For Western Liberals, their Fickle Bereavement and Outrage is Limited to Injustices Committed by Non-Leftists

March 3, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: Crying liberal women, Guilt Tourism, history, Katyn, Katyn Massacre, Katyn Massacre Memorial, Liberal Guilt Tourism, Liberal hatred of the West, Liberal hypocrisy, Liberal Support of Communism, Liberal support of the USSR, Liberal Virtue Signaling, Liberal Women', Liberals don't care about Communist murders, Liberals support of Soviet Union, Nazi Katyn, poland, Polish village of Zdziary, politics, russia, Soviet Massacre, Soviet Massacre Katyn, ukraine, USSR Katyn Forrest Massacre, western liberal women, Zbigniew Stypułkowski Leave a comment

During WWII, the great Polish resistance leader, Zbigniew Stypułkowski made an astute observation of his nation’s two enemy occupiers Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, when he commented that there were no significant differences in the brutal way both operated. He saw both as equally evil, dictatorial systems. On September 1, 1939, Stypułkowski was a member of the Polish parliament when two of the evilest empires known known in the history of man Nazi Germany and the Communist Soviet Union, decided to divide his democratic nation up between themselves. They did so for no other reason than they could.

After the Soviet Communists and the Nazis invaded his country, Stypulkowski helped organize the anti-Nazi resistance in the western portion of Poland. The intellectual politician soon became a respected resistance leader, rising to the rank of Colonel. A large bounty was placed on Stypulkowski’s head by the Nazi occupiers who were bedazzled by his cunning as a prominent guerrilla leader. Yet, no Poles stepped forward to betray Stypulkowski. Both the Soviet Communists and the Nazis surpassed any measure of wickedness previously established in history. Both regimes practiced the mass extermination of millions of their political opponents yet, the Soviets Communists unarguably murdered far more than even Hitler’s regime. What astonished Stypulkowski was the way both regimes, though independent of each other, work identically. In the German occupied sector of Poland, the Nazi’s quickly massacred all elites and intellectuals while anyone deemed a political opponent was shipped off to a camp to be gassed or worked to death. Likewise, in the Soviet occupied sector of Poland, the Communists quickly massacred all elites and intellectuals while anyone deemed a political opponent was shipped off to a camp to be executed or worked to death. Both had secret police who worked with uncannily similar tactics.

The Soviet Communists were quick to murder anyone who even had the appearance of someone who might resist. Most notable, was the Katyn Massacre where the Soviet Communists murdered over 22,000 military and police officers as well as others deemed to be intellectuals- most of whom were Polish Jews. Yet it was the ruthless proficiency of these systematic murders in Katyn which was most shocking. The mass murder was carried out with the efficiency of an industrial slaughterhouse.

See the short video below:

In typical Communist fashion, at the end of WWII when these thousands of bodies were discovered, in shallow graves, each with bullet holes in the backs of their skulls, the Soviets blamed the massacre on their former allies, the Nazis. Yes, they did so directly on the orders from Comrade Stalin. The Nazis were defeated after all and had no historical voice in the matter. For almost 50 years, the Katyn Massacre was attributed to the Nazis. The Nazis by the way, were just as evil as the Soviet Communists and would have been all too happy to have to done the dirty work at Katyn themselves but alas, the Soviet NKDV beat them to the punch.

Each year during the cold war, on the declared anniversary of the Katyn Massacre, there was a Soviet and Polish sponsored memorial gathering to remember these “victims of the Nazis.” Although the Soviets had objected to the placement of physical monuments on the site and preferred to conduct the event in a low key fashion, some select residents of western countries and a limited number of “approved” western media sources were allowed to attend the memorial gathering. Interestingly enough, few average Poles were ever invited and the memorial seemed more like a media event. After all, average Polish citizens might have dared, given the opportunity, to raise some awkward questions such as, “The murdered Polish men were all taken into to custody by the Soviets in the Red Army sector- how were the Nazis able to get to them?”

Only Communist could pull an event like this off and keep a straight face but, wait…it gets better. Every year on the anniversary of the Katyn Massacre, limited numbers of naïve western liberals (mostly women) would make their way to Katyn, Poland in order to,” remember, mourn, and light candles for the “Nazi ‘victims.” Many of these liberal women were filmed with hot tears streaming down their checks as their lower lips quivered over the grizzly fate of these alleged victims of Nazi brutality. They certainly seemed like Norma Desmond, to be ready for their close-up.

Then suddenly, the Soviet people overthrew their Communist dictators in the USSR and those living under Communism in the Eastern Bloc Countries had just previously done likewise. The Berlin Wall came crashing down, and freedom spread beyond the Iron Curtin. Soon thereafter, the secret archives of the former Communists states were made public. Along the way it was discovered, in black and white, that the Nazis did not perpetrate the Katyn Massacre but rather it was as many had already suspected, the Communist Soviets who methodically killed these 22,000 Polish elites.

Now, try not to laugh. I dare you. After democracy was restored in Poland, the Katyn Massacre Anniversary to remember and morn, continued on. However, it took on the new tone of an anti-Communist memorial. Monuments were finally erected in the Katyn forrest to pay homage to these victims of Communism. However, after it was established that the Massacre was committed by the Communists, the crying western liberal women stopped showing up. Maybe it was because there were no longer any Communist officials for them to hug and cry in the arms of over the brutality of Nazism and US foreign policy. Yet it was historically, still a savage massacre- right? It would seem that liberals are only interested in mourning massacres that suit their political ends. Yet maybe there’s another reason. Maybe they caught wind of something.

Perhaps these western liberals heard about the little farm near the diminutive Polish village of Zdziary, not far from the location of the Katyn Massacre. Each year, during the anniversary remembrance, the small farm was cordoned off by a group of Polish and USSR Communists party officials including, Soviet KGB officers and Polish Security Service (PS) personnel. Once there and away from the prying eyes of western “liberal guilt tourists,” they could let their hair down. The liquor would flow, and these Communist officials would begin hours of mocking the western “useful idiots” in attendance- mostly liberal western women. The Communist officials would put on skits where in turn, many of the attendees would imitate the liberal useful idiots’ maudlin sorrow and tears to roars of laughter. Many of these men would entertain their comrades by recounting their sexual conquests of the sundry “loose” western women in attendance, many of whom would throw themselves at the first Communist official they encountered during the couple of days before the ceremony. The jollity and revelry would go on until the wee hours.

The annual fun abruptly ended with the collapse of Communism. Suddenly, the liberal western women lost interest in attending when they learned what was for them, the disappointing news that the massacre was actually committed by their ideological allies, the Communist.

The Reverend Billy James Hargis: A Beloved Christian Leader in America Until He Began to Criticize Communism

March 2, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: Billy James Hargis, Billy James Hargis Communism, Billy James Hargis scandal, General Edwin Walker Leave a comment

During the early 1960s, the New York Times reported that Reverend Billy James “Hargis appears to be on his way to rivaling the Reverend Billy Graham.” Yet at the time, millions of American evangelical Christians already considered him of equal stature to Graham. He was a household name. Reverend Hargis’ Christian Crusade program was broadcast daily on over 500 US radio stations and weekly on 250 television stations. Millions of Americans turned into his broadcasts. So, what happened?

Today, everyone knows who Billy Graham was. When Revered Graham died in 2018, condolences poured in from all over the world. American political leaders, Democrat and Republican alike praised his life and works. America mourned the passing of this “giant of a man.” However, Reverend Hargis died an obscure death in a Tulsa nursing home in 2004. There were the perfunctory newspaper obituaries yet, most people seemed to have forgotten who he was. Why? How?

It appears the good Reverend Hargis’ troubles began when he dared to begin criticizing Communism- both the Soviet state and its puppets as well as Marxism’s domestic purveyors. Isn’t taking on Communism a little outside the lane of a respected Christian evangelist? Shouldn’t he have just stuck to the Bible? Reverend Hargis felt not.

As a member of the clergy, Hargis was concerned by what he perceived as the rapid moral decline of our society in the early 1960s. He was vexed by the rising tide of illegal abortions, divorce, homosexuality, rampant drug use, pornography, and overall permissiveness coupled with attacks on our free enterprise system and Leftist infiltration of churches and seminaries. Hargis began investigating the people who were enabling these social ills. At every turn, he discovered that the path led back to either Communists, their fellow travelers or Communism’s reliably useful idiots on the liberal or progressive Left. Reverend Hargis was perplexed as to why these Communist influenced assaults on the moral fiber of our society weren’t being covered by the major American media outlets. Reverend Hargis felt that if the large media corporations wouldn’t cover these issues, he should use his sizable broadcasting platform to do so. That’s when his troubles began.

Hargis projected where all this burgeoning moral depravity would lead us as a society. He made a series of bold predictions which were mocked by the Left and their cohorts in the major media outlets. Hargis had the temerity forecast, based on where he saw our society heading, that one day in America:

Abortion would be made legal by either the courts or federal legislation.
Divorce would become widespread and there would be legislation to allow “divorce on demand.”
Homosexuality would “come out of its closet and into the public mainstream.” Author’s Note: In a free society, we should not punish or discriminate against people over their sexual orientation.
Pornography would be made legal by the federal courts.
The death penalty would be abolished and or severely limited due to expanded appeal procedures.
The drug problem would get worse, not better and become far more widespread.
Leftist would continue to infiltrate the church to change Christian doctrine and create churches which advance Leftist goals.
Television programming and Hollywood movies would ditch the Production Code and start making movies with nudity, sex, extreme violence with overtly anti-Christian themes and storylines.
Leftist would continue to infiltrate public schools and would one day turn public schools and universities into centers for Leftist indoctrination.
The major American media would ditch its pretense of fair and unbiased news and go all in to advance the Left’s objectives.
Crime would rise to unseen levels, and it will become more violent and deadly than anything we’d ever before seen.
The sanctity of human life would be cheapened.
The Left would start a full-fledged assault on the sacred constitutional right of Americans to own firearms and to exercise self-defense.
The federal government would one day become all powerful and, through its vast expansion and myriad programs, would exercise unprecedented control over our lives.
Hargis also criticized America’s abrogation of its responsibility to defend democracy against the threat of Communism at home and abroad. He criticized the Kennedy administration’s failure to take out the Communist regime in Cuba and asserted that the United States was on track to shirk its responsibility to confront and subdue the Communist threat in Vietnam.

In the early 1960s, Hargis’ predictions were derided as laughable, dystopian conspiracy theories. At least so, until they all came to pass. Yes, Hargis read the proverbial tea leaves remarkably well. The question he pondered at the time of his predictions was, what would he should do to alert the American public of these concerns? Had he decided to avoid the subject and simply continued to preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, he would have would have been remembered today as an evangelist who enjoyed and storied career. However, Hargis was not the type of man to shrink from a fight, if he felt the cause was just.

Hargis would use his media empire, which reached millions, to shine the light of truth on what he saw as the “seedy, shadowy dark enclaves of domestic Communism’s campaign to subvert the traditional values of our society.” Initially, his actions proved successful. Millions of more people began to listen to his broadcasts and donations to his ministry increased significantly. However, not everyone was pleased. Hargis’ expanded media footprint caused the establishment media and certain liberal politicians to paint a target on his back. Were that not enough, the Reverend was not afraid to name names and drew the ire of both President Lyndon Johnson and his successor, Richard Nixon. This was risky new territory for Hargis as in the pre-Watergate era, US Presidents frequently used federal agencies such as the FBI and the IRS, to go after prominent citizens who were a threat to them. Reverend Hargis became the subject of an ongoing government campaign of harassment from the IRS, FBI and even the FCC. While there was never a basis for criminal charges, the political persecution of Hargis from these federal agencies continued for years.

At every turn, the government was there to pester Hargis with investigations, tax audits and civil court actions. None of this slowed the growth in his radio and TV audience. Hargis remained as popular as ever with Christian America. In the 1960’s he began a road show with American war hero, retired Army General Edwin Walker. The road shows proved particularly popular and others, outside of the Christian faith began attending. The message was Christianity combined with populist conservatism.

In the 1960s, the new mainline conservatism advocated by Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley and Ronald Reagan was in its infancy. Populist conservatism as espoused by politicians such as Donald Trump, was almost non-existent. Hargis, like General Walker, was a populist conservative. In fact, Hargis is one of the founders of the movement. Populist conservatism would remain on the fringe of the Republican Party for many decades until the era of Donald Trump. In Hargis’ roadshow, which drew tens of thousands of Americans in every city they visited, became the genesis of what is now called “Trumpism.” Apart from Hargis and Walker, there were scarcely few others prominent leaders in the new populist conservative movement which blended evangelical Christianity, with anti-Communism and an “America First” agenda that was protectionist and anti-immigration. Sound familiar? It’s safe to say that without Reverend Hargis, we might never have known “Trumpism” today.

As Reverand Hargis’ audience continued to grow, he experienced setbacks from the government but nothing that would stop his message from resonating. Having not slowed Hargis’ movement with harassment, the government seemed to escalate its tactics to discredit Hargis and Walker. Before I go any further, I would urge you to watch the embedded video below. It’s a deleted clip from the Oliver Stone film JFK, which recounts the government’s efforts to lay a trap for prosecutor Jim Garrison by setting him up with a fabricated gay sex allegation in a public bathroom with police officers conveniently standing by to nab him.

Restroom Scene (Deleted) from the Oliver Stone film, JFK (1991)

This was a common method used to destroy the credibility of certain people whom the government deemed “troublemakers.” It was unsuccessfully attempted on New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison pretty much as shown in the clip above. The same method was used against WWII hero, General Edwin Walker in a Dallas public restroom. Just as in the clip, a bunch of police were waiting right there to arrest Walker after being framed for “lewd public conduct.”

After the incident with General Walker, Hargis traveled with loyal people around him at all times. By keeping witnesses next to him everywhere he went in public, Reverend Hargis seemed to have airtight protection against government dirty tricks. That is, until he didn’t. By 1974, Hargis served as the President of the American Christian College and Seminary in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Suddenly one day, like a lightning bolt out of the blue, two young students stepped forward and claimed that Reverend Hargis had forced them into sexual relations. The allegations were made by a female student as well as a male student. How convenient. That certainly covered all of the bases. Yet no one seemed more surprised over these claims than Reverend Hargis himself, who had been married for decades with three children. For his part, Hargis vehemently denied the allegations until the day he died. Whether the allegations are true or not, we’ll never know.

What we do know is that the Tulsa District Attorney did an exhaustive investigation into the case and found no criminal wrongdoing had occurred. No charges were filed. After a thorough investigation, both of the area newspapers, The Tulsa Tribune and The Tulsa World refused to even publish the mere accusations. Unfortunately, Reverend Hargis was tried in the court of public opinion by the national establishment media. This would lead to his ruination. Donations to his ministries dwindled. The media induced scandal finished him as an effective spokesperson for his cause.

Few today draw the connection between Trumpism and the political and religious crusades of Reverend Billy James Hargis. Yet, it’s likely that without Hargis, there would not be Trumpism today. At least not as we know it. Hargis’ lived his remaining years away from the spotlight. In many ways he died a broken man but, the political movement he started would come to fruition and become the predominant dogma of the Republican party.

Below is an interview with Hargis from 1979, on the popular national television program, the Tomorrow Show, hosted by Tom Snyder.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Tom+Synder+Billy+James+Hargis

Climate Change: Marxism’s Trojan Horse

February 27, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Alleged Climate Change Tags: 50 years of climate alarmism, Christiana Figueres, Christiana Figueres Climate Change to destroy Capitalism, Christiana Figueres UN Climate, Climate change doom, climate change hoax, Climate Change is Communism, Climate Change is Communist, Climate Change is Marxist, Climate change scam, Climate Change scare tactic, Climate Change to Destro Capitalism, Climate Change to destroy capitalism, Climate doom, Environmental Wackos, Environmentalism to destroy capitalism, global warming hoax, Global warming to destroy capitalism, goal environmentalists to destroy capitalism, Green movement destroy capitalism, Green new deal, Greens are reds, Ice Age is comming, Kenneth Watt, Kenneth Watt Climate Extremist, Kenneth Watt Ice Alarm, Mostafia Tolbia, Mostafia Tolbia quote, the environment vs. capitalism, the Green Scare, Thomas Lovejoy, Thomas Lovejoy climate alarmist, UN Environment Program Leave a comment

The Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition, among whom there is seldom a disagreement on anything, have been trying to sell us the idea that we’re facing a world ending “climate crisis” for the past 50 plus years. Yet, the world is still here.

These alarmist of the wacky Left would be the first to admit that they’ve frequently had to change their comical doomsday cries of “apocalypse,” over the past half-century. Like Chicken Little, they cry, “The sky is falling!” Except it isn’t and never will. Like a desperate gambler’s frantic last cast of the dice, the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition is always coming up with new alarmist gimmicks in their forlorn attempts to scare us into accepting their failed policies. Yet, the people still aren’t buying their damaged goods.

In the 1960s, they warned that our oil supply would soon be depleted and if we didn’t make a “drastic change,” it would be the end of our society. In the 1970s, the headlines proclaimed that our “poor environmental stewardship” was leading us into “a new ice age” where the civilized world would “parish” if we didn’t make “drastic changes in our lifestyles and public policy.” Yet, the ice age never materialized. In the early 80’s, the new Leftist buzzword of alarm was, “Acid Rain,” caused by our “industries” or translation: our employers. That ploy didn’t work either. By the 1990s, the Left’s clarion cry was, “Global Warming.” Yet, when things didn’t get warmer, they changed the title of their con to “Climate Change.” How convenient. If temperatures drop, it’s “climate change.” If temperatures increase, it’s “climate change.” If temperatures stay the same it’s still, you guessed it, “climate change.”

Along the way, the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition has given us the most dire and dystopian predictions. On August 10, 1969, an article in the New York Times: “We must realize that unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.” Really?

In 1970, prominent environmental academic Kenneth Watt, sounded the “ice alarm,” speaking in Pennsylvania at Swarthmore College: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

Time magazine asserted on June 22, 1974: “Telltale signs are everywhere, from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest. Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7”

On July 18, 1976, the New York Times predicated that the environmental crisis would end agriculture in America when it stated, “… the news for the future is not all good. The climate is going to get unreliable. It is going to get cold. Harvest failures and regional famines will be more frequent. Weather will probably make history—again.”

In 1982, Mostafia Tolbia, executive director of the UN’s Environment Program, pointed to the possibility of widespread devastation in less than 20 years. He cited “an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, and as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.”

In February 1993, Thomas Lovejoy, assistant secretary for Environmental and External Affairs at the Smithsonian Institution, stressed the world had one remaining decade of opportunity to avoid calamity. “I am utterly convinced that most of the great environmental struggles will be either won or lost in the 1990s and by the next century it will be too late.”

Then again, maybe not.

These and literally thousands of other doomsday predictions have been made going back to the 1960s. Yet, our focus should not be on the doom and gloom forecasts but rather, on what these prognosticators of our climate demise want us to do in order to avoid “catastrophe.” These wild predictions concerning the end of civilization after all, are designed to scare us into acting. Specifically, they are seeking our acquiescence in the destruction of capitalism and individual rights. The very values that made the United States a world superpower. A system which has created the most prosperous society in the history of mankind. How do we know this?

We know this because if you listen to or read them carefully, they tell you as much. At a 2015 news conference in Brussels, Belgium, United Nations “Climate Advisor” Christiana Figueres, admitted that “the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.”

As far back as 2011, The Nation Magazine, a stalwart publication within the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition proclaimed the battle is to be defined as, “the environment vs. capitalism,” and the ultimate destruction of the later. The UK’s Guardian screamed in a headline, “Dare to Declare Capitalism Dead- before it takes us down with it!”

Who would buy this you ask? In truth, not many among the average citizenry. Think about it. For the past forty years, the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition has beat this drum everyday in the media. Their cohorts who run our public schools have attempted to indoctrinate our children in this Marxist dogma in the very schools we support with our tax dollars. These radical environmental themes have run rampant in Hollywood films and Television programing. The Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition has spent untold billions of dollars to “educate us” on the environmental crisis caused by capitalism.

So, after decades of the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition trying to scare us into their way of thinking, they have some monumental achievements which they alone are entitled to take full credit for, as follows:

A 6-3 majority of conservative Supreme Court Justices who don’t buy the damaged wares they are peddling.
A Republican/Nationalist Congress who recognizes them for what that they are.
Donald Trump, an America First President who calls climate change “a big hoax,” and refers to the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition as being, “scum!”
Millions of young voters who reject socialism and climate alarmism. Also known as “young Trump supporters.”
Large shifts among ethnic minority voters who continue to trend Republican.

So, we owe the Communist-Socialist-Progressive-Liberal coalition our sincere gratitude. Keep up the good work my Commie friends! Your brand is radioactive and you repel far more than you attract! Yet, you unintentionally do our country and its capitalist system a great service.

Ana Montes: Convicted Communist Spy and Traitor to America

February 17, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: American Communist Traitors, American Left helping Communist Cuba, Ana Montes, Ana Montes CIA, Ana Montes Communist agent, Ana Montes Communist Spy, Ana Montes Traitor, Ana Montes treason, Army Green Beret Sergeant Gregory A. Fronius., Charles Manson Daddy Hangup, CIA double agents, Code Name Blue Wren, cognitive opening, Communist Spies in US, Communists in US Government, Cuban Spies, Cuban spy, Green Beret Sergeant Gregory A. Fronius, Gregory A. Fronius, Gregory A. Fronius murder, Jim Popkin, Liberal love of Cuba, Professor Kendall Myers Communist, Professor Kendall Myers spy, Sergeant Gregory A. Fronius, UVA Professor Kendall Myers Leave a comment

Ana Montes was if not still is, a disgusting Communist and traitor to her (our) country, The United States of America. The daughter of an accomplished physician, Montes came from a comfortable home with a Catholic and politically conservative upbringing. Her loving father was a strict taskmaster who pushed his children to excel. Life isn’t easy, after all. In her late teens, young Ana seemed to rebel against the high standards her good father expected of her. In college she would do a running dive off of the deep end.

Young Ana began college in the 1970s, at the University of Virgina. Far from her family and the culturally conservative environs of her youth, she undoubtedly found the UVA campus to be fertile soil for one desiring to rebel against every value their parents had instilled in them. In short, Ana appeared to have what Charles Manson called a “Daddy hangup.” Manson found these types of young women the easiest to recruit into his cult because of their desire to rebel against the values of their parents which presented what psychologists today call a “cognitive opening.” For these confused young women, Manson 1) offered a new support network. (family substitute) 2) introduced new Leftist values to replace the morals taught by their family and 3) a new life’s purpose as an activist working for advancement of these new Leftist values.

Marxist activists on the UVA campus undoubtedly recognized the “cognitive opening” with respect to Ana Montes. Soon, for this confused young woman, the Marxists on campus 1) offered a new support network. (family substitute) 2) introduced new Leftist values to replace the morals taught by her family and 3) a new life’s purpose as an activist working for the advancement of these new Leftist values. It was likely just that simple.

Ana was an articulate and unquestionably bright young women who could have been a tremendous asset to our country and society. Unfortunately, she chose a darker path. During Ana’s student years, the United States was fighting a proxy war in Latin America against Soviet sponsored terrorism, subversion and guerrilla revolution. Although nobody had voted for the Communist, they were attempting, with the assistance of their Soviet masters, to seize through the barrel of a rifle, that which they could never have hoped to achieve through the ballot box. Pretty straight forward, right? The Communist are the bad guys here, as usual- right? Apparently not so, for young Ana and her friends. She chose sides with enemies of free people everywhere when she threw her hat into the ring for the Communists.

Ana, a fluent Spanish language speaker, began joining various Leftist and Pro-Communist groups on her campus that were taking the Communist’s side in our adversarial relationship with Castro’s Cuba as well as in the fight against Communism within Central and South America. Large College campuses were hotbeds of activity for this type of Marxist student activism in the 1970s when Ana was a student. UVA was a center, if not a safe space for Marxist student activists. UVA Professor Kendall Myers was an active spy for the Communist Cuban government. He was charged and convicted in 2009 and the court meted out a life sentence. As for Ana Montes, she graduated UVA in 1979 and went to work for the CIA. Background check anyone? However, she maintained contact with her Leftist connections from UVA. She would eventually earn a graduate degree from Johns Hopkins University. Quite impressive!

In addition to Professor Myers, there was also a UVA graduate student named Marta Velazquez, who was a payrolled Cuban agent. Ms. Valazquez’s job was to recruit young campus Leftists to spy for the Cuban cause. The following is an excerpt from the New York Daily News article about Montes dated December 29, 2022:

“Vazquez zeroed in on Montes, who had made no secret of her government job or her disgust with American foreign policy.

At a restaurant in Washington, (Velazquez) made a soft pitch,” Popkin writes. ‘Ana, I have friends who can help you assist the desperate Nicaraguan people…. They need someone to translate Spanish-language news articles.”

Velazquez suggested a trip to New York, so Montes could meet her friends, who were Cuban intelligence officers.

On Dec. 16, 1984, Montes agreed to betray her country.”

On December 16, 1984, had Montez instead declined to betray her country and simply have walked away, we might know her today as a dedicated and prominent government official. We’ll never know for sure. By all accounts, she certainly seemed to possess the innate intelligence and competence to serve at the highest echelons of the federal government. Unfortunately, after she sold her soul to the devil on that December day in 1984, she would spiral uncontrollably downward into a black, bottomless pit of treasonous espionage on behalf of America’s Communist enemies.

Naturally, throughout the course of her service to Cuba as a spy, she was paid many millions of dollars by Castro’s government- right? Actually no, she did it all in the name of what we assume to be her Communist ideology. If not for this reason, then why at all? It is unmistakably clear that she disagreed with U.S. foreign policy with respect to Communism. “Montes accepted no money for passing classified information, except for reimbursements for some expense,” according to the New York Daily News article cited above. She more than likely could have obtained payment given her position at the CIA, but she did not. In the course of her traitorous conduct, how much damage did she really do? Unfortunately, quite a bit.

She unashamedly disclosed the names of US undercover agents working against the Communist government in Cuba. In coded communications with her Communist handlers, she alerted them to the imminent arrival of a Cuban spy working for the United States. Her Cuban Communist handler grimly replied via codes message, “We are waiting here for him with open arms.” That US spy undoubtedly met with a torturous death too horrible to discuss, thanks to Ana. Ana Montes, as a CIA officer, also visited a military base in El Salvador run by United States Special Forces. Shall we say coincidently, weeks later, Communist rebels rendered a pinpoint attacked on that camp, killing 44 US backed Salvadorian soldiers, including United States Army Green Beret Sergeant Gregory A. Fronius. A government inquiry would years later place the blame for Sergeant Fronius’ death directly on Ana Montes. I’d trade several hundred of Ana Montes’ ilk for one Gregory A. Fronius- an easy call. Ana also revealed the existence of a stealth satellite so costly and highly classified that U.S. government officials still won’t utter its name. I think you get the idea. Why go on?

Communism is a brazen cult-like religion that causes its adherents to dedicate their entire lives to the destruction of Communism’s number one enemy: The United States of America. Ana Montes oozed confidence, promise and real brilliance. Why did she throw it all away? You can ask her yourself, should you ever see her where she currently lives in Puerto Rico. That’s right, she was released from prison after doing a little over twenty years, in 2023. This, of little comfort to the family of United States Army Green Beret, Sergeant Gregory A. Fronius. Little comfort to the families of the scores of others who were brutally murdered based on her treason. The story of Ms. Montes is a tragic and depressing story. If you want to dig deeper, there is a comprehensive and excellently written book published about Ms. Montes betrayal of her country which was written by author Jim Popkin and titled, Code Name Blue Wren: The True Story of America’s Most Dangerous Female Spy—and the Sister She Betrayed. Apparently, it’s a good read.

The Hoaxters (1952) A Cautionary Tale that is Still Relevant Today

February 16, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: 1952, American Communist, American Fifth Column, Barry Sullivan, Communist Gulags, Communist subversion in America, Communists, Dore Schary, George Murphy, Herman Hoffman, How to Identify a Communist, Howard Keel, James Whitmore, Joseph Stalin, Marilyn Erskine, Nazi and Communist similar, Robert Taylor, Ronald Reagan, Sidney Tomack, The Hoaxters (1952), The Hoaxters documentary, The Hoaxters film, Walter Pidgeon Leave a comment

Watch the movie in full on youtube at: https://youtu.be/u7a0GASCfHM?is=7QI3RBN3UnXgGmka

The Hoaxters (1952) is a splendid documentary film from MGM, produced by the legendary writer, director and producer, Dore Schary. It used as narrators, some of the biggest names in Hollywood including, Walter Pidgeon, Robert Taylor, James Whitmore, George Murphy and several more Tinseltown heavyweights.

The studios and leading royalty of Hollywood actors set out the make The Hoaxters (1952) because of the concerns which they and the overwhelming majority of Americans harbored toward the worldwide rise of Communism. The dictatorial ideology that seemed as bad or worse than the Fascists enemies we had recently fought during WWII.

The film opens with the warning, “People who are not governed by God, will be ruled by a tyrant.” The film’s introductory scene depicts a typical mid-century American carnival. The precise territory where an average American carnival goer might encounter the garden variety huckster, hoaxster or snake oil salesman. How fitting for a film about Communism, the greatest bait-and-switch con ever perpetrated upon the human race.

The film accurately points out that there aren’t a lot of differences between Communism and Fascism. The 1952 film also labels U.S. domestic Communists as a subversive fifth column operating inside America. They still are. The problem is that today, most of these disloyal American Communists don’t join the Party or admit that they are Communist because of the overwhelming public scorn for their failed ideology. Yet the film makes the point that for its adherents, Communism is not just a cult-like religion but, a “way of life…an evil and malignant way of life. It is a lie! It is a big lie!”

The film goes on to say that “the deadly peril that faces Democracy today is the deadly parallel that exists between Communism and similar brands of totalitarianism…” This, stated in 1952, is still true today. By far, the greatest threat to American Democracy and its national security is the threat posed by internal Communist subversion within the United States. This threat of today, is far vaster than the threats posed by Islamic terrorist or even external Communism from American adversaries such as China, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela.

The film also provides a poignant comparison between Communism and Nazism with respect to those things, these similar ideologies either discouraged or outlawed. For example, Christianity. Hitler and most leading Nazis were Atheist, just like the leaders within the Soviet Union. Quoting from an official Soviet Communique, “The struggle against the Gospel and Christian legend must be conducted ruthlessly and with all the means at the disposal of Communism.” In Nazi Germany and the USSR and its satellite countries, Christians were persecuted. They are still being persecuted in the Communist world today.

Both totalitarian ideologies disallow free and fair elections, free public discourse and deny the right of citizens to own firearms. Eerily similar are how perceived political opponents were shipped off to concentration camps where in most instances, the internees who were not immediately executed, died later after being worked to death. The Nazis would gas some prisoners and work the rest until they died of starvation, exhaustion or disease. The Soviets and other Communist societies would execute some prisoners by way of a bullet and work the rest until they died of starvation, exhaustion or disease. At the time this film was made in 1952, there were over 14 million political prisoners in these types of camps within the Soviet Union. Most would never leave these internment centers.

The film devotes considerable time to the activities of domestic Communist within the United States. The film aptly identifies these UnAmericans as a “Fifth Column,” seeking the demise of our free society from within and having no less a goal than the violent overthrow of our democratic republic. It’s amazing how little has changed in the past 73 years.

Should Communists and their progressive, liberal kissing cousins ever succeed in outlawing private ownership of firearms, the American public could be defenseless against such a Leftist takeover. Should such a Communist revolution ever happen in the United States, many tens of millions of Americans would be shipped off to camps on a scale that would likely dwarf the Nazis and even the USSR.

This film was and remains a Clarion call to all loyal Americans to guard against the evils of the Liberal/Progressive/Socialist/Communist allied front in our current society. Yet, in a society where Communist actively hide behind less hated labels such as “Progressive,” “Social Democrat,” or even “Liberal,” how do you identify a true Communist believer from a mere fool or misguided individual?

There are no easy ways to identify a Crypto-Communist. However, one method is to, during conversation with a suspected Crypto-Communist, blatantly criticize, either Communism, a Communist Country or a Communist historical figure. If the suspected Communist angrily objects, the chances are, you’re dealing with a true Marxist believer. Another technique is to ask a Communist to name three things he likes about America. If he has difficulty in doing this or answers with a curt “nothing! “then, follow up and ask him to name things he like about a Communist country of your choosing. If he has nothing positive to say about America while singing the praises of Cuba or Venezuela, you have almost certainly identified a Communist.

The cautionary tale of The Hoaxters (1952) is even more valid today than it was in 1952. Everyone should watch this film and remember a concerned American actor’s warning to us back in 1964 when he cautioned, “we’re always just one generation away from losing our freedom here in America.” That concerned actor’s name was Ronald Reagan.

Bella Abzug: A Vile Communist

February 11, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: Battling Bella, Bella Abzug, Bella Abzug Barry Farber, Bella Abzug CIA file, Bella Abzug Columbia Law School, Bella Abzug Communist, Bella Abzug Communist Front Group, Bella Abzug family, Bella Abzug FBI file, Bella Abzug feminist, Bella Abzug Manhattan, Bella Abzug Marxist, Bella Abzug New York, Bella Abzug Soviet Union, Bella Abzug USSR, Martin Abzug Leave a comment

The late Bella Abzug was quoted as saying, “There are those who say I’m impatient, impetuous, uppity, rude, profane, brash, and overbearing.” She was all of those things, to be sure. Yet, while these characterizations of Ms. Abzug are undeniably true, she conveniently omits her most damnatory character flaw: That she was a actual Communist, at least according to her fellow Communists and the FBI. Abzug was part of the 1960’s era wave of Jewish feminists which included the likes of Gloria Steinem, Judith Plaskow, and Betty Friedan.

Let’s first authenticate her Communist bonafides. Ms. Abzug had not only a lengthy FBI file approaching 400 pages but a domestic CIA file documenting her subversive actives on behalf of her Communist cause. During the height of the Cold War, Ms. Abzug was adored by our Communist enemies throughout the world. The Links to both her FBI and CIA files can be found below. Her FBI file was the result of hundreds of man hours of surveillance, investigations, interviews and information acquired from confidential informants, including both active and former members of the Communist Party. Here are the highlights or if you will, the lowlights:

She was placed on the FBI security index for subversives who had Communist Party connections and were considered dangerous. Most domestic Communists were spared the dishonor of making this index.
FBI officials labeled her “Either an outright Communist Party member or one who follows the line of the Communist Party very closely.”
Ms. Abzug “paid tribute (money) to attorneys for the Communist Party.”
“Surveillance of Abzug’s home reveals Soviet official contacts with Abzug and arrangements were made to meet a USSR delegation to the United Nations.” In short, she had meetings with our foreign adversaries on US soil. Further, Communist officials don’t pay mere social visits to their American sympathizers.
Abzug was “interested in travel to Soviet Union.”
Abzug was “described by reliable confidential informants as ‘out-and-out’ Communist.’”
Abzug was referenced in a letter to the FBI which describes Abzug “as a member of numerous Communist Front organizations and whose congressional campaign is a top priority in communist and Soviet diplomatic circles.” Abzug was always eager to help her fellow enemies of America whether they were foreign or domestic.

Still have doubts? Read it for yourself. Links to both her lengthly FBI file and the sanatized CIA file summary are linked below:

Abzug FBI File

Abzug CIA File Summary

Ms Abzug was born Bella Savitzky on July 24, 1920 in The Bronx, New York. Her father was a butcher by trade who operated a small neighborhood delicatessen. Bella’s parents had immigrated to the United States in 1902, after fleeing the brutal antisemitic pogroms loosed on Jews living within Russia at the time. Nobody seems to recall precisely when young Miss Bella Savitzky (Abzug) became so enamored with Communism. She attended an Orthodox Jewish Temple with her family- typically not a spawning ground for Communists. It’s reported that she was captivated by the Russian Bolshevik revolution.

What is known, is that in the years before start WWII, after Germany and the Soviet Union signed a non-aggression pact., known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, 19-year-old Bella Savitzky (Abzug) become an outspoken advocate for the United States not involving itself in the war that would follow later, when the Communist USSR and Nazi Germany would invade Poland and divide that democratic nation up between themselves as spoils of war. While the rest of the free world looked on in horror, a teenaged Miss Savitzky (Abzug) frantically wrote Senators, Congressmen and spoke to anyone who would listen about how “wrong” it would be for the US to involve itself in “another European war.

The future Ms. Abzug continued her relentless championing of the Party line for nearly two years after the German-Russo invasion of Poland. When asked how she could support the invasion and subjugation of a democratic nation, Miss Savitzky (Abzug) intoned with a straight face, “The people of Poland were liberated by the USSR. Life is much better for them now under Communism.” Some pressed the young Communist on the half million Polish civilians branded as “socially dangerous” and as “anti-Soviet elements” who were forcibly removed from their homes and deported in cattle cars to labor camps in Siberia and Kazakhstan. Miss Savitzky (Abzug) responded with the formulaic, Party approved answer, “These are nothing more than reactionary lies!” Except, they weren’t.

Yet, her tenacious antiwar polemics changed faster than you can say Trotsky, on June 22, 1941 when Germany tossed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Pact aside and invaded the Communist Soviet Union. Prior to this, she had defended the Germans for their invasions of France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway and even Czechoslovakia. She had previously and shamelessly brushed aside others questions about Hitler’s treatment of her fellow Jewish people in German occupied territories. Suddenly, as if on a dime, she changed her position from “the Germans are our allies,” to “Germany must be wiped from the map and this country (the United States) has a moral obligation to intervene.” In short, young Bella was happy to be a party shill for Nazi Germany up until the point when Hitler attacked her beloved Soviet Union.

Miss Savitzky (Abzug) then a student at New York’s Hunter College, later obtained a place at the Columbia University School of Law. Some have suggested she gained admission to the Ivy League law school with the help of her Communist Party colleagues. In those days, Columbia was known as a hotbed of so called “Marxist intellectualism.” Did I say “was? Bright Communist youth had an inside track to admissions at certain Ivies because of the Party network of faculty and administrators at many of these colleges who actively “assisted” with the admissions for select numbers of young and promising Party members. Still, this seems somewhat speculative as it is undeniable that. Ms. Abzug would have been a strong candidate for admission to Columbia Law given her high intellect and superior undergraduate record.

However, while a student Columbia Law, a Communist faculty member advised her to remove her name from the Communist Party membership rolls. Whether she was a member of the Communist Youth wing or the actual Communist Party of New York is unclear. Nevertheless, she was advised that her Party membership could possibly raise problems with her being admitted to the New York State Bar after graduation. She took the friendly advice but, did not end her involvement in Communist activities.

Later, after she became a licensed lawyer, she would spend the ensuing decades working for and collaborating with virtually every Communist front group in New York City. Yet alas, we are getting ahead of the story here. While still a law student, Bella volunteered for various public interest law firms and causes. She dreamed of a future as a crusading public interest lawyer, fighting for justice on behalf of the people and against their oppressors! However, she soon discovered that public interest law didn’t pay particularly well. In fact, the pay was quite lousy. This presented a bit of a conundrum for young Bella. Her family had no money to speak of, and she needed to be able to support herself after all! In the parlance of Jeff Lebowski, “…she wants more, man, she’s gotta feed the monkey, I mean–uh, hasn’t that ever occurred to you man? Sir?”

Yes, Bella’s lack of financial resources was an obstacle to her future plans. So, while still a law student, Bella set out to find herself a man or at least some have suggested as much. We’ll never know for sure but as a law student, she just happened to meet a nice you man who was from an affluent family and who didn’t share her radical political views. He was also shall we politely say, rather obsequious toward her- put a check mark in that final box! Maybe it was genuine love at first sight. We’ll never know. Yet it’s unmistakably clear that she chose a husband who openly disagreed with her politics. This is unheard of with Communists. Even mere liberals seldom marry outside their beliefs! Hence, it seems as though the great feminist of the 20th Century chose a groom with the financial resources to support her through her Communist activism. How convenient. This, from the woman who would years later crow, “all the men on my staff know how to type,” So much for, “no woman should have to depend upon a man.”

She found her man and may God have helped him. Bella’s beau was one Martin Abzug. He was by all accounts a great provider for his family and more. Here’s what we do know about Mr Abzug. First, he was a kind, decent and honorable man- a good husband and father. Second, he was not a Communist and in fact he told reporters that that he often disagreed with many of his wife’s political views. Third, he focused on his work and family and avoided the spotlight. In a July 20, 1986 Los Angeles Times article pertaining to Mr. Abzug’s marital challenges he stated , “I didn’t want to be dominated.”

Mr Abzug was an accomplished writer and novelist. He also enjoyed a successful career as a Wall Street stock broker. He came from an affluent Jewish family who operated an established and respected business in the Manhattan Garment industry. Mr Abzug died tragically from a heart attack in 1986.

If Mr. Abzug avoided the spotlight, just the opposite could be said of his wife. The joke in Washington was that the most perilous place to be in town was to be standing between Bella Abzug and a television camera. Bella Abzug was the quintessential “old Battle-axe with about as many ladylike qualities in her as one could expect to find in man like Lee Marvin. “Battling Bella,” as her Leftists admirers called her, was a profane, loud mouthed, gravely voiced, Communist who noisily flaunted her hairy, butch persona.

She had an unladylike appearance and bore an uncanny resemblance to what the late Ed Asner might have looked like in drag. She exhibited all the social graces one might witness at a chapter meeting of their local Hell’s Angels. The Los Angeles Times rather tactfully described Ms. Abzug’s, “propensity for language heard more on the street than in the hallowed halls of Congress.“

Having successfully made a name for herself as a leader in the so called “feminist movement” and as an anti-Vietnam war activist, Ms. Abzug in 1970, figured her time had arrived when she brazenly announced a primary challenge to the liberal, 14-year incumbent Democrat Leonard Farbstein, for a congressional district on Manhattan’s West Side. She defeated Farbstein in that 1970 primary- a shocking upset. Abzug would face the mild mannered Republican talk show host Barry Farber, in the general election.

After her unforeseen primary victory her Republican opponent Mr. Farber, sent the bellicose Ms. Abzug a dozen red roses and a politely worded invitation for a debate to discuss the issues. According to a New York Times article from August 25, 1970:

“The roses did not produce the usual appreciative response. Instead, an angry Mrs. Abzug, who was not at her Sheridan Square headquarters when Mr. Farber called, later charged her opponent with “cheap gimmickry.” She asserted that Mr. Fraber “should come out from behind his mike and roses.” According to a New York Times report on August 25, 1970. Link to the story below:

New York Times 082570

Although Farber was too gentlemanly to raise Abzug’s Communist past in the 1970 congressional campaign, others did. Their valid concerns and detailed evidence of Bella’s Red double-life were predictably and unashamedly, ignored by the progressive Manhattan press. In the world of liberal media dishonesty, this is what’s known as “bias by omission.”

Ms. Abzug defeated her Republican opponent Barry Farber, in a much closer general election than one usually would expect from the West Side of Manhattan. Many Democrats considered Ms. Abzug a bit too extreme for their liking and voted for her Republican rival. Ms. Abzug would serve a total of three uneventful terms in the US House until she made a long shot bid for United States Senate in 1976. She was easily dispatched in the Democratic Primary by Daniel Patrick Moynihan who went on to win the general election as well. Unfortunately for her, Ms. Abzug’s loud mouthed Lefty brand didn’t sell well outside of Manhattan. After her defeat, she fell off the political rader and into obscurity.

Ms. Abzug was a vile unAmerican Communist who as far as anyone can recall, routinely refused to stand for National Anthem and spurned reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. She hated our country, its freedoms and everything else for which it stands. Given her druthers, she would have all too happily replaced our democratic republic with a communistic, Soviet style police state, replete with reeducation gulags, work camps and Berianesque kill lists. More alarming, is that her legions of unabashed admirers from the political fringe who enjoy chanting, “This is what democracy looks like…,” are aware of all this and nevertheless consider her Marxist dogma to be virtuous. Although, it’s somewhat comforting to know that there’s still at least one Jewish person apart from Karl Marx, for whom the Left is willing to place their anti-semitism in abeyance.

Continue reading →

Jack Webb: Hollywood Actor, Director, Producer and Patriot

February 9, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: dragnet, dragnet-hippes, dragnet-lecture, dragnet-radio-show, dragnet-tv-series, jack-webb, jack-webb-career, jack-webb-communism, jack-webb-conservative, jack-webb-lapd, lapd, red-nightmare-1962, red-nightmare-movie, sergeant-friday, the-d-i-1957 Leave a comment

Jack Webb was more than merely a successful Hollywood actor, director and producer. He was an American patriot. His work was entertaining while showing us what it meant to be an American and the values that we should all strive to live by and protect.

Born in Santa Monica, California, on April 2, 1920, the son of Samuel Chester Webb and Margaret (née Smith) Webb. He grew up in the Bunker Hill section of Los Angeles. As a child, Webb worshiped at Our Lady of Loretto Catholic Church and attended Our Lady of Loretto Elementary School where he served as an altar boy. Webb would remain a devout Catholic for the rest of his life. He then attended Belmont High School near downtown Los Angeles, where he was elected student body president.

Webb served in the Army Air Corps and after his discharge, took a job as a radio announcer. This led to a long career in radio, television and motion pictures. Webb loved his country and never missed the opportunity incorporate patriotism into his shows. In the late 1940s, before televisions were widely in use, Jack started a popular radio program titled Dragnet. Rather than fabricate police noir stories, Webb then took the then novel approach of using real police cases directly from the LAPD files and making radio dramas out of them.

Dragnet became a nationally syndicated program which portrayed the day-to-day work of the LAPD in their war against crime. It was a wildly popular show. Mr. Webb would develop a decades long relationship with the dedicated officers of the Los Angeles Police Department. Dragnet showed the American people the long, thankless hours law enforcement spent tracking down criminals and protecting we the citizenry. The American publican began to develop a newfound level of respect for the police. Dragnet later would become a popular TV series starring Webb. Each week, the show would dramatize real cases handled by the LAPD and at the end, show the outcome of those cases including when the criminal was convicted, and the sentence meted out. Some of the Dragnet shows showed police addressing the subversive Communist elements in our society as well as their kissing cousins, the hippies. Dragnet is still broadcast today on the ME-TV cable channel and other networks- a testament to its enduring appeal.

While making Dragnet in the 1950s, Mr. Webb was cast to star in the popular motion picture, The D.I. (1957) playing the lead role of Gunnery Sgt. Jim Moore. The movie explained the training that went into making members of America’s toughest service branch, the United States Marine Corps. Training and dialogue were portrayed in a very realistic manner, The film showed the US Marine Corps for what it is, an exclusive organization where one must earn all that they receive including the very title of “US Marine.” The film is still revered to this day by Marines everywhere and over the years, more than one young man after watching the film, has chosen to test himself by seeing if he has what it takes to become a of the few and the proud.

In the realm of motion pictures, Webb had an impressive career which included a role in the American Classic movie, Sunset Boulevard (1950). Perhaps, Webb’s magnum opus was the film Red Nightmare (1962). The film was praised and supported by the Kennedy administration and by the President’s brother, US Attorney General, Robert F. Kennedy. The film presented a nightmarish no-holds-barred look at what life might be like in the United States if the Left had their way.

This disturbing film set during the Cold War, has many striking parallels to the politically correct, DEI, cancel culture of today. The Communist message is clear, “In America you have too many freedoms. One day it will be our mission to destroy those bourgeois capitalist freedoms.” This, just as the Nouveau Left of today advocate for.

In the film, we are shown a traditional Midwestern small town which has been transformed into a hellish landscape of barbed wire fences with Communist guards securing the exit points and Marxist imagery. The once clean and vibrant small town has been transformed into a lifeless, frightening wasteland of scattered debris and near empty streets similar to communities in the Communist world. Webb appears on screen and begins his narration:

“From the looks of it, it could be Iowa, California, Tennessee. You might call this a college town, Communist style, as part of a long-range plan to destroy our free way of life.”

The film shows those typically strange people among us whom we often tend to ignore: the weird people, the eccentrics, the vocal liberals and other oddballs. Yet some of these cranks in the film had an ideologic agenda and are now among the town’s Communist overseers.

They turn the schools into Leftist indoctrination centers (sound familiar?) and one of the characters has a daughter who comes home from school and proclaims:

“It’s true, Daddy. The party convinced me that I should free myself of the lingering bourgeois influence of family life.”

This film, made over 60 years ago, presents characters whose rhetoric has an uncanny resemblance to the types of things we might hear today from Balack Lives Matter activists or other contemporary Leftist groups. I would encourage anyone who values their liberty to watch it.

Webb was a champion for police officers everywhere and a tireless fighter for the preservation of Constitutionally guaranteed American freedoms. He left a legacy of great works that people are still enjoying to this day. Our society owes Jack Webb and those like him, a debt of gratitude.

When Teddy Kennedy Colluded with our Foreign Adversaries

February 9, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: chappaquiddick, edward-kennedy, edward-kennedy-treason, joan-kennedy, kennedy-letter-to-kgb, kennedy-letter-to-soviet-union, kennedy-treason, lion-of-the-senate, mary-jo-kopechne, ted-kennedy, ted-kennedy-alcoholic, ted-kennedy-communist, ted-kennedy-criminal-charges, ted-kennedy-divorce, ted-kennedy-drinking, ted-kennedy-for-president, ted-kennedy-harvard, ted-kennedy-kgb, ted-kennedy-philandering, ted-kennedy-reagan-reelection, ted-kennedy-soviet-union, ted-kennedy-treason, ted-kennedy-us-army, ted-kennedy-useful-idiot, ted-kennedy-ussr, ted-kennedy-whip, teddy-kennedy Leave a comment

There’s never been a serious debate about it. It’s undisputed that the late Senator, Edward M. “Teddy” Kennedy lacked the intellectual prowess and political acumen of his two older brothers- President John F. Kennedy and Senator Robert F. Kennedy. He was always regarded as a bit of a lightweight. Still, in 20^th Century America, the name “Kennedy” opened a lot of doors. In 1962, Teddy’s father, Joesph P. Kennedy, Sr, bought his 30-year-old son Teddy, a seat in the United States Senate. What of young Teddy’s qualifications for this office, one might reasonably ask?

The answer to this question was raised during a 1962 debate which young Teddy had to impatiently suffer through with his Republican opponent, Massachusetts Attorney General Edward McCormack. It was McCormack who retorted during the debate:

“If your name were Edward Moore, your candidacy would be a joke. You have absolutely zero qualifications. You’ve never even held a steady job. But your name isn’t Edward Moore. Your name is Edward Moore Kennedy.”

Teddy’s father had spent as much money on his son’s 1962 Senate election as Richard Nixon had raised in running for the Presidency two years earlier. In these early days before required public disclosure of campaign finance, Teddy’s father shamelessly greased everyone’s palm to ensure his son’s election- union bosses, newspapermen, Afro-American church pastors, etc. Hence Teddy, the young political neophyte, was victorious in an election that was bought and paid for by his father- fair and square!

Teddy had attended Harvard, like his father and older brothers. However, Teddy’s academic performance was shall we say, less than scholarly. Prior to his graduation, he had been kicked out of Harvard after hiring another student to take his Spanish final. Those pesky Spanish verb conjugations really confused the young lad. He was busted by the exam monitor and school officials tossed him out on his ear for his violation of Harvard’s academic honesty policy. No longer a student and thus losing his deferment from the draft, not even his father could get him out of his mandatory military service. Teddy served two years in the U.S. Army where he was discharged as a Private First Class (E-3).

After finishing his two years of service in the Army, Teddy petitioned his way back into Harvard- with a little help from Daddy. Two years later, he earned his degree. He had applied for Harvard Law School and even with considerable pressure on the law school from his father, school officials balked at admitting a student with a “C” average. However, Teddy’s father was able to secure his admission to the University of Virginia Law School where Teddy graduated with less than stellar grades. It wasn’t that Teddy was dumb, he just preferred the life of wine, women and song to certain mundane things like say, academic performance.

Not long after graduating, Teddy was given the title of “Western States Campaign Chair,” in his brother’s presidential race of 1960. His brother, John F. Kennedy, ended up losing every single one of the Western States. Teddy was what typical American liberals refer to as a “rich, privileged white guy.” However, the Left has always made an exception in applying this mark when the “rich, privileged white guy,” is willing to advance their cause. Under those circumstances, the “rich, privileged white guy,” becomes known as the “useful idiot,” a term invented by the Communist Bolsheviks. Don’t you just love the hypocrisy of the Left?

Teddy’s first decade in the Senate was unremarkable from a legislative standpoint. He was less than respected by his peers in the chamber. However, his evening escapades became the talk of the town. Teddy had a penchant for going to the local bars with his buddies and leaving with various strange woman most nights. This, while his young wife sat at home and cared for their children. While Teddy was unable to achieve the political standing of his older brothers as statesmen, he surely seemed up for the challenge of outperforming them as philanderers. The latter was no small achievement.

Teddy’s debauched lifestyle came crashing down atop him in the wee hours of the morning on July 19, 1969. Teddy had been at a bibulous gathering of his friends and young women on Chappaquiddick Island, off the eastern end of Martha’s Vineyard. As usual, his wife was at home caring for their young children. Teddy would leave the island with his conquest for the night: the young, naïve true believer, Marry Jo Kopechne. Driving back toward Edgartown with Miss Kopechne, a highly inebriated Teddy drove off the wooden bridge, plunging his car, himself and 29-year-old Miss Kopechne into the icy cold waters of Cape Pogue Pond.

Teddy was able to free himself from the car. Miss Kopechne was not. Rather than attempting to rescue Ms. Kopechne, the drunken U.S. Senator hobbled down the road, fleeing the scene. Yeah, he bolted and left Miss Kopechne for dead. While escaping the scene, he passed four different homes near the location of the accident. These homes had their porch lights on. All he had to do was knock on a door and ask the residents to summon the authorities. Yet, Teddy wasn’t thinking about Miss Kopechne, only the political ramifications from the authorities discovering him in his intoxicated state after driving his car off the road with a passenger still trapped inside. The police diver who retrieved Miss Kopechne’s body, later reported that she likely survived underwater for some thirty minutes as her body was found with the upper torso thrust into “a large air pocket.” Miss Kopechne didn’t drown. She suffocated. Had Teddy went to one of those homes and called the police, Miss Kopechne might still be alive.

Teddy stumbled back to the house he was staying at. He sobered up and the next morning, after consulting his political advisors, concocted a cover story. This didn’t prevent him from being charged with a crime but, with the full force of the Kennedy family bearing down on the authorities, he received a sweetheart deal whereby he would plead guilty to the misdemeanor charge of leaving the scene of an accident with a two-month suspended sentence. Had it been you or I, we would have been handed a long prison sentence. Chalk up another win for the “privileged white guys.”

Teddy used his family name and sympathy over the recent assassination of his older brother, Robert F. Kennedy, to get the Senate Democrats to elect him as their Majority Whip. The primary job of the Whip is to keep the other Senators of his party in line and ensure that they vote the way the Senate Majority Leader wants them to vote. Pretty simple, right? Except, there was a problem. Kennedy’s Democratic Senate colleagues didn’t really have a lot of respect for him. They had the strange idea that Teddy was a lightweight who wasn’t particularly dedicated to his responsibilities as a Senator and further, that he was only a member of the Senate due to his family name and wealth. How dare they!

Later, Teddy was politely asked to give up his position as Whip. He went quietly. As the years passed, Teddy’s career in the Senate didn’t amount to very much. It wasn’t long after Chappaquiddick, when he returned to his decadent pleasure-seeking lifestyle. His wife finally left him although, returned to his side for his abortive presidential campaign in 1980. Drowning in his own delusions a grander, Teddy confidently declared that he would mount a primary challenge to sitting Democratic President, Jimmy Carter. In response, Jimmy Carter publicly announced that he would, “kick Teddy Kennedy’s ass,” in the Democratic Presidential Primaries. President Carter in fact, did just that. Carter would go on to lose in a landslide to Governor Reagan in the 1980 General Election. Thus, making him the first sitting President since Herbert Hoover to lose reelection to another term. Yet, it’s likely that Teddy would have fared far worse were he the nominee instead of Carter. This, as many southern Democratic voters could at least tolerate Carter, although not Teddy’s wild-eyed liberalism.

The election of Reagan seemed to annoy Teddy to no end. Reagan was from a poor, working class family in the Midwest who graduated from the fine but obscure Eureka College in Eureka, Illinois. Kennedy seemed to consider that alone as disqualifying Reagan from the high office. But you know, those dumb voters- right? The former California Governor seemed to so easily capture that which Teddy considered his birthright, even though it had so utterly eluded him. Teddy looked upon Reagan as a simple-minded plebian and made it his life’s mission to undermine Reagan’s presidency. He crossed the line into sedition when he set out to conspire with Soviet leaders to thwart President Reagan’s agenda.

Soon after taking office, Reagan met with his military and national security advisors and declared that the status quo of peaceful coexistence with the Communist world had to change. He introduced a bold plan to bring on the collapse of the Communist USSR from within. See The Historical Truth Project article, How Ronald Reagan Took Down the Communist World. Teddy, upon catching wind of this, became quite unhinged. Teddy believed there was a rightful place in this world for the USSR and Communism. Those forced to live under Communist rule as well as most Americans, disagreed with him.

When Reagan took office, the US was in a life-or-death struggle against world-wide Communism. The past American policy of “Containment,” had not worked. Reagan left a lucrative career as an actor to pursue political office solely because he considered the issue of Communism to be the “moral imperative of our time.” The Soviet Union and its network of totalitarian satellite countries were seeking our demise as a nation. They were our enemies. This fact didn’t dissuade Teddy from colluding with them to hurt Regan’s reelection prospects in 1984. Kennedy, in typical liberal fashion, saw Reagan as a greater threat to the world than the Communist alliance of nations dedicated to our destruction.

Through his Soviet contacts, Teddy sent secret correspondence to the notorious KGB of the USSR. After the Soviet Union collapsed, Kennedy’s correspondence was uncovered and no less than the London Times reported on this in their edition of February 2, 1992. The report detailed a 1983 document describing Kennedy’s overtures to Soviet officials.

In secret correspondence addressed to USSR leader Yuri Andropov, KGB head Victor Chebrikov, reported that Teddy was eager to “counter the “militaristic policies” of President Reagan. A little Treason with your bourbon Mr. Kennedy? But Teddy didn’t stop there. He stood ready to give our Communist adversaries the whole farm. Kennedy’s handlers in the USSR soon gave him the code name “Polezni Durak.” In Russian, “Polezni Durak” translates into English as “useful fool” or “useful idiot.”

In addition to giving away U.S. secrets, Kennedy also offered the Soviet Communist public relations advice. In a report from KGB head Chebrikov to the Kremlin, Kennedy’s advice was outlined as follows:

“Kennedy believes that in order to influence Americans it would be important to organize in August-September of this year, televised interviews with Y.V. Andropov in the USA. A direct appeal by the general secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. The senator is convinced this would receive the maximum resonance in so far as television is the most effective method of mass media and information.”

Kennedy emissaries such as John Tunney traveled to the USSR to relay messages and to coordinate resistance to our sitting US President. Just think what would have happened had a Republican been caught engaging in similar activities with our foreign adversaries. Further, Kennedy informed the Soviets that he would be seeking the Presidency again in the 1988 elections and that the Soviet Communists could count on “warm relations” with his future administration. Why of course they could!

In the end, President Reagan’s reelection campaign won the largest landside in history- 49 states. Reagan has secured a legacy in American History as one of our greatest Presidents. Like the Soviet Union itself, Teddy too was “resigned to the ash heap of history.” He stuck around in the Senate until his death in 2009 but, was never of any real importance. His fawning admirers in the liberal press assigned him the name, “The Lion of the Senate.” To his colleagues in the upper chamber, this nickname was the source of much snickering.

Many have asked the question, how could someone with Teddy’s family name, wealth and connections amount to so little? Well, the Corleone family had Fredo. The Kennedy family had Teddy. Maybe it’s just that simple.

Operation Barbarossa: Merely a German Surprise Attack or Was it a Preemptive Strike?

February 8, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: Barbarossa Preemptive, barbarossa-preemptive-attack, Ice Breaker, icebreaker, Icebreaker Book, Mikhail Meltyukhov, nazi-attack-ussr, Operation Barbarossa, Otto Remer, Soviet Offensive Plans, Soviet Offensive Plans Controversy, Stalin Plan to Attack Hitler, Stalin's Missed Chance, stalin-planned-invasion-of-germany, stalins-missed-chance-2004, Viktor Suvorov Leave a comment

In the Summer of 1941, the world’s two most evil, totalitarian regimes went to war with each other when Germany launched a massive invasion into Soviet Union. Both nations were led by ruthless dictators who ruled with an iron hand while systematically murdering many millions of their own citizens, as well as many others who were unfortunate enough to reside in lands occupied by either. We all know the story. Hitler, eager to acquire new lands or “Lebensraum,” started the war when he ordered a surprise attack on the Red Army called “Operation Barbarossa,” on June 22, 1941. Pretty cut and dry, right? But is it true?

In the summer of 1944, some three years after the start of Barbarossa, Adolph Hitler was asked by one of his Generals, during a walk at the German leader’s Rastenburg Headquarters, his reason for attacking the Soviet Union. His response, similar to what he had disclosed to others before, was as follows:

“Had I not acted as I did…by the end of 1942 at the latest, we would have experienced what we (Germany) are experiencing now in 1944.”

What did Hitler mean by that?

As more information from the Soviet era archives is being made available, new revelations are leading honest scholars to question the causes of the German-USSR war, the deadliest in world history. Was Barbarossa really an unprovoked sneak attack à la Pearl Harbor? Or was it a preemptive strike against the Communist Soviet Union which merely beat the Reds to the punch? Some serious scholars who’ve examined the Soviet archives, are supporting the latter theory.

Here’s what’s undisputed. As early as October of 1939, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin ordered Red Army General Gregory Zhukov to prepare a comprehensive invasion plan to be initiated against Germany. Zhukov’s plan was completed and presented to Stalin on May 15, 1941, with a proposed implementation (attack) date for the offensive, set in July of 1941. While the Soviets planned their invasion, Stalin ordered a secret mobilization which included lowering the USSR’s daft age down to 18 from previous minimum of 21 years old. Stalin also ordered the call up of millions of Red Army Reservists who began a prolonged period of training in offensive operations. Further, multiple large scale military exercises were held which simulated a broad front attack on Germany. These have been written about extensively by Russian military historian Mikhail Meltyukhov, in his book, “Stalin’s Missed Chance (2004).”

These conclusions are also supported by a former high ranking Soviet GRU Intelligence Officer named Viktor Suvorov. Suvorov’s rank and GRU position afforded him the rare privilege of being able to study Stalin’s archived war plans. These plans, drafted by General Zhukov, revealed that the Soviet invasion of Germany was merely an “ice breaker” or springboard for the ultimate Soviet Communist invasion of the entirety of Western Europe. Suvorov would later defect to the West in 1978.

In early 1941, Germany had only ten army Divisions posted along the Soviet Border while the Soviet Union had over 90 Red Army Divisions along their side of the same border in addition to over a 150 other Army formations and Brigades. Yet, it was this information coupled with intelligence gathered from paid informants and spies within the USSR that lead the Germans to prepare a preemptive strike before the Soviets had their chance to attack. When the German’s launched Operation Barbarossa on June 22, 1941, no Soviet Citizen was more surprised than Stalin himself, who was expecting to shock the Germans with a surprise attack of his own, in the following month of July 1941. The German Blitzkrieg quickly overwhelmed and vanquished the Soviet Red Army forces along the USRR border, which were still superior in numbers to their new German enemy. Given the large build up of Red Army forces along the Soviet border with Germany, how could such a rout have happened?

Perhaps the best answer to this question was expressed by German Army General Otto Remer, who was the recipient of Germany’s highest award for valor, the Knights Cross. General Remer, who participated in Barbarossa, stated as follows:

“The initial successes of our forces against the Soviets were due to the fact that the Russians were not stationed in defense positions but were instead positioned right at the front for attack, which made it possible for us to quickly encircle large Soviet forces. Thus, in the first weeks of the war, we were able to capture more than three million prisoners of war as well as enormous quantities of war equipment, all of which was on the frontier, positioned for (a planned) attack.”

General Remer’s description of the Russians not being, “stationed in defense positions,” is a somewhat charitable understatement. Far from having dug in fighting positions, construction of obstacles and positioning large swaths of land mines- the normal things armies do when in a defensive posture- the Red Army had their vehicles lined up with full tanks of fuel. Munitions were mostly loaded onto the vehicles and not in hardened munition dumps. The soldiers were literally sleeping in and next to their vehicles as if awaiting the orders to attack at any moment. When the Germans launched their assault, the Reds were caught flat footed, with their pants down.

Yet, it was what the German soldiers found during the invasion which confirmed once and for all, what the Communist forces intentions were. As the Red Army was overrun, German soldiers began to find detailed maps of German territory. Many of these maps had identified military and strategic objectives to be taken by the Soviet forces during their planned invasion. Many of the Soviet soldiers had German language phrase books which contained questions such as, “Take me to the nearest SA headquarters building.” Nazi SA headquarters could only be found within German territory.

Everything the victorious German forces found pointed toward a planned Soviet attack. Despite the overwhelming evidence, virtually all of the liberal historians in the West still refuse to acknowledge the truth about the USSR’s intentions. Typical. So sadly typical.

How ironic that most of the evils of Communists past and present, are exposed by those who had to suffer under that evil system.

Woody Guthrie: The Cowardly Communist

January 11, 2025 By Dan "Danny Boy" White in Uncategorized Tags: Folk music, Folk Singer, This Land is Your Land, This Machine Kills Fascists, Wood Guthrie draft dodger, Wood Guthrie Franco, Woody Guthrie, Woody Guthrie Arlo Guthrie, Woody Guthrie Communist, Woody Guthrie Marxist, Woody Guthrie Merchant Marine, Woody Guthrie radical, Woody Guthrie Spanish Civil War, Woody Guthrie Trump, Woody Guthrie Vietnam Leave a comment

Woody Guthrie: “This machine kills Fascist.”

Leftist folk singer Woody Guthrie was a Communist. This fact is not in historical dispute nor should it ever be, as Woody proudly proclaimed his Communist bona fides virtually to any poor sod who was willing to listen. Unfortunately for Woody, Communism was not his only major character flaw. He haughtily displayed a placard on his guitar which read, “This machine kills Fascist.” Really?

Woody Guthrie had been a tireless cheerleader for the US entry into World War II, prior to Pearl Harbor. This was at a time when over 90% of Americans were against the idea of sending their sons to fight in another European world war. Yet Woody advocated through his music, writings in communist publications, and public appearances, for the full fury of American might to be unleashed on the “Fascist Beasts.” This mind you, well before Pearl Harbor and the ensuing declarations of war from the other Axis nations. Woody’s warmongering pleas for “Fascist blood” at that time, were widely rejected by the American public- just as his Communist ideology was.

This changed in December of 1941, after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, followed by the remaining Axis nations declaring war on the United States. While the American public were reeling in shock and anger, Woody seemed quite delighted over the development. Thus, as a vocal proponent of war with the Fascists, Woody, in his late 20s and indisputably physically fit, naturally rushed down to the Army recruiter’s office and demanded to be placed into an Infantry unit- right? Actually no, he did just the opposite.

Rather than join in the epic struggle against Fascism which he had so passionately championed, Woody Guthrie unceremoniously balked and fled the draft. After a year and a half of dodging and with his Draft Board closing in on him, Woodie escaped wartime service once and for all, when he took a civilian position in the Merchant Marine. This, in 1943 and only after the US Navy had begun to provide beefed up naval escort protection for Merchant maritime vessels. So much for “This machine kills Fascists!” When Woody had his chance to actually fight the “Fascist Beasts,” he ran away- intentionally fleeing the draft. Undoubtedly, one of those hapless, impoverished and downtrodden men, whose cause Woody would often champion in his songs, died in his place.

“Oh brave so brave Sir Woody. Sir Woody ran away.

Bravely ran away, away!

When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled.

Yes, brave Sir Woody turned about and gallantly he chickened out. Bravely taking to his feet, he beat a very brave retreat, Bravest of the brave, Sir Woody ran away.”

Adapted from The Ballad of Brave Sir Robin from the movie, Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975).

Yet, this wasn’t the first instance of Woody’s talk not matching his walk. During the so called “Spanish Civil War,” Woody wrote multiple folk songs attacking Franco and his Nationalist government in Spain during the 1930s. It appears Woody’s chief complaint against Mr. Franco and his government was the same’s use of its military to put down a Communist revolution. The term, “Fascist” was regularly bandied about by Woody and his Marxist friends and attributed to anyone who dared to object to Communism or for that matter, disagreed with anything else that they said. My, how some things never change. Woody wrote and passionately performed anti-Franco ballads to rouse Leftist men into “joining the struggle.”

However, when those naive young men whom he had inspired to war in Spain, eventually asked Woody himself to join the cause, Sir Woody beat a hasty retreat out of town. Many of those gullible volunteers, incited to war by Woody, later met with gruesomely savage demises- going down to ragged ruin in their lost cause. Yet, not brave, so brave Sir Woody. Sir Woody ran away! Naturally!

In short, Woody was a cafe Communist who lacked the courage required of his convictions. As to the Spanish government of Franco, they soon crushed the Marxist revolutionaries and would later be counted among the United States’ closest allies in NATO while playing a key role in the worldwide struggle against Soviet sponsored Communist expansionism. As for Mr. Woody Guthrie, he was discharged from his civilian position in the Merchant Marine, after he was deemed a security risk due, to his Communist beliefs. It seems Woody was attempting to indoctrinate his Merchant shipmates on the alleged virtues of Communism. As one might expect, there were no takers onboard- only crew complaints about the annoying Communist in their midst.

After the Merchant Marine service spewed him out, Mr. Guthrie continued to evade military conscription until the Draft Board finally caught him. He was escorted to his induction center by the police. Conveniently for Brave Sir Woody, the war was over. His induction into the military didn’t dissuade him from writing and recording a “song” condemning the US for dropping nuclear bombs on Japanese cities to end the war. He was sent to the Army in 1945- kicking and screaming. He lasted less than six months before bring sent home having again been adjudged a “security risk” due to his Marxist beliefs.

Prior to WWII, Woody had publicly praised Soviet dictator and mass murderer, Joseph Stalin. He wrote a column in the Communist newspaper “People’s World,” defending Stalin’s invasion of Poland- a democratic county. Guthrie claimed that the Communist invasion would “benefit the Polish peasant farmers.” Mr. Guthrie also wrote a song which praised the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, which was signed in 1939 between the Communist Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.

The following year, Guthrie would write and perform the song that would become his magnum opus, “This Land is Your Land,”1940. The song was intended to be a biting satirical parody of the most popular song of the day, “God Bless America,” by Irving Berlin. Originally, “This Land is Your Land,” was insidiously Communist in its message. By way of example:

“There was a big, high wall there that tried to stop me.

A sign was painted said “Private Property.

But on the backside, it didn’t say nothing.

This land was made for you and me.”

In short, the meaning intended by Woody for, “This Land is your Land,” was that all the lands and private property in America belong to everyone equally and not to the individual owners who paid for, maintained and improved them. “Uncle Joe” Stalin was undoubtedly proud. Later, the Marxist inspired lyrics would be removed. Today, “This Land is Your Land,” is viewed as a pro-American, patriotic ballad and is interpreted as meaning that the people control the destiny of America through their elected representatives who are ultimately accountable to them alone.

Just prior to his death from Huntington’s disease in 1967, while US servicemen were fighting and dying in Vietnam, Woody predictably and passionately announced his support for the Communist North Vietnamese enemy. It’s doubtful any of the brave young men fighting in that war were affected by Woody’s pronouncement. Those men had a selfless sense of duty which caused them to answer their county’s call. A value which was quite alien to Woody Guthrie, who would have done well by reading Shakespeare:

“A coward dies a thousand times before his death, but the valiant taste of death but once.”

From William Shakespeare’s play “Julius Caesar.”