Reagan's jihad on the Free Speech Movement -- Final End

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:58:43 06/10/02 Mon
Author: Drummond
Subject: Reagan's jihad on the Free Speech Movement

What isn't widely known is that Ronald Reagan was once a self-identified liberal, and that his political career was boosted by his turning in the names of friends in the Screen Actors Guild with views he later deemed subversive. He later built bridges with the FBI by helping stage a holy war against the Free Speech Movement, at UC Berkely in particular.

The largest military R&D lab is Livermore, under the authority and realm of UC Berkely. During the 50s, UC president Clark Kerr hired many scientists who had been involved in the Manhattan project, a good portion of them leftists, and refused to fire professors who criticized the loyalty oath. Kerr was no radical, endorsing the barring of communists from teaching positions, but he was principled in other respects. Hoover apparently hated him, especially after he let loose an essay question for the aptitude test that called for criticism of national police organizations like the FBI. The anti House Un-American Activities protests at SF City Hall in 1960 also freaked the FBI out, because they couldn't figure out who organized them.

The article linked below is an in depth analysis of 10,000 FBI documents obtained after a long court battle through the now endangered Freedom of Information Act (the "anti-government" party is bent on killing the very sunshine laws that provide any promise of accountability whatsoever). Apparently Reagan lied on his clearance form committing a felony, and helped prepare memos to the White House with slanderous claims about various figures, and helped the FBI in their concerted effort to destroy the career of Clark Kerr, who made Berkely one of the best schools in the country. Reagan's handlers coined the term "Filthy Speech Movement," and earned himself the political support of the FBI, which was verified in a memo just released.

The idea that the FBI should do anything but gather information and arrest lawbreakers is in my mind totalitarian. It involved itself in a political effort to undermine opposition to the war, civil rights abuses, and other causes. Essentially, it was a politburo, as revealed during the cointelpro hearings of the following decades.

Of course, they don't do that anymore, right?

And now, they are demanding the right to once again harass domestic political movements they don't like.

The real question is about the records that they weren't forced to produce, and the information that was censored. I wonder if we aren't just touching the tip of the iceberg.

http://sfgate.com/campus/

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

More dirt on US presidents Drummond? -- PAUL., 18:37:06 06/11/02 Tue
- Carter was the closest to the choirboy -- Drummond, 19:39:13 06/11/02 Tue
  - I have no trust in any human goverment, -- PAUL., 07:52:23 06/13/02 Thu
    - Does government have to be perfect? -- Drummond, 18:23:51 06/13/02 Thu
      - I am but not with mans goverments, -- PAUL., 19:05:23 06/13/02 Thu
        If God created the world to be perfect, what happened? -- Drummond, 00:49:08 06/14/02 Fri
        Mans freewill happened.. -- PAUL., 04:08:04 06/14/02 Fri
        Sounds like freewill was a mistake if perfection was the goal -- Drummond, 13:07:53 06/14/02 Fri
        Freewill is not imperfection, -- PAUL., 13:48:20 06/14/02 Fri
        Well, then, perfection was not the goal was it? -- Drummond, 00:40:15 06/15/02 Sat
        Reread the last message, -- PAUL., 19:09:08 06/15/02 Sat
        The goal -- Neuminas, 07:00:12 06/16/02 Sun
        I just think... -- Drummond, 00:04:26 06/18/02 Tue
        Nothing imperfect comes from God, -- PAUL., 16:02:54 06/18/02 Tue
        The Bible says everything comes from God (NT) -- Drummond, 08:55:16 06/19/02 Wed