However, Sen.Joe McCarthy was in fact a patriot and a hero, Islamo-tards are not.
UPDATE by Bostom, scroll down
A note from Vlad: ”We need a new Sen.Joe McCarthy to weed out all the Muslim infiltrators more than we need a Churchill.”
I understand using terms that people automatically connect with, but the cuss word of ”McCarthyism” is highly problematic, since (Diana West and the many scholars she quotes in American Betrayal) the besmirched patriot was in fact correct in an overwhelming amount of his investigations of Communist infiltration of the US government and its public institutions.
That said, I give a whole bunch of kudos to Phyllis for highlighting the fact that ‘Islamofauxbia’ is nothing more than disingenuous bunk.
Dr. Phyllis Chesler, Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies at the City University of New York and a self-described feminist, argued that the leftist mantra that any criticism of the doctrines of Islam is Islamophobic is “the new McCarthyism” on Saturday’s “Huckabee” on the Fox News Channel.
“That is the new McCarthyism coming to us from the Left. Because the minute you want to have a rational realistic conversation about Islamic fundamentalism, Islamic terrorism, Islamic apartheid, conversion by the sword, [the] history of slavery, which still exists in many Muslim countries, then what happens is a liberal and a leftist feels that, and they’re true believers, they believe you are then a racist and an Islamophobe” she said.
Dr. Chesler then rebutted the notion that there is widespread Islamophobia in America, stating “interestingly enough, the FBI in 2012 tells us that the hate crimes in America, 62.4% were against Jews, they were anti-Semitic, and guess how many hate crimes against Muslims in America? 11.6%. So, this Islamophobia is McCarthyism, and it’s a way of silencing the conversation which Americans must have now.”
After seeing a clip of Harvard students arguing that America is a bigger threat to the US than ISIS, she declared “this is how Obama thinks, this is how Harvard thinks, it’s how Ben Affleck thinks.”
More here (plus video, not embedded on TT due to autoplay feature)
Andy Bostom updates with the following:
Just watched this clip. A very effective appearance, unfortunately marred by the inappropriate use of the false Leftist construct. “McCarthyism”
As a biostatistics trained clinical psychologist, I think you can appreciate how the table, extracted from the brief essay, below (let alone Evan’s full opus on the subject, which I encourage you to read)–a mere tip of the iceberg–puts the lie to the Left’s endless ranting about “McCarthyism”:
The accompanying table provides a sampler of some of the suspects named by McCarthy, his aides, or in his committee hearings, and reflects what is now known about them, based on official records (some of it was known even then but ignored or misrepresented).
Suspects named by McCarthy, his aides, or before his committee; identified in sworn testimony, FBI archives, or other official security records as Communists or Soviet agents; or took the Fifth Amendment when asked about such matters.
*Took Fifth Amendment as to Communist/ Soviet activity-affiliation
Solomon Adler, Chi Chao ting and V. Frank Coe would all abscond to Communist China. Joel Barr and Alfred Sarant, members of the Rosenberg spy ring who worked at Fort Monmouth and related commercial labs in the 1940s, would flee to the Soviet bloc before the McCarthy Monmouth hearings started. Philip Jaffe would self-identify as a Communist in his memoirs.
Analyzing this list of 50, we find all of them either (a) identified in sworn testimony, or in FBI and other once-confidential official security records, as Communists or Soviet agents, and/or (b) pleading the Fifth Amendment when asked about such activities, saying a truthful answer would tend to incriminate them.
As is self-evident from this lineup, it’s untrue that McCarthy never spotted a single Communist or Soviet agent, or–per one variation–came up with only a handful of valid cases. He in fact tracked down a small army of such people, and the roster given here is merely a sampling of the flagrant suspects who attracted his attention.
This is most obviously so of the Fifth Amendment pleaders. Our table of 50 includes 18 McCarthy cases who refused to answer questions concerning Red connections, but these were only a fraction of the total who claimed the privilege. All told, an astonishing 100-plus McCarthy suspects would plead the Fifth before his committee (the bulk of these in the Fort Monmouth/defense-supply probe that triggered the Army-McCarthy hearings).
Also, contra the standard image, McCarthy and his staffers in the usual instance did not allege that his suspects were Communists or Soviet agents–though in some famous cases (Owen Lattimore, Annie Lee Moss) this did happen–for the simple reason that the probers didn’t then know the total story. More typically, they wielded dossiers concerning adverse security findings, membership in pro-Red groups, and so on–thereby understating the scope and nature of the problem.
Thus, such named McCarthy suspects as Solomon Adler, T.A. Bisson, Lauchlin Currie, Mary Jane Keeney, and many others were not then IDed as Soviet assets, though in fact they were. McCarthy knew enough to spot them as bad actors–in many cases knew a lot–but didn’t know what we know today.
Add the fact that, in case after significant case, McCarthy suspects were linked in ever-widening circles to a host of other operatives of like nature. For example, Adler, Currie, Keeney and the egregious pro-Soviet apparatchik Robert Miller were all parts of much larger networks, each with multiple contacts in the government, press corps, and outside groups of shadowy purpose.
All told, the McCarthy cases linked together in such fashion amounted to several hundred people, constituting a massive security danger to the nation. However, numbers per se were not the central issue. By far the most important thing about his suspects was their positioning in the governmental structure, and other posts of influence, where they could shape American policy or opinion in favor of the Communist interest. This they did on a fairly regular basis, a subject that deserves discussion in its own right.
For now, there is enough to note that the standard version of McCarthy and “McCarthyism” being wielded to discredit Diana West is, throughout, a fiction. How and why it was concocted, and is being repeated even now, must be the topic for another essay.
- Stanton Evans is the author of