Remarks Delivered by Allan Ryskind at America’s Survival, Inc. February 24, 2015 Conference on “America’s Enemies in Hollyood Then and Now” Ryskind is the son of famous Hollywood screenwriter Morrie Ryskind and a long-time editor of Human Events.
By Allan Ryskind History concedes that Joseph Stalin was one of the bloodiest dictators in the 20th century, so it’s hard to believe that anyone would bestow honors on this evil ruler, even indirectly, but Hollywood, at least a portion of it, seems quite up to this curious task. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Hollywood continues to honor screenwriters who were known as hard-core Stalinists, folks who for a major part of their lives took the side of the Caligula in the Kremlin over their own country in the 1930s, ‘40s and ‘50s. And Hollywood is poised to do so again this year. These writers, many of them part of the famous Hollywood Ten that the movie industry continues to champion, were with Stalin in his prime killing years, when he was murdering millions of his own countrymen through the purges and instigating a horrific famine through the collective farm program. They rallied to the Kremlin dictator when he switched sides to support Adolf Hitler when the Nazi warlord unleashed World War II by invading Poland in 1939. They were with the Fuerher when he conquered most of Western Europe the following year and then launched massive bombing raids against Great Britain. And they turned against Hitler for just a single reason: The Nazi leader betrayed his pal in the Kremlin and invaded Russia in June of 1941. These Red screenwriters also cheered the ousting of the American Communist party chieftain, Earl Browder, in 1945. Why? Because Browder was voicing the heresy that there could be a peaceful path to Socialism in America. They rallied behind the Soviet totalitarian all through the Cold War as he seized Eastern Europe and parts of Central Europe by force and credibly threatened a military invasion of Western Europe. And they were on Stalin’s side when he gave North Korea’s Kim Il-sung the signal to invade South Korea in 1950, a war that cost the lives of nearly 40,000 Americans. To this day, the Hollywood community continues to heap honors on these screenwriters, showering them with awards and even making pictures praising them as beloved defenders of the U.S. Constitution. It is mind-boggling, really. I’ll get into the events and pictures saluting these screenwriters in just a bit, but one of the reasons I wrote this book was to challenge what has become the prevailing view: that there never were any hard-core Stalinists in Hollywood. Jack Valenti, who represented many of the Hollywood producers for nearly 40 years, has dutifully fed the myth by suggesting in his book, This Time, This Place, that the Hollywood Ten and the others who were actually blacklisted by the producers were unfortunate victims of “innuendo, rumor and mostly baseless accusations. . .” (The worst thing you could ever say about some on the Left denied work in Hollywood, according to Valenti, was that they had “flirted with Communist ideas. . .” But this is just untrue. In those famous 1947 hearings and in the multiple hearings it conducted in the 1950s, the much-maligned House Un-American Activities Committee (or HUAC, as it is frequently called) uncovered several hundred folks who had been earnest party members, large numbers of whom held important positions in the industry and would never turn their backs on the party. Moreover, the people I mention as Communists, including the Hollywood Ten, were serious Reds who viewed America as the enemy and whose allegiance was to Moscow and Joseph Stalin. The folks I’m talking about had party cards, worked covertly—and successfully—to penetrate the powerful guilds and the labor unions, filled entire pictures with Soviet propaganda, used their wealth and energy to promote Red activities outside the movie industry and never deviated from the Stalinist line. Never. They were determined to hand Hollywood over to the Kremlin and by 1944 they had come close to achieving their goal. Another important point to remember: they firmly believed in overthrowing our form of government by force and violence. Indeed, the Hollywood Communists, who fully embraced Moscow during the Cold War, would, judging from their own statements and the organizations they belonged to, have happily sided with Stalin in a hot war, even if he had launched an unprovoked assault against America. Now why do I believe what may seem so contrary to current opinion? The extensive research for my book certainly bears out my conclusion. But there is another reason as well. In the household I grew up in in Beverly Hills, I managed to meet many people who fought the Communists in Hollywood (and elsewhere), including the famous labor leader Roy Brewer, Oliver Carlson, a scholar on the topic of communism and a former Communist himself, and Ayn Rand, who left her native Russia after the Communist takeover. I became well-acquainted with Freda Utley, who joined the British Communist party, married a Russian and, sometime in 1936, learned that her husband had been taken by the secret police to a labor camp. She never saw him again. She came to America where she became one of the country’s most eloquent anti-Communist writers. After the Empire fell, her son, Jon, went to Russia and discovered his dad had been executed for protesting the camp’s conditions. I also met Benjamin Gitlow, a famous American Communist who had earned Stalin’s wrath and was booted out of the party for having crossed him, and I knew journalist Eugene Lyons, who, while covering the Moscow beat for about six years with the United Press, became a leading anti-Stalinist figure. In short, I had inside information from very credible people. And, of course, I learned a lot from my dad, Morrie Ryskind, who was a popular screenwriter himself. He came out to Hollywood in the mid-1930s, having had a successful career on Broadway doing musicals for Irving Berlin and George Gershwin. When he came out West, he would do about 50 movies in all over his lifetime, including a half dozen Marx Brothers films. But my dad was also a major anti-Communist screenwriter and knew what the Communists he faced in the Screen Writers Guild were really about. Though he would later help found Bill Buckley’s National Review, he was on the left side of the political spectrum when he left Broadway for Hollywood in the mid-1930s. Some of his best friends were ACLU liberals and Socialists like Norman Thomas. And he was eager to join the Screen Writers Guild, a product of the Left, because he believed that writers should be able to bargain with their bosses, just as workers were forming unions to bargain with their bosses. But when he joined the Guild, he found it was loaded with Communist party members whom he found to be loyal to an enemy government. By 1944, he and many of his colleagues feared that the Communists were on the verge of taking control of Hollywood. So my dad, Walt Disney, Sam Wood, a famous director, labor officials and studio executives formed the Motion Picture Alliance, which became the major anti-Communist organization in Hollywood. Ayn Rand became a member, so did actors Robert Taylor, Clark Gable and Gary Cooper. John Wayne would become its president. Roy Brewer, an important labor leader, became its most influential member. The reason it was formed was because hard-core Communists were embedded in numerous Hollywood organizations, including the unions and the various guilds. The Screen Writers Guild’s flagship publication, The Screen Writer, was edited by Dalton Trumbo, an excellent screen writer, and Gordon Kahn, our next-door neighbor. They were both dedicated Communists. They turned The Screen Writer into a Communist propaganda organ, devoted to informing its readers of the wonders of Soviet Russia, the excellence of the pro-Stalinist screenwriters, and the supposed malignant motives of the anti-Communist community. The monthly also printed pages of notes and ads publicizing Communist educational institutions, lectures on the greatness of Marxism and the Soviet Union, speeches on American history and “Red baiting” by CP chieftain, John Howard Lawson, et cetera, ad nauseam. My dad and others were also taken aback by the number of hard-core Communists who were writing glorious film tributes to the Soviet Union and Joseph Stalin himself. Among them: Hollywood CP head John Howard Lawson, Alvah Bessie, who fought on the Soviet side in the Spanish Civil War, and dedicated Communists Richard Collins and Paul Jarrico. Lillian Hellman in The North Star told us of deliriously happy families who were living on a collective farm, a Stalinist “experiment” that resulted in death by famine of at least 3 million Russian farmers. (Lillian flatly denied in her book, Scoundrel Time, that she ever joined the Communist party, a statement belied by the fact that she informed her lawyer, Joe Rauh, that she did, indeed, join the Communist party, her admission sitting in Rauh’s papers at the Library of Congress.) Communist screenwriters Dick Collins and Paul Jarrico gave us Song of Russia, which depicted a pre-World War II Russian village as one of the wonders of the world. Everything was splendid, including the Soviet collective farms bursting with happy children and an astonishing abundance of food. The Soviets harshly persecuted religious people, but in Song of Russia we are informed that priests were the anchors of these wonderful collectives, sort of Pat O’Brien and Spencer Tracey characters, dispensing wisdom and happily performing religious services. Bernard Dick, a liberal scholar on Hollywood’s far-Left screenwriters, bluntly called the film a “Stalinist tract, written by Communist writers.” Despite all this, the anti-Communists won the battle, at least temporarily. The House Un-American Activities Committee held its first major investigation of communism in Hollywood in 1947. The hearings produced the so-called Hollywood Ten, most of whom were writers, who refused to say whether they were Communists, even though we were in the midst of the Cold War. The overwhelming majority of Americans knew Stalin was the bad guy by 1947. Even some of the most liberal organizations in our country, such as the Americans for Democratic Action, had banned, or should I say blacklisted, Communists from joining their groups. Largely as a result of these hearings, the Hollywood Communists were initially set back on their heels. The public had reacted negatively to the Ten’s refusal to say whether they were part of a Soviet Fifth Column in America and their outlandish tactic of branding HUAC’s members as fascists and Gestapo agents badly backfired. Fearful that movie-goers might think that Hollywood was coddling subversives if they didn’t do something dramatic, the producers decided that no one could work in Hollywood if he or she was a member of the party, the decision that initiated the blacklist. The Communists in the Screenwriters Guild were also reeling, with the Guild’s anti-Communist slate overwhelmingly defeating the pro-Communist slate in a critical election. The Conference of Studio Unions, exposed by HUAC as Red controlled, had been mortally wounded. And Hollywood, no longer making pro-Stalinist pictures, was turning out anti-Communist films. Is any of this relevant today? Well, I think correcting the conventional history is important just for its own sake. But what is amazing, at least from my perspective, is that Hollywood continues to heap honors on these Stalinist screenwriters and hail them as champions of freedom and the First Amendment. Stalinists in favor of free speech? Well, Hollywood continues to embrace this novel concept. In 1997, I attended a grand affair at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills where Billy Crystal and other Hollywood celebrities lamented the blacklist and took part in an event that gave First Amendment awards to Ring Lardner, Jr., a Hollywood Ten luminary, and Paul Jarrico, who headed the Hollywood section of the CP in the 1950s. Today we get countless TV re-runs of The Majestic, starring Jim Carrey, which savages HUAC and names a wonderfully patriotic town, steeped in American values and the love of freedom, after John Howard Lawson, a Stalinist from about 1934 until the day he died. And this year we have another treat in store, a movie about Dalton Trumbo, another Hollywood Ten figure, a major apologist for Hitler during the Hitler-Stalin pact period and an enthusiastic supporter of Kim Il-sung’s North Korea—insisting, in fact, that North Korea was fighting for its independence when it invaded South Korea in 1950, just the way we fought for our independence from the British. The movie will feature Bryan Cranston, the star of Breaking Bad. John Goodman and other big-name stars are also in the film. The publicity already tells us what the film is about: That Dalton bravely “stood against the Communist witch-hunt at the height of the Cold War” and was “punished for his principled stand for free speech and the Constitution.” Already much of Hollywood is abuzz with the idea that this could be Oscar material. So I would now like to challenge Hollywood movie makers, actors and directors, conservatives, liberals and even some progressives. It’s hard for me to believe that most of you honestly think of yourselves as backers of Joe Stalin and all his criminal activities that are now part of history. So why, if you don’t view yourselves as worshippers of this evil ruler, do you keep celebrating the lives of your colleagues who did?
0 Comments
Globalists Panic as Trump Survives and Virus Spreads
By Cliff Kincaid – January 24, 2020 In the span of just one week, at the Davos World Economic Forum, two globalists sounded the alarm about President Trump’s America, declaring we are living in “revolutionary” times. This means another panic has set in, as Bolshevik Bernie is positioned to capture the Democratic presidential nomination and go down to another defeat, in much the same way that socialist Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign imploded in Britain. First, the future King of England, Prince Charles, said at Davos, in order to combat "climate change” and move forward, “we need nothing short of a paradigm shift, one that inspires action at revolutionary levels and pace." Then, atheist billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros took the stage at Davos, declaring war on President Trump and claiming we are living in a "revolutionary moment." This is not just talk. Soros is known as the hedge fund operator who broke the Bank of England through currency manipulation and short-selling. He makes money by undermining national economies, causing dislocation and human suffering. He is a fan of the European Union and told Davos that Boris Johnson’s victory in Britain in the Brexit election was a “crushing defeat” for the globalists. He also took aim at nationalists Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil and Matteo Salvini in Italy. Charles and Soros sounded like revolutionaries in a state of panic over plans for their New World Order. Of course, we are now witnessing the emergence of another infectious disease, a new Coronavirus, which originated in China and may have passed from animals to humans. In addition to the spread of the disease and the possibility of hundreds or thousands of deaths, financial and oil markets are threatened. Airlines and travel stocks are falling. This may just be the crisis the globalists need. This comes as America’s first Marxist president, Barack Hussein Obama, is reportedly concerned that Bernie has not hidden his Marxist side well enough and has been far too open about his own authoritarian, or totalitarian, plans for America. They fear that after Trump survives impeachment, he may be, in the words of Vice President Mike Pence, “unstoppable.” Sanders is perceived as easy pickings for the Trump machine. Obama was much smarter than Sanders. His counted on his friends in the media to conceal his involvement with the Democratic Socialists of America and a top operative of the Communist Party, Frank Marshall Davis. But Sanders doesn’t have many friends in the media. Fearful of losing to Trump, the Democratic establishment, including CNN, has mobilized against Sanders. Groups representing Sanders and Elizabeth Warren issued a statement declaring that “The progressive movement has the chance of a lifetime to defeat Donald Trump and elect a truly transformational progressive President of the United States, but it won't happen if we fight each other instead of working together to win.” Nevertheless, pressure is mounting on Warren to pull out. Her latest embarrassment came when a father who saved his money to put his daughter through college without debt wondered why he should be punished for his thrift under Warren’s debt-relief plan for deadbeats. If Sanders’ candidacy is not derailed and the Democrats are stuck with him, another strategy may be used – economic disruption. In his Davos speech, Soros even suggested an economic crash is coming, saying, “...an overheated economy can’t be kept boiling for too long. If all this had happened closer to the elections, it would have assured his [Trump’s] reelection. His problem is that the elections are still 10 months away and in a revolutionary situation, that is a lifetime.” The implication is that certain forces operating throughout the world, some perhaps in mysterious and unregulated hedge funds, could intervene to crash the economy, jeopardizing Trump’s victory. The Marxists used to be the experts in exploiting human suffering for the purposes of sparking revolution. But hedge funds can do far better than the Marxists. There is money to be made when the world economy takes a downturn. On the offensive, Trump used his Davos speech to call his critics the “perennial prophets of doom” and “foolish fortune-tellers,” noting their record of phony predictions: “They predicted an overpopulation crisis in the 1960s, mass starvation in the ’70s, and an end of oil in the 1990s. These alarmists always demand the same thing: absolute power to dominate, transform, and control every aspect of our lives.” Their “climate action” plan now depends on a mystical sense of nature being sacred and somehow under the control of man (and a global super-state) through Green New Deal-type schemes. In many ways, it is a return to paganism and a primitive style of living. Joan Veon’s book, Prince Charles: The Sustainable Prince, notes that he was greatly influenced by the South African-born mystic Laurens van der Post, later exposed as a liar, fraud, and pedophile. Veon also says Charles was a convert to James Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis, a belief based on the Greek goddess Gaia, the Earth Mother. One chapter of Al Gore’s book, Earth in the Balance, writes sympathetically about the pagan tradition of worshipping a goddess of the earth, and complains that Christianity wiped out this tradition. According to these elites, there are too many of us, and we have too much economic and political freedom to improve our lives and our standard of living. Capitalism and Christianity are incompatible with their New World Order. Interestingly, one version of the global warming (now climate change) theory originated with marijuana advocate Carl Sagan, who was also an astronomer. Before he came to believe the Earth was inhabited by a spirit called Gaia, Sagan was writing about the virtues of dope and “the cannabis experience.” He explained, “I do not consider myself a religious person in the usual sense, but there is a religious aspect to some highs. The heightened sensitivity in all areas gives me a feeling of communion with my surroundings, both animate and inanimate.” The U.N.’s Environmental Sabbath program advised kids to hold hands around a tree and meditate. The purpose, through dope or meditation, is to become “one” with trees, rocks, and dirt. Elites like Prince Charles can be viewed as fools or worse, but it’s clear that Soros, with his hold on the Democratic Party and tens of billions to spend, is serious. His associates in the Council on Foreign Relations have made clear their intentions, for the new issue of their journal Foreign Affairs is out, with a lead article, “The Twilight of America’s Financial Empire,” objecting to how the United States uses financial power for the benefit of America. The January/February 2020 issue is devoted to “Global Capitalism” and one gets the impression that the elites are hoping for a crash, in order to take America down a notch or two (and undermine the Trump economy). Another article, “The Starving State,” which is subtitled, “Why Capitalism’s Salvation Depends on Taxation,” represents another desperate attempt to destroy economic growth with higher and higher rates of taxation. Co-author Joseph Stiglitz is an adviser to the Democratic Party and was an adviser to the ill-fated Jeremy Corbyn campaign in Britain. Stiglitz, an advocate of nationalizing U.S. banks, is a member of the Socialist International Commission on Global Financial Issues. He wrote the book, Making Globalization Work, in which he argues for a variety of global tax schemes that would cost American taxpayers billions of dollars. Trump is their enemy because he stands in the way of their global socialist model. *Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org Dear Friend of America's Survival,
A scheme to collapse the world economy can take many forms, including through a “global emergency” caused by something new, like the coronavirus. “World financial markets rocked by China coronavirus” shouts the British Guardian. A writer for Yahoo!Finance claims that oil markets are threatened. The United Nations is now involved as a U.N. health agency has decided to “gauge” the global threat. The last time something like this happened was when the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) killed 774 people and cost the global economy billions of dollars. For America's Survival, Cliff Kincaid Dear Friend of America's Survival,
Atheist billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros was at Davos, declaring war on President Trump and claiming we are living in a "revolutionary moment." He suggested an economic crash is coming, saying: "...an overheated economy can’t be kept boiling for too long. If all this had happened closer to the elections, it would have assured his reelection. His problem is that the elections are still 10 months away and in a revolutionary situation, that is a lifetime." To understand what this means, read my column: Can Hedge Funds Topple Trump? I note, "Hedge funds can cause an economic downturn by targeting companies, countries and currencies with short selling strategies." Soros said: President Trump is a con man and the ultimate narcissist who wants the world to revolve around him. When his fantasy of becoming president came true, his narcissism developed a pathological dimension. Indeed, he has transgressed the limits imposed on the presidency by the Constitution and has been impeached for it. At the same time, he has managed to gather a large number of followers who have bought into his alternative reality. This has turned his narcissism into a malignant disease. He came to believe that he could impose his alternative reality not only on his followers but on reality itself. Here are some excerpts:
Read the rest here. For America's Survival, Cliff Kincaid As a law enforcement veteran of nearly 43 years and a long-term observer of the escalating social decay and destruction caused by marijuana in California and elsewhere, I am appalled that a political leader espousing family values and conservative platform positions could in any way justify legalization of marijuana, either medically or recreationally. Ignoring the harmful impacts to our children and our environment coupled with other short-term and long-term impacts of the drug is absolutely negligent, reckless, heartless and exhibits to me in vivid clarity the fact that money and perhaps power is more important than the welfare of our society, its children, adults, environment and quite frankly our future. Would he endorse meth, heroin, cocaine, or fentanyl use? Would he endorse tobacco use?
We just concluded a murder case in my county involving a man shot in the back of the head because he had a lot of money and came to my county from Texas to buy marijuana. We had another double-homicide last year on an illegal marijuana site. A few weeks back, I went to the funeral of an El Dorado County (CA) Sheriff’s Office Deputy ambushed and killed at an illegal marijuana site. There are peer-reviewed studies and mounting evidence that substantiates the problem associated with marijuana is getting much, much worse because of the legalization of marijuana and decriminalization of other drugs. Why do you think California’s growing homelessness, crime, and mental health crises are so out-of-control? Our problems are largely exacerbated because too many politicians are going with the money, power, and influence instead of doing what is right. You have to be very, very lazy, totally out-of-touch, or complicit with the drug industry, and the often unspoken truth of the “GIANT CONSPIRACY” to promote the marijuana industry, which really is a multi-billion dollar industry that is addicting our children, disabling many in the current generation, corrupting the minds and judgment of our political leaders, and imposing unbelievably burdensome fiscal liability for future mental health, medical, social, justice, and environmental harms this corrupt industry foments. I know there are well-intended politicians and advocates that truly believe there are medical benefits to marijuana and some libertarians will tell you people should have the choice to use it, but taxpayers and our children and local governments pay the biggest price and that price tag will keep growing as time goes on, due to current and future medical, social, justice system, and environmental costs which, we all know, will far outweigh any medical or monetary benefit derived from this industry. We still kill over 400,000 or so people every year due to tobacco use. How many people need to die and how many children addicted, or people otherwise harmed by users or traffickers before our political leaders will get the message that changes are needed? How many tons of illegal marijuana has to flow across state borders to contaminate the lives, futures, and communities of countless Americans? How many parents must bear the burden of wounded, addicted, unsuccessful, or dead kids before someone listens? I just reviewed my coroner statistics for 2019 and of the 30 accidental deaths in my county, methamphetamine, opioids, and THC (marijuana) are the most common drugs involved in these deaths. Our suicides for the year nearly doubled to 17 and of those tragic deaths, THC was involved in 5 of the suicides. I refuse to support a candidate, regardless of political party, that supports this industry. How can they look at us with a straight face and advocate for something so harmful to our children, environment and society in general? Even if a politician initially is misled by the industry and false or misleading information, it is incumbent upon that leader to learn more about the critical issues involved and make logical and meaningful adjustments to the benefit of his or her constituents. Although we know the number of drug users is ever-increasing in this nation, the majority of Americans still reject such harmful behavior, which disputes a politician’s claim that he or she is representing the majority of his or her constituents. It looks like the marijuana industry is assuming the ill-fated future of prior and current industries, such as the tobacco industry and opioid big “pharma” peddlers, which, we would all agree, have helped contribute to the deaths of millions and untold misery to survivors and their associates. Even in California, where legislation and the fate of our cities seems to be very much in doubt, the majority of counties and cities have rejected commercialization of marijuana. I sent a message to Senator Gardner about a year ago and I never got a response. Since he hasn’t changed his stance, it appears he is basically callous to the growing needs, desires, concerns, and potential harm posed to his constituents. I apologize for the long dissertation but this issue and the culpability of our political leaders needs to be exposed for what it really is – complicity in one of the most harmful industries in the history of this great nation.
Dear Friend of America's Survival,
This is dynamite: "Religious Support For Democratic World Federation" - i.e. world government. It's from the Citizens for Global Solutions, a part of the World Federalists. Citizens for Global Solutions used to be known as the World Federalist Association (WFA), a group that favors world government and global taxes on American citizens to pay for it. The article by David Oughton declares: ...some religious groups and leaders have advocated for the creation of a democratic world federal government that would create just world laws and prosecute individuals who violate them. Violent conflicts would be settled and global problems could be solved through a nonviolent democratic process. A world constitution would make explicit the powers and limitations of the world federation, the powers and limitations of national governments, and the rights and responsibilities of all citizens of the world...In their response to global economic tensions, the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace wrote in 2011 that a supranational authority “should have a realistic structure and be set up gradually.” The complete article can be found here. The Roman Catholic Church is leading the way. He adds: The Catholic bishops of the world emphasized this teaching at the Second Vatican Council. They taught that everyone should “work for the time when all war can be completely outlawed by international consent.” They realized that such a goal requires “the establishment of some universal public authority acknowledged as such by all, and endowed with effective power to safeguard, on the behalf of all, security, regard for justice, and respect for rights.” The author's impressive credentials can be found here. For America's Survival, Cliff Kincaid Peter’s Pence donations are allegedly used for investments in real estate and Hollywood films1/23/2020 Dear Friend of America's Survival,
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) says the purpose of the Peter's Pence Collection is "to provide the Holy Father with the financial means to respond to those who are suffering as a result of war, oppression, natural disaster, and disease... The Peter's Pence Collection has raised nearly $190 million to support our suffering brothers and sisters around the globe. " The Peter's Pence financial account was reportedly used to fund Hillary Clinton's campaign in 2016. This revelation was in the book The Dictator Pope. Now the USCCB has been sued for alleged fraudulent use of funds. The Stanley Law Group has filed suit, stating: On January 22, 2020, Stanley Law Group filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island against the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) for its role in the fraudulent promotion of Peter’s Pence as a charity to assist individuals throughout the world who have been affected by “war, oppression, natural disaster or disease.” Recent reports have shown as little as 10% of the contributions made to Peter’s Pence are actually used for these stated purposes. Marc Stanley stated, “It’s regrettable and tragic that such a trusted and well-respected organization has been taking advantage of the generosity of Catholic donors. USCCB must come clean and give back the money it took from well-intentioned people who thought they were giving urgently-needed funds to help the destitute around the world.” The lawsuit declares: For years, USCCB has solicited and collected hundreds of millions of dollars in donations from parishioners of Catholic churches throughout Rhode Island and the United States as part of its “Peter’s Pence” collection. USCCB consistently promotes this specific collection as necessary for helping those suffering the effects of war, oppression, natural disaster, or disease throughout the world, and who are thus in need of immediate relief. Regrettably and tragically, only a very small portion of this money—as little as 10%—has found its way to the needy for whom it was given. The rest of the money—hundreds of millions of dollars over the last several years—has been diverted into various suspicious investment funds, which in turn have funneled the money into such diverse ventures as luxury condominium developments and Hollywood movies while paying fund managers hefty, multi-million dollar commissions. For America's Survival, Cliff Kincaid Dear Friend of America's Survival, Brazilian federal prosecutors have charged Glenn Greenwald, an associate of traitor Edward Snowden, with having “directly assisted, encouraged and guided” six hackers. They allegedly hacked into the accounts of officials in the Jair Bolsonaro government of Brazil. Bolsonaro defeated a Marxist regime to take power in Brazil through free and fair elections. The Marxists have been trying to discredit and undermine his government ever since. Greenwald’s record includes collaborating with Leninist groups such as the International Socialist Organization, and Islamist organizations such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood front. The Muslim Brotherhood is a global Sunni Muslim movement that seeks to spread Sharia` or Islamic law around the world. Snowden is a former NSA/CIA contractor who fled to Russia and is now under the control of the Russian intelligence service, the FSB, and charged with espionage by the U.S. The charges against Snowden include violating the Espionage Act, theft of government property (18 U.S.C. 641) and the unauthorized communication of national defense information (18 U.S.C. 793 d). Section 798 of the Espionage Act absolutely prohibits the publication of classified information in the area of communications intelligence. That would include programs of the NSA. The law does not include a loophole for self-proclaimed journalists who cooperate with spies to violate the law. Snowden depended on Greenwald, formerly with the Guardian and now working for the billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, to release and publicize his illegally acquired classified information from the National Security Agency (NSA). Greenwald is an American citizen, but lives in Brazil with his homosexual lover, David Miranda, who was accused of espionage for trying to sneak some of Snowden’s documents through Britain. Miranda was detained and questioned for nine hours. Greenwald was accused of involvement in a business marketing videos on such sites as “hairystuds.com” and “studmall.com.” He claimed the allegations were “personal attacks and smears” and called the gay pornography “adult videos.” In our book on Snowden, we note: Glenn Greenwald has an affinity for governments, groups and movements opposing the United States. Greenwald spoke publicly in favor of “weakening” America, saying that al-Qaeda’s 9/11 terrorist attacks were “very minimal in scope compared to the level of deaths that the United States has been bringing to the world for decades—from Vietnam to illegal wars in Central America…” Greenwald described Anwar al-Awlaki, the American al-Qaeda leader killed in a drone strike, merely as “someone who the U.S. government hates because he speaks effectively to the Muslim world about the violence that the United States commits regionally, and the responsibility of Muslims to stand up to that violence.” Al-Awlaki inspired the Fort Hood massacre, in which 13 were killed. Greenwald's media business, the Intercept, is demanding that Brazil drop the criminal charges against Greenwald. Greenwald came to our attention in 2009 when he proudly received an award named after I.F. Stone, a leftist journalist exposed as a Soviet agent. Greenwald was also given a Hugh Hefner award in 2014 -- named for the porn kingpin -- for his anti-NSA stories. For America's Survival, Cliff Kincaid Dear Friend of America's Survival,
At Davos, in order to combat "climate change," the Future King Prince Charles called for a "revolutionary paradigm shift" in how the global economy works, urging "sustainability" as the standard and based on green taxes. This is global socialism. I have been warning about this for decades. Prince Charles said, "...to move forward, we need nothing short of a paradigm shift, one that inspires action at revolutionary levels and pace. " But there's more: Prince Charles' spiritual guru turned out to be a pedophile. The best book on Charles is Joan Veon's Prince Charles: The Sustainable Prince. If you want real coverage of the Royal Family, read this book. Joan passed away in 2010. Joan Veon wrote: "Now who were THE players behind the birthing of sustainable development? To my surprise, it was Prince Charles. Not happy with the Christian faith, Charles turned to "para-psychology" which some define as "dabbling in the occult." He was greatly influenced by the South African-born writer, explorer, and mystic Laurens van der Post who was a friend of his grandmother, the Queen Mother. The prince was also influenced by James Lovelock, a British scientist who formulated the "Gaia hypothesis, which today is known as the worship of the earth, a belief based on the Greek goddess Gaia, the Earth Mother." Reviewing the book, Teller of Many Tales: The Lives of Laurens van der Post, by the British journalist J. D. F. Jones, the New York Times reported that Van der Post was "a Jungian mystic and a spiritual adviser to Prince Charles" and that, according to British newspapers, "he taught the prince to talk to his plants. ...And when it came to women, der Post was a bounder. In the early 1950's, when he was 46, he seduced the 14-year-old daughter of a wealthy South African winemaking family, who had been entrusted to his care during a sea voyage. She became pregnant, and although he sent her a small stipend, he never publicly acknowledged the daughter born of the relationship." The global warming or climate change theory, which Prince Charles and others now embrace, was conceived by Soviet communists as a means by which to destroy the industrial base in the United States. This disinformation theme has been embraced by the liberals now claiming to be tough on Russia. Joan Veon adds: At every turn the Prince is still involved in the affairs of the United Nations, sustainable development, and public-private partnership. The Prince's representatives are to be found at all the key global meetings, expounding and advancing this life changing philosophy. Perhaps we should wonder why the world still follows him and carries out his dictates. For America's Survival, Cliff Kincaid The Impeachment Trial: Getting Trump (and the Clintons) Off the Hook
By Cliff Kincaid – January 20, 2020 In one of the biggest blunders of the Trump presidency, it has been decided that two of Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyers should be on the team defending President Trump against impeachment. This time, the anti-Trump headlines can’t be blamed on liberal media bias. “Alan Dershowitz, marred by ties to Jeffrey Epstein, will defend Trump at impeachment trial” was the Los Angeles Times headline. Dershowitz, who is knowledgeable and media-savvy, is a Harvard Law Professor Emeritus. The Washington Post noted that he is a friend and supporter of Bill and Hillary Clinton who voted for her in 2016 and even contributed money to her campaign. He voted for Barack Hussein Obama twice before turning on him over his treatment of Israel. A more complete analysis of his donations, according to OpenSecrets.org, reveals thousands of dollars over the years to mostly Democratic Party candidates such as Ted Kennedy, Elizabeth Warren, John Kerry, and Al Franken. There is no doubt that Trump has an excellent case to make against impeachment and that the Senate won’t convict him. The strange part of the story is why his defense team not only includes liberal Democrat Dershowitz but the “Republican” lawyer who botched the impeachment case against Bill Clinton, Kenneth Starr. He is a Fox News contributor who served as Independent Counsel investigating the Clintons from 1994 to 1999. He failed to pursue the most serious charges, including a cover-up surrounding the 1993 death of Deputy White House counsel Vincent Foster. Strangely, both defended billionaire pedophile Epstein, a high-level friend of the rich and powerful whose alleged suicide in prison has been openly questioned and even ridiculed. Asked why he defended Epstein, Starr replied, “I was very happy to respond to the needs of a client of the firm.” The comments were made after a 2015 National Press Club event on “the future of higher education and the calling of faith-based institutions.” Starr served as president of Baylor University, a private Christian University, only to be fired for allegedly ignoring sexual assault issues on campus. Some stories refer to him as the “disgraced” former Baylor University president. But none of that bothered Fox News, which hired him as a legal analyst. As Independent Counsel, Starr nailed Clinton on lying about his affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. But he and his successor as Independent Counsel, Robert Ray, failed to bring charges against the Clintons on other more serious scandals. Ray, who changed his voter registration from Democrat to independent before taking the job, claimed that he didn’t have enough evidence to proceed with prosecution. Ray, who is also on the Trump impeachment defense team, rubber-stamped Starr’s conclusion, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that White House deputy counsel Vince Foster committed suicide where his body was found in Ft. Marcy Park. In Travelgate, he failed to hold Hillary Clinton responsible for ordering the unjustified firing of seven career White House travel office employees with unblemished reputations. Billy Dale, head of the travel office, commented, “I am disappointed by Robert Ray’s decision to not prosecute Hillary Clinton and others in the Travelgate affair. Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to have me thrown in jail to cover up their corrupt efforts to give the Travel Office’s business to their friends. Unsurprisingly, a jury found me innocent of all of Hillary Clinton’s charges in record time.” In Filegate, the Clintons were not held accountable for the improper acquisition of more than nine hundred FBI files, mostly on Republicans of previous administrations. Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch commented at the time, “Judicial Watch has serious differences with Independent Counsel Ray, who should have indicted Mrs. Clinton and others in both Travelgate and Filegate.” Foster researcher Hugh Turley comments on the curious developments in the Trump impeachment case, as lawyers who failed to hold the Clintons accountable for serious wrong-doing are now supposed to be defending Trump. He notes, “Robert Ray, who replaced Starr as Independent Counsel, is also on the Trump team. Starr was also on the Jeffrey Epstein defense team. And Dershowitz, another member of Trump’s defense, was associated with Epstein. As you know, Bill Clinton was linked to Epstein. Starr only appeared to be Clinton’s enemy while he actually covered up the murder of Vince Foster.” This sounds like a “conspiracy theory” to those who have not bothered to investigate the curious circumstances surrounding Foster’s demise. But Turley, with John H. Clarke and Patrick Knowlton, co-authored the final 20 pages of Ken Starr’s report on Foster’s death. The U.S. Court of Appeals that appointed Starr as Independent Counsel ordered Starr, over his objection, to include their analysis in his report. That analysis, on their website, www.FBIcover-up.com, contradicts Starr’s suicide-in-the-park finding. Foster, like Epstein, was the man who knew too much. As we note in our special report, The Deep State Wears Black Robes, “He [Foster] had knowledge of various Clinton scandals, including Travelgate, the Waco tragedy, and possibly some illegal activities involving national security. His secretary testified he had access to mysterious binders associated with the NSA, the agency that conducts mass surveillance, ostensibly for the purpose of monitoring terrorists and foreign agents.” Accuracy in Media founder Reed Irvine and I wrote at the time that while President Clinton was charged by Starr with perjury and obstruction of justice surrounding a sex scandal, there were much greater abuses of power and illegal activity for which he should have been removed from office. We were voices in the wilderness. It’s mighty suspicious that Trump has been maneuvered into hiring people who either voted for Hillary or failed to hold her and her husband responsible for serious misdeeds. It not only looks bad but suggests that defending Trump may be useful to some in preventing the president from getting to the bottom of the Clinton scandals. After all, such an investigation could lead back to Trump’s attorneys. *Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org |