Center for Security Policy Diana West Frank Gaffney US History US politics

CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY PANEL ON THE LEGACY OF FDR’S NORMALIZATION WITH THE USSR…….

 

The parallels of Soviet agents and sympathizers having influenced the FDR government (U.S. policy) during the 30’s and 40’s, and the Muslim Brotherhood operatives within the US government influencing policies in relation to Islam and Middle East involvement, is staggering.

The Legacy of FDR’s Normalization of Relations with the USSR

2 Responses

  1. The debate reached The Netherlands, a contribution of Henk V.

    Another comment.
    At Amazon , the book of Diane West is for a reasonable price available 🙂
    Fjordman is a gifted observer and analyst . In addition, he has the ability to give his observations and conclusions in clear text to us for consideration.
    Insights of people like Diane West and Fjordman can do us an excellent service , we do not want to lose everything what belongs to us .
    The author of ‘American Betrayal ‘ explains a core of the problem , on which the West is struggling .
    ” Generations of Western ‘ appeasement ‘ of communist crimes have the moral and cultural backbone of Western civilization weakened , so this is an easy prey for new forms of predators ” .
    What is ‘ appeasement ‘ anyway? The most useful word is ‘ calme down ‘ . Suppose there arises a dispute , a conflict can escalate . This tension rises and threatens ultimately to lead an explosive situation. One wants to take the pressure off , usually through talking . Appeasers
    So ‘ appeasers ‘ know very well that things are not right ! But talking and pondered one thinks to achieve behavioral changes . At the causes of the resulting tensions The appeaser always wants the counterparty calm by talking the pressure off take and spend . Reasonable to conduct
    Hate appeasers ‘conflict ‘ models ! Conflicting opinions just talk your way !
    This strategy follows the West for many decades . And a too far-reaching political antidepressants weakens the West , says the writer .
    This policy of ” appeasement “is founded on the false premise that everyone , when it comes down to it , is of good will .
    At constant doing , reasonable people act like this , there is already deliberating often something to achieve through talking and a willingness to give and take .
    The Dutch ” polder model ” it is a common example .
    In confrontations with dictatorships and very expansive tendencies there is nothing to ‘ calm down ‘ . The urge to rule reasoning usher in anyone’s head .

    One of the most striking examples of this was the failed visit of the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938 . This idealistic and gentle politician abhorred any kind of war . He believed in the power of a reasonable conversation and he was convinced that the ‘ peace talks ‘ with Hitler
    ( http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conferentie_van_M % C3 % BCnchen ) Hitler of warfare could be taken . By making far-reaching concessions (including giving away the Czechoslovakian Sudetenland to Germany )
    He was mistaken terrible! The opposite was the case . Hitler estimated the attitude of Chamberlain precisely and preparations for war were accelerated .
    The continued willingness to make concessions by imperialist forces always correctly assessed : it is a sign of WEAKNESS .
    Politically correct believes this is an example to ‘ demands to turn ‘ a high degree of indulgence to explain today’s Islam : to make gradual concessions so .
    You can guess the outcome .
    Diana West argues that after the fall of Nazism , which was not the result of constant dialogue , but through the use of military means , ( the only logical line against malicious expansive powers! ) West fell short against communism , which is at least as bad behaved like the Nazis had gedaan.De communists remained unscathed and they were able to infiltrate the West widely spiritually and to spy .
    Two explanations can be given for in each case :
    World War II intervened so the existence of the citizens who were affected by it , that there is a new benchmark that forms the concepts of good and evil .
    That benchmark is felt to this day, and here is what rightly or wrongly, with the thinking and actions of Nazism can be connected : BAD and everything was brought against Nazism in contention : GOOD!
    And to start with the latter: the communist regimes of Lenin and Stalin were probably totally criminal, when they looked good , but the Soviets have fought side by side with the Allies . AGAINST Nazism and that made them automatically GOOD. Moreover, everyone knows that the communists were very active in the resistance against the Nazis . Participation in the war against Nazi Germany did actually once a form of rub of the sins of communism , picture liable reviewed.
    The Communists were not so bad and in a sense, that attitude never completely disappeared .
    Dutch politicians with very leftist beliefs never had a hard time in the Netherlands . How many people with a very leftist background were able to trouble with another label and effortlessly find their way in Dutch politics ? And it is not significant enough that Maxima’s introduction was made in Dutch society by the very leftist politician Andrée van Es ?
    The “left” luckily escapes just and we must ask ourselves whether the political world after the Second World War with two sizes to measure continuously , ‘left’ protective ‘right’ constantly putting in the corner .
    The treaty between von Ribbentrop of Nazi Germany and his colleague Molotov , the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs , shows that the two former superpowers differed much less than is sometimes thought . The Poles may be talking about it.
    A second factor which explains why communism never seriously is judged and condemned to ‘ thanks ‘ to the success of the ‘ Frankfurt School ‘ . About this direction is written here enough , but it is desirable that we remember in any case that this movement has ensured that key positions are occupied by very leftist people . Anywhere in the West , in all places where knowledge-transfer takes place ,
    The result is that there are already several generations, people are bombarded with leftist ideas .
    Sometimes the left character of the infiltration may unwittingly betrays . If you want to demonize , you place someone in our society that still simply ‘ the right or extreme right ? It follows that the “better” people already are not right .. In other words, ….
    So , we have lost the Cold War ?
    Let ‘s just say that we have not convincingly won in any case .
    Henk V.

  2. Another comment.
    At Amazon , the book of Diane West is for a reasonable price available 🙂
    Fjordman is a gifted observer and analyst . In addition, he has the ability to give his observations and conclusions in clear text to us for consideration.
    Insights of people like Diane West and Fjordman can do us an excellent service , we do not want to lose everything what belongs to us .
    The author of ‘American Betrayal ‘ explains a core of the problem , on which the West is struggling .
    ” Generations of Western ‘ appeasement ‘ of communist crimes have the moral and cultural backbone of Western civilization weakened , so this is an easy prey for new forms of predators ” .
    What is ‘ appeasement ‘ anyway? The most useful word is ‘ calme down ‘ . Suppose there arises a dispute , a conflict can escalate . This tension rises and threatens ultimately to lead an explosive situation. One wants to take the pressure off , usually through talking . Appeasers
    So ‘ appeasers ‘ know very well that things are not right ! But talking and pondered one thinks to achieve behavioral changes . At the causes of the resulting tensions The appeaser always wants the counterparty calm by talking the pressure off take and spend . Reasonable to conduct
    Hate appeasers ‘conflict ‘ models ! Conflicting opinions just talk your way !
    This strategy follows the West for many decades . And a too far-reaching political antidepressants weakens the West , says the writer .
    This policy of ” appeasement “is founded on the false premise that everyone , when it comes down to it , is of good will .
    At constant doing , reasonable people act like this , there is already deliberating often something to achieve through talking and a willingness to give and take .
    The Dutch ” polder model ” it is a common example .
    In confrontations with dictatorships and very expansive tendencies there is nothing to ‘ calm down ‘ . The urge to rule reasoning usher in anyone’s head .

    One of the most striking examples of this was the failed visit of the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938 . This idealistic and gentle politician abhorred any kind of war . He believed in the power of a reasonable conversation and he was convinced that the ‘ peace talks ‘ with Hitler
    ( http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conferentie_van_M % C3 % BCnchen ) Hitler of warfare could be taken . By making far-reaching concessions (including giving away the Czechoslovakian Sudetenland to Germany )
    He was mistaken terrible! The opposite was the case . Hitler estimated the attitude of Chamberlain precisely and preparations for war were accelerated .
    The continued willingness to make concessions by imperialist forces always correctly assessed : it is a sign of WEAKNESS .
    Politically correct believes this is an example to ‘ demands to turn ‘ a high degree of indulgence to explain today’s Islam : to make gradual concessions so .
    You can guess the outcome .
    Diana West argues that after the fall of Nazism , which was not the result of constant dialogue , but through the use of military means , ( the only logical line against malicious expansive powers! ) West fell short against communism , which is at least as bad behaved like the Nazis had gedaan.De communists remained unscathed and they were able to infiltrate the West widely spiritually and to spy .
    Two explanations can be given for in each case :
    World War II intervened so the existence of the citizens who were affected by it , that there is a new benchmark that forms the concepts of good and evil .
    That benchmark is felt to this day, and here is what rightly or wrongly, with the thinking and actions of Nazism can be connected : BAD and everything was brought against Nazism in contention : GOOD!
    And to start with the latter: the communist regimes of Lenin and Stalin were probably totally criminal, when they looked good , but the Soviets have fought side by side with the Allies . AGAINST Nazism and that made them automatically GOOD. Moreover, everyone knows that the communists were very active in the resistance against the Nazis . Participation in the war against Nazi Germany did actually once a form of rub of the sins of communism , picture liable reviewed.
    The Communists were not so bad and in a sense, that attitude never completely disappeared .
    Dutch politicians with very leftist beliefs never had a hard time in the Netherlands . How many people with a very leftist background were able to trouble with another label and effortlessly find their way in Dutch politics ? And it is not significant enough that Maxima’s introduction was made in Dutch society by the very leftist politician Andrée van Es ?
    The “left” luckily escapes just and we must ask ourselves whether the political world after the Second World War with two sizes to measure continuously , ‘left’ protective ‘right’ constantly putting in the corner .
    The treaty between von Ribbentrop of Nazi Germany and his colleague Molotov , the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs , shows that the two former superpowers differed much less than is sometimes thought . The Poles may be talking about it.
    A second factor which explains why communism never seriously is judged and condemned to ‘ thanks ‘ to the success of the ‘ Frankfurt School ‘ . About this direction is written here enough , but it is desirable that we remember in any case that this movement has ensured that key positions are occupied by very leftist people . Anywhere in the West , in all places where knowledge-transfer takes place ,
    The result is that there are already several generations, people are bombarded with leftist ideas .
    Sometimes the left character of the infiltration may unwittingly betrays . If you want to demonize , you place someone in our society that still simply ‘ the right or extreme right ? It follows that the “better” people already are not right .. In other words, ….
    So , we have lost the Cold War ?
    Let ‘s just say that we have not convincingly won in any case .
    Henk V.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.