Stalin’s Secret Agents

Try a word association quiz with the phrase “Cold War,” and the first two responses that are almost certain to come to the mind of the general public are “paranoia” and “McCarthyism,” which is practically a synonym for paranoia. The common assumption, thanks to decades of public school indoctrination and the influence of leftist intellectuals, is that the Cold War, at least in its early decades, was all about suspicious Republicans fearing a Red under every bed and blacklisting innocents in Hollywood. But a recent book (the paperback edition hits bookshelves next month), lays out the historical evidence for massive Communist penetration of our government beginning in the New Deal era, increasingly rapidly during World War II, and afterward leading to gaping breaches of national security and the betrayal of free-world interests.

Contrary to the notion that domestic Communists were simply harmless, misguided idealists, Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein shows that widespread government infiltration by Soviet spies sabotaged our foreign policy and molded the post-WWII world in favor of the Soviet Union. Evans, the author of eight previous books including the controversial revised look at Joseph McCarthy called Blacklisted by History, is a former editor of the Indianapolis News, a Los Angeles Times columnist, and a commentator for the Voice of America. Romerstein is a leading Cold War expert, formerly head of the Office to Counter Soviet Disinformation at the U.S. Information Agency from 1983 until 1989, who has served on the staff of several congressional committees including the House Intelligence Committee.

The early Cold War spying which resulted in the theft of our atomic secrets, radar, jet propulsion, and other military systems was serious enough, but that wasn’t the major issue. “The spying,” as the authors put it, “was handmaiden to the policy interest,” which was by far the leading problem. As President Franklin Roosevelt’s health and mental ability waned, covert Communist aides exerted pro-Soviet influence on U.S. policy, which was reflected in postwar discussions by the Big Three powers about the new shape of the world. The policy impact of such deceptive influence on the part of Soviet agents

was to turn Western influence and support against the anti-Communist forces and in favor of their Red opponents, as U.S. and other Allied leaders based decisions on false intelligence from pro-Soviet agents. The effects were calamitous for the cause of freedom, as numerous countries were thus delivered into the hands of Stalin and his minions.

The three leaders – FDR, Churchill, and Stalin – “would ultimately decide what political forces would prevail where and the forms of government to be installed in formerly captive nations, including those in alignment with the victors.” Unfortunately, at that time “seeking Soviet ‘friendship’ and giving Moscow ‘every assistance’ summed up American policy [in meetings] at Teheran and Yalta, and for some while before those meetings.”

"Jihad in America: The Grand Deception" Wins Best Documentary

The documentary I co-wrote for the Investigative Project on Terrorism, Jihad in America: The Grand Deception, won Best Documentary at this weekend's Beverly Hills Film Festival. You can find it here on Amazon.

Topless Jihad

Recently members of the Ukrainian-based, global feminist group Femen staged protests across Europe calling for “topless jihad.” While American feminists today are satisfied whipping up outrage about Mitt Romney’s binders and Sandra Fluke’s right to bill taxpayers for her birth control, Femen’s Amazonian warriors dive right in to do battle in a real War on Women being openly waged by Muslim misogynists. Topless jihad – it puts a whole new spin on #MyJihad.

The protests in Sweden, Italy, Ukraine, Belgium, and France [here are images from the demonstrations; warning – most contain nudity and/or offensive language] were in solidarity with a gutsy young Tunisian activist named Amina Tyler, who recently shocked Islamic sensibilities by posting naked images of herself online, with the words “I own my body; it’s not the source of anyone’s honor” penned on her bare chest.

The head of Tunisia’s Orwellian-titled Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice responded to this provocation as you might expect from a violent totalitarian, calling for Tyler to be stoned to death lest her obscene actions lead to an epidemic of Muslim women casting off not just their burqas and blouses but their oppression as well.

Nice Sharks Finish First

The Los Angeles Times did a profile recently of gleefully greedy investor Kevin O’Leary of ABC’s popular business pitch show Shark Tank. Sarcastically dubbed “Mr. Wonderful,” he is the sharp-tongued dealmaker that audiences love to hate, the show’s “Wicked Witch of the West,” as one TV producer put it. His brutal honesty and cold put-downs (“You are a nothing-burger”) make O’Leary stand out as the Simon Cowell among the panel of other self-made multimillionaires. Too bad the LA Times didn’t look past the ratings-grabbing arrogance and profile a more exemplary co-star – O’Leary’s polar opposite, Canadian software king and nice-guy-who-finished-first, Robert Herjavec.

Robert is the elegant gentleman Shark, whose “brilliant blue eyes and expressive features seem particularly adept at telegraphing sympathy,” as one interviewer perfectly phrased it. Where Mr. Wonderful might dismiss a wannabe entrepreneur on the show with a curt “You’re dead to me,” Robert often delivers his honest assessment of a pitch – and even his rejection of it – with a compliment and encouragement rather than an insult. “Because of my mom, I learned never to be rude,” he says, exhibiting a politeness and respectfulness that sadly seem quaint in the attitude-filled world of reality TV.

The son of Croatian immigrants who arrived in Canada with just $20 when he was 8 years old, Robert once got emotional on the show – even choking up other sharks as well – when he referred to his now-deceased father’s quiet struggle to make ends meet for his family in the New World. His father hated living under Communist oppression in dictator Tito’s Yugoslavia, was repeatedly jailed for speaking out against it, and just wanted his only son to grow up free.

Iran Declares War on Hollywood

In response to last year’s Oscar-winning film Argo, based on the real-life rescue of a handful of American citizens during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Tehran plans to sue Hollywood filmmakers who participate in the production of such “anti-Iran” propaganda films.

In the movie, in which director Ben Affleck also plays the lead role, Iranian officials are shown being outwitted by an elaborate CIA plan to camouflage the U.S. diplomats fleeing the country as part of a team scouting locations for an outlandish science-fiction film.

Iranian authorities have labeled Argo a propaganda attack against their nation and humanity. The country’s state-run broadcaster Press TV complains that the film is “a far cry from a balanced narration” and is “replete with historical inaccuracies and distortions.” The film was banned from the general public – not that this accomplished anything, since an estimated “several hundred thousand copies” have been sold by DVD bootleggers who say it’s their biggest seller in years. As an additional measure, Iranian officials held a private screening of Argo as part of a conference called “The Hoax of Hollywood” and called it a “violation of international cultural norms,” whatever those are.

Press TV detailed its objections to the film in an online article: “The Iranophobic American movie attempts to describe Iranians as overemotional, irrational, insane, and diabolical while at the same time, the CIA agents are represented as heroically patriotic.” At the risk of speaking for Ben Affleck, I would respond that the movie does not depict all Iranians this way, only the murderous Islamic fundamentalists who took over the country, and who already do a great job living up to the description “irrational and diabolical.”

Nonetheless, Press TV reports that offended Iranian officials have talked to an “internationally-renowned” French lawyer about filing a lawsuit. “I will defend Iran against the films like Argo, which are produced in Hollywood to distort the country’s image,” said attorney Isabelle Coutant-Peyre. In a curious, Hollywood-worthy twist, Coutant-Peyre just happens to be the wife of mega-terrorist Carlos the Jackal, currently imprisoned in France where he converted to Islam.

The Misunderstanding of Lauryn Hill

Grammy-winning singer Lauryn Hill had drifted to the margins of the pop culture radar in recent years until Monday, when she made surprising headlines by being sentenced to three months in prison for failing to pay nearly $1 million in taxes. She then raised some eyebrows even further by audaciously comparing her situation to the slavery of her ancestors.

“I am a child of former slaves who had a system imposed on them,” Hill exclaimed in a forceful statement to the court. “I had an economic system imposed on me.” A little bit of advice to millionaire rock stars: unless you want your credibility rating and degree of public sympathy for you to plunge to zero, don’t compare the outcome of your own choices to the crushing misery of a slave.

Despite her mixed creative output and audience reception in recent years, Hill is one of the most successful women in the history of the music business. Now 37, she hit it big as a teenager in the 1990s with the Fugees before hitting it even bigger with her multiplatinum 1998 album The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill. She has a shelf full of Grammys, including one for co-producing Santana’s blockbuster Supernatural album.

In 2000, Hill began to feel the oppressive demands of fame and the music industry, and dropped out of the public eye supposedly to protect herself and her children, now numbering six, from its pressures. “I was told, ‘That’s how it goes, it comes with the territory.’ I came to be perceived as a cash cow and not a person. When people capitalize on a persona, they forget there is a person in there.”

Man’s Search for Offline Meaning

Last week technology writer Paul Miller returned to the internet after an entire year offline, an experiment to see how unplugging would affect his productivity and quality of life. At the outset, he believed not only that the internet was making him unproductive, but that “it lacked meaning. I thought it was ‘corrupting my soul.’” A year later, what did he conclude? “I’m supposed to tell you how it solved all my problems. I’m supposed to be enlightened. I’m supposed to be more ‘real,’ now. More perfect.” Supposed to, but there was a problem: “I was wrong.”

At 26, Miller had used the internet “constantly,” he says, from the age of 12, and made a living from it since he was 14. As a result, “I didn’t know myself apart from a sense of ubiquitous connection and endless information. I wondered what else there was to life.” With the backing of his employer, he decided, with no small degree of eager anticipation, to unplug, “find the real Paul, far away from all the noise, and become a better me.”

Everything began promisingly on May 1, 2012. He got outside to play Frisbee, take bike rides, meet with people in person. He pumped out essays and wrote half a novel. He lost 15 pounds effortlessly and bought new clothes. His attention span swelled. He interacted better with people. He lived in the moment. He got so in touch with his humanity that he cried during Les Miserables. He had indeed discovered the real Paul.

And then it all came undone. By the end of 2012,

I’d learned how to make a new style of wrong choices off the internet. I abandoned my positive offline habits, and discovered new offline vices. Instead of taking boredom and lack of stimulation and turning them into learning and creativity, I turned toward passive consumption and social retreat.

Schools for Subversion

On Monday, May 6 at the Luxe Hotel in Los Angeles, the David Horowitz Freedom Center and Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors are co-hosting a symposium and panel discussion entitled “Schools for Subversion: How Public Education Lays the Groundwork for University Radicalism.” The panel will feature FrontPage Magazine’s own classics professor Bruce Thornton, retired educator Larry Sand, “Dissident Prof” Mary Grabar, and Kyle Olson.

Olson is the publisher of EAGnews.org, a news service dedicated to education reform and school spending research, reporting, analysis and commentary. It is the flagship website of the Education Action Group Foundation. The author of Indoctrination: How ‘Useful Idiots’ Are Using Our Schools to Subvert American Exceptionalism, Olson has appeared on Fox News, the Fox Business Network, NPR and MSNBC, as well as scores of talk radio programs from coast to coast. His work has been cited by the Drudge Report, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.

Mark Tapson:         You recently appeared in a Fox & Friends segment called “The Trouble with Schools.” Briefly, what is the trouble with schools?

Suicide’s on the Rise. Now for Some Cute Guinea Pigs

The Atlantic online posted a rather shocking piece by Alexander Abad-Santos this week entitled, “3,026 More People Die from Suicide in America Each Year Than in Car Crashes.” As if that revelation itself weren’t depressing enough, what was also eye-opening – and inadvertently revealing – was the way in which Abad-Santos tried to give the bad news a lighthearted spin.

In its grimly-titled Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report for May 3, he wrote, the U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) examined an 11-year study of suicide figures and concluded that in 2009, “the number of deaths from suicide surpassed the number of deaths from motor vehicle crashes in the United States.”

An even more disturbing discovery: the age group that saw the biggest surge in suicides since the end of the millennium was Baby Boomers, Americans in their fifties. Their suicide rate boosted by nearly 50 percent. Concern about suicide usually focuses on troubled teens, not adults entering their golden years – what happened? The CDC's deputy director explained in The New York Times that the jump in Baby Boomer numbers is due partly to economic ills suffered during the study’s span of time.

After going on to detail the increase in the most popular methods for ending one’s own life (suffocation, poisoning and firearms, for those morbidly interested), Abad-Santos oddly chose to close with this:

Considering that we've just ruined your day — and that someone apparently shot himself in the head at an airport in Houston today — we leave you with this... a pair of guinea pig brothers chewing in unison:

And then he posted a 25-second video of two Guinea pigs comically chewing in sync.

Cheating = Extinction

In an Acculturated piece I wrote back in October called “The Culture of Cheating,” I mentioned the deeply corrosive effect that cheating has on a personal level. It can be easy to rationalize it when you’ve convinced yourself that cheating isn’t hurting anyone. But even if you’re never found out, it is a self-betrayal that shreds your integrity and your self-image, and repairing that internal damage is no easy task. And what about the external damage, to the broader society? Biology tells us that cheating equals extinction.

Biological populations, from microorganisms to humans, depend on the cooperation of their members in order to thrive as a society. But in any cooperative activity, there is the risk of “cheaters” benefitting from the productivity of others while making no contribution of their own. Take the slacker roommate, for example, who refuses to do his share of the housework. Cheaters exploit the system, taking without giving, with destabilizing consequences for the social unit as a whole. What happens if enough of this behavior spreads throughout the population? How much cooperation is necessary to maintain a society?

In a new study published this week in the PLOS Biology journal, MIT researchers Alvaro Sanchez and Jeff Gore (no relation to Al) investigated the competition between cooperating and cheating strains of a yeast colony. They found that, depending on the mix of strains, the yeast either achieves a stable coexistence or collapses for lack of cooperation. In other words, a yeast society dominated by non-producers – cheaters – is more likely to face extinction than one consisting entirely of producers, or cooperators.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Hollywood Awards Gala

The Hollywood Bureau of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) had its 22nd Annual Media Awards Gala last Saturday at the Hilton in Long Beach, California, bringing together “American Muslims, TV and film studio executives, public officials, interfaith leaders, and media professionals to celebrate our honorees’ achievements in using the arts to foster positive social change.” “Positive social change” in this context is Muslim Brotherhood-speak for “the fundamental transformation of American culture.”

MPAC’s busy Hollywood Bureau, established shortly after 9/11 and sharing the Brotherhood’s subversive ideology, claims to serve as a professional resource to the entertainment industry by providing accurate information on Islam and Muslims. It has consulted with the producers of such TV shows as 24, Bones, Lie to Me, 7th Heaven, The Good Wife, and Homeland. It offers script consultation (read: approval) for filmmakers who want to get Islam “right,” and helps Hollywood professionals connect with Muslim filmmakers, writers and actors.

For the past 21 years, MPAC has honored “Voices of Courage and Conscience” who use art and media “to create accurate portrayals and enriching dialogue around important social, cultural and political issues.” A few of the “accurate and enriching” artists and their works that MPAC has honored with awards in the past are filmmakers Michael Moore (for Bowling for Columbine) and Spike Lee (for Malcolm X), producer Lawrence Bender (for An Inconvenient Truth), George Clooney’s production company (for the morally inverted Syriana), and actor Alec Baldwin (“for his courageous commitment to social justice and civil liberties, and for standing up against violations of Muslims’ civil liberties in national media interviews and at the 2004 Democratic National Convention”).

This year, MPAC honored three projects: the Oscar-nominated 5 Broken Cameras, the Fox TV series Bones and the Sundance Film Institute’s Feature Film Program.

Aafia Sidiqqui: Repaying Opportunity with Terror

One of the more jaw-dropping excuses that the news media have concocted in defense of the Boston Marathon bombers’ murderous evil is that America herself failed the two immigrant brothers. “Expecting hospitality,” sympathized an American University professor, “they felt alienated and disillusioned, even with all of the opportunities and privileges available to them as citizens of this country.” This is reminiscent of a parallel tale of opportunities and privileges made available to another jihadist immigrant –Aafia Siddiqui, who attended the same Boston mosque as the Tsarnaev brothers, benefited from the same welcome embrace of our society, and like them, still repaid it by plotting terror.

The Pakistani Siddiqui immigrated to the United States in 1990, graduated from MIT on a full scholarship and obtained a Ph.D. in 2001 from Brandeis. A full scholarship to MIT – quite an opportunity and a privilege. Described by her fellow students as “religious,” she joined the Muslim Students' Association, a creation of the subversive Muslim Brotherhood, and solicited money for Brooklyn’s Al Kifah Refugee Center, an early nerve center for al Qaeda in America.

When Pakistan asked the U.S. for help in 1995 to combat religious extremism, Siddiqui circulated an email deriding Pakistan for joining “the typical gang of our contemporary Muslim governments,” and closing with a quote from the Quran warning Muslims not to take Jews and Christians as friends. She wrote three guides for teaching Islam, expressing the hope in one that “America becomes a Muslim land.” Meanwhile she took a 12-hour pistol training course.

Christianity, Islam, and Atheism

Now that the Boston bombers have turned out, contrary to the fervent hope of the left, to be not Tea Partiers but Muslims, the media are spinning the terrorists’ motive away from jihad and shrugging, helplessly mystified, about the “senseless” attacks. And so our willful blindness about Islam continues. Nearly a dozen years after the 9/11 attacks, too many Americans still cling to militant denial about the clear and present danger of an Islamic fundamentalism surging against an anemic Western culture. What will it take to educate them? And once awakened, what steps can we take to reverse the tide?

The vicious Boston attack makes these questions and William “Kirk” Kilpatrick’s new book Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West all the more timely. In addition to being an occasional contributor to FrontPage Magazine, Kilpatrick is the author of other books, including Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right from Wrong and Books That Build Character: A Guide to Teaching Your Child Moral Values Through Stories, and his articles about Islam have appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, Catholic World Report, and other publications. He was interviewed here by Jamie Glazov at FrontPage about the new book, which he intended not only as a wake-up call to the West about Islam, but also as a practical guide, especially for Christians, to pushing back against its spread and to countering Islam’s Western apologists.

Christianity, Islam, and Atheism opens with a section titled “The Islamic Threat,” in which Kilpatrick describes the rise of supremacist Islam and our correspondingly tepid defense of Western values. Our collapse in the face of Islam, he says, is due in large part to our abandonment of Christianity, which has led to “a population vacuum and a spiritual vacuum” that Islam has rushed to fill. “A secular society… can’t fight a spiritual war,” Kilpatrick writes. Contrary to the multiculturalist fantasy dominant in the West today, “cultures aren’t the same because religions aren’t the same. Some religions are more rational, more compassionate, more forgiving, and more peaceful than others.” This is heresy in today’s morally relativistic world, but it’s a critical point because “as Christianity goes, so goes the culture.”

The Left's Top Six Boston Bombing Lies

You have to admire how, when it comes to pushing their agendas, the American left stays relentlessly on point. Nothing stalls, much less derails, their locomotive, not even a terrorist act on our own shores. As Mad Men’s adman extraordinaire Don Draper tells his clients, “If you don’t like the conversation, change it.” The left doesn’t like the current Boston bombing conversation because it’s about Islam, their partner in an unholy alliance; so they quite simply do everything in their power to change it. How? Let us count the ways.

Blame the right. Immediately after last week’s Boston Marathon terrorism, the mainstream news media began speculating that right-wingers were behind the blasts. And by speculating, I mean demonizing, because that was the left-leaning media’s fervent intent – to not let the crisis go to waste, to cast suspicion upon the overlapping segments of society they are hell-bent on “otherizing,” to use their own terminology: law-abiding Tea Partiers, patriots, veterans, Republicans, the NRA, white people, Christians. A CNN analyst, to name only one example, focused the discussion on “right-wing extremists.” More blatantly, Salon put its hateful bigotry on display in an article entitled, incredibly, “Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American.”

Blame the NRA. Once the ongoing investigation revealed it to be beyond dispute that the terrorists weren’t Tea Partiers, the left didn’t miss a beat. Even while the remaining fugitive was still at large, MSNBC’s attack dog Lawrence O’Donnell shamelessly blamed the National Rifle Association for hindering the investigation by having lobbied to block a taggant “that would enable tracing of the purchase of gunpowder”:

The NRA’s effort to guarantee that America's mass murderers are the best equipped mass murderers in the world is not limited to those who use automatic weapons and high capacity magazines. The NRA is also in the business of helping bombers get away with their crimes.

O’Donnell conveniently neglected to mention that an independent scientific ruling years ago had recommended, for various reasons, against the use of taggants.

Sex, Fame and Videotape

Farrah Abraham, twenty-year-old star of the MTV reality show Teen Mom whose bestselling autobiography last year detailed her turbulent childhood, pregnancy, and motherhood at sixteen, caused a media stir recently when she was spotted leaving the offices of adult film company Vivid Entertainment hand-in-hand with porn star James Deen. Vivid is the go-to distributor for celebrities exchanging a sex tape for big bucks and fresh notoriety.

Sure enough, Abraham had made a sex tape with Deen. Why? At first she claimed, oddly, that she wanted one as a sort of nostalgic keepsake for when she is older. But Deen soon let it slip that Abraham’s actual plan was to make a professionally produced porn video and pass it off as a leaked sex tape for the aforementioned money and fame. She didn’t deny it; indeed, rather than exhibit any sense of embarrassment, much less shame, that she was literally prostituting herself to the highest bidder, Abraham seemed concerned only about reassuring her impressionable fans that she had practiced safe sex:

As my young fans and others should expect, I made sure my partner was tested and clean as well as contraception was used… As for the company who has a copy of my personal video, my lawyer is taking care of that matter. I will not be settling for anything less than a couple million.

So now we have disturbing official confirmation that young women today view sex tapes as an entrepreneurial endeavor. This is due in large part to the empire built by Kim Kardashian, arguably the most famous woman in the world, atop her own sex tape.