-Caveat Lector- American liberalism and fifth columns By James Henry No. 111, 8-14 March 1999 Many Americans are complaining about the use of US troops in places like Kosovo, Macedonia, Bosnia, Somalia, etc. What these critics have missed is that it is a liberal president who sent them there and did so with the support of liberal-minded Congressmen and Senators. This fact is vitally important because it gives us a clue as to what is really going on here. If we examine the 1972 George McGovern presidential campaign we find that it provided the means by which those who are deeply hostile to American values and contemptuous of its history and traditions were able to worm their way into mainstream politics. It is now their ideological values that dominate the Democratic Party whose only genuine resemblance to the party of Truman and Kennedy is in name only. These are the people who supported Hanoi's conquest of South Vietnam and who broke a solemn pledge to supply Saigon with the means to protect itself against communist aggression. These are same liberals whose political treachery made Pol Pot's murderous regime possible. The same ones who opposed the Reagan military build up that finally broke the back of the Soviet Empire. And did they not also condemn operation Desert Storm? Didn't these very people oppose every initiative and action that curtailed Soviet expansion? Aren't these the people who supported the Marxist Sandinista's and still rationalise Castro's regime? Yet they now callously put at risk the lives of American troops in places that do not in anyway serve American interests. Why? Perhaps all of this will confuse some readers. Maybe they will put it down to left-wing inconsistency or hypocrisy. They would be wrong because there is a very definite pattern here. Every policy these left-wing Senators and Congressmen (I will now refer to liberals as left-wing) strenuously opposed was designed to promote American interests. Every military policy they now support is not only unrelated to American interests they actually endanger them by unnecessarily making enemies. They broke the agreement with Saigon because it was in the interest of American and its allies to prevent a communist victory. On the other hand, they strongly support and defend treaties that violate US sovereignty and endanger national security. Now we have it — no conspiracy but a deep rooted hatred of America. To them, America is a racist, sexist, oppressive and exploitative capitalist state. Therefore, because it is unjust and aggressive, actions, treaties and agreements that serve its interests must be unjust by definition and therefore need to be resisted. Breaking the agreement with Saigon which put the South Vietnamese under communist tyranny was just because the North was a socialist state. This is what Tom Hayden thought and it is what he still thinks. And what happened to Hayden? He got himself a Senate seat in California. Has he changed his views? Of course not. But Hayden is but one of many. There is Henry Waxman of Hollywood, Maxine Waters of California, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, Rep. Major Owens of New York, Rep. Lane Evans of Illinois. What these members of Congress have in common is their open connection with the Democratic Socialists of America. Former Congressman Ron Dellums is still asssociated with the organisation).** These are the people people who would send your sons and daughters to a Bosnia or a Kosovo while voting against a missile defence system. Why? Because the former does not serve US interests while the latter does. Recent events have clearly demonstrated that the majority of Democratic Senators and members of Congress are to varying degrees within the Waxman socialist camp. This is the real problem. Not conspiracy but ideology. So why don't Republicans attack these people's socialist views and expose them to the American public? Because they fear the media's smear machine. They know the Democrats' media storm troopers would immediately leap into action with screams of "McCarthyism", "reds under the beds", "political persecution", etc, because the media itself is basically left-wing. Between 1979 and 1980 S. Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman interviewed 240 journalists employed by the country's leading media outlets. Less than 20 per cent had ever voted Republican and 56 per cent honestly believed that America exploited the Third World and was the cause of its poverty. Since then things have only gotten worse. In April last year the Freedom Forum released a nationwide survey conducted by the Roper Organization which showed that 89 per cent of all journalists had voted for Clinton and that only 4 per cent are Republicans. Not only that, 96 per cent of these journalists thought it was their role to 'educate' the public rather than simply report the news. Now you know why the media covered up for Clinton and supports military intervention in areas that are of no strategic or political interest to the US while still attacking the strategic defense initiative that is designed to protect Americans against a nuclear attack. And where did this lot get its ideas from? Our university humanity departments, of course. Those who believe that the American media is corrupt are absolutely right. But it is ideological corruption. That is what attracted me to The New Australian. This, I thought, is a publication that truly hits the nail on the head. It knows where the real danger lies, just as Horowitz's CSPC (Center for the Study of Popular Culture) does. We are well and truly in the midst of a cultural civil war. Without a doubt the enemy is within and a good slice of the Democratic Party has joined it. Perhaps it should change its name to the Fifth Column Party. At least that would be honest. *In Australia and other Western countries liberals are usually defined as anti-left **Ron Dellums, former Congressman and closet socialist, made his hateful feelings plain when he attacked "America [as] a nation of niggers . . . If you are black, you are a nigger. If you are blind, you're a nigger. If you are an amputee, you're a nigger...Blind people, poor whites, those far to the left are all niggers . . ." This is the same humane socialist who voted for breaking the agreement with the Cambodian and Saigon governments, resulting in the deaths of millions. Dellums is so enamored of Castro's totalitarian regime he once turned over his offices for the use of committees set up by Cuban agents. Your're right — the word for this is treason. **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
