Posted on 08/24/2004 8:23:39 PM PDT by Fedora
Interesting you mention that. The Joseph Rauh mentioned in the article was a cofounder of the ADA. My opinion after researching the ADA is that it was either infiltrated from the beginning or set up as a front to lure in moderate liberals. There's a lot of interesting information on the ADA in Steven M. Gillon, Politics and Vision: The ADA and American Liberalism, 1947-1985. There is also some interesting information on the ADA here:
Although the authors of the report clear the ADA of charges of being a front, a closer look at some of the individuals mentioned and actions described raises some questions--I've bolded some key names:
During the past few years we have received many inquiries concerning the status of this organization, and therefore deem it appropriate to devote some space to it here. This organization is in no sense a Communist front, or in any way subversive. It was started in Washington, D. C., on January 4, 1947, by a small group of ultra-liberals from the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party. Some of the early members were Leon Henderson, Wilson Wyatt, Chester Bowles, Harry Girvetz, Carey McWilliams, Sr., Gus Gaynor, Joseph Rauh, Walter Reuther, Stanley Mosk, and David Dubinsky. It was to be a
But this sort of criticism diminished as the A.D.A. came to the defense of embattled liberals who were clamoring for an emasculation of the government's loyalty and security program in the face of indisputable evidence of infiltration of the most sensitive positions by Soviet agents and dedicated American Communists. The ADA has attacked the Subversive Activities Control Board, the Attorney General's list of subversive organizations, federal and state committees on un-American activities and the use of informants who were once Party members. As this program began to assume shape and to gain momentum there was a corresponding and understandable absence of criticism in the Party press. Of course it is perfectly clear that simply because an organization, or an individual, is in favor of something the Communist Party also espouses, does not necessarily mean that the organization or individual is subversive or following the Communist Party line for some ulterior motive. We repeat, however, that some of the techniques employed by A.D.A. leaders, and the fact that it has opposed with considerable vigor almost the entire loyalty-security program of the government, it has made it the target of considerable criticism.
In California, the A.D.A. started business in March 1947 under the direction of the actor, Melvyn Douglas. During the thirties, Mr. Douglas had drifted very close to the Communist Party, joining a few relatively innocuous front organizations, and with his wife, Helen Gahagan Douglas, had entertained some ardent Communists in their home from time to time. But both Mr. and Mrs. Douglas quickly saw the movement for what it really was, and repudiated it. Moreover, they made no secret of their antipathy toward Communism and have since been forthright about this attitude. Mr. Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., a Washington lawyer, together with Anthony Wayne Smith, an attorney and liberal philosopher, has been active in the affairs of the A.D.A. since its inception. Rauh has represented many clients summoned before Congressional committees investigating Communism—as, of course, is his right—but his zeal got the better of his caution in 1954. To place this incredible affair in its proper perspective, it is imperative that we have no doubt concerning the position of the A.D.A. about what it terms "informers." Rauh wrote in the organization's publication, The Progressive, in May 1950:
"Let us do away with confidential informants. dossiers, political spies... No one can guess where this process of informing will end."
― 142 ―
But that was four years before Mr. Ruah [Rauh] ran into Paul Hughes, who had recently been discharged from the Air Force and needed money. He went first to an agent of the McCarthy committee and tried to sell him a lurid tale about overseas subversion at a strategic air force base. The agent properly checked the story, found it false, and got rid of Mr. Hughes. The latter then tried the F.B.I., where he met with an equally chilly reception. Then he contacted the editor of a liberal publication, who suggested a conference with Ruah. These two credulous gentlemen believed Hughes' statement that he had been a secret agent for the late Senator McCarthy and that—with appropriate financial assistance—he could and would expose the dire methods the McCarthy committee had employed. So, over a period of nine months, a period of gestation for the birth of the purposed expose, Hughes got $2300 from the editor of the liberal journal and $8500 from the A.D.A. leader. During this time he made long reports, in considerable detail,—all completely fabricated and spun from his own active imagination—and finally committed the inevitable blunder that led, not only to his downfall, but the exposure of Ruah's actions as well.
Hughes made the mistake of posing as a private investigator, was summoned before a Federal Grand Jury and testified that a former Communist named Harvey Matusow had been pressured to repudiate his sworn statements to federal agencies by none other than Hughes' benefactor, Joseph Ruah. This, too, was an outright lie, and Hughes was promptly indicted for perjury. This, of course, made it necessary for Ruah to appear and testify at the trial, and out came the nauseating fact that while excoriating the use of informants by official agencies of the government in their fight against subversion, Ruah had himself hired a paid informer and a political spy to get the goods on the late Senator Joseph McCarthy. Hughes had never worked for McCarthy or his committee, and indeed had been quickly detected as a transparent fraud by an alert McCarthy agent. Thus Ruah tried his best to use an informer and a spy--but was too naive to even find a good one.
Since this affair the A.D.A., still under Ruah's leadership, has demanded bail for the eleven Communist leaders tried at Foley Square and convicted under the Smith Act; has protested a contempt conviction of Vincent Hallinan as a result of a court appearance for Harry Bridges; declared that the Communist threat in this country is vastly over-rated, and is presently demanding that the government restore to J. Robert Oppenheimer his access to secret information.
We're talking about RED/PINK DIAPER BABIES. Neither of the Clintons were,but wee algore WAS!
Added you to the ping list! :)
I wrote it for FR, but it incorporates a lot of material for an article on Brandeis and Frankfurter I started writing a while back which I may develop into another article or book for wider distribution. There's a lot of information here which has relevance beyond the Kerry campaign, IMO.
"You're missing thes whole point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We're talking about RED/PINK DIAPER BABIES. Neither of the Clintons were,but wee algore WAS!"
Algore's daddy's resume never read like this.
Remember some "pigs" are more equal than the rest and algore and his daddy are not this "EQUAL"!
I am in NO mood for this tonight.Go do some research on the Gores and Armand Hammer. THEY WERE PAID OFF BY THE STINKING KGB! The are just as much a bunch of damned FELLOW TRAVELERS,with an even BETETER pedigree,than Kerry,for the term.
Posting about that which you do NOT understand,doesn't help your case any.Okay? :-)
Thanks for the ping!
bookmarking
"Ye gods and little fishes............!
I am in NO mood for this tonight.Go do some research on the Gores and Armand Hammer. THEY WERE PAID OFF BY THE STINKING KGB! The are just as much a bunch of damned FELLOW TRAVELERS,with an even BETETER pedigree,than Kerry,for the term.
Posting about that which you do NOT understand,doesn't help your case any.Okay? :-)"
YES the KGB bought and paid for the GORES, who paid off daddy KERRY?????
I see a difference in mindset you do not, yet I do not tell you, you do not understand.
There's only one way to settle this: Clinton, Gore, and Kerry should have a contest to see who's the pinkest! To make sure the judging is fair, Jimmy Carter will supervise. . .
ROTFLMSO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:-)
I found this rank speculation: Q re initials KJW
Some of the documents, like the after action reports, etc are initialed : KJW
..."Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's mother Rosemary Forbes Kerry, was a member of the affluent Forbes shipping family and a descendant of John Winthrop, who helped found Boston in 1630."...
James Grant Forbes is the father of Rosemary Forbes Kerry and the maternal grandfather of 2004 U.S. Presidential candidate Democrat John Forbes Kerry and of the 1991 French Presidential candidate Green Brice Lalonde.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/James-Grant-Forbes
John Forbes Kerry ; John Winthrop Kerry :
This is rank speculation, but did or does John Kerry ever go by John Forbes Winthrop Kerry?
Did John Kerry sometimes use his maternal grandmother's maiden name as his middle name? Winthrop Kerry If so, then the John Winthrop Kerry initials would be JWK or KJW
James Grant Forbes (October 22, 1879 - April 24, 1955) was born in Shanghai, China, where the Forbes family of Boston amassed a fortune from the opium trade and merchant banking after the Opium Wars.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/James-Grant-Forbes
He went to school in England and graduated from Harvard University. Forbes was a successful international lawyer and banker. He married Margaret Tyndal Winthrop, who came from a family with deep roots in Massachusetts history going back to the John Winthrop, the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The couple lived in the United States for the early years of their marriage, but after the birth of their third child they moved to Europe and made Paris, France their home. During World War I, and after having had several more children, they moved to England, where they rented Barrow Green Court. Margaret had two English governesses to help bring up her 13 children. Forbes is the father of Rosemary Forbes Kerry and the maternal grandfather of 2004 U.S. Presidential candidate Democrat John Forbes Kerry and of the 1991 French Presidential candidate Green Brice Lalonde.
v
Kerry or Bush?
Socialism or liberty?
Excellent article. Please keep me on the ping list.
I was just asking about Kerry's dad this afternoon. Great research.
Interesting question. Another FReeper has been helping me look into some of the Kerrys/Forbes' inter-relationships with some of the other prominent families in Massachusetts. We'd noticed the Winthrop connection before but didn't notice the initials thing. I have forwarded your question to them and will let you know if anything interesting turns up.
Posing the question that way also makes me think about the domestic aspect of Kerry's leftism, which is another aspect of the issue.
Thanks! Have added you to the list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.