Vasarahammer has an interesting observation that bolsters West’s position of Russian influence in US decision making during WWII:
The fact remains that WWII was not such a success from an British/American point of view as it is sometimes painted to be. Half of Europe was left behind Iron curtain for 50 years and the effects of that can still be seen. The effects of Lend & Lease were very much visible in the Continuation war front. Suddenly, the Soviets started having American gear and Studebaker trucks. This would not have happened if the USSR did not have able spokesmen close to the US government.
“Professor” Radosh Gets an “F”
Written by: Diana West
Friday, August 09, 2013 2:08 AM
Note to readers.
In just one of today’s installments of the Smear Me Show at Frontpage, Radosh tells readers that an episode he criticized in his original “review,” and that I flagged yesteday for not being in the book, is in the book — and in three places.
This is a lie, too.
But it gets worse. First, he has to swap the first episode (not in book) for a new one (also not in book), and hope no one notices.
His original episode (still not in book) relates that “George Elsey found confidential files in the Map Room that showed FDR naively thinking he could trust Stalin, and instructed Hopkins to tell Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov that FDR was in favor of a Second Front in 1942.”
Remember: Elsey, Map Room, confidential files, FDR telling Hopkins to tell Molotov he favored a Second Front.
Today he writes:
Maybe she couldn’t find the anecdote. But it is there in three different places where she writes how FDR told Hopkins to go into Molotov’s bedroom while he was staying in the White House so that he could meet with the President, and at that meeting, Hopkins told Molotov that FDR was in favor of a Second Front.
Whoa, whoa, whoa — where’s George Elsey? Where’s the Map Room? Where are those “confidential files”?
Will anyone be surprised to learn that this new episode isn’t in my book either?
It gets worse — as in even more incorrect.
I would like to salute the contributions made in the comment-trenches in response to the recent eruptions over American Betrayal. It is interesting to note that the Frontpage cadre, led by chief enforcer David Horowitz, finds it hard to believe that so many people would take to the comment sections, Facebook, blogs and elsewhere wholly unsolicited by me and oppose their ugly attempts to render certain research, certain arguments unacceptable inside boundaries of historical debate as they, themselves, set them.
The Wall is going to come down no matter what they do to shore it up.
Meanwhile, on somewhat closer scrutiny, I find the Radosh mess to be a series of flattened, screaming, straw-man arguments that fail in terms of the most basic intellectual honesty to convey any reality-based synopsis of the evidence assembled inside the pages of my book.
For example, Radosh has readers believing that my quite lengthy, sourced discussions of whether Harry Hopkins, FDR’s top wartime advisor, was an agent of Stalin’s influence turn on one document. This is a 1943 Venona cable in which “Agent 19” is passing information to Moscow gained inside a small private meeting that included FDR and Churchill about the postponement of D-Day to 1944.
He writes: “The identification of Hopkins as Agent 19 is the linchpin of West’s conspiracy case.”
This is a lie. My case against Hopkins, and, for that matter, the larger Soviet influence network, which included at least hundreds of identified American traitors assisting the KGB from various positions and institutions, by no means turns on one document. For Radosh to say so is ridiculous, but it is also damaging if people believe him. The range of my dossier on Hopkins is varied and extensive, as any casual perusal of the book reveals. Radosh, however, has chosen to omit all mention of the evidence I have gathered in my case against Hopkins. This, in and of itself, demonstrates that Radosh is not honestly evaluating my discussion of whether the president’s top advisor during WWII might have been an agent of Stalin’s influence. Nay-saying one piece of evidence to the exclusion of many other pieces of evidence is a transparently mendacious effort to misrepresent the book. This is not book reviewing; it is book assassination.
Here are just a few of the briefest, most quickly conveyed points about Hopkins Radosh doesn’t mention.
Not included, for example, is the startling assessment of Hopkins by Iskhak Ahkmerov, the famed Soviet “illegal” who ran a stable of top spies for the Kremlin, including Alger Hiss, who called Hopkins “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents.” (The source of this is trusted KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky.)