educate you on the mind-set of modern day Communism and its leftist friends and relatives, and it will keep you informed on the left’s activities both in the U.S. and around the world.

q         In our October 1998 issue of The Schwarz Report we inadvertently left out a word.  On page 1 the sentence should read, “Using Stalin’s formulation, namely, that the closer we are to socialism the more enemies we will have.”  We left out the word “enemies.”

From the Archives: The Best of Dr. Fred Schwarz
      “The communists, and many alleged non-communist experts, repeatedly affirm that Fascism is the diametric opposite of Communism.  They locate Communism on the left of the politcal spectrum and Fascism on the right.  They infer or affirm that Socialism and Fascism are irreconcilable enemies.
      Nothing could be further from the truth.  The Socialism of Communism, the Socialism of Nazism, and the Fascism of Italy were blood brothers.  Fights between Communists and Fascists are really family feuds.”  CACC Newsletter, April 1, 1979

New evidence details Communist plot

      Cold War historians say they now know more about how and why the Soviet Union and China fabricated a campaign in the 1950’s to convince the world that the United States used germ and chemical warfare in the Korean War.
      New documentary evidence from Moscow’s still-secret archives suggests that the charge was instigated by Chinese field advisers to the North Koreans. With many Koreans dying of cholera, the Chinese advisers decided U.S. chemical and biological warfare must have been the cause.
      “It was a huge campaign, waged through the press and the World Peace Council, a Soviet-backed organization with branches in many countries,” said historian Kathryn Weathersby, a specialist on the Soviets’ role in the Korean War.  “There were public [anti-U.S.] demonstrations in most Western European countries and it complicated the early years of NATO because there were demonstrations against meetings of the Western alliance because of those allegations.”
      To make the charge stick, the Communists went to extraordinary measures–infecting North Koreans awaiting execution with plague and cholera so their bodies could be shown to outside investigators, and forcing 25 captured U.S. pilots to sign “confessions.”
      The undertaking, blessed by Josef Stalin and backed by Mao Tse-tung and Chou En-lai, had some success.  The charge, denounced by U.S. officials from President Truman on down, was repeated in a 1989 book by two British journalists, Peter Williams and David Wallace, and again in a 1990 ceremony staged by Beijing.
      In fact, “neither Soviet officials nor Russian ones have to this day ever stated that the Korean War biological warfare allegations were false,” said biological warfare specialist Milton Leitenberg of the University of Maryland.
      Using newly accessible documents, Mr. Leitenberg and Miss Weathersby put together a now-it-can-be-deduced study of the claim and the unpublicized decision to back off 

it.  Their research is to be published in the Bulletin of the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson Center, a government-sponsored think tank.
      The new evidence came from the Presidential Archives in Moscow, which is still closed to all but a handful of Russian researchers.  In January, a researcher was permitted to make notes – but not photocopies – from 12 documents.
      The germ warfare accusation was made in 1952, at the height of the Korean War and at a time when North Korea confronted massive outbreaks of cholera and plague.
      With an armistice only a few months away, a secret May 2, 1953, resolution of the presidium of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union backed away from the charge, the documents show.
      “The Soviet Government and the Central Committee of the [Communist Party of the Soviet Union] were misled,” said the resolution, which has never before been made public.  “The spread in the press of information about the use by the Americans of bacteriological weapons in Korea was based on false information.  The accusations against the Americans were fictitious.”
      The instigation for making the claim apparently came from Chinese field commanders advising the North Koreans, researchers say.
      On February 22, 1952, North Korea told the United Nations that U.S. aircraft had dropped disease-bearing insects in seven raids.  Two weeks later, Chou charged the United States had sent 448 aircraft on 68 missions to spread plague, anthrax, cholera, encephalitis and meningitis.
      Without any field investigation of its own, an “International Scientific Commission” led by British biochemist Joseph Needham, an avowed Marxist, issued a 699-page report accepting the Chinese claims on the basis of testimony from witnesses. It was Mr. Needham, now dead, who repeated the charge in a 1990 ceremony where he was honored by Beijing on his 90th birthday. 
      The Washington Times, November 18, 1998 p. A 14

I.F. Stone: Red and Dead
by Robert D. Novak

      This is the ninth anniversary of I.F. Stone’s death.  When he died of a heart attack in a Boston hospital on June 18, 1989, he rated a top-of-the-page New York Times obituary that called him “a pugnacious advocate of civil liberties, peace and truth” and asserted that his “integrity” was acknowledged even by “detractors.”  On ABC television, Peter Jennings praised Stone’s credo: “To write the truth, to defend the weak against the strong, to fight for justice.”  A eulogy by the civil libertarian Nat Hentoff described him as a “lonely pamphleteer” prying loose the truth in I.F. Stone’s Weekly (1953-68) and I.F. Stone’s Bi-weekly (1969-71).
      From the days when I covered Congress in the late ’50s and early ’60s, I remember Izzy as a solitary figure prowling Capitol Hill, rumpled, loaded down with documents, and flashing a bemused smile.  He was much admired as a symbol of incorruptibility.  In fact, looking back at Stone’s lifetime work, one sees a pattern emerge.
      He was born Isidor Feinstein, the son of Russian-Jewish immigrants, in Philadelphia in 1907.  He dropped out of the University of Pennsylvania his junior year to devote full time to duties as a reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer.  While working for the Philadelphia Record in 1933, he wrote articles for Modern Monthly under the pseudonym “Abelard Stone” that assailed Franklin D. Roosevelt for moving toward Fascism and called for a “Soviet America.”
      In the 1930s, Stone–writing editorials for the New York Post– applauded Stalin’s infamous show-trials.  “Stone was lyrical in his praise of the Soviet government,” writes Dr. Kenneth J. Campbell in Moscow’s Words, Western Voices, “claiming that Communism was transforming Europe’s most backward nation ‘into the most advanced.’ ”
      Stone’s subsequent writings in the Nation and other left-wing publications expressed nearly unrelieved approval of Soviet policy and opposition to NATO and other anti-Kremlin initiatives.  The climax came with the publication in 1952 of Stone’s book The Hidden History of the Korean War, which claims that the United States and South Korea provoked the North Korean invasion in 1950.  Campbell calls it “a masterpiece of innuendo, anti-American rhetoric, repetition of Soviet propaganda themes and a dearth of evidence to support his theses.”
      From its beginning in 1953, I.F. Stone’s Weekly was the launching pad for missiles aimed at U.S. foreign policy– especially when it collided with Moscow’s.  So, to Stone, Nikita Khrushchev, not John F. Kennedy, was the hero of the 1962 missile crisis.  Needless to say, Stone attacked the U.S. intervention in Vietnam early and often.
      That Izzy Stone was far out on the left (a fact largely

omitted from the fawning obituaries) began to take on a sinister cast four years after his death.
      Oleg Kalugin, a former KGB major general stationed in Washington, in a 1992 interview with the London Independent, said: “We had an agent– a well-known America journalist– with a good reputation who severed his ties with us after 1956 [Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin].  I myself convinced him to resume them.  But in 1968, after the invasion of Czechoslovakia...he said he would never again take any money from us.”  Gen. Kalugin later told Soviet intelligence expert Herbert Romerstein and Reed Irvine of Accuracy in Media that the agent was I.F. Stone.
      Under intense fire from the mainstream media, Kalugin backed away from this identification–saying Stone was only “a fellow traveler.” But other information started to come out.  In 1993, Accuracy in Media obtained FBI documents under the Freedom of Information Act that showed that former Daily Worker editor John Gates, operating as an informant, identified Stone as a covert Communist party member in the 1930s.
      More damaging is evidence from the Venona papers.  These intercepted documents, decoded by U.S. intelligence and released by the National Security Agency in 1996, show that NKVD agent Vladimir Sergei, working under cover of the Tass news agency’s Washington bureau, recruited Stone in 1944. Stone was at first unresponsive, but Sergei learned that Stone had belonged to the party in the ’30s and tried again.  He was more successful on the second attempt.
      According to Sergei, Stone had reacted to the first approach “negatively, fearing the consequences.”  Now, it was reported back to Moscow that Stone “was not refusing his [Sergei’s] aid,” while urging the Russian spy-master to “consider that he had three small children and did not want to attract [the FBI’s] attention.”  Stone expressed his “unwillingness to spoil his career,” Sergei reported.
      Stone also asserted to Sergei that he earned as much as $1,500 a month through his newsletter (about $150,000 a year in 1998 money), but that “he would not be averse to having a supplementary income.”  Sergei’s cable dealt with “establishment of a business contact” with Stone, who was given the code name BLIN (“pancake” in Russian).
      No wonder the obituary writer appeared to know nothing of this: Hardly a word has appeared in the mainstream press about Stone’s Communist connections.  And the Nation names its annual prize for “excellence in student journalism” the I.F. Stone Award.  Ignoring the past, however, does not expunge it.

Reprinted by permission of The Weekly Standard
June 22, 1998 p. 16-17

True and False Liberation Theology, part 3
by Ronald Nash

      Liberation theologians have a lot to say about poverty.  In fact, that from which their theology seeks to liberate people is poverty.  Unfortunately, liberation theology cannot offer a proper remedy for poverty because it fails to understand the disease.  Liberationists accept the myth that poverty results exclusively from one person or nation exploiting another.  Michael Novak explains:
      What most hinders liberation theology is a Latin tradition, many generations old, of blaming outsiders, while exempting  oneself from responsibility for one’s own future.  The current form of this tradition is to aspire to the benefits of capitalism  while refusing to recognize the moral validity of its requisite habits and institutions: of invention, forethought, saving, investing, punctuality, workmanship, and the like.
      What liberation thinkers seem to do best is blame others for the problems of Latin America.  But as Michael Novak has shown, their claims that Latin American nations are dependent upon the United States are greatly exaggerated.  First-World nations are not responsible for Third-World poverty which antedates capitalism and which, in fact, used to be far worse than it presently is.  As Novak has shown, Latin America has for decades had the resources required to begin easing its poverty and destitution.
      Liberationists attack capitalism on the ground that it exploits the poor.  On their view, the only way some people can become rich is by exploiting others.  In other words, the attack against capitalism depends on the assumption that voluntary economic exchanges are a zero-sum game.  And so liberation thinkers conclude, the reason some nations are poor is because they have been exploited by richer and more powerful nations.  While it is true that some nations have exploited others (witness the recent history of the Soviet Union), this fact does not support the conclusion that colonialism or dependence is either a necessary or sufficient condition of Third-World poverty.  In fact, some of the most developed areas in the world today (Malaysia, Singapore, and Hong Kong) are former colonies (Hong Kong is still a British colony), while some of the poorest nations in the world (such as Afghanistan and Ethiopia) were never colonies.
      It is false to claim that the West is the major cause of world-wide poverty.  As William Scully explains: “Actually, much of the developing world that has had contact with the West owes its economic development to such contact, which provided access to Western markets, Western enterprise, capital, and ideas.  Today’s poverty in [areas like Latin America] is much more the result of domestic mismanagement and unsound domestic policies than of Western interference and domination.”  The West did not become rich at the expense of the poor.

      Liberation theology therefore fails to understand the real causes of poverty.  Since it misunderstands the nature of the disease, it cannot hope to provide a cure.  It is deficient both in its diagnosis and in its prescription.  In recommending a cure, liberationists are never able to think beyond the old Marxist line of redistribution.  Advocates of economic redistribution frequently mention the miracle when Jesus fed the five thousand.  They refer to Jesus’ obvious compassion and pity for the hungry and how He proceeded to feed them. However, the redistributionists  always drop their analogy at just this point and move on to other subjects.  I suggest they need to stay with the analogy a bit longer.
      It is certainly important to note that Jesus took pity on hungry people and fed them.  But we should follow the story to its conclusion and observe that Jesus performed a miracle by actually producing wealth—in this case, the food.  If Jesus’ compassionate feeding of the hungry is to be taken as an analogy of how Christians today are to have an interest in the needs of the poor, His miracle of producing wealth (the bread and fish) should also lead us to ask by what means we should seek not just to distribute wealth, but also to produce it.  But it is precisely at this vitally important point—how wealth will be produced—that the silence of liberation thinkers is so eloquent.  Before wealth can be distributed, it must first be produced.
      The creation of wealth does not happen by accident.  On the contrary, it results from human action and social cooperation.  When proper attention is given to the necessary role that the creation of wealth must play in relieving poverty, it is clear that capitalism offers the poor their only real hope of economic deliverance.  Socialism can only increase the misery of the masses while encouraging the growth of tyranny.  The only way in which the poor of any nation can be delivered from poverty is through an economic system that first of all produces enough wealth so that all are capable of sharing.  Economic systems that decrease or discourage the production of wealth can never succeed in eliminating poverty; they can only make it worse.
      It is interesting to note how liberation theologians never mention formerly poor nations like Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong that have achieved the highest rates of economic growth in the world.  Perhaps they ignore such countries because the nations have succeeded by consciously rejecting Socialist models and have followed a free-market approach.
      No workable economy is feasible that does not take account of the operations of the market.  Any economy that violates the principles of a market economy is doomed to failure, and even worse, is bound to create conditions in which human liberation becomes less attainable.  What the impoverished nations of the world need is a new liberation theology, by which I mean one that recognizes the failure of socialism and works to reestablish free-market principles.

Chile and Pinochet
by Eric Margolis

      Chile’s former strongman, General Augusto Pinochet, is the Great Satan for leftists everywhere.
      This week Pinochet, now a Chilean senator, was arrested in London, where he had gone for back surgery.  Britain held the 82-year-old retired general after a Spanish judge sought to have Pinochet extradited to Spain to face charges of “genocide, torture, and other crimes” rising from the disappearance of Spanish Marxists during Chile’s ‘dirty war’ of the 1970’s.
      Ironically, Cuba’s communist caudillo, Fidel Castro, whose firing squads have executed thousands, and whose prisons are notorious for vicious torture of political prisoners, was being feted in Spain at the very same time the warrant was issued for Pinochet.
      Communists and their little stepsister, Socialists, are making a great hue and cry that Chilean security forces killed 2,000-3,000 Marxists during the 70’s dirty war.  This sudden and touching concern for human rights comes from a party that murdered 80 MILLION people this century and has never even repented its monstrous crimes.
      Had Allende’s Communists cemented their hold on Chile, thousands of “bourgeois” and “enemies of the people” would have been executed– as they were in Cuba.
      Britain is holding Senator Pinochet in violation of the diplomatic passport he carries.  Tony Blair’s new socialist government is obviously more concerned with ideological revenge than diplomatic convention.  And talk about ‘perfidious Albion.’  During the Falklands War, General Pinochet aided Britain, and saved many British lives, even allowing Britain’s SAS commandos to operate against Argentina from Chile.  So much for British gratitude.
      Beside the shocking illegality of his detention by the United Kingdom, the charges levelled against Pinochet by the Spanish judge and the left-leaning media are untrue– or distorted.
      In 1973, army commander Pinochet overthrew Marxist Salvador Allende, who was turning Chile into a Stalinist state.  Pinochet, backed by the U.S. and Britain, led the subsequent war against Marxist terrorists.  All urban wars are dirty and bloody.  Look at Northern Ireland, Israel’s war against Palestinians, or Algeria.

      Marxist urban rebels tried to overthrow Chile’s government, using bombings, assassinations, kidnapping and guerilla assaults.  Chile, and neighboring Argentina, suffered a reign of terror and faced near anarchy as Communist guerrillas attempted, in their own words, to ‘destroy the capitalist state.’  Chilean and Argentine security forces were ordered to fight an all-out war against the Communist rebels.  Terror against terror.  In the process, some innocent people were arrested, tortured or disappeared.  But most victims were not innocents.  They were mainly Marxist guerillas and terrorists, or part of the Marxist support network that included students and Marxist clergy and nuns.
      The soldiers finally won these bloody wars, restoring peace to Chile and Argentina.  Today, thanks to– and because of– victory in these conflicts, Chile and Argentina are proud, prosperous democracies.  The soldiers who did the necessary dirty work to make this possible are often accused of crimes, and shunned by the society they saved.
      Pinochet’s sweeping free-market reforms transformed Chile from a Socialist disaster into Latin America’s fastest-growing economy.  Once Chile was politically stable and economically booming, Pinochet returned the country to full democracy.  He resigned from the military and became a senator.
      The charges against Pinochet are preposterous.  The Spanish judge has no grounds to demand arrest.  Genocide deals with eradication of whole peoples, not a few thousand Marxist revolutionaries in an urban terror war.  Russia just murdered 100,000 Chechens.  Serbs killed 300,000 civilians in Bosnia and Kosova.  Where are the warrants for ex-Communist Yeltsin and the current Communists Milosevic or Castro?
      Final irony.  If Pinochet had failed and Allende survived, Chile would not be a democracy today, but a Stalinist police state like Cuba, with no human rights, no democracy, and thousands of political prisoners.
      Pinochet’s triumphant success in Chile reminds leftists of Communism’s great crimes and abject failures.  That’s why they hate him so much.  Pinochet saved Chile and restored democracy.  He deserves salutes, not arrest.

      Toronto Sun, October 22, 1998 quoted in Insider Report October 1998 p. 3-4

McCarthyism revisited
by Arnold Beichman

      A dishonored Joe McCarthy died some 40 years ago but the debate about McCarthyism goes marching on.  It is a debate which is as bitter and nasty as it ever was back in the 1950’s (although not as widespread) when the destructive and self-destructive Wisconsin senator was in his prime as the enemy of Communism and his enemies were yelling at the top of their lungs that they had been silenced by his ruthless, antidemocratic intrigues.  Today McCarthyism is a cliche word for putative violations of civil rights (a.k.a. witch hunts) and character assassination (a.k.a. red-baiting).
      There is, however, a difference in the tenor of the debate about Mr. McCarthy four decades on from the 1950’s.  Then, if someone shouted out “McCarthyite,” debate was immediately squelched because the target had to explain, usually to a scornful audience, that anti-Communism or anti-Stalinism was no “McCarthyism.”  The reason for the change is that, as the London Observer put it a few years ago, “Historians are now facing the unpleasant truth that he was right.”  Nicholas von Hoffman in The Washington Post put it more cogently, “point by point,  Joe McCarthy got it all wrong and yet was still closer to the truth than those who ridiculed him.”
      Much, much earlier, Irving Kristol, then a junior editor at Commentary Magazine, published an article (March 1952) titled, “ ‘Civil Liberties’ 1952: A Study in Confusion.”  His prescient article contained a passage for which the left-liberals pilloried him.  This is what he wrote:
      “Perhaps it is a calamitous error to believe that because a vulgar demagogue lashes out at both Communism and liberalism as identical, it is necessary to protect Communism in order to defend liberalism.  This way of putting the matter will surely shock liberals, who are convinced it is only they who truly understand Communism and who thoughtfully oppose it.  They are nonetheless mistaken, and it is a mistake on which McCarthyism waxes fat.  For there is one thing that

the American people know about Sen. McCarthy: he, like them, is unequivocally anti-Communist.  About the spokesman for American liberalism, they feel they know no such thing.  And with some justification.”  
      The liberal-left took the last sentence out of its indubitably correct context– that liberals believed it necessary “to protect Communism in order to defend liberalism”— and tried to turn Mr. Kristol into a defender of Mr. McCarthy.  Today even those who once reviled Mr. Kristol, contemporaneously or retroactively, for that passage, have had to realize that the cry of “McCarthyism” is meaningless.  What’s come out of once secret Soviet archives and the “Venona” decryptions of KGB messages identifying among others, Alger Hiss and the Rosebergs as Soviet spies, has forever put to rest the political sophistries about the Kremlin being the citadel of a lively if aberrant socialism.
      As Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York writes in his new book, “Secrecy,” “The U.S. government’s pursuit of alleged sympathizers and spies in the post World War II period did not amount to persecution, still less delusion.  Not a few in fact were spies, and of those most were left untroubled.”
      I have a set of the “Venona” decryptions (they are easily obtainable on the Internet) and there are dozens of code names, probably American spies, which the wizards at the National Security Agency were unable to identify.  But there are names which have been identified as KGB agents.
      Had Franklin D. Roosevelt died in 1944 instead of 1945, then Vice President Wallace said he would have appointed Laurence Duggan as secretary of state and Harry Dexter White, secretary of the treasury.  Both men were high officials in the Roosevelt administration.  Both were longtime spies for Stalin.  Mr. Duggan supposedly committed suicide– he jumped, fell or was pushed out of a skyscraper window when publicly identified.  White died of a heart attack on the night before he was to testify the next day about his loyalties.
      The Washington Times, November 16, 1998 p. A 19

q    “On  May 28, President Clinton issued a ‘FURTHER AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 11478, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’ asserting that: 
“ ‘By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, and in order to provide for a uniform policy for the Federal Government to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 11478, as amended, is further amended as follows:
“ ‘Section 1.   The first sentence of section 1 is amened by substituting ‘age, or sexual orientation’ for ‘or age’.
“  ‘Section 2.   The second sentence of section 1 is amended by striking the period and adding at the end of the sentence, ‘to the extent permitted by law.’.”
      The Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin, June 15, 1998 p. 1

q    “This action by President Clinton is an assault on the religious liberties of millions of Bible-believing Americans who accept God’s admonition that homosexual practices are an abomination.  It is also an affront to those who oppose discrimination on the basis of inherited characteristics such as race, putting genetic attributes on a par with corrupt conduct.
      We not only have a right but a duty to discriminate against conduct which is unlawful in the sight of God.”
      The Howard Phillips Issues and Startegy Bulletin, June 15, 1998, p. 1

q    “Beijing does not practice free trade; it conducts ‘strategic trade’ to strength itself for the coming clash.  In China, there is no distinction between the private and the state.  Thousands of Chinese companies -- from hotels to toy factories -- are run by the People’s Liberation Army.  The PLA exploits its unrestricted access to the huge U.S. market to earn hard currency for the aggrandizement of state power.  China’s civilian sector buys what strategic interests dictate, like those 46 supercomputers recently sold by the United States, the precise whereabouts of which we cannot confirm.
      “U.S. companies are lured into China by offers of access to the ‘world’s greatest market’ and a low-wage labor force.  Once there, the U.S. firms find that access to China’s consumers is restricted and the hidden price of low-wage Chinese labor is mandatory transfer of technology to Chinese ‘partners,’ who copy the American machines and begin replicating our factories.”
      Patrick Buchanan, The Washington Times, May 27, 1998 p. A 15

q    “The ANC’s strong ideological commitment was again demonstrated during the visits of Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Yasser Arafat, leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization.  Castro received a rapturous welcome when he arrived for the 12th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement

(NAM), held in Durban in September.  He then stayed on for a two-day official visit, during which he addressed Parliament.  His visit was used to trot out all the old cold war Marxist rhetoric.”
      Roca Report, No. 117, September 1998, p. 2  

q    “Rome-Italy’s Communists will help rule the country for the first time in half a century after Premier Massimo D’Alema won a vote of confidence Friday in the Chamber of Deputies for his new government.
      “The vote on D’Alema’s center-left coalition, Italy’s 56th government since World War II, was 333 in favor and 281 against, with three deputies abstaining.  The premier is expected to win the upper chamber, the Senate.
      “D’Alema, a former Communist, has promised to continue the strict economic policies imposed by his predecessor, Romano Prodi.
      “During debate before the vote, Italy’s center-right opposition, led by former Premier Silvio Berlusconi, promised a fierce fight against D’Alema.  Berlusconi’s Freedom Alliance called supporters to march in protest in Rome today.
      “The opposition contends that D’Alema’s coalition, which ranges from former Christian Democrats to Communists holding Cabinet posts for the first time since 1947, fails to respect the outcome of a 1996 election.
      “Many of the centrist deputies were elected to Parliament in 1996 on the center-right Freedom Alliance ticket, not on the center-left Olive Tree group, which proposed Prodi, an economist, as premier.
      “D’Alema is seeking a broad base of support to pass the 1999 budget as well as to revive efforts to change Italy’s constitution to reform the electoral system.
      The Colorado Springs Gazette, October 24, 1998 p. 13

q    “In the heyday of the American counter-culture, for children of the affluent classes, America – greedy, materialistic, power-hungry – could do no right and the Soviet Union and the pro-Soviet Third World – not motivated by greed or self- seeking – could do no wrong.  Significantly, working-class Americans never bought this dream of a Soviet utopia.
      “In truth our affluent “flower children” were not very interested in foreign affairs, but only in personal and sexual freedom and “self-fulfillment.”
      Richard Grenier, The Washington Times, Oct 6, 1998, p. 19

q    “It must count among the most amazing spectacles of history to be inundated with the rhetoric, theory, and practice of Communism, and see not one Communist around.  We read and hear daily about class warfare, redistribution of wealth, the “dispossessed” masses, the disadvantaged, universal health care, speech codes, sensitivity training, restriction on parents’ rights, school-to-work – the list goes on and on.  The agenda is with us, the Party is not.”
      Balint Vazsonyi, America’s Thirty Years War, p. 176-177