You brought the discussion in that direction when you wrote, quote, “many Communists being Jews,” because it was only alleged that the Rosenbergs were Communists, or at the least, Communist sympathizers, and I’ve seen no proof to substantiate either claim, even though I have been privileged to pore over several documents related to that case.
There are those who claim that Julius Rosenberg was, in fact, a Communist, while others claimed that he was only sympathetic to the cause of Communism. I’ll defer to others more learned than I on that issue, but again, I have seen no documentation (yet) that offers irrefutable proof of his sympathies. And, I do think that a discussion of Jews and membership in the Communist Party may be germane to this discussion, but you are certainly welcome to discontinue your participation in this thread (which I created, by the posting of the question), if you are somehow “offended” by my remarks in my previous post, because, Gawd knows, I definitely don’t wish to offend anyone; I just wish to have a polite and rational discussion about the subject matter at hand, and I won’t attempt to suppress anyone’s views on whatever they wish to say on this subject, or in which direction they wish to take it, because, as I have stated before (and with much pride), free speech should be respected everywhere in the United States of America, including on these boards and within the various threads, as long as the public comments don’t deal with things that are deliberately desgned to enflame and provoke people into doing things that they may later regret (upon their conviction by a jury of their peers).
Now, if you are going to take the stance that, “He [Julius] could not have done what he did, without being a Communist, or a Communist Sympathizer,” then my response to that would be something along the lines of, “There were folks who were white, who sold whiskey and guns to Native Americans in the 1800s, and they did it only for things of value, and that didn’t make them Native Americans, did it?”
Also, there was a black attorney with the ACLU, who once defended a KKK member, and no one accused the black attorney of being a member (or sympathizer) of that organization, just because he was defending the right of the Klansman to speak freely in public. In fact, if you can believe this, the Klansman publicly thanked the attorney for representing his free speech rights, and told him he thought he had done an “excellent” job.
Also, the discussion of McCarthyism is also relevant to this topic/thread, because much of the fear and hysteria that permeated the late 1940s and early 1950s, was promulgated by those who shared the beliefs of “the Gentleman from Wisconsin,” who would loudly proclaim to anyone who would listen, that “There’s a Communist under every rock!”
Lastly, please take note of the fact that I will drink poison, before I will enter a thread that you have initiated, and tell you what is “OK” to discuss, and what is not.
Only a Communist would dare to do that, right?
Thanks again for your thoughts. Please continue to share them with me, anytime you feel the need.