SEARCH RESULTS

Sino-Vietnamese relations are two thousand years old. Some of the history is considered myth but nonetheless celebrated by the Vietnamese. The Chinese finally conquered Vietnam in 111 BC. “The occupation of Viet-Nam was to last, with a few brief interruptions due to rebellions, for 1050 years, until 939 AD.” (Bernard Fall. Last Reflections on a War. 37) Resistance to Chinese rule began as early as 39 AD. and was led by the Trung sisters known as Hai Bà Trưng. Honored in Vietnam they held out against the Chinese for two years before they were defeated and committed suicide. Another female resistance leader of Vietnam was Trieu Au in the 3rd century AD who led a “thousand-man army” that was ultimately defeated by the Chinese. Many Vietnamese leaders resisting the Chinese were actually Chinese themselves. In 542 A.D. a Chinese named Ly Bon led resistance to Chinese rule. The Chinese leaders of Vietnam accepted their role as leaders of Vietnam and not as vassals of China. (Joseph Buttinger. Vietnam: a political history. 35) Nevertheless, they spoke a local dialect and created their own Vietnamese culture. (Joseph Buttinger. Vietnam: a political history. 36) In 939 A.D. the Vietnamese asserted full independence from China by defeating them at the Red River Valley. (Joseph Buttinger. Vietnam: a political history. 37) This “success . . . was due not only to China’s internal problems but also to the fact that the struggle for independence no longer rested on a narrow social base. Gradually it took on the character of a national revolution.” (Joseph Buttinger. Vietnam: a political history. 33-34)

Elizabeth Becker. You Don’t Belong Here: How Three Women Rewrote the Story of War. 2021 The three women are Catherine LeRoy, ubiquitous French photojournalist famous for her unbelievable close in shots of combat and her pictures of parachuting American forces while she too parachuted. Kate Webb - New Zealand reporter on the war. Kate Webb had been captured by the North Vietnamese and then wrote a book about it. (10) Francis “Frenchie” Fitzgerald, author of the classic Fire in the Lake which is still and always be the book about the Vietnam War. Sylvana Foa - reporter in Phnom Penh, Cambodia during the Vietnam War. Foa angered the US Ambassador to Cambodia by “revealing that the United States embassy was illegally directing the pilots” bombing Cambodia in the early 1970s.

STRANGE JUSTICE JANE MAYER AND JILL ABRAMSON There’s a whole lot more on the Republican smear effort against Hill. I am trying to concentrate on Thomas. To get Clarence Thomas on the supreme court the “bush administration launched a lobbying offensive that employed all the tricks and tactics of modern campaign. Bush manipulated a “weak and scandal-ridden Senate”, worked with the “religious right” and created “grassroots black support”. Thomas spent ten years trying to get on the Supreme Court. Mayer and Abramson spent several years trying to and interviewing Anita Hill. Hill initially resisted the entreaties of Mayer and Abramson. She had been so traumatized by her treatment testifying about the sexual harassment of Clarence Thomas that when she returned to Oklahoma had got “an unlisted phone number . . . installed a security system . . . and did not go out in public.” (1) Finally, Anita Hill decided to fight back. She had been attacked in the press and by David Brock in his book The Real Anita Hill which criticized Hill as being unbalanced, had a sex life, “and both personally and politically ,motivated to lie about how Clarence Thomas had treated her.” Brock has since disavowed his work as a conservative attack dog. (2) Hill met with Mayer and Abramson and over a period of time opened up to the two journalists although she expressed doubts about the success of her side of the story. After the hearings she suffered from the constant vitriol against her. (2-3) Thomas viewed himself as the victim in the congressional hearings not Hill. His “reputation had beeb deliberately besmirched by his political enemies.” They were the “purveyors of the New Intolerance” which targeted black conservatives. He challenged “current social and cultural gimmicks” and “the latest ideological fad”. In college you had to have an Afro. Being a black conservative meant you were a traitor to your race. As a result and following his Supreme Court confirmation, he read the Moonie paper the Washington Times. While on the Supreme Court “Thomas so determinedly out of touch that associates occasionally had to tell him about about current events. (6) Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall who Thomas replaced had no kind words for Thomas and other black conservatives. He referred to them as “goddam black sellouts who directly benefited from the legal remedies such as affirmative action and then denounced them.” Thomas benefited from this is elementary, high school and then being admitted to Yale Law School. (14) The first of Clarence Thomas’ lies are that he “did not ask to be nominated, I did not lobby for it . . . I did not aspire to it.” But people who met Thomas as early as 1981 said he wanted to replace Thurgood Marshall on the court. (18) And, quite the contrary, Thomas was not the best qualified person to be on the Supreme Court as George H.W. Bush asserted. He “had been on the bench for less than two years reference his current judicial p[opition. Bush claimed that Thomas being black had nothing to do with his nomination to the court. This “was so disingenuous as to be embarrassing. (21) Susan Jane Hoerchner knew of a top government official who had sexually harassed one of her friends from law school. That official was in charge of investigating such claims. (21-22) She knew Thomas was that official. (22) Hill told Hoerchner that she remained silent about Thomas because she did not want another supreme court nominee to go through what Robert bork had gone through. (24) Hill told another friend, Ellen Wells, about Thomas. (213) Nothing had ever come up about Thomas since he began being confirmed for various positions since 1981. (26) “Despite his active participation in college athletics and an ability even now to bench-press 250 pounds, Thomas, it turned out, had managed to get a draft deferment for “curvature of the spine,” which enabled him to avoid military service in Vietnam. He also admitted that, as he had previously told the FBI, he had take “a few puffs” of marijuana as a student.” (27) Thomas’ confirmation hearing would be guided by corporate lobbyist Kenneth Duberstein. (24) Thomas would be with him and other s who would coach Thomas. (28) PIN POINT a” tiny, Baptist, churchgoing community.” (33) in the mid-1980s Thomas began giving speeches about his spring ing in PIN POINT. (31) “Only Ronald Reagan, the son of an alcoholic sho salesman surpassed Thomas in his knack for transforming heartrending personal anecdote into high political art. (32) “Thomas had already defined his political qualifications less in terms of this work than of his life.” (32) He claimed he rose professionally without the aid of others. He continued, “Honesty, hard work, discipline, and I would throw in chastity, obedience and humility.” (32) As a result, he opposed the welfare state. (32) His mother was legitimate; his grand father abandoned her; (32) His mother went to live with a strict aunt in Pin Point Georgia. (33) In 1948, Clarence Thomas “was born in a rough wooden shack . . . The walls were insulated only with newspapers and caulked with library paste . . . Instead of electricity there were kerosene lamps and instead of plumbing, an outhouse.” His mother had a relationship with a man who deserted her because he impregnated another woman. (33) Nevertheless, the strict morals of the community made the above behavior rare. (34) “What whites don’t realize , said a black journalist who came to know Thomas fairly well, is that [he] is not just a black guy alienated in a white world. He starts out as a little black boy not accepted in the black world. . . . a community that is far more close-minded and rigid than many whites imagine.” (34) At the age of seven, Thomas’ mother abandoned him and his siblings for a man who did not want the children. So, Thomas was abandoned first by his father and then by his mother. (37) His grandfather Myers Anderson although raised a Baptist converted to Catholicism in part so that his grandsons could attend Catholic schools on reduced tuition. Thomas’ grandfather was a taskmaster, abusive and emotionally distant. Ironically, Thomas spoke well of his grandfather at his confirmation hearings. (38) The nuns at the Catholic Schools were also brutal. (39) Contrary to the deprivation and abuse Thomas suffered growing up Mayer and Abramson cite a friend of Thomas’ who claimed that, “It’s a myth those boys [Thomas and his brother] were poor . . . they always had pocket money and never went for anything.” (40) Rather than rising on his own, other friends pointed out that his grandfather gave him support. (40) Thomas emphasized the “disadvantages” of segregated education which meant little funding for African American schools and that he had to over come this. However, he received a good education in the Catholic schools he attended even though they were segregated. (41-42) Because of “that Thomas never shared the plight of more ordinary blacks.” Thomas would criticize the Supreme Court Brown vs. Board of Education ruling because it assumed “that all-black institutions were necessarily inferior.” Thomas wanted respect for “black separatism.” (42) Thomas said he “fended for himself” with no government help. He forgot government policies outlawing segregation which meant Thomas did not have to go to the back of the bus. (42) In addition, Thomas’ “grandfather was and active member of the NAACP.” Nevertheless, Thomas showed no appreciation for his grandfather’s work. (43) His grandfather was angry, saying that Thomas told people he would return to Georgia as a civil rights lawyer but turned out “Thomas just helped Thomas.” But Thomas gave speeches praising his grandfather. This is a confused man. (44) Because of his small build in his youth, and his exceptionally dark skin, the kids in his black school call him “Nigger Naps.” This had an adverse affect on a young man trying to find friends and himself. “Thomas would speak of the self-hatred and the way it strengthened his determination to prove his tormentors wrong.” (45) He and some of this friends believed that the civil rights movement did not represent the pure African but existed for the “light skinned cartel.” (45-46) Nevertheless, he preferred light skinned blacks and would eventually marry a white woman. He told “his mother there was no way he could have been seriously interested in Hill, because she was too dark for his taste.” Continued racist comments any Christian whites infuriated him. (48-49) He would continue to find Christians and Catholics as racist as anyone. Yet, the whites don’t remember it that way. They note that contrary to being ignored for his athletic abilities he was given an award. (49) At Holy Cross College he read great black authors such as Richard Wright. He began to look into American racism and solutions. He quickly “rejected many of the orthodoxies concerning racial remedies well before many of his peers; he questions, for instance, the benefits of affirmative action and welfare long before it was fashionable to do so - almost, it sometimes seemed to his friends, because doing so was unfashionable.” (51) At the same time he “flirted” with the black power movement and even “hung a Malcolm X poster in his dorm room.” (51) Thomas was alway the odd person out in any debate. For instance, “when the black students on campus voted to live together in a separate dorm, Thomas was the sole person against it. He argued . . . that if blacks wanted to segregate themselves, they might as well attend a black school like Howard University.” He also did not want whites to have an excuse for avoiding him. Years later, as a conservative, he regretted his stances as he felt “isolated from both blacks and whites. (58) Instead of socializing Thomas studied. Blacks found that they had to study harder as whites believed that affirmative action helped “dummies” get into college. Thomas cited this as his opposition to affirmative action as it stigmatized blacks. The same thing occurred at Yale Law School. (58-59) However, other blacks did not feel “looked down upon” as Thomas did. And although he accepted financial aid through affirmative action Thomas “ later discounted any benefit he’d gotten from the affirmative action.” Thomas claims that it wasn’t affirmative action as whites perceived but that the whites stopped stopping blacks from getting in. “I wanted to right some wrongs that I saw in Savannah.” (64) Thomas became a liberal Democrat and voted for George McGovern in 1972. He even smoked marijuana. However, his “views on women were distinctly old-fashioned.” (59) He felt they should be in the kitchen. (60) Thomas opposed vehemently sex before marriage however “showed an unusual interest in talking about sex in gross and explicit anatomical language.” He was also obsessed with porn. Thus, after Anita Hill described Thomas’ references to porn his former classmates were not surprised. Those classmates said he described porn movies and materials in detail. They “did not believe his professions of horror at this kind of grotesque language.”( 61) However, his supporters, Senator John Danforth of Missouri and Oral Roberts University Dean Charles Kothe “never heard Thomas utter a profane work” or comment on pornographic movies. (63) He truly hated wealthy people whether they be black or white or mixed race. (65) He constantly complained that elite law firms in Georgia rejected him and that meant he could not do justice in Savannah. But Savannah law firms offered him positions. Thomas has a selective and inaccurate memory. He quickly moved on and de cited to attach himself to the Republicans who were going places, in Thomas’ words. (71) He worked in Missouri Attorney General John Danforth’s office where they challenged Roe v. Wade in a lawsuit with Planned Parenthood. Thomas participated in discussions but did not offer an opinion. In his confirmation hearings he dented that “he had ever debated the ruling in his life.” He opposed abortion on demand because if his mother had one he wouldn’t be here. (72) According to his sister, Emma Mae, [in 1974- she had an abortion and talked to Thomas about it. He was understanding because she had been told that she could die because she had used an IUD and still became pregnant. (72) In 1989 he filled out a questionnaire to be a federal judge and could not mention any jury trials. (72) Heavily influenced by conservative Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution. Also, African-American J.A. “Jay” Parker published the Lincoln Review which was very right-wing. Parker had supported Barry Goldwater fro president in 1964; and believed that government had no responsibility whatsoever to take care of the destitute. He opposed both state and local aid, whether for food, clothing, or housing.” Thomas found a kindred spirit. (76) Thomas attacked the class action lawsuit to fight against illegal discrimination and believed that each case should be decided on its merits. (78) Regarding sexual harassment Thomas believed the definition too broad and vague and could lead to trivial complaints. He also believed that you could not enforce any such rules. (78) Complaining about welfare in an interview with Juan Williams, Thomas said that his “sister is so dependent, gets mad when the mailman is late with her check. . . .She and her kids have no motivation.” However, by that time Thomas’s sister was working double shifts at minimum wage. This bothered her as Thomas did not mention extenuating circumstances. (79) She was taking care of their aunt who had a stroke. (80) Although a Reagan supporter he initially said he would refuse to work in the EEOC for Reagan as it would derail his career as a black man. (80) Thomas was a perfectionist over all parts of this life. His first wife go into an accident after falling asleep at the wheel. In the hospital Thomas berated her for damaging the car. (84) Thomas began asking Anita Hill out in 1981 and she did not directly say she was not romantically interested. (98-100) Anita Hill had confided in 1981 with Bradley Mims about Clarence Thomas’ behavior. He remembered her as having been upset and not wanting to talk about Thomas’ use of sexually explicit language. (101) However, Hill knew Thomas was going places and wanted to ride his coattails. He was “the best and worst thing that had ever happened to her”. (103) Thomas was nominated to be head of the EEOC after “less than a year as head of the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights.” He never led a large organization and as the Reagan Administration had difficulty finding blacks for positions Thomas became the only person considered. (104) “To the surprise of many who learned of her complaints about Thomas, Anita Hill moved to the EEOC with him after he won confirmation.” Hill said that Thomas’ harassment stopped as he was dating a woman named Lillian McEwan. (104) “the temporary cessation of Thomas’ harassment is central to Hill’s credibility; it makes more plausible both her decision to follow him to the EEOC and also her story that during this period she allowed him to drive her home one evening and come into her apartment in order to help her hook up a new stereo. Hd he been actively harassing her, both actions -each requiring her to choose to remain in close contact with him - would be difficult to fathom. Hut if she believed that Thomas was safely involved with another woman, she might well have felt able to resume friendlier relations.” (104) However, Hill and Thomas contradicted each other. Mims recalled Hill asking him help with the stereo which he knew a lot about. So he was surprised that, although being upset with Thomas, she asked him for assistance. (104) “Hill testified that among the reasons she chose to follow him [to the EEOC] was her fear that without Thomas, her job at the Department of Education wasn’t secure. . . . Thomas’ defenders . . . . [pointed out] that her job was a career civil service slot, not a political one, and thus virtually impossible to eliminate.” (105) In addition, Hill felt obligated to work with Thomas as he hired her and given her a chance.” (106) After his romantic relationship with a different woman died Thomas began his sexual attentiveness, according to Hill. (107) Many people recall the Clarence Thomas statement that a pubic hair was on his Coke. (108) But some people don’t remember if they hear it first-hand. However, the statement resonated with Thomas’ Holy Cross and Yale colleagues. (108-109) Henry Terry, a colleague from Yale said, “When Anita started talking, I knew the man was guilty.” (109) Despite Thomas’ documented obsession with pornography he denied every hearing about Long Dong Silver. However, Barry Maddux who owned a video store that rented porn said Thomas was a regular customer. (109) He also had a stash of Playboy magazines. (110-111) Ronald Reagan “opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act” from the beginning. Thomas was appointed head of the EEOC under Reagan and the successful actions of the EEOC were stopped in their tracks by Thomas. The agency hired unqualified people and so, was called the “Turkey Farm.” (118-119) As for Clarence Thomas he never really liked the idea of “integration as a goal in and of itself.” He believed that Affirmative Action was a crutch that degraded African-Americans implying that they “needed assistance.” (119) In addition, he did not believe that America had become a color blind society. “The playing field, as he saw it, w Ould never be level, and government could never remedy prejudice so deep and widespread. . . . He considered himself something of an African-American nationalist, a radical who could, in tow speeches in 1983, praise the Reverend Louis Farrakhan.” (120) On the other hand, he lamented the critical treatment of black conservatives; made his blood boil.” (120) He complained constantly that black civil rights leaders did nothing but “bitch.” Interestingly, he also complained that conservatives wanted black conservatives to “caricatures of sorts.” Yet, that is what Thomas did around white people, according to Angela Wright. He believed that blacks were parasites but that he, Thomas, was “a self-made man.” (121) Wright, recalled that Thomas expressed a like for those pinkaninny dolls. [Wright had a temper.] As an administrator, Thomas formed circle around himself which was meant to make him look good but had nothing do with the EEOC. (123) He took disagreement in the office personally. He “did not tolerate dissent.” (124) Also, under his stewardship cases backlogged. A frustrated Lynn Bruner complained and finally informed the press. Thomas as so furious he downgraded a previous evaluation and demoted her for, describing “the chairman [Thomas] in a negative light.”(130) Five years later “Bruner remained angry” and this hostile work environment explains why Anita Hill failed to “file a formal complaint against Thomas.” (130-131) “During his confirmation hearings Thomas” expressed disbelief at Anita Hill’s accusations of his sexual harassment of her “given his strict rule about not mixing his personal life with his professional life.” However, “three other women who worked for Thomas there [at the EEOC] experienced, witnessed, or were told about behavior on his part that was strikingly similar to that which Hill described. Not one of these women ever met Hill before she came forward, and although all three agreed to testify on her behalf . . . none was called.” The Judiciary Committee thought these women had been influenced because they had been fired.” (131) Angela Wright “swore in an affidavit that Thomas began to consistently pressure me to date him.” (131-132) He asked her the size of her breasts. She tried to change the subject. (132) Told her he liked her hairy legs. (133) He referred to another woman as “Big Ass.” (134) Mayer and Abramson show a pattern of behavior suggesting that Thomas used his political power to pursue women who worked for him.” (139) Thomas became enamored with the idea that “God-given natural law should take precedence over man made law.” He would use this to oppose abortion. (141) Juan Williams wrote presented Thomas as an open minded person in a 1987 article with the Atlantic. “But from 1985 on, Thomas’ public stands were almost uniformly synchronized with those of the most conservative elements in the Justice Department.” (142) During the confirmation hearings Senator Joe Biden questioned Thomas about this and incredulously “Thomas fully retreated form his past. . . . I don’t see a role for natural law in constitutional adjudication.” (209) He also back away for his agreement with an anti-abortion paper. (209) Nevertheless, he was reconfirmed by the Senate in 1986 to lead the EEOC. (143) He met his wife Ginni in 1987. They appeared to be opposites. She was, however, more conservative than Thomas. She introduced Thomas to the Truro Episcopal Church in Fairfax Virginia. It was “popular with Reagan administrations ultraconservatives.” (144) Anita Hill became a professor of law at Oral Roberts University in Tulsa Oklahoma. Obnoxious red-neck students harassed her. They disrupted her classes. (147) While teaching law at Oklahoma State University Hill spent a summer at American University College of Law and was criticized for her support for Robert bork. She didn’t like all of his views but thought the attacks on him unwarranted. (148) Clarence Thomas wanted Robert Bork’s vacant seat on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. (149) However, a hurt Thomas reckoned he had a low profile. (150) In 1988, however, Thomas launched “an aggressive, canny, and in the end very effective campaign for the [Supreme] Court” despite his later assertions that “he had never lobbied for” it. (151) First, Thomas met with a representative of the conservative Free Congress Foundation, Patrick McGuigan. McGuigan admired Thomas although he had never met him. (150-151) Thomas met other conservatives through the Federalist Society. (152) The next step was to lobby President George H.W. Bush. A friend relayed that Clarence Thomas liked Ayn Rand. (153) Finally, after all the politicking Clarence Thomas made the list and was nominated to the D.C. court. (154) However, there were civil rights activists and the NAACP to placate due to his arch conservative views. He successfully smooth talked them into at least not opposing his nomination. (157) A conservative lobbyist took up Thomas’ cause to make sure he had Senate support for hims confirmation. (158) In February 1990 his confirmation hearings for the District Court began. Thomas impressed Democrats “a reasoned supporter of judicial restraint, not a conservative ideologue. I think my obligation . . . is to follow the Supreme Court precedent, not to establish law on my own, he testified.” The hearings went well except for a few women’s and civil rights organizations. (159-160) Some Senators voted for Thomas on the basis that the president had the right to choose his own person for the court. HOGWASH! The Senate is not their to rubber stamp! (160) The DC Circuit Court had major influence in the country. The court before Reagan was considered liberal and activist. And, they frequently mediated disputes between the executive and legislative branches of government. (160) Under Reagan Antonin Scalia, Kenneth Starr and then Clarence Thomas served. (161) As a circuit judge Thomas rarely spoke. Abramson and Mayer surmise he did not want to leave a paper trail. (161) He ruled on a case involving Ralston Purina dog food. One of the owners was Senator John Danforth who helped Thomas’ career. Some thought Thomas should have recused himself. (161-162) Thomas also ruled in a case that freed Oliver North. Twice publicly he had praised North. (162) “There was a flurry of excitement in Thomas’ chambers when Justice Brennan retired after the 1990 Court Term.” However no one wanted to move that fast. (162) Upon Thurgood Marshall’s retirement, President Bush drew up a list of replacements that included no white men. (166) Thomas was chosen but there was a concern that he was “too extreme.” (167) “Thomas would now need what he had never before valued, popularity among African-Americans - or, failing that, at least the appearance of it.” (168) Bush consulted with the Sullivan Group, an organization of black conservatives. Several of them “expressed reservations.” However, Bush needed a conservative. (169) The White House had a Pin Point plan for Thomas to keep telling about the hardships he overcame. (170) Although it appeared that there was spontaneous public support for Thomas, it was the “professional politicians and special interest groups” who organized for him. (170) The White House was informed of a “federal anti-lobbying” law which “prohibited the use of taxpayer funds to spread domestic propaganda or to organize outside lobbying campaigns to pressure Congress. . . . But the law had plenty of loopholes.” They found a way around the law. (172) The White House worked with people who had known Thomas in Pin Point and worked to have them testify for Thomas at the hearings. (180) The White House also worked within the black National Bar Association. (182) The key issue would be if “Thomas will be favorable to civil rights enforcement.” Barbara Arnwine noted that Thomas opposed a school desegregation rolling, was hostile to the Voting Rights Act, and, had himself been lax on enforcing civil rights regulations. (183-184) There were many shenanigans over the Associations vote. To the point that one member said they would testify against Thomas if asked to testify. (184) To continue encouraging black citizens to support Thomas’ confirmation two white fundamentalist organizations created the African-American Freedom Alliance. Their ads linked Thomas’ confirmation to the success of blacks overall in America. They said, “As the left strives to keep Judge Clarence Thomas from his seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, it’s like forcing blacks to take a seat in the back of the bus.” (184-185) Right-wing, conservative, fundamentalist preachers and political pundits strategized, organized and lobbied African-Americans to get Thomas on the Supreme Court. (184-192) All this was successful as “Thomas’ standing among blacks had risen to more than 65 percent approval in most national polls.” (195) In 1991 Democrats had 57 Senators and the Republicans had 43 Senators. (196) The White House relied on “the Senate’s traditional deference to a president’s choice of nominee.” In addition, the Democrats had lost their clout in the Senate. (197) “The Democrats not only lacked discipline; by 1991 most of them also lacked courage.” The Regan victory of 1980 led Democrats to shift to a conservative ideology. “The very word liberal became an embarrassment.” They lived in constant fear of being targeted with negative campaigns focusing on single divisive issues such as abortion and gun control. (197) Furthermore, Bush’s racist campaign against Michael Dukakis and the Republican attack on racial quotas for affirmative action, the Democrats froze. (198) Later, Thomas supporters offered funding to those Democrats who would support Thomas’ nomination. (200) Other political machinations were used against Democrats in order to get votes for Thomas. As the hearings approached Clarence “Thomas had to be throughly coached, first, to protect himself against allegations that he lacked the legal depth to be a Supreme Court justice, and second, to soften the rougher edges of his ideology. (202) Duberstein instructed Thomas to appear as amiable, flexible, and moderate inside the Beltway as his supporters outside the Beltway had been assured by the likes of Gary Bauer that he was not.” (203) That would be difficult as Thomas left a paper trail of incendiary opinions he authored to precisely ingratiate himself with the conservatives. He felt uncomfortable hiding this side of himself. “Left to his own devices he would have given the Senate and the public a more forthright and illuminating exposition of his views.” (203) Abortion would not be discussed. The White House did not want to alienate moderate Republicans. (203) The American Bar Association gave “Thomas the tepid rating of qualified.” White senators were averse to getting in the way of the only black supreme court justice in American history. (206) During the hearings Thomas refused to “state disposition on abortion.” His friends found him insincere. The real Clarence Thomas would have been honest to a fault claimed a friend. (209) Hill had conflict about whether she should come out about Thomas as his hearings approached. She not only remembered her problems with him but she also became concerned about his sharp shift to the right “as a doctrinaire ideologue. . . . In the later Reagan years, she felt Thomas had ceased to have the open mind required of a judge.” (214) On the other had, “Hill had . . . become more liberal and more concerned with women’s rights - she had kept up sporadic contacts with Thomas since leaving the capital in 1983. . . . Hill chose to satay in touch with Thomas because it was good for her career.” (214) Not filing a complaint against Thomas Hill did what “the majority of sexual harassment victims” did. (215) During the hearings “Thomas alleged that Hill and her advisers had concocted the entire harassment story in an effort to destroy me.”[sounds like Trump: me, me, me] (219) “Thomas was consumed with outrage.” (237) The great constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe called Senator Joe Biden to inform him that he was concerned about Anita Hill’s statements. (239) “Oh boy, this is trouble, was the first reaction of Alan Simpson, the Wyoming Republican who was staunchly behind Thomas.” (252) Other conservatives also were “caught off guard” by Hill’s allegations. (251) Men who knew of Thomas’ interest in the film Bad Mama Hama and his collection of “sexually explicit magazines . . . began to think seriously about the committee.” (253) Senator Howard Metzenbaum “commented that Joe [Biden] bent over too far to accommodate the Republicans, who were going to get Thomas on the Court come hell or high water. Or, as and adviser to Senator Kennedy put it . . . Biden agreed to the terms of the people who were out to disembowel Hill.” (259) Thomas’ supporters decided to attack Hill’s credibility. Her veracity, her motives, her private life, and ever her sanity would come under assault. . . . Hill’s apparently pristine character would have to be completely transformed.” (267) They found records of phone calls from Hill to Thomas so that Senator Alan Simpson insinuated that Hill harassed Thomas. (268) Thomas would accuse the press of going through his phone logs and records of his life. That was a lie. (269) “the Republicans had thick dossiers on each of Hill’s potential witnesses.” (300)

Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter. Imperial Brain Trust: the Council on Foreign Relations & United States Foreign Policy. 1977. These two authors are leaders in Marxist criticism of the impact of capitalism on U.S. foreign policy and its effort to dominate the world. Political, military, business, labor and academic leaders in the country established the Council on Foreign Relations after World War to replace the British Empire which they believed the United States had an obligation to continue. I will cover their impact in my Vietnam War section some time in the future.

Different Points of View over the future of Atomic weapons. During the Afghan War, President Donald Trump (GAG!) authorized a General to use the Mother of all Bombs, a bomb just shy of the power of an atomic bomb, on his own. Notice that this had no positive affect for the US in the outcome of the war. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/world/asia/moab-mother-of-all-bombs-afghanistan.html) There is a plethora of information about the development and use of the atomic bomb during World War II. Much of the world was astounded that the US used such a bomb on civilians. Others said, drop more. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima on August 9, 1945, “served as the symbolic coronation of American global power.” Nevertheless, the use of the atomic bomb in World War II brought international condemnation. At the Tokyo War Crimes Trials of 1946-1948, Justice Pal of India cited the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as war crimes. U.S. President Harry S. Truman responded by publicly saying that the atomic bombs were dropped “in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands of young Americans.” However, President Truman in correspondence with John Foster Dulles that his reasons for dropping the atomic bombs were the attack on Pearl Harbor and the murder of our prisoners of war. “The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them.” (Martin Sherwin. “Hiroshima and Modern Memory.” The Nation. October 10, 1981) “In the summer and fall of 1945, US atomic policy left us troubled and perplexed. Roosevelt, we thought, had been committed to a policy of international understanding and conciliation. . . . Truman’s policy, however, appeared to have the opposite aim: to keep a monopoly of the atomic bomb in U.S. and British hands, and to use it as a strong trump card in tough political bargaining with the Soviet Union.” (Sherwin, Martin. A World Destroyed: the Atomic Bomb and the Grand Alliance. 1975. xi) And, well before the bombings FDR and Churchill “rejected steps that might have led to the international control of atomic energy.” (Martin Sherwin. “Hiroshima and Modern Memory.” The Nation. October 10, 1981) According to nuclear physicist Hans Bethe who worked on the Manhattan Project, “Many of us had been influenced directly or indirectly by Niels Bohr, the great Danish physicist. He argued that only international control of nuclear weapons could save the world from a nuclear arms race, and that such a race would imperil, not enhance the security of the United States and Great Britain. Many other scientists, especially at the University of Chicago Metallurgic Laboratory, at the initiative of Leo Szilard, had come independently to the same conclusion. Martin Sherwin, George Mason University History professor who specialized in the history of nuclear weapons, wrote that, this interpretation by physicists and historian is wrong. Roosevelt decided, with Churchill, “that the bomb should remain and Anglo-American monopoly.” (Sherwin, Martin. A World Destroyed: the Atomic Bomb and the Grand Alliance. 1975. xii) However, this is not mentioned in Hiroshima in America: fifty years of denial, by Robert Jay Lifton and Gregg Mitchell. KOREA There are numerous arguments about whether or not the atomic bomb should have been used in Korea, Vietnam, or other existential circumstances. In late 1950, following their invasion of Korea, Chinese forces surrounded U.S. Marines. “Distraught himself, the chief executive (Truman), told a press conference on November 30 that nuclear bombsight be used against the enemy and seemed to indicate that the decision would be MacArthur’s.” (William Manchester. American Caesar. 608, 610; Bruce Cumings. The Korean War: a History. 2010. p. 30) The U.S. developed the ability fire an “atomic shot from a cannon.” (Bruce Cumings. The Korean War: a History. 2010. p. 34) “In mid-May Ike (President Dwight Eisenhower) told the [American] National Security Council that using nukes in Korea would be cheaper than conventional weaponry, and a few days later the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended launching nuclear attacks against China.” (Bruce Cumings. The Korean War: a History. 2010. p. 34) This is interesting since Eisenhower’s reaction to Hiroshima was, we didn’t have to use that awful thing on them. (Lifton, Robert Jay and Mitchell, Greg. Hiroshima in America: fifty years of denial. 1995. 213) Operation Hudson Harbor - flying lone B-29 bombers over North Korea to simulate a dropping of an atomic bomb. North Korean leaders must have had “steel nerves” as this simulation was eerily similar to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Operation Hudson Harbor concluded that the use of atomic weapons would not be “useful” as it was difficult to identify “large masses of enemy troops.” (Bruce Cumings. The Korean War: a History. 2010. p. 157-159) The United Nations/United States forces faced defeat in Korea but Truman looked strong because he “threatened to use the atom bomb against China.” However, this “made peace talks virtually impossible.” (Stone, I.F. The Hidden History of the Korean War. 213) Major General Emmett (“Rosy”) O’Donnell, commander of the Far East Air Force’s Bomber Command . . . [stated that] “We have never been permitted to bomb what are the real strategic targets, the enemy’s real sources of supply.” He said that the strategic bombing commanded been “designed to deliver the atomic offensive to the heart of the enemy” and indicated very clearly that he thought the bomb should have been used against the Chinese.”” (Stone, I.F. The Hidden History of the Korean War. 245) RICHARD NIXON Richard Barnet, former State Department aide, activist and scholar, who founded the Institute for Policy Studies (Wikipedia) warned “of the danger that the United States government might resort to the use of nuclear weapons. Barnet then cites Vice President Richard Nixon speaking to the Executive Club of Chicago on March 17, 1955 as saying, “The weapons which were used during the Korean War and World War II are obsolete. Our artillery and our tactical Air Force in the Pacific are now equipped with atomic explosives which can and will be used on military targets with precision and effectiveness. “It is foolish to talk about the possibility that the weapons which might be used in the event war breaks out in the Pacific would be limited to the conventional Korean and World War II types of explosives. Our forces could not fight an effective war in the Pacific with those types of explosives if they wanted to. Tactical atomic explosives are now conventional and will be used against the military targets of any aggressive force.” Of course, we are not aggressors by threatening China or invading Vietnam. VIET NAM 1964 American Republican Presidential candidate Senator Goldwater of Arizona was a reserve Air Force General and “suggested that the United States could isolate the Vietcong in South Vietnam any bombing the supply routes connecting China and North Vietnam.” He also proposed using nuclear weapons “to clear the jungles where the Vietcong were presumably hiding. The public reaction to those notions was one of horrified alarm.” (Thomas Powers, The War at Home. 2) It turns out that the United States bombed Southeast Asia the equivalent of many atomic bombs through out the war. “Although Goldwater was finally persuaded to stop talking about nuclear weapons.” Although Goldwater’s advocacy of atomic weapons scared people his idea to win the war did not. Johnson portrayed himself as “responsible” as opposed to Goldwater who he implied would get us all killed. (Thomas Powers, The War at Home. 9) Noted military writer Hanson Baldwin believed that the US should use its overwhelming technological power to counter communism even if that meant nuclear weapons. Of course, only for “defensive purposes.” “If we cannot do this, he says, we had better “call it quits.” (Noam Chomsky, At War with Asia. 52) General Curtis LeMay advocated the use of nuclear weapons to end the conflict with communism once and for all. “We ought to nuke the chinks. . . . We are swatting flies when we should be going after the manure pile.” (Thomas Powers. The War at Home. 40; Rowland Evans and Robert Novak. Lyndon B. Johnson: the Exercise of Power. 538) So, there is pretty much agreement that the use of the atom bomb was on the table. The horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki completely ignored. In 1954 the United States “assuming the Chinese Communists intervene would engage in a “highly selective atomic offensive.” (Pentagon Papers. New York Times. 1971. 46) However, if the “Chinese Communists do not intervene” then the use of atomic weapons would occur if it would aid the US in the war. (Pentagon Papers. New York Times. 1971. 47) McNaughton drafted a “Proposed Course of Action” to McNamara. In his long list of actions McNaughton noted risks. One was the “escalation to the use of nuclear weapons.” (Pentagon Papers. New York Times. 1971. 442-445, passim) Presidential assistant for national security, Walt. W. Rostow, wrote a memorandum on May 6, 1967, analyzing U.S. bombing strategy in Viet Nam. One of his conclusions was “we do not want a nuclear confrontation over Viet Nam.” (Pentagon Papers. New York Times. 1971. 585, 588)

Our views of President Roosevelt are not necessarily accurate. Different Points of View over the future of Atomic weapons. According to nuclear physicist Hans Bethe who worked on the Manhatten Project, https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1967/bethe/biographical/ “Many of us had been influence directly or indirectly by Niels Bohr, the great Danish physicist. He argued that only international control of nuclear weapons could save the world from a nuclear arms race, and that such a race would imperil, not enhance the security of the United States and Great Britain. Many other scientists, especially at the University of Chicago Metallurgic Laboratory, at the initiative of Leo Szilard, had come independently to the same conclusion. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1967/bethe/biographical/ “In the summer and fall of 1945, US atomic policy left us troubled and perplexed. Roosevelt, we thought, had been committed to a policy of international understanding and conciliation. . . . Truman’s policy, however, appeared to have the opposite aim: to keep a monopoly of the atomic bomb in U.S. and British hands, and to use it as a strong trump card in tough political bargaining with the Soviet Union.” (Sherwin xi) However, Sherwin argues that this interpretation by physicists and historians is wrong. Roosevelt decided, with Churchill, “that the bomb should remain and Anglo-American monopoly.” (Sherwin xii) “Do you have a design in mind for your blog? Whether you prefer a trendy postcard look or you’re going for a more editorial style blog - there’s a stunning layout for everyone.” You’ll be posting loads of engaging content, so be sure to keep your blog organized with Categories that also allow visitors to explore more of what interests them. Create Relevant Content Writing a blog is a great way to position yourself as an authority in your field and captivate your readers’ attention. Do you want to improve your site’s SEO ranking? Consider topics that focus on relevant keywords and relate back to your website or business. You can also add hashtags (#vacation #dream #summer) throughout your posts to reach more people, and help visitors search for relevant content. Blogging gives your site a voice, so let your business’ personality shine through. Choose a great image to feature in your post or add a video for extra engagement. Are you ready to get started? Simply create a new post now.