S., was another key witness for the prosecution who was threatened with deportation if she did not testify against Hiss. The government claimed that Hiss was part of an underground spy cell called the “Ware Group.”
However, Lee Pressman, a labor attorney who was a law school classmate of Hiss and a member of the group, testified that this was a Marxist study group in the 1930s and that Hiss was not a member. Pressman was later accused of being a Russian spy.
It was claimed that Chambers and Hiss had been introduced by Josef Peters, alleged brain of the entire communist underground. But there is no record of this, and Peters was mysteriously deported to Hungary on the eve of the trial, so he could not testify and said he never met Chambers, except possibly once in the 1930s.
Chambers: Dubious witness.
Hiss’ wife, Priscilla, allegedly typed some of the smuggled State Department documents on a typewriter that was traced back to the Hiss family. However, later it was found that the FBI had suppressed a lab report showing she could not have typed the documents. The Woodcock typewriter, serving as key government evidence, was also possibly reproduced by the CIA or U.S. military intelligence, echoing the way the CIA has been alleged to be behind Guccifer 2 in the alleged Russian hack of the DNC computers.
Nixon alluded to this when he told aide Charles Colson, as recorded in White House tapes: “The typewriters are always key. We built one in the Hiss case.”
Hiss’ opponents believed they had their smoking gun years after the trial when encrypted Soviet cables, released following the opening of the Soviet archives in 1991 (known as the Venona files), exposed a State Department spy code-named Ales, whom they believed to meanAlger.
However, a 2007 American Scholar article by Kai Bird and Svetlana Chervonnaya argued that a more likely candidate was Hiss’ colleague, Wilder Foote, because a KGB operative placed Ales in Mexico City when Hiss was known to be in the U.S and the information came from someone inside the Office of the Lend- Lease Aadministration, where Hiss never worked.
The Soviets showed little interest in the political information Hiss could provide, since the Cambridge Five (famed British spies) leaked the major secret documents related to Yalta. Ales hence does not appear to have violated the Espionage Act, which requires specific injury to U.S. national interest.
More Parallels With 2016
The Hiss case exemplifies the abuse of the judicial system and manipulation of public opinion by opportunists such as Richard Nixon and elements of the Deep State during the Cold War. One can see parallels with Russia-gate here too, with opportunists such as Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and his uncorroborated leaks coming from intelligence sources.
Nixon: Opportunistically seized the moment.
These resemblances to current events are unfortunately salient. The Deep State always has wanted Russia as an enemy so huge military-defense budgets can be maintained, and so Russia does not control Central Asia’s oil and gas wealth. The main target of its political machinations today, farcically, is a Republican president who is an arch-imperialist and embodiment of the American dream in its valorization of wealth accumulation.
During the 2016 election, the party of Roosevelt ran a divisive candidate in Hillary Clinton who undermined the progressive insurgent, Bernie Sanders, through undemocratic methods. Instead of looking in the mirror, party power-brokers sought to blame Russia for its embarrassing defeat and divert the public’s attention. They spread rumors of Russian electoral manipulation, which, as in the Hiss case, have never been corroborated and probably never could be.
The Russia-gate investigation so far has many of the footprints of a politicized disinformation campaign, an amateur one at that, given that the January 2017 “assessment” by only three intelligence agencies—released to try to prove the charge of election hacking—was bereft of any evidence and focused mainly on attacking English-language Russian television as an alleged propaganda outlet.
Gross inconsistencies also have been apparent; in the refusal by Democratic National Committee to allow the FBI to examine its computer server where the alleged hack took place and in Special Counsel Robert Mueller‘s refusal to interview WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange or witnesses such as British diplomat Craig Murray who met with the alleged leaker. Mueller also refuses to engage with a study carried out by the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, or VIPS, that determined the DNC data was leaked, not hacked, and that the data copying was performed on the East Coast of the United States and exceeded internet capability for a remote hack.
Liberals as Rightists
Mueller: Indictment will never be tried. (White House/Wikimedia)
The timing of the indictment of 12 Russian spies by Mueller on the eve of a summit between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump was also suspicious, along with the indictment being presented as proof when it is unlikely the case would ever be prosecuted.
Businessmen with ties to the Democratic Party, such as William F. Browder, meanwhile have replaced the old Wall Street Republicans in pushing the anti-Russia hysteria. They too aim to deflect attention from their commission of white-collar crime. In Browder’s case it was tax evasion, for which Putin prosecuted him. The methods of the New Cold Warriors are generally reminiscent of the old GOP in the levying of baseless accusations and adoption of methods of clandestine surveillance and attempted entrapment to discredit or prosecute Americans suspected of collusion with Russia, as had been the case with Hiss.
The Democrats and liberal media pundits on CNN and MSNBC and in journals like The New Yorker appear to be oddly in sync with the extremist John Birch society, which accused Eisenhower in the 1950s of leading a communist sleeper cell.
As Establishment Democrats and their fellow travelers drive much of the Russophobic hysteria in an effort to undermine Trump, it has been important for them to promote a useable past and distort the original history of the Cold War. As a case in point, Seth Ackerman wrote a piece in the supposedly left Jacobin magazine denouncing Roosevelt’s vice president, Henry Wallace, who had advocated for détente with the Russians, as a communist dupe.
Ackerman then asserted in a July essay, which was at least somewhat critical of the Democrats’ current Russophobia, that “Hiss was a Soviet spy” who was “reportedly awarded secret Soviet decorations in honor of his service to Moscow.” However, even serious scholarship of an anti-Hiss bent has acknowledged that Hiss’ guilt remains speculative, and the opening of the Soviet archives has not revealed any smoking-gun evidence apart from the Venona files whose meaning is contested.
Joan Brady, in an important recent study of Hiss, “America’s Dreyfuss,” notes that the “red scare whipped up around the case became for America what antisemitism had been to Germany [in the 1930s], a force to unify the people and deflect attention from an economic re-arrangement that could not function freely without chipping away at their rights.”
Decades after the case against Hiss, he remains a “bogeyman” who continues to serve as the embodiment what happens when we let our guard down.
These words resonate in our political climate where the Russian threat is again being invoked as a force to unify the people against false enemies and to steer attention from pernicious economic arrangements and criminal malfeasance by political donors.
Spooked by insurgencies on both the right and the left in the 2016, the Establishment is worried about growing social unrest, both of which have been smeared as being influenced by Russia. New bogeymen are again being created to sustain a dangerous confrontationist policy toward Russia whose consequences may be even worse than the first Cold War.
Jeremy Kuzmarov is an historian and author, with John Marciano, of “The Russians are Coming, Again: The First Cold War as Tragedy, the Second as Farce.”
If you value this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one. Please give to our end-of-year fund drive, by clicking Donate.
Oh wow – that brings a lot back! As the french say “plus ca change, plus c’est le meme chose”.
I was in highschool in boarding school in Mass. when the Hiss story started and I would not have known anything about it except for the fact that my roommate was the daughter of Dr. Bennett (forget his first name) who was the head of Union Theological Seminary in N.Y.C. and who had gone to school with Whittiker Chambers and knew him for a compulsive and clever liar. Dr. Bennett had told his daughter about this and she was following the story avidly in Time magazine etc. and constantly expressing anger and dismay over the unfairness of what was happening to Alger Hiss. So I followed the story too and tended to believe her and side with HIss. I was 17 and a lot like the two idiots in Tom Stoppard’s play “Rosencrantz and Guilderstern Are Dead” who are minor characters in the play Hamlet who have no idea what is actually going on.
Oddly, some years later around 1960 or so I visited some close friends over a weekend on their farm in Connecticut. Alger Hiss (now out of prison) was also a guest at the time. My friends had met him through Hiss’s wife who volunteered at liberal organization that my friends also worked at.
I liked him very much, but I was shy about telling him what my roommate had said because – well, he was out of prison and it was all over, right? I was in my mid twenties – and still not very bright about how things work. We ended up corresponding a little when I learned he was looking for a rental in this Ct. area and I offered him my summer cabin, which in the end he turned down. Some years after that – having his address and the Hiss case was again in the papers, I wrote him and told him about what Dr. Bennett said about Chambers. Hiss wrote back and apparently knew all that, so it was not helpful.
I read Hiss’s book and he was understandably incensed over the fact that he basically went to prison for not recognizing Chamber from a photo he was shown by the FBI – Chambers had aged and gained a lot of weight, so Hiss had said he did not know this person, but when Chambers was physically presented to him he did recognize him and said so, but by now the FBI had decided that they had caught Hiss in a lie and proceeded to trial.
I’m sorry to say that this bright, gentlemanly and innocent man who did mostly good things for America working for the Roosevelt administration, died as an angry and bitter older man. It is a sad story and one that has been repeated countless times.
Thank you for your article; I think the comparisons you make are apt, and I’m going to look up your book “The Russians are Coming” sounds interesting
Thank you for a fascinating personal story from another crazy age. It is truly remarkable how easily the American public is duped by liars for the MIC.
Some of the highlighted links are missing, including the one about Alger Hiss’s wife could not have typed the memos.
Please fix.
“Russia-gate” is the perfect for this era — familiar and simplistic.
spot on
While true that the Russia-Gate is an attempt to maintain Russia as an enemy to continue MICC funding doesn’t mean Trump didn’t conspire with Putin to launder Russian oligarch’s ill gotten gains. For the real meaning of Russia-Gate one has to look no further than the geopolitical machinations of former national security advisor Zbignieu Brezinski. Russia’s need to prevent the continued election of DNC hawks, neo-conservative hawks, et-al, they need to do everything they can to interfere in US elections to try & stop the spread of NATO’s encroachment on their zone of influence. Why should we blame them considering they are defending themselves against US imperial adventure. The US has been trying to roll back the Russian Revolution for 102 years. Nothing is new here except the players. Trump is just a pawn in the larger geo-political process even though he is informed by the likes of Steve Bannon who understands the larger geo-political issues. From the Russian point of view they are engaged in the destruction of an illegitimate American Empire that is the largest terror org there has ever been. They understand the destruction of so-called liberal democracy is no loss to the world considering real democracy is socialist in form. Using digital weapons to effect that outcome is a legitimate use of their resources in the defense of Putin’s vision of imperialism. As Putin says, “the greatest loss of the 20th century is the demise of the Soviet Union”.
“As Putin says, “the greatest loss of the 20th century is the demise of the Soviet Union”.
Perhaps you should quote Mr. Putin’s statement in full using http://en.kremlin.ru/ as authenticated source.
The context was a question and answer on the “Soviet Union”.
The word used in Russian is usually translated as “catastrophe” not “loss”.
The next sentence was approximately “Those who do not regret that catastrophe have no heart, those who seek to bring back the Soviet Union have no brain”.
“Using digital weapons to effect that outcome is a legitimate use of their resources in the defense of Putin’s vision of imperialism.”
You fail to define “Putin’s vision of imperialism” leaving a space that others can fill with their expectations/beliefs, a practice emulated by your contention that “Using digital weapons to effect the outcome is a legitimate use of their resources” facilitating the inference that the opponents of the “United States of America” are restricted to the Russian Federation, that the Russian Federation did influence the election of Mr. Trump, and that this was necessary since the resources within the “United States of America and its associates” including but not restricted to the “Integrity Initiative” were incapable and/or had no motivation of/in doing so.
Thank you for your useful data-stream and possible response time, whether by design or default, in illustration of comments below.
My above “spot on” response was to test the posting process here that seems to be faulty since posts are easily disappeared for no apparent reason. As a result I didn’t see your response. Of course Putin sees the issues with the old SU but also understands the distortions in the Soviet model caused by continual Western interference. Putin’s vision of US imperialism is what the Soviet definition has always been, i.e, the 102 years of attempts to thwart the Revolution of 1917. It doesn’t take a lot of analysis to follow that unless one is trying to sow confusion. The other enemies you refer to are also socialist in nature & so no explication is necessary on this type of forum. A certain level of background knowledge has to be assumed. Not sure what your end “thank you for ref to data stream”, refers to.
Posts are not “disappeared for no apparent reason.” We have an automated moderating system that withholds certain comments, which are then manually moderated and restored if they do not violate our comments policy.
“We have an automated moderating system that withholds certain comments, which are then manually moderated and restored if they do not violate our comments policy.”
Whether by design and/or default describing a process by a part of a process is to engage in misrepresentation through framing.
In a “culture of surveillance” broadcasts are made on transmission not on “publication/receipt”, although some deem this “pre-judical” and some deem this another opportunity afforded in the “land of opportunity”, and some deem this as a rabbit hole that others can fall into – Mr. Rove’s contention re “We are an empire…” refers.
Such obfuscation is often facilitated by emulating Sam in the Roadrunner cartoon (the process of framing).
“The other enemies”
As the article attempts to illustrate coercive social relationships are maintained by use of the other and reliance on binaries, which encourages iterations of immersion in the opponent’s framing – “We are an Empire, we create our own reality to which others react, when they are reacting we create another reality to which they react” Mr. Rove refers.
In “US” history that has often been embedded in notions of “traitors” in “Soviet Union” history “Enemies of the people”
leading Mr. Brecht to quip in 1953 that the party should replace the people for being enemies of the people.
Words are catalysts containing inferences to elicit a reactive emotional response as implicit in Mr. Rove’s contention.
Those with a purpose of transcendence consequently never resort to the concept “enemies” but refer to “opponents” of “colleagues” in recognition of the opponents’ complicity in facilitating their own demise.
“Not sure what your end “thank you for ref to data stream”, refers to.”
We the people hold these truths to be self-evident is another tool of immersive iteration posing the notion that everyone can understand” intuitively”. Practice shows that is not the case since apparently some are engaged in activities to “resurrect” situations that never existed, thereby reacting to holograms in illustration of Mr. Rove’s contention.
Another tool of immersive iteration is the relationship to “doubt” in different social relations in different temporary socio-economic constructs such as the “United States of America” and elsewhere.
The contention that “these truths are self-evident” adds to insecurity in relation to doubt posed as a pejorative and often encourages the practice of bridging doubt by belief to attain certainty/comfort – this is another illustration of Mr. Rove’s contention re “We are an empire”.
In some other social relations doubt is perceived as catalyst/opportunity of/for lateral change and hence is perceived as a benefit and embraced.
Consequently some with the purpose of transcendence share hypotheses with others to test if they are so minded.
Ideology is immersive akin to a swimming pool – when you start to emerge you still carry water droplets.
Examples of “We the people hold these truths to be self-evident” are inherent in your contentions, but not limited to:
“It doesn’t take a lot of analysis to follow that unless one is trying to sow confusion.”
“The other enemies you refer to are also socialist in nature”
“so no explication is necessary on this type of forum.”
“A certain level of background knowledge has to be assumed.”
all in illustration of Mr. Rove’s contention including immersion in the subject/object binary.
Another indicator of “cultural immersion” is your usage of “Putin” instead of Mr. Putin or President Putin, a product of projection of aspects of exceptionalism in the paradox “Despite us “being” exceptional some are like us and all others want to be like us” which “informs” attempts of “perception management”, the subject of the previous comment to which you chosse not to refer..
“the distortions in the Soviet model caused by continual Western interference.”
This is an analogue of the contention of some that the “US” constitution was “wonderful” but was besmirched by others and so our efforts should be focused on returning to the “state of grace” of indeterminate time – a hologram reliant on the iteration of the paradox of simultaneous asserting/denying agency.
Inherent in the social relations of the misnamed “Soviet Union” were the interactive relations to facilitate its demise, as was/is inherent in the “United States of America” – Mr. Brecht’s observations of 1953 including the party should replace the people for being enemies of the people refer.
Lateral process has multiple components, interactions, metamorphoses, trajectories and velocities and so it is not self-evident as practice shows, rendering “strategies” wishes and “tactics” hopes for those immersed in “We the people hold these truths to be self-evident”..
The demise of the “Soviet Union” was in large part facilitated through disconnection by the people, not disconnection of the people as is inherent in the mantras “We won the cold war”, or the people were enemies of the people.
The opponents often hold/believe that the benefits of “dumbing-down” accrue solely to them – Mr. Rove’s contention “We are an empire…” refers – which is transcended through design/implementation/modification of lateral strategies, as it was in the “Soviet Union” your experience and knowledge of which understandably appears cursory/evangelical perhaps in emulation of: everyone has the right to their own opinion as long as they don’t act on it.
Such are among the wonders of wonderland.
Your points are well taken. With regard to “Soviet Union” in quotation marks it is my deep conviction that leaving Russian word ‘Soviet’ without translation into English word ‘Council’ is intentional from the very beginning of October Revolution. It much easier to demonize Union of Soviet Socialist Republics rather than Union of Counselor Socialist Republics. People outside Russia would be confused to know that starting from Supreme Council on the top all Republics, cities and down to small villages were governed by City and village Councils.
Demonization of Russia has very deep roots. Compare the history and geographic position of Russia with that of proverbial “West”. Even English cows may graze year around on open grounds whereas Russian cows must stay in barns from 6 to 7 months. Therefore, Russian people have natural propensity to socialism and when Western M$M proclaim Russian existential threat it is truth but not the whole truth. Russia is and will be existential threat to Capitalism.
“vpurto
January 11, 2019 at 8:51 pm
“Your points are well taken.”
It may appear pedantic but your sentence is framed emulating ideologically derived notions from both the “United States of America” and the “Soviet Union” which limits, delays and/or precludes the transcendence of capitalism.
To facilitate this transcendence the formulation “Your points are well taken” requires replacement by “Your points are well shared” – the transcendence of social interaction based on equal but different where but precludes equal (giver/taker, subject/object etc) by equal and different facilitating co-operation, difference/non-conformance (a catalyst of change, and equality) and processes of lateral transcendence.
“‘Soviet’ without translation into English word ‘Council’ is intentional from the very beginning of October Revolution.”
To emulate your formulation this is the truth but not the whole truth, nor is what follows below the whole truth since omniscience does not exist.
The “Soviet Union” emulated the “United States of America” in many regards including creating class based social relations under “Emperor’s new clothes”/mantles of non-class based social relations – in the “United States of America”‘s case the mantles include but were never restricted to “We the people…” and “United States of America” and in the “Soviet Union”‘s case the mantles included but were not restricted to “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” and the “Soviet Union”, where “soyuz” metamorphosed into “profsoyuz” for facilitation.
Like “Congress” in the “United States of America”, the “Soviets” in various forms were vectors to facilitate class based social relations including but not restricted to through being “representative” in various definition.
“Russian word ‘Soviet’ without translation into English word ‘Council’ is intentional from the very beginning of October Revolution”
Quite so but to simultaneously criticise the “Soviet Union” to sustain the “United States of America” by the “United States of America”, and to praise the “Soviet Union” to sustain the “Soviet Union” by the “Soviet Union”.
Perhaps you do not have access to the following data-stream but if you study the minutes (protocols) of the Petrograd Soviet of November 1917 – a time of severe food shortages, you will see that among the first items proposed by the Bolshevik faction and passed with the help of others was to increase the food rations of the members of the Petrograd Soviet.
Your note on the relationships of “Soviets” emphasises the juridical not the actual, since from inception the “Soviet Union” was known and understood by some to be wonderland hence Mr. Putin’s remark that “anyone who tries to bring back the Soviet Union has no brain” .
Mr. Bulgakov’s heart of a dog is more representative of the actuality of the “Soviet Union” from 1923 until 1991 than say the “Soviet Constitution”, and why the heart of a dog enjoyed less publication than the “Soviet Constitution” until the late 1980’s, and even then on wider publication was held to be a work of lesser significance than the Master and Margarita.
“Therefore, Russian people have natural propensity to socialism”.
Perhaps the points re using old vessels above appear obscure to you in this case “socialism”.
The transcendant formulation should read – Almost people have a natural propensity to co-operation, and presently co-operation is required to address various existential threats to the bio-sphere, the opportunities of doing so being facilitated by the practices of all including the opponents.
“Western M$M proclaim Russian existential threat it is truth but not the whole truth. Russia is and will be existential threat to Capitalism.”
Spectators tend to ponder what is within linear paradigms and some practitioners tend to ponder how to in lateral process.
How to’s are often facilitated by opponents’ propensity to bridge doubt by belief to attain certainty/comfort and other manifestations of self-absorption/self-preening/self-regard.
Thank you for your data-stream.
Enjoy your journey.
vpurto
January 11, 2019 at 8:51 pm
“Your points are well taken.”
Although the assays of phenomena oscillate, those immersed in coercive social interactions often perceive “remedy” through prisms of coercion thereby replicating and facilitating the continuance of coercive social interactions and the delay/preclusion of perceiving/designing/implementing/evaluating lateral strategies of transcendence.
This process of oscillation facilitates the opportunities of some to evangelise aversion to doubt, including through filling old vessels with new content/inferences – for example “chaos” inferred to be a synonym of danger/pejorative/not nice, rather than previous content/inferences that “chaos” is that which is not yet perceived without resort to here be dragons.
A prevalent trajectory of bridging doubt by belief to attain “certainty/comfort” resides in usages of notion of “order” predicated on pre-judgements/perceptions/inferences of “chaos”.
Processes of oscillation afford opportunity not restricted to the lateral, hence nothing is predetermined but requires facilitation/interaction through intervention.
The opponents are presently seeking to interact through intervention to restrict opportunity to the linear through evangelising pre-determination in myriad forms, including but not restricted to
https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-global-rise-of-fascism-capitalism-end-game/5665313
https://www.globalresearch.ca/russiagate-is-paul-whelan-a-spy/5665161
affording opportunities to others to assess the assay of linearity inherent in the perceptions outlined above to facilitate perceiving/designing/implementing/evaluating lateral strategies of transcendence since the “world” and phenomena interacting have always been “multi-polar” in varying oscillation/trajectory, irrespective of beliefs explored by Mr. Schroedinger and his cat.
And the point is ? Are you afraid anyone but a mental deficient would mistake Putin for a socialist or anything but the capitalist monster that he is ? Im sure you dont need to worry about that.
“….Trump didn’t conspire with Putin to launder Russian oligarch’s ill gotten gains. ” How many oligarchs and were they Putin’s minions??? Why assume Putin lies just because the US leaders seem to? Putin constantly repeats that Russia does not interfere in other nations’ elections, that he expected Hillary to win in 2016 and that the policies did not change anyway and Russia accepted what the US people chose (!) Actually studying Putin’s actions and words over 18 years show he is telling the truth. US elections cannot be considered in any way free and fair. Most of the fault does not lie outside the USA.
“Actually studying Putin’s actions and words over 18 years show he is telling the truth.”
Thank you for illustrating a lateral process previously described which not only facilitated/facilitates the transcendence of the “Soviet Union” by the Russian Federation with the complicity of the opponents, but also facilitates “hiding in open view”, both of which undermines the opponents’ belief/illusion that the benefits of “dumbing-down” accrues solely to them.
Perhaps I could suggest a further aid to understanding?
Perhaps you should refer to Mr. Putin and/or President Putin instead of Putin since some are of the view that not only is the “United States of America” a land of opportunity but it is also a land of contempt which some may construe you reflect?
Some were always cognisant of the opportunities derived from the opponents’ resort to spokespersons such as Ms. Halley, Psaki et al in representation of a society where smart is a synonym of well dressed with polished shoes and good teeth, in distinction to other societies where smart is a synonym of wise.
In illustration of hiding why’s in open view – those who deem themselves as “exceptional” often fail to perceive that others do not assign the same significance to them as they seek to assign to themselves, since to anglacise/paraphrase Mr. Burns
Ah lord what a gift to give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
appears hidden to hemselves.
It was/is not a productive use of time/opportunity to “interfere in other nation’s elections”,best leave that unproductive use of time to others so immersed of which there were/are many (truth not being a function of majority vote).
Enjoy your journey.
Journey to what ?Russian Nationalism? Im afraid thats YOUR journey.Its not required to be a flak for Russian oligarchy to be aware of the misdeeds of their enemies in “The United States of America” ….why the scare quotes BTW, are you challenging that as a proper noun ?
You may want to read this background story…. Regards, Intel Today
70 Years Ago — Did Richard Nixon Frame Alger Hiss? [Dec. 6 1948 – The Pumpkin Papers]
https://gosint.wordpress.com/2018/12/06/70-years-ago-did-richard-nixon-frame-alger-hiss-dec-6-1948-the-pumpkin-papers/
All data-stream have utility so thank you for the link.
Framing conditions output which becomes a misrepresentation with utility hindering perception/investigation of what is missing and/or de-emphasised.
In this case I would suggest the missing and/or de-emphasis of Mr. Roy Cohn and Mr. Robert Kennedy may prove of interest, whilst understanding that when lying on your stomach even a dog can seem tall, which facilitated/facilitates various snake oil salesmen such as Messrs. Nixon, Kissinger and Brzhzinski to unduly assign significance/agency to themselves.
Enjoy your journey.
Ther seems something baffle-em-with-BSish about this.
Certainly, there must be more to this story than Kuzmarov’s theory.
If all this kind of thing is just for domestic distraction purposes, why Russia then? What is this monomaniacal obsession with Russia again and again. Kuzmarov doesn’t explain that. Is Russia the approved permanent scapegoat and if so, why? Why pick on the biggest scariest nuclear power other than the US on the planet for heavens’ sake? Why not try something else if the only purpose is misdirection as in the Hiss case? Yes, Stalin was a monster, but why cast Putin in that same light? It’s anachronistic. Russia has democracy, freedom of religion, a popular government, and I’ve heard the gulags have been closed for a long time.
It reminds me of Tevya from Fiddler on the Roof, looking skyward and asking God, “I know we’re your chosen people, but couldn’t you please just choose someone else once in a while?”
“why Russia then”
Lateral processes are interactive and hence omniscience does not exist and neither does uni-causality.
Coercive social relations require notions of the other to sustain such relations and potential opportunities of doing so are maximised, and potential threats of doing so are minimised, by generally restricting effort to the ideological sphere.
Similarly bullies tend to restrict the opportunities to be challenged by others and rely on representations of action rather than action, only engaging in non-ideological coercive practices with high probabilities of “success” – Mr. Powell’s doctrine refers.
Operating within the ideological sphere is generally best achieved by basing efforts on pre-existing beliefs/expectations/notions and enhancing them.
Consequently the opponents seek to conflate the “Soviet Union” with the Russian Federation in furtherance of seeking to “establish” the notion that the Russian Federation is a linear development of the “Soviet Union” and hence the Russian Federation is emulative of the “Soviet Union”.
However from inception the “Soviet Union” emulated some coercive social relations such as those pertaining in the “United States of America” including but not restricted to creating a class based society under the propaganda mantle of a non-class based social relations – “We the people refers” which required/requires increasing/widening resort to coercion to sustain the illusion.
Since the “Soviet Union” was not an existential threat to the “United States of America” but the “United States of America” required/requires “the other as existential threat” in large measure the notion of the ” Soviet Union” as existential threat to the “United States of America” was created, part of which is explored in the article above.
From 1991 until circa 1998 this ideological notion was an obstacle to strategies/wishes of the “United States of America” – Mr. Fukuyama’s notion of the end of history refers – and hence the notion of existential threat from the CIS/Russian Federation was disappeared through “We won the cold war” and other tools derived from belief/hubris.
The immersion of the “United States of America” in such illusions facilitated opportunities for others to catalyse the transcendence of the “Soviet Union” by the Russian Federation – the CIS being one of the trajectories in this lateral process, another being the increasing practice of co-operation and decreasing practice of coercion.
Not all in the “United States of America” were so immersed and they tested hypotheses in the autumn of 1994 but under the influence of Mr. Clinton and associates chose to interpret the data derived through their own prism of expectation/utility.
During the 1998 default a reassessment by the “United States of America” and its associates was made,gradually bringing into focus the possibility of the Russian Federation and its associates posing a “future” existential threat to the “United States of America” through not being emulative of the “United States of America” by seeking to transcend coercion with cooperation, vassalage with sovereignty, representation with participation, individualism with mutual benefit, and equal but different where “but” precludes equal with equal and different facilitating non-conformance (a catalyst and pre-requisite of change) – ergo the end of the end of history.
This is a rough thumbnail of processes perhaps sufficient to serve purposes.
Mr. Bulgakov was of the opinion that manuscripts don’t burn but are temporarily disappeared.
To illustrate Mr. Bulgakov’s contention the following was disappeared between 10-00 hrs UTC and 13-30 hrs UTC 10th January 2019.
Thanks to the “disappearers” for the useful data-stream.
“It reminds me of T evya from Fiddler on the Roof, looking
skyward and asking God, “I know we’re your chosen
people…..”
OlyaPola
January 10, 2019 at 5:27 am
“why Russia then”
Lateral processes are interactive and hence
omniscience does not exist and neither does uni-causality.
Coercive social relations require notions of the other
to sustain such relations and potential opportunities
of doing so are maximised, and potential threats of
doing so are minimised, by generally restricting
effort to the ideological sphere.
Similarly bullies tend to restrict the opportunities to
be challenged by others and rely on representations
of action rather than action, only engaging in nonideological
coercive practices with high probabilities
of “success” – Mr. Powell’s doctrine refers.
Operating within the ideological sphere is generally
best achieved by basing efforts on pre-existing
beliefs/expectations/notions and enhancing them.
Consequently the opponents seek to conflate the
“Soviet Union” with the Russian Federation in
furtherance of seeking to “establish” the notion that
the Russian Federation is a linear development of the
“Soviet Union” and hence the Russian Federation is
emulative of the “Soviet Union”.
However from inception the “Soviet Union”
emulated some coercive social relations such as
those pertaining in the “United States of America”
including but not restricted to creating a class based
society under the propaganda mantle of a non-class
based social relations – “We the people refers” which
required/requires increasing/widening resort to
coercion to sustain the illusion.
Since the “Soviet Union” was not an existential
threat to the “United States of America” but the
“United States of America” required/requires “the
other as existential threat” in large measure the
notion of the ” Soviet Union” as existential threat to
the “United States of America” was created, part of
which is explored in the article above.
From 1991 until circa 1998 this ideological notion
was an obstacle to strategies/wishes of the “United
States of America” – Mr. Fukuyama’s notion of the
end of history refers – and hence the notion of
existential threat from the CIS/Russian Federation
was disappeared through “We won the cold war” and
other tools derived from belief/hubris.
T he immersion of the “United States of America” in
such illusions facilitated opportunities for others to
catalyse the transcendence of the “Soviet Union” by
the Russian Federation – the CIS being one of the
trajectories in this lateral process, another being the
increasing practice of co-operation and decreasing
practice of coercion.
Not all in the “United States of America” were so
immersed and they tested hypotheses in the autumn
of 1994 but under the influence of Mr. Clinton and
associates chose to interpret the data derived
through their own prism of expectation/utility.
During the 1998 default a reassessment by the
“United States of America” and its associates was
made,gradually bringing into focus the possibility of
the Russian Federation and its associates posing a
“future” existential threat to the “United States of
America” through not being emulative of the “United
States of America” by seeking to transcend coercion
with cooperation, vassalage with sovereignty,
representation with participation, individualism with
mutual benefit, and equal but different where “but”
precludes equal with equal and different facilitating
non-conformance (a catalyst and pre-requisite of
change) – ergo the end of the end of history.
This is a rough thumbnail of processes perhaps
sufficient to serve purposes.
Re the temporary nature of disappearance:
Mr. Bulgakov was of the opinion that manuscripts don’t burn but are temporarily disappeared.
To illustrate Mr. Bulgakov’s contention the following was disappeared between 10-00 hrs UTC and 13-30 hrs UTC 10th January 2019.
Thanks to the “disappearers” for the useful data-stream.
“Ronald Johnson
January 10, 2019 at 12:04 am
Alger Hiss was identified as a Spy for the USSR in the
Venona transcripts, confirmed by a turncoat KGB agent,
Oleg Gordievsky, according to this account:
http://famous-trials.com/algerhiss/680-hissvenona
But wait, here is a more nuanced argument from the CIA:
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-ofintelligence/
csi-publications/csistudies/
studies/vol51no4/the-mystery-of-ales.html
A lengthy debate, to the conclusion that Hiss was a spy,
before the “Pumpkin Papers” trial:
“…By the end, it is clear that Hiss alone remains the best
candidate to be ALES. His espionage career from the mid-
1930s has been well documented, and he fits all the other
criteria set out by VENONA 1822. As for the 5 March
1945 cable placing ALES in Mexico City, the simple
explanation is the strongest. Gorskiy, because he was busy
and also to avoid drawing attention to his agents, was
unlikely to have kept daily track of the whereabouts of
residency assets. When he sent his interim reply to the 3
March cable, Gorskiy believed Hiss still was in Mexico.
Like residents and chiefs of station since time immemorial,
Gorskiy simply had his facts wrong and sent erroneous
information to his headquarters…..”
OlyaPola
“a turncoat KGB agent, Oleg Gordievsky, according
to this account:”
Some are of the view that the prime evaluation
criterion is utility.
Some are of the view that the prime evaluation
criterion is trust the source.
Some are of the view that the prime evaluation
criteria is who vouched for the source – a linear
extrapolation of trust the source.
Some of some amalgamate the primes leading to curved balls.
“I know we’re your chosen people”
Miracles indeed including how 37 comments at 14-30 UTC 10th January 2019 becomes 27 comments at 14-38 UTC 10th January 2019.
Perhaps the 10 loaves and ten fishes in reverse, or someone gobbled loaves and fishes like the gluttons who wanted to gobble all of the sausages.
Alger Hiss was identified as a Spy for the USSR in the Venona transcripts, confirmed by a turncoat KGB agent, Oleg Gordievsky, according to this account:
http://famous-trials.com/algerhiss/680-hissvenona
But wait, here is a more nuanced argument from the CIA:
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol51no4/the-mystery-of-ales.html
A lengthy debate, to the conclusion that Hiss was a spy, before the “Pumpkin Papers” trial:
“…By the end, it is clear that Hiss alone remains the best candidate to be ALES. His espionage career from the mid-1930s has been well documented, and he fits all the other criteria set out by VENONA 1822. As for the 5 March 1945 cable placing ALES in Mexico City, the simple explanation is the strongest. Gorskiy, because he was busy and also to avoid drawing attention to his agents, was unlikely to have kept daily track of the whereabouts of residency assets. When he sent his interim reply to the 3 March cable, Gorskiy believed Hiss still was in Mexico. Like residents and chiefs of station since time immemorial, Gorskiy simply had his facts wrong and sent erroneous information to his headquarters….”
“a turncoat KGB agent, Oleg Gordievsky, according to this account:”
Some are of the view that the prime evaluation criterion is utility.
Some are of the view that the prime evaluation criterion is trust the source.
Some are of the view that the prime evaluation criteria is who vouched for the source – a linear extrapolation of trust the source.
Some of some amalgamate the primes leading to curved balls.
…By the end, it is clear that Hiss alone remains the best candidate to be ALES.
Another statement like the UK’s Skripal accusation “highly likely” with no evidence needed.
Wasn’t Hiss’s conviction for perjury simply based on his claim that he knew Chambers only slightly (as a tenant, was it?), whereas Chambers claimed to know Hiss intimately and provided details about Hiss which seemed to confirm Chambers’ claim. We now know that the FBI was bugging the Hiss telephone, so that J.Edgar Hoover was in a position to supply Chambers enough intimate details about Hiss to falsely convict him of perjury. Is there anything more to the Hiss travesty than that?
According to the Venona transcripts, Alger Hiss was a spy, later confirmed by a Soviet confessor:
http://famous-trials.com/algerhiss/680-hissvenona
While I have no argument with the facts in this article, I can’t buy the comparison of then vs now. The Democrats are only accusing the Russians of meddling in our elections and are not painting them as a military threat that would justify massive defense spending. (They use terrorism for that.) On the other hand, it is the defense industrial complex that is painting Russia as a military threat which can be added to all its other enemies so as to justify a bloated defense budget.
Nice article. I look forward to reading the book. Here’s a relevant quote, penned in ~1929:
“The United States is not only the strongest, but also the most terrified country.”
-LD Trotsky
“Robert Mueller‘s refusal to interview WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange or witnesses such as British diplomat Craig Murray who met with the alleged leaker.”
The last five words in that sentence make every effort to appear to be a hyperlink, but –alas– are not.
I suppose the author is aware they aren’t?
This link has two interviews with Craig Murray on this subject. There are two interviews with Bill Binney there as well.
https://opensociet.org/2018/08/08/how-to-understand-this-russian-hacking-thing/
It’s wonderful to see Kuzmarov lay this out in historical context.
A lot of us still use these words “left” and “right” to refer to certain ideas and policies, however. It’s not necessarily a Red Team | Blue Team sort of thing.
The DNC is a smidgen or two to the right of Richard Nixon, right there with his Cubans and dark backers. He could not in those days get away with what they do. They’d make him jealous.
Well first off hats off to Mr. Kuzmarov for trying to make some analogy that would discredit the current round of anti-Russian baiting unfortunately the analogy falls a bit flat. First off Whitaker Chambers testimony was collaborated by another living soul specifically Alger Hiss in front of Congress when he finally admitted to knowing him during Chambers communist days. Whether Alger Hiss was a true communist or just another CFR member who was helping to maintain a convenient boogie man i.e. the former Soviet Union, who the US was propping up in order that we justify that air is round of defense spending or whether Hiss was a true believer which though doubtful is irrelevant. As for his complete dismissal of the John Birch Society a fair reading of their allegations leaves one somewhat amazed in how much they actually did get right especially in light of the later work of Anthony Sutton and Carol Quigley, of course they got a lot embarrassingly in spectacularly wrong but one can at least say they were honest in there accusations which is much more than one can say for the left historically. Regardless as much as I appreciate Mr. Kuzmarov’s attempted journalism in this matter the analogy most falls flat in the obvious, it is provable the United States propped up the Soviet Union from its infancy right up until the final days obits collapse, the danger we find ourselves in now is the Russian Federation has been forced to develop a credible response to Western aggression and we unfortunately have several lunatics at the helm and more generally in charge of our foreign policy.
Circling back to the article certainly long before the last presidential election and up into the present several different parties are colluding with various foreign governments top among them Israel. Our primary problem at the moment is the seeming fact that no one has collaborated to any meaningful extent with the Russian government which would at least be some sort of easy out and closure in this matter which would be good especially when one considers both sides have nuclear weapons. Unfortunately at this point the Democrats especially but all of the never Trumper’s have climbed on to a ledge and simply will not come down, of course it doesn’t hurt that most if not all of them are in some way shilling for the security state but regardless the nation has a gun to its head, either Donald Trump nuts up and fires Mueller or all his generals, Pompeo and Bolton or this thing is going to get much worse.
American culture is bamboozled by endless propaganda in the media, so we use words such as “Democrat,” “Liberal,” and “The Left” to refer to exactly the same thing.
Why would we need three words for exactly the same thing?
This is redundant and here’s the difference:
https://opensociet.org/2018/10/01/the-left/
Fascinating piece but I’m left unsatisfied. As you point out, we seem to have a shifted cast of characters conducting the same operation. Who is really behind it? Is it a “feature” of our political system that the political party long out of power uses Russia as a boogieman? (Don’t kid yourselves, we haven’t had a Democratic president since Carter) Or, is this a reflection of the flight of moderate Republicans from St. Ronnie to the Democratic party which they promptly infested.
Does the FBI/CIA ever uncover spies or regular criminals inconvenient to whatever political side they favor during a given period?
The Seth Rich murder and its surrounding circumstances stand out as being a warning of just how extreme politicized corruption has become in the US.
I would like to echo John’s comment; nobody should call the DNC Democrats “The Left”. They are more right wing that Ronald Reagan was. Just call them the conservative corporate Democrats. They have no relation to the Left in politics, but they are perfectly aligned with the Right.
Well first off hats off to Mr. Kuzmarov for trying to make some analogy that would discredit the current round of anti-Russian baiting unfortunately the analogy falls a bit flat.
First off Whitaker Chambers testimony was collaborated by another living soul specifically Alger Hiss in front of Congress when he finally admitted to knowing him during Chambers communist days. Whether Alger Hiss was a true communist or just another CFR member who was helping to maintain a convenient boogie man i.e. the former Soviet Union, who the US was propping up in order that we justify that air is round of defense spending or whether Hiss was a true believer which though doubtful is irrelevant. As for his complete dismissal of the John Birch Society a fair reading of their allegations leaves one somewhat amazed in how much they actually did get right especially in light of the later work of Anthony Sutton and Carol Quigley, of course they got a lot embarrassingly in spectacularly wrong but one can at least say they were honest in there accusations which is much more than one can say for the left historically. Regardless as much as I appreciate Mr.Kuzmarov attempted journalism in this matter the analogy most falls flat in the obvious, it is provable the United States propped up the Soviet Union from its infancy right up until the final days obits collapse, the danger we find ourselves in now is the Russian Federation has been forced to develop a credible response to Western aggression and we unfortunately have several lunatics at the helm and more generally in charge of our foreign policy.
Dunderhead:
That is not really accurate about the corroboration. Hiss never knew Chambers under his real name. Chambers used a number of aliases. And he would not admit to the one he used with Hiss, George Crossley. That later came out from a book editor Chambers worked with under that name. Nixon kept this information from Hiss, and refused to let him meet Chambers face to face before he testified before the HUAC. In addition to the name, Chambers appearance had really changed. He had gained quite a lot of weight, about 45 pounds, and had some serious dental work done. It was a classic prosecutor’s trap set up by our future president who later admitted that he built the typewriter to frame Hiss with.
Not really accurate Dunderhead.
Hiss did not know Chambers under his real name. Chambers used one of his aliases, George Crossley when he knew Hiss. At first Chambers would not admit he used that name. Later it came out from a witness who had been a book editor for Chambers that he did use that name. Nixon knew this and that is why he would not let Hiss meet with Chambers in person until after Hiss appeared before the HUAC and said he did not know a man by the name of Chambers. Further, Chambers’s appearance had changed a lot, he had gained 45 pounds and had radical dental work done. It was a classic prosecutor’s trap Hiss fell into since he did not have a criminal lawyer.
I really liked this article until the line “As the left drives much of the Russophobic hysteria in an effort to undermine Trump…”.
Please, stop referring to the Corporatist Democratic Party as “Left”. They are far right wing, and cannot even support something as simple as single payer wholeheartedly.
To call the DNC and its sycophants “left” is to give them credibility they do not deserve, as today’s DNC is substantially to the right of Nixon.
The ACTUAL Left has been at least as smeared by the right wing as Trump, look at the treatment Jill Stein has gotten, for example.
Until the DNC renounces Capitalism, they are a right wing party. Please stop falling for the delusion they are somehow Left.
Valid John about misuse of the term “left.” Thanks. Jeremy Kuzmarov
Thanks for this. The author mentions the Joan Brady book which is quite good. But there are two other relatively recent books that have been published which expose Chambers. One by Martin Roberts called Secret History and another by Lewis Hartshorn called Alger Hiss, Whitaker Chambers and the Case that ignited McCarthyism.
Hartshorn’s book, based on grand jury and HUAC testimony, is a systematic and devastating expose of all the lies Chambers told. I lost track at about 30. There is also a good documentary called The Trials of Alger Hiss. Unfortunately it is almost impossible to find this film for rental or purchase. The Hiss case was important since McCarthyism really started after his conviction. Plus it made for Nixon a national reputation.
Thank you Jim for your comments. I am going to check out those books and film (if I can access it).
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Interesting article. I had read the MSM versions of the Hiss case. This provides a plausible alternative version…
And here’s sobering commentary on this subject from Aaron Maté, in which he recounts the Russiagate story from its inception:
Someone Finally Connected the Dots: Russiagate is Helping Trump
Great link, O Society, thanks!
Not only is Aaron Maté honest (he’ll admit when he doesn’t know something), but he is a stickler for facts and a great analyst. In other words, he’s able to put each fact into its proper context, showing you where and how it fits into the story.
O Society – thanks for the link to the Mate interview. Excellent and spot on in his analysis.
I generally like Aaron Mate, but I think he jumped to a conclusion by saying that Assad was the one responsible for violently quashing dissent during the initial protests. I wasn’t there either; but I have heard, and I think it’s entirely possible, that Assad’s forces were not the first to get violent, but instead it was “agent provocateurs” that had infiltrated the protests. Considering our involvement in the Maiden protests in Ukraine, and our long time ambition to unseat Assad, I think it’s entirely possible that our proxies were the ones who initiated the violence and forced Assad to respond.
As America anxiously awaits special counsel Robert Mueller’s so-called “final report” and proof of “collusion,” it should be wary of two truths: Mueller may never write a public “final report”—especially not one that sets forth evidence like the Starr Report did—and any “bombshells” he reveals are unlikely to outline a grand conspiracy. This will not be a failure of the investigation but rather of our own expectations.
Trump is guilty of 1001 things. Why did you have to choose collusion with Putin, the one thing he’s not?
https://opensociet.org/2018/12/06/dont-expect-mueller-to-charge-a-grand-conspiracy/
Two important things to keep in mind regarding Mueller’s so-called investigation are: 1) Mueller has the power to coerce false testimony in exchange for leniency. Likely targets would include Cohen and Manafort. 2) The CIA has the ability to fabricate “evidence” using the Marble Framework revealed in the Vault 7 releases. With such tools, Mueller has the ability to fabricate whatever conclusion he wants.
If RussiaGate had a shred of credibility, the NSA would have had the “smoking gun” in no time, and built their entire case in a matter of weeks. This “theater of the Absurd” we’ve endured for the last two years serves as a distraction from the CONTENTS of the leaked emails that could have otherwise dominated the news cycle, to keep Trump on a short leash, and to keep the $$$ flowing to the MIC. So far, it’s worked like a charm.
Skip – spot on analysis. The CIA’s ability to simply fabricate evidence is also shared by intelligence associated tech companies, which as you say means it is possible “Mueller has the ability to fabricate whatever conclusion he wants.”
https://grayzoneproject.com/2018/12/25/senate-report-on-russian-interference-was-written-by-disinformation-warriors-behind-alabama-false-flag-operation/